skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The PATENTS file can not modify or nullify anything except itself, either by its existence or by its subsequent revocation. No court would say that it does, because the implications for contract law in general go far beyond patent and copyright.

The law is more about precedent than logic. Unless you can point to specific opinions from lawyers or judges on this, this sounds more like your opinion than any kind of proof.

At issue is that Facebook putting both the License file and the PATENTS file in the same repository seems to many people like an overt act that extinguishes any implicit patent grant in the same way the "Clear BSD" license does (although a difference there is a modified license file). It feels to me like like Facebook is trying to have it both ways -- seeming to be a good citizen in the free and open source community but at the same time creating a one-sided deal with extra conditions. If they wanted to be unambiguous, they could have used the Clear BSD license and then added the PATENTS file.

> I've seen plenty of real lawyers agree.

Links?

For reference, here is an opinion from an actual US Patent lawyer citing actual US legal judgement about implied patent licenses implying how an implicit grant in this case would be broader in scope than the explicit Facebook PATENTS license:
http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Implicit_patent_licence

===

In 2005, Dan Ravicher explained that, in the USA, recipients of software under the GNU GPL version 2 receive an implicied patent grant, based on the following US case law.

De Forest Radio, 273 U.S. 236 (1927)
"No formal granting of a license is necessary in order to give it effect. Any language used by the owner of the patent, or any conduct on his part exhibited to another from which that other may properly infer that the owner consents to his use of the patent in making or using it, or selling it, upon which the other acts, constitutes a license.”"

Hewlett - Packard Co. v . Repeat - O-Type Stencil Mfg. Corp. , Inc., 123 F. 3d 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
"Generally, when a seller sells a product without restriction, it in effect promises the purchaser that in exchange for the price paid, it will not interfere with the purchaser's full enjoyment of the product purchased. The buyer has an implied license under any patents of the seller that dominate the product or any uses of the product to which the parties might reasonably contemplate the product will be put."

Bottom Line Mgmt., Inc. v. Pan Man, Inc., 228 F. 3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2000)
"Unless the parties provide otherwise, the purchaser of a patented article has an implied license not only to use and sell it, but also to repair it to enable it to function properly. This implied license covers both the original purchaser of the article and all subsequent purchasers."

===

Still this does not address the issue of an explicit grant extinguishing an implicit grant. It seems like that may still need to be tested in court. The practical issue then is, why bet your company on an unknown like that when there are perfectly acceptable alternative UI libraries (even better ones technically like Mithril, Inferno, and so on)?
I've got the equipment to do hot air soldering, and I flatter myself that I've gotten pretty good at some fine SMD work, but these days I rarely bother. The premium on a service like macrofab.com usually is less than the money I waste on spare parts I accidentally destroy and postage from many different distributors.
> And what do I see here? That before it even started people are fighting it.

Seems to me, before it even started, people started abusing it. (e.g. by just keeping it running through the whole session)

If you want to invent some acceptable method of compensation for the web, you should make sure that both sides have power to negotiate a fair price.

With ads and tracking, it seems to be all or nothing: Either unreasonably high prices (perpetual tracking and potential malware for a 5 minute article) or unreasonably low (use an adblocker and get it free)

The "proof of work" payment method seems to have the same problem.
And you can use another card game. Get over it, as long as it's disclosed everyone involved are consenting.
Sure you can, probably just not in one of the urban areas, particularly the bay area.
I am not entirely sure:
https://www.paragon-re.com/trend/3-recessions-2-bubbles-and-...
I think we are past that cycle so far. It could burst anytime, but in the bay area the impact probably won't be that high.
Yes, feasible, but what makes large-scale censorship so apparently desirable, or at least so widely desired? The first obvious thought is that there are repressive governments around the world who wish to keep power. And this is true. But it can't be the whole explanation since plenty of relatively free western democracies and businesses are enthusiastically embracing censorship, laws about 'hate speech', and so on.

My guess is that a clue lies in the censorship going on much closer to home, in our own minds. Thoughts which contradict our ideas about who we are and what we should do are suppressed all the time. They fail to reach the light of consciousness. In other words, like the individual mind, it seems the hive mind must eventually develop an ego.
The only reason anyone would do this is if you actually wanted to take down torrent sites.
I watched this over the weekend. As someone who has spent an absurd amount of hours following this case: it breaks new ground, has great depth, and is absolutely riveting.

There are at least seven jaw dropping moments in it. One is explaining how Bitcoin wallets pre-cache the next 100 change addresses the wallet will use, so that if someone steals your wallet without you noticing it and continues to use it you will determinisically share the same change addresses on your next 100 transactions each, which both leaves a forensic trail and also resulted in Gox continuing to send money into accounts controlled by the attacker.

