skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The right to free speech isn't for acceptable speech. Acceptable speech needs no protection. It's there specifically for speech that isn't considered correct.

This rights so important that they listed it first. It protects the deplorable because the acceptable needs no protection. You are not the arbiter of what is and isn't lawful, thankfully.

Yeah, Nazis suck, but they are still afforded basic human rights, that of freedom of expression. We've clearly decided this.
I'll send you an email now that you put it in your profile :)
[removed language flame war]
Amazon provides salaried jobs at their regional warehouses, and revenue to the resellers, and revenue to affiliates.

Perhaps the only thing missing is a way to sort results on Amazon by locale.
Pandas author on unsustainabilty of project, lack of funding
> This is evolution. Embrace it or face your personal extinction as a software developer.

Woah there Mr Hyperbole.

The reason PHP is still in use, and not dead or dying, is that it's one of the simplest languages to write server-side code in.

That means it's remarkably easy to hack something together quickly, with no compilation step to get in the way.

Unless that changes in a drastic fashion, projects will continue to get started in PHP, and PHP's user base will continue to grow, and (hopefully) the language will continue to improve to accommodate that growth.
> the decision being made is between EME and Adobe Flash

Flash is a mix of dying and dead, mostly the latter. Having to use Flash is a strong economic and practical motivation not to use DRM, and if that wasn't the case there wouldn't be so much pressure to implement something in the browser itself.
And then DRMed content will be properly separated off into its miserable DRM slum that everyone hates, the cost of using it will be higher, users will complain more, companies who don't use DRM will capture more of the market, etc.

That's the entire point.
Yeah, but that doesn't give me a "copy". It will lose quality (and I expect frames as well), and it requires letting the computer run through the entire movie at normal playback speed, which I haven't gotten around to doing. Again, it's been enough of a deterrent for me to do this, which is my bigger point. I never said it's 100% foolproof, just hard enough to be a deterrent.
> In a statement, the company said the March breach was not related to the hack that exposed the personal and financial data on 143 million U.S. consumers, but one of the people said the breaches involve the same intruders.
I think it's good news- if your identity has not been used, there's less chance that it will be, because the data has been already out for that long.
You might be interested in a site I created, Day Old Hacker News (http://dayoldhackernews.com). This shows Hacker News as it was exactly one day ago, so the comments are always full.
I know right? Such a mom thing to say.

My 10 year old self rolled his eyes so hard.
Yeah, and Amazon often offers better prices with instant gift cards and several days grace period to ship your games to them on their dime. GameStop is only a good deal a few times a year during specific sales.
Food Menu – Discover foods in your city
I already use noscript, but most people won't like having to hit 'temporarily allow' and reloading the page 1-3 times before most sites will function. Also, sites that lean heavily on trendy frameworks like fucking React often just white-screen because of their extreme reliance on JS. I'm hugely against its adoption for that reason, but I understand that I'm in the minority there.

I dunno, it just seems like common sense at this point. Javascript is a powerful attack vector, like ads. And many people already use adblockers in some capacity, for that kind of reason.

It'll definitely suck as HTML5's various peripheral features become strong and widely-used attack vectors.
W3C is not an organization focused on morals. It is an organization which exists to advocate for and codify open web standards (note, not an open web, but open standards).
What actual power does the W3C have to harm (or protect, for that matter) security researchers?
Will the next version of Rails include this by default? ...Unfortunately, it would be a breaking change, so maybe not until Rails 6?
I'm a Star Wars collector and parent who shops at TRU. Beyond debt, the stores are mismanaged the same as most other old-school retailers that are having problems.

For the last Force Friday (the day all the stores get new Star Wars toys and people go out at midnight to purchase), there were numerous reports of TRU's opening at midnight with almost zero new inventory. How does that happen, it's a planned date set months in advance. My TRU also has $200 items that have sat on the shelves for over 2 years.
I've run plenty of interviews, thanks. And as a result I've developed some strong opinions on what's wrong with them, and it's not that some monstrous fraction of people are completely unable to code or solve problems.
Superior audio and visual experiences with WebGL
Results of the Ubuntu Desktop Applications Survey
I go to B&N with gift cards a lot. Even with cash, I'm already in the store, and most of what I buy costs less than an average lunch. Amazon might cost less, but not enough less to matter if I happened to pop into the bookstore while walking around the mall.
> Really? I can see a pretty good argument for why it SHOULD be legal. If I want to post some content I make online why shouldn’t I be able to try to protect it?

The current state of affairs is that it's not just legal to use DRM, it's illegal (DMCA) to try and break a DRM scheme, _even if you do so in order to exercise your legally guaranteed fair use rights_.