Also, for bonus points: Gox allocated the new addresses as deposit addresses for new customers. So when the attacker moved stolen coins, their change appeared to be deposited on Gox into the accounts of hithertofore innocent people. (The attacker retained custody of it and Mt. Gox appears to not have swept it into e.g. offline storage, which we have fairly persuasive evidence did not really exist.)

This being the Bitcoin community, what would you expect someone who suddenly has 1,000 BTC credited to their exchange account to do?
Fun twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/internetofshit
> Your preferences are one thing, your patches or having a say into the development is a very different thing.

That's correct; "saying", as I do, and "having a say" are different. In practice however my options as a user of DBMS are limited - I don't know if I can buy a standard compliant DBMS at all, not to say for market-competitive price, and I'm not sure I'll have an opportunity to replace it with another standard compliant implementation if for some reasons I'll want to have a better match. In other words, I'm market taker, and not market maker. I do suspect there are many DB users in this same position, which would benefit from a possibility to switch from DBMS to DBMS.

> The standards conformance is not a goal on it's own. The primary goal of the developers is to serve the users, particularly those that support the community in some way (e.g. by paying the developers). That's what makes the project possible.

It would be nice if developers of a leading open source DBMS paid more attention to standards - that's what I'm saying. I don't believe their users would suffer from that, or even that their users are sufficiently indifferent to that - that's neither my own experience nor what I'm reading in articles touching choices of DB.

> The last thing the users want is having to do significant changes to their applications just before the syntax suddenly changed to match SQL standard. Standards are valuable, but backwards compatibility has a value too.

I understand this as you saying "we have a choice between features and standards, and we choose features". Yes, backwards compatibility has value; in my opinion, value of standard following isn't understood well enough. I think we aren't in the world where performance is uber important for all use cases; those involved in development of PostgreSQL are either not fully aware of the needs of - some, may be non-paying - users, or choose to postpone this work, that's my understanding of the situation.

> The SQL standard was created so that each database did not invent it's own query language.

Exactly. Same language means that if I have, say, window functions or isolation levels in SQL standard and use them, I can expect to have them and them to be functionally equivalent in standard compliant implementation. It's a sad situation when there are just a few, if any, implementations of the standard; why do we have standards in the first place become then questionable.

> I strongly disagree with the idea that databases should be drop-in replaceable, as it entirely ignores the large parts of the fuctionality (architecture, indexing, ...) which is out of scope of a SQL standard.

As I understand it you're saying that it's impossible or hard to have large parts of functionality in a standard compliant implementation. I think that you could have extension features on top of standard, allowing users to use them when they choose to have extensions or not to use them when they need to have conformance to standards. I've had discussions regarding DB choice based on features which are in non-implemented standards enough to pay attention to the matter.
>Although I knew that 80,000 BTC had already missing from Mt. Gox when Jed McCaleb sold it to Mark Karpèles — McCaleb suggesting to Karpèles “maybe you don’t really need to worry about it” — hackers had already cleaned out Mt. Gox while McCaleb owned it. He had sold Karpèles an insolvent exchange.

I didn't know that part. Puts things in a different light. I always assumed McCaleb was gone before any of the shenanigans happened.
> Software is so complex that nobody really understands it.

Unless this statement is trying to imply something deeper than what it states, I would disagree.

I work with embedded systems and connected devices. To me it's not a problem of complexity, but a problem of not having a strong standard of practices on both the device side and the facility side.

Have sensitive data on your network? Separate it from the rest of the network, or don't put devices on the network that don't meet your security needs.
Pirates definitely add more value per dollar charged.
Writing with the Machine (2016)
They do not necessarily appreciate in value, especially if you buy at the peak of a bubble! They don't even tend to appreciate all that much over the long run when you factor inflation and ownership costs. Expensive houses are not a riskless transaction, even though many of our parents told us they were.
India beat China in this. Since more than 1yr Whatsapp admins are responsible for posts in their groups.
macOS/OS X has been free for quite some time. And it's not illegal, it just violates the EULA - there is a distinction.
SEC shows support for ICOs that are not obviously securities
Well, he did say "linux desktop", not "linux laptop" :D
Thank you for the information. Unfortunately, unreliable data channels currently seem to be the best option if you want people to be able to host their own game server easily from within the browser without having to install additional software.

Having experimented a bit with WebRTC myself, I agree that it is overly complex but it also offers many features. And if usage is too complicated for game developers, they can still libraries that simplify the usage for their purpose.
The founders of this have spammed most news sites, quora and stackoverflow with links. It's just a bunch of node js scripts with redis and mongodb packaged together, nothing professional at all.