It seems to me that there should be some sort of sort of moral right to self-defense that applies here: just like society/the law recognises that it is morally acceptable to use deadly force to defend yourself from someone who is trying to murder you (even if it wouldn't be otherwise), we can recognise that it is morally acceptable to use the legal equivalent of deadly force (ban DRM, make it illegal for them to enforce their right to protect their content) in self-defense (against them using DRM to make it illegal for you to enforce your right to fair use).

More bluntly: Content creators, with their support of the DMCA, have proven that they have no concern for my rights or freedoms. What standing do they have to expect me to have any for theirs?
The timeframe isn't unusuall unless they've also have not reported it to major stakeholders and regulatory bodies.

That said this might absolve them of some responsibility if 5 months ago that vulnerability wasn't disclosed to major companies.
... and earn 7 figures annually.
I think you're too quick to put DRM and WebAssembly in the same bucket. Yes, WebAssembly could lead to a future of closed-source proprietary technology on the web (and in that sense is similar to DRM), but the difference is that WebAssembly offers technical value. WebAssembly is a tradeoff for the public, whereas DRM exists strictly to restrict the public.
Do us a favor and actually think your cunning plan through for a minute.

Why should content owners post their products for free consumption? What is the incentive for them to do that? How much money do you think they will make?

In case you haven't noticed, the web is losing to apps at every level, from things like Facebook/Instagram/Snapchat to shopping apps. Even newsreaders are being turned into apps. My parents only use the Apple newsreader, for example.

Do normal people even use the web anymore? It seems the web is only used by tech developers.

Such a sad loss for the web..
I looked into both of those researchers. I could find nothing published by them with regards to MS. They do both seem to have published on Lyme disease. Can you provide any published research to back those youtube videos?

Maybe I'm wrong here, but this feels like giving medical advice based on very little hard evidence. Considering I have a loved one with MS, I find such advice sickening. You see this with many terminal diseases.

Terminal disease is a fucking terrible thing. It makes people desperate in every sense of the word, it makes them grasp at anything. Flippantly mentioning a few things that 'might help' is basically saying. "Hey, here's a thing that maybe means you won't die / suffer as much from dying". Making such claims lightly is (excuse my language) being a fucking asshole.
You are getting someone's hope up, only for that hope, and a little piece of that person with them, to be smashed to pieces when it turns out to be wrong.
Moreover, you are telling that person "don't accept your fate, here try this". Acceptance is needed for a healthy way to process terminal disease. 'Advice' like this fucks with that in a big way.

Don't overestimate your own chances of being success at the expense of a dying person please.

(I know, harsh words. But I needed to get this off my chest)
Food Menu is a community for foodie and you get to discover foods in a better way. It got featured in Product Hunt Upcoming. You can check it out and subscribe to get early access. https://www.producthunt.com/upcoming/food-menu
don't be an asshole.

don't cargo cult confidence.

there. done.
Unrelated, but any interest in making the Android app available via a non-Play-Store medium?
Good! Let them do that, and let us keep working on things like ipfs, blockchain naming systems, matrix and host identity protocols. The more they try to corrupt the web, the more energy goes into fixing the broken architectures. Then one day, nobody will use the broken DRM net. Politics is a programmer's most wasteful use of his time. Code them out of business.
Websites that otherwise wouldn't have used DRM start to use it, that's what changes.
I don't know about the figurines themselves, but I did plenty of this for buildings and vehicles.
Because it doesn't work that way? The banks that fund the "giant loan" in #1 put in covenants preventing any payments to the equity investor (who has to put in their own money) from paying out on the equity until all the debt has been paid off. This is not their first rodeo. The nature of the covenants varies a lot between industries, but the general rule is that the banks won't lend into the deal unless they are guaranteed to get their money back out first (maybe the CEO gets a salary, but it's all specified in the debt documents upfront). That's almost the definition of leveraged finance.

If you want to criticize the leveraged buyout model, a stronger critique is whether the equity investor is putting 10 bets down, where each has a 10% chance of a >10x return, which puts 9 companies at risk.
Ultimately, I think the failure of the open web runs deeper than that. When I visit, for example, a cookbook website, when I view a recipe, the problem isn't just that the site can run arbitrary scripts on my computer. It's also that I have no control over how that recipe displays because so much of that display is in HTML. I can't pull it into a useful format and store it with all my other recipes because it's in HTML. And contrary to its goals, HTML isn't a semantic markup language. I can't automatically convert imperial into metric units, because they aren't represented as measurements at all. I can't configure the display of the recipes for my nearsighted grandmother because that configuration happens when the recipe is rendered from a recipe document into an HTML document. The failure of the open web is that we need JavaScript to reasonably render the various kinds of documents which are being stripped of their metadata so they can be shoehorned into a non-semantic document format.

Removing JavaScript prevents malware and adware vendors from running their programs on our machines, but it doesn't empower users. We can control or data but we still can't analyze data websites give us.

The way forward, I think, is to create more standardized document types and let people build renderers for them. If I go to a cookbook website, I should be able to download recipe documents. If I don't like how my cookbook program renders the recipe, I should be able to download another program can render it. This breaks the power that websites have as the sole entities with the capability to render their documents, and gives the power back to users.
What's your point?

Most women wear makeup and if men knew acting a certain way would increase their chances with women, most would probably do it. Do we really need to add caveats for every special case in every situation?
Are you presupposing any of those things in your response to me?
Namecheap still does not support TOTP based multi-factor authentication
That design decision makes sense, to decouple the EME module, and great that Mozilla offers a prebuilt binary without it, as an opt-out. I wonder if Chromium (or a fork) can also be built without this feature?
> Pros for not prosecuting:

The size of the sells were truly negligible for all executives involved, in proportion to how many shares they have and routinely liquidate. The same argument that there were any sells at all would been made regardless of the number of shares.

A company that size will always have material non public information.

Equifax's OPSEC was horrible all along and a gigantic leak was bound to happen, so the extent and ramifications of this fairly routine breach were eeeeehhhh not considered.

> Cons for not prosecuting:

The execs did it on the same day.

Something something the people something want blood.
The security holes that the standard introduces into my browser.

If I can compile it out, or get a version that someone I trust has compiled with it removed, that only leaves the rest of the web as a botnet attack surface.

That's what changes. Or doesn't improve, depending on how one views the timeline.
That would be the major fundamental problem, yes. Another more logistical (but still very important) problem would be the costs of availability.

Digitizing, categorizing, paying for storage, etc, could create a spending issue.
Mozilla's users outvoted Mozilla staff, and Mozilla staff gracefully conceded that users are best served when they have the OPTION to consume DRM-controlled content or free content.
Maybe you can persuade your partner with:

1. Cancelling Netflix saves money.

and ...

2. Watching less TV gives you more free time to get outside, exercise etc.
A situation of life and death is not analogical to multiplying already enormous wealth.

People that intentionally damage the society on a day job and beat their partners in the evening are not analogical to a politically incorrect doctor.
" it needs to go via pushing a backdoored keybase client (or, ahem, a secret entity needs to force that to happen)."

Or just one or more packets directed at the client if it has some kind of listener open with a vulnerability. If nothing else, most security-focused apps don't do covert channel analyses. If this one doesn't, its secrets might be intercepted through storage or timing channels via another compromised app (even unprivileged) on the computer. Mitigating that usually has a performance hit and/or takes a language whose operations map pretty well to hardware where developers can estimate timing well.

So, they've removed one step. That's good. Opponents don't have to go straight to subversion from there, though. There's a few more possibilities.
Math can be built on, etc. but it is never rejected or controversial. It is just true or false.
So, the more precise description of different types you could read about, say, on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_sclerosis#Types. To describe it briefly, though - there are different types, some appear later in life some earlier, some show up sporadically, while some are constant and get progressively worse. The issue is that, from what I know, there is nobody who can even tell if they are the same pathology, just that they have some similar symptoms.
You are literally describing Blendle, which does this in NL. You can even link up digital newspaper subscriptions to it so you can read those articles for free!
> I'm also very wary of buying on Amazon, because it's been flooded with cheap crap from Aliexpress.

Seattle here. Only transplants buy from Amazon. We've known about this problem here for years.

You'll usually see native Seattlites buy from B&H, Newegg, or the local shops and use Amazon as a last resort.
That's part of why I've got several shelves of DVDs. Browsing is enjoyable, and I was able to pick up a lot of movies cheaply when Blockbuster was going out of business.
HitchRz.com Hitch a Ride Domain for Sale at GoDaddy.com
Apple defends new ad-tracking prevention measures in Safari
The thing being extorted doesn't have to be money. It can be, for example, control of a distribution channel to lock out prospective competitors.
> to make it easier for there consumers.

No, never. DRM Is never easier for consumers.

What happened was that Apple banned alternative browsers and plugins like Flash on iOS which meant there was a sizable platform of - importantly - semi-rich people that did not have a usable DRM solution outside being told to install an app.

The user dropoff from demanding you install an app is huge.

They were losing money, plain and simple, on people who didn't A. download a plugin or B. install an app to push DRM on them.

This battle was over years ago. Safari adopted EME, all the corporate powers that be that wanted to have their cake and eat it too on the buffet of consumer ignorance to how dicked over they are when companies shovel proprietary code down their throats. No major browser wanted to even try fighting this. New browsers that turn up will never gain traction if they don't "support Netflix".

Those of us who care about ethics go on using Firefox without the DRM bullshit plugin / Chromium / etc and the rest keep being ignorant as they always have been.