They definitely do not have "50000" companies using this and are probably just using stolen logos on the (broken) homepage.
Why would a miner want to implement that?
>Remember this the next time that The Economist, Time magazine or New York Times tries to talk about "the wonders" of communism.

Could it be that, if they talk in favour of it, they have a different idea of Communism to you? Modern Communist academics do, we must investigate the ontology of Communism; a good read on this is from Badiou, The Communist Hypothesis. Most modern academic Communists believe that we must search for what happened, how to prevent it and how to move past it, to say nothing of the various splinters and brothers in the Communist family tree - anarchism, Communailsm, democratic Socialism, etc.

If you do reading on Communist literature since about 1950 you'll see they have occupied themselves with this investigation, the very one you are accusing them of ignoring.
Caselabs[1] offers cases in black, gunmetal and a special run of white. I have also seen special runs of unpainted cases available.

The Merlin line is currently available with a two-tone option with black, gunmetal or white exterior and black, gunmetal, white or red internals.

[1]: http://www.caselabs-store.com/pc-cases/
>> And Apple has really doubled down on ease of use, at the expense of everything else wonderful about having a powerful computing device you can hold in one hand. To the point where it's become just like regular, can't-talk-back-to-it television.

Worse, actually. At least those old TV sets didn't spy in on your intimate conversations, neither did they keep track of your whereabouts and generally spy in on you. Your phone, does.
$700k to $1.1m in 10 years is about 4.6% annualized...that doesn’t seem that crazy.
Sure thing. I can also block whatever crap I don't want running in my browser so I'll be doing that. Just giving feedback.
>I guess I just don't understand why Apple needs to put things in place to allow you to work with companies you don't want to work with.

What's not to understand? Apple is selling you the phone. Its in Apple's interest to put as many features on the phone as potential buyers might be interested in. Allowing the owner's of a device to control access to different parts of a device rather than 3rd party software is not just good business practice, its common sense.
But Hacker News just isn't that, and it doesn't want to be that. Sometimes you just have to do as the Romans do.
I'm not particularly familiar with how PostgreSQL development is done. I suspect it carries a lot of baggage from the past releases, both good and bad. I hope the team will see the value in structuring the product in such a way that users of the product won't feel themselves making a hard choice taking PostgreSQL for new projects - or maintaining it in existing systems.

> Which RDBMS provider/vendor has set the bar high for themselves in regard to standards compliance and achieved it?

I think we had better compliance to the standards in DB industry as a whole some years ago, but that's just a feeling. I think we have right now better compliance to the standards - as in industry mostly following standards within, say, 5 years - in branches of engineering like compilers and browsers. In open source SQL engines PostgreSQL is overall one of the strongest propositions which I recommend often. However you don't maintain your lead if you don't recognize your weak points.
I've done some work on dynamic type checking for JavaScript and the tricky part is always when things start going higher order; sadly this is often omitted from examples.

The motivation for dynamic checking was often because many JavaScript programs couldn't be given any useful static types. With the great work on Flow and TypeScript I'm starting to become convinced that we'll just be able to statically check most JavaScript programs in the future and get decent types out.
Laughing at a confirmation hearing is not protected speech.

Though the article says what happened after she laughed is why she got convicted.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/03/us/code-pink-sessions-lau...

I think even in the UK parliament the opposition makes fun of and laughs at each other without fear of prosecution.
> Why?

Not having to deal with Linux's refusal of maintaining a stable driver API and ABI for a start. The number one reason that stops Android from getting updates on smartphones is that hardware manufacturers don't want the burden of constantly making small changes to their proprietary drivers to follow new linux kernel changes, something that they don't have to worry about when they make drivers for, say, Windows PCs.

Even Google's own phones, like the Nexus and Pixel, are stuck because of this. They receive updates faster than non-Google phones, but they do not receive more than 2 years of feature updates (with an additional year of security updates courtesy of Google backporting fixes from newer android builds to the older kernel).

Fuchsia is not going to be burdened by Linux kernel dev policies of constantly breaking APIs and their requirement for driver developers to open source their stuff, obey the kernel coding preferences (like when they rejected AMD's driver because of the HAL) to get them mainlined so that they can finally be kept in a maintained state.
Yes, Ikea is far more annoyingly maze-like than Walmart or similar stores. In fact, it's so bad that I'll never hike through another Ikea again.
>> On Hackernews there was once a skeptic of postmodernism who got into a debate with a Derrida fan. The skeptic said "If deconstruction is not BS, how about you explain to us, in plain English, what it's all about." The Derrida fan replied "No. How about you demonstrate that you've read Husserl, Heidegger, Hegel, Nietzsche, Freud, and Levinas. Then we can begin to talk about Derrida.