Really, DRM isn't even helping anyone. It is a lawyer requirement for legal contracts between media producers and distributors. "We require you fuck over your customers to give our old rich men investors who have no clue what technology is a false idea that nobody can copy our floppy". Pirates will continue to circumvent and distribute better quality versions of everything than any company is willing to stream you anyway, and people who were using the streaming services in the first place weren't pirating to begin with.

What this does mean is what should be straightforward user experiences for online video are going to start becoming a clusterfuck of broken, insecure proprietary blob DRM drivers every video site "automagically" downloads and runs on users computers that either don't work cross platform or breaks all the time. Web video will have peaked in 2016, when ubiquitous mp4 support meant almost any site can just host videos and have them work, and 2018 and on will be the era of everyone trying to use shitty DRM plugins that will fail and break everywhere just like Flash and Silverlight did years ago. But having the option available is going to inspire companies like newspapers that have no business trying to DRM lock their newscasts to try to use DRM anyway because fuck ethics.
Ian Hickson is opposed to centralized control of content on the web, but is staunchly committed to centrally controlling humans' right to have children via intentional genocide!

http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1023585606&count=1
You are free to run Firefox without the DRM module.
After a raft of social engineering attacks on it's SMS-only 2FA system Namecheap promised to introduce Authy-based authentication instead back in May 2017. Instead, they rolled out a custom solution called OneTouch which requires the Namecheap mobile app and is still tied to your phone number...and doesn't actually integrate Authy or TOTP based passwords

https://blog.namecheap.com/authy-based-2-factor-authenticati...
There are plenty of places where you can view arguments for and against PHP alone and in comparison to Python and Ruby on the internet. This submission is specifically about HHVM. Asking people to justify the use of PHP in such a context is just inviting a language flame war. Please don't.
Of course! I have to presuppose that we share the same language, that the laws of physics won't shift and turn the atmosphere into spiders suddenly, that typing won't suddenly introduce poison into my bloodstream and thereby be a lethal mistake, all KINDS of things. Dealing with other people brings ethics and such into things, and that's the highest level of philosophy.
Not just region, I think it's per AZ.
You see Kotlin is a drop-in replacement for Java. Just like VB.Net is a drop-in replacement for C# and vice versa. There is no scenario in the .Net world thinkable that cannot be solved with VB.Net. Yet nobody uses it, while there were droves of people that were very comfortable with VB long before C# even existed.

C# was on equal footing a better language than VB.Net and people started using that. Nobody can deny C# is just more productive. Even when the real differences between VB.Net and C# are much smaller than it seems. You as a Java developer must understand why a Java-like language like C# would be superior to a BASIC-derived language unless there were other factors in play.

Kotlin is proven better than Java, not forcing people to deal with nil all the time leads to safer and more terse code when used by an equally skilled programmer versus Java. It's the exact same position as VB.Net vs C#. And major vendors are backing it, just like C# got official support from Microsoft.

I can't judge C++ versus Rust. But Rust is not a drop-in replacement for C++ at all for what I understand about it.
Founders no longer work on it full time. This is an extremely strong indicator and I've never seen a startup recover from this.

Employees get tasked to things other than the core business of the startup. Usually consulting or some other side business.

Startups rarely ever die loudly. They just seem to crawl off away from everything else and try to die as quietly as possible.
This is the next century

Where the universal's free

You can find it anywhere

Yes, the future has been sold

(Blur 1995)
>This was absolutely NOT wanted by Firefox.
They were the only browser to represent the users in this fight.
Don't put Mozilla in the same group as those other traitors.

But they ended up including DRM in their browser. So they're traitors and hypocrites, right?
Unfortunately network effect is HUGE when it comes to the internet. Just because you can code a superior internet, doesn't mean people will move to it en masse.
The issue you are ignoring is that only one person needs to "save and distribute" it, then the pirated version becomes easier to view than the DRMed version.

The proof in the pudding is that every TV show and film is instantly available online to anyone who can work a BitTorrent client.
Like I said I support better fair use laws as I know that’s a real issue right now.

The comparison to deadly force.... seems hyperbolic. No one is in mortal peril. I would have voted you up without that. Those kind of statements make it impossible to have/take discussions like this seriously.
Upvoted you, so count me in.

Hard to believe in 2017, but as recently as five years ago Google (of all people) published the Caja compiler [1] for sandboxed/statically verified JavaScript subsets, and there was AdSafe aiming for safe JavaScript as well.

[1]: https://developers.google.com/caja/

[2]: http://www.adsafe.org
I doubt it. Specifically, I doubt they will, or even want to. That's not really what they do, they are mostly advocates.

As advocates,I'm sad to see them do this. I will still donate to them, but it's unfortunate to see them quit. This means they will no longer have a seat at the table for future discussions.

They still do enough good to be worth donating to, but this was not a very good choice on their part.