I find that a valid rebuff of a "skeptic" (on quotes). A true skeptic should know their shit, first and better than anyone they care to er, skepticise.
There are several, easily found by googling "self publishing": https://tragicbooks.com/2017/01/02/my-experience-self-publis...
This is in part why supporting the FSF and other bodies that seek to ensure that choice and transparency are promoted. The only real way to compel companies to comply is to support viable alternatives to the dominance of a vendor controlled market.
Prime Day 2017: 12.9M DynamoDB requests per second
Trump Administration Seeks to Avoid Withdrawal from Paris Climate Accord
Controlling iPhone Music Playback with Ford Stock Nav/Radio Head Unit
> In other words, the bet didn't really prove anything other than that the hedge fund industry overall is less attractive than the broader market.

The context of the original challenge suggests that this was the intention. I actually think that it proved something a little stronger.

If some moderately savvy investor were deciding whether to invest her $1m in index funds or hedge funds, she would actually have to choose which hedge fund to invest in. Presumably Ted Seides knows more than our example investor would about hedge funds (and has access to more of them she would). So Ted is an (optimistic) stand-in for how well she would actually have done, which is frankly the more relevant question.

On a related note, Ted probably didn't invest in RenTec, or at least not the Medallion Fund, because he can't. Most funds. like Medallion, that can consistently beat the market will either stop taking additional investments or straight up return capital to investors and trade their own money. Buffett doesn't actually go so far as to claim that no one can beat the market (after all, he did); his claim is merely that our average investor can't really take advantage of it to beat the market themselves.
> Making things simple is about taking options away

Dangerous. The hard part is knowing what you can take away and providing the right default for all other things.
Nope. If you post your idea on a public forum I will be responding with my opinion. Feel free to stop posting if you don't want my replies.

I'm also genuinely curious what kind of card game has such intensive server requirements because I just don't see it. Maybe you have a legitimate need to contribute to global warming, it just seems unlikely to me.
I know a few foreigners here in Japan using in home units like that. They arnt heavy users, so Hardline just isn't worth it for them.

They never complain about speed to me when I ask (then again I doubt they would even notice, unless it was really bad, not exactly techs).

I have considered it, but then again the price of a 1gb/s is so damn cheap here . . .
I don't want to dismiss your idea, but it's also worth noting that the majority of surgical errors are decision-making errors, not technical errors. Most mistakes aren't anything you'll see on video; they occured before the case started when the surgeon decided to perform operation X when Y was more appropriate.
> it used to be possible to pretty accurately forecast large tech retailers' product sales each quarter (like Apple) by reverse engineering FedEx and UPS tracking numbers.

That's great. Were tracking numbers vendor-specific in some way? So you could, let's say, order an iPhone once a week and get an idea for how many iPhones (or total Apple products) were sold in that time period, just by using the tracking numbers? Was it dependent on geography in some way?
As long as that's the case, maybe (and even then I don't think it would be) but as it is now, what entity ensures that sites actually use the mining as payment and not simply make you pay the whole time?

How would you negotiate prices if your customers are not even aware how much they are paying?
It boggles my mind to buy a house that maxes out your mortgage qualification on $500,000 HHI.
They showed videos of people using it in bright sunlight as well as in the dark.

If they used a variety of frequencies alternating at some known sequence or something it should be possible to differentiate signal from noise, but I have no idea what I'm talking about.
The active investors who are left of course.
Practical Functional Reactive Programming
It is a neat trick! Somehow those pieces of metal are storing a magnetic field like a permanent magnet, but release their "charge" when the field is broken.

There's another interesting effect where an electric charge can be pulled from that set-up. Lasersaber demonstrates that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_ssUTRbRRs

I certainly can't explain it, and I don't think we have an adequate theory that does explain it (yet).
THANKS! I'll look. You did much better shopping than I did.
Would you be able to describe how your data was normally priced? I'm sure it is very context dependent, but I'm very interested. For example, let's say you have information that allows you to forecast the earnings of a publicly traded company to within 1% MoE; for how much could you sell this information (either one time, or periodically) to a financial company?

I once briefly chatted with a man who ran a company that used satellite imagery to predict crop yields. I found it amusing how rather than providing this information to farmers ("It looks like you're going to produce only 60% of what you did last year, time to cut some expenses!"), there was so much more money in providing this information to hedge funds and trading firms. Morality aside, the potential for technology like this is exciting.

It's kind of cool how the combination of big data, scraping, statistics, etc. allows this small niche of analytics to thrive. I have a decent background in most of these subjects, and this seems like a very freelance-able job, so I'd love to dabble in this area and learn how it works.