skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
With permissive licences like the MIT licence, Evil Corp could take your code and improve it, but make their improvements proprietary. Evil Corp then has a better product than you. They can continue to benefit from your future work, but you can't benefit from theirs.

The same is true of the GPL, as long as Evil Corp never distributes the binaries to the end user. This is the service-as-a-software-substitute loophole.

With the AGPL, if Evil Corp modifies your code and allows their customer to run it, their customer is entitled to receive the source under the AGPL, which allows them to contribute it back upstream to you. You then have a product just as good as Evil Corp. They benefit from your future work, and you can benefit from theirs.
That's from 2005, and it's one of many forum software available at that time.

> There's a new release of PHP that adds several features, including a new sodium extension making PHP the first programming language to adopt modern cryptography in its standard library.

Surprise, yet another case of the blind leading the blind outside of PHP-land.

http://www.i-programmer.info/news/98-languages/11368-php-72-...
>And why people look to the Government as some panacea of trust and integrity is beyond me.

Blind allegiance to authority and the government is indoctrinated on us from an early age by state mandated school curriculum, the media, implicit fear, and other factors.
No it is not. That is debt, absolutely no doubt about it. That is emphatically not even USD. It is contracts to pay USD to a named person at some future date that are "changing hands", not USD.

There is a very big difference, especially in case of liquidity problems. But there are more huge differences : for instance, exchanging money is not free (someone's paying 2% or so). Thirdly, those transaction are legally required to be reversible (just browse some online forums), and are reversed in apparently 1-2% of cases.

If bitcoin has proven anything, it's that there is a huge need for a currency that you can actually exchange over the network.
Facebook has lost the plot
Cat Snapchats That Will Leave You with the Biggest Smile Part 5
Exactly. Their confidence not only helps to spread misinformation, but also signals to me that if I offer corrections, they'll argue with me down to the last pedantic toe-hold they can win. No thank you.
>> At least in my experience that is not true. I quite often run into this issue and the OOM-killer will only kill one of the processes inside the container, not the entire container.

Hence one does not run multiple processes in the container or / and handle crashes of potential child processes correctly.
America is a crazy country in some very obvious ways, one of them being your view of criminals in general. Everything from militarized police with military hardware , corrupted, racist cops, the war against teens doing some minor pot smoking, and the prison system being a massive industry.... Its just nuts. Compare to any other modern country. It's off the charts, the craziness.
This needs to come with an asterix: profiles of the rise of the Chinese tech industry or its supposed move from "imitation to innovation” often forgo how Chinese companies are entirely protected from foreign competition in their domestic market and that the Chinese government is forcing foreign companies wanting to do business there to share intellectual property with Chinese competitors.

It's a story about unsavory government behavior going unchecked not about private industry achievement.
Why shouldn't I kill somebody? - what could happen? A whistleblower notices and exposes me?

Yes, one ignore laws and licenses, but aside from ethic reasons you will typically run into problems sooner or later.
I agree. There needs to start being punishments for leaders of these institutions who put our society at risk over pure greed. The institutions might need to be saved atm but if everyone on charge gets away scot free then it's just going to degrade people's belief that our system is worth having
For instance, if you depend on an old version of the Spring framework, using some Java 8 features (like lambdas) will break, since it generates bytecode Spring doesn't understand. Compiling as Java 7 prevents inadvertent use of these features.
My local bar has over a half dozen cameras pointed to customers and workers areas. I installed them plus the DVR at owner request, they're perfectly visible and nobody gives a damn (except a couple customers once asking if the devices were also listening and recording audio). Everyone knows the owner doesn't use the data for anything illegal, and one time thanks to cameras we caught a worker who stole food bags to use or sell them elsewhere. Trust does also play a role here.
How to find out if Cambridge Analytica holds any data about you
Platforms to build a Chatbot
Assuming that linked code is distributed. You can use it internally as much as you want. (With the caveat that distribution has a broader meeting under AzGPL.)
WordWeb: Word Vector Visualizer for 260+ Langs
You may be experiencing the same bug as we did: memory freed by the GC of a containerised JVM was not able to be returned to the host machine.

IIRC it was due to a bug in glibc >= 2.1. Something about how mallocs are pooled. IIRC you need to tune it to be <= num of physical threads. Usually people advise 4 or 2.

# openjdk 8 bug: HotSpot leaking memory in long-running requests
# workaround:
# - Disable HotSpot completely with -Xint
# - slows the memory growth, but does not halt it:
MALLOC_ARENA_MAX=4

So, ensure that your java process is launched with that environment var (so, export it in the same shell, or precede your java command with it).

If you happen to be using Tomcat, I recommend putting:

export MALLOC_ARENA_MAX=4

into:

/usr/local/tomcat/bin/setenv.sh

As for how much memory you allocate to your containers: as of JRE 8u131 you can make this far more container-friendly:

-XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:+UseCGroupMemoryLimitForHeap

This is equivalent to saying:

-XX:MaxRAM=$(cat /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/memory.limit_in_bytes)

https://github.com/moby/moby/issues/15020
https://github.com/docker-library/openjdk/issues/57
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170888
Thanks I will add a note to my list of ideas on my rather long list of todo things.
Another very simple way to look at this is with the pidgeonhole principle. If I have (for simplicity) 4 signed 8-bit numbers, there are only 2^32 possible digital outputs I can represent. However, in the presence of aliasing, there's a theoretically infinite number of possible analog signals that could have produced those numbers, and no way from the numbers alone to distinguish them. Therefore, you need additional data to distinguish the original signal. In the analog domain, the most practical choice is to pre-filter the signal so that you know the sampling is adequate in the frequency range you are sampling. With that additional constraint you can take those numbers and reconstruct the original signal within the parameters of signal processing theory.

This point of view also has some advantages in that if you think about it, you can see how you might play some games to work your way around things, many of which are used in the real world. For instance, if I'm sampling a 20KHz range, you could sample 0-10KHz with one signal, and then have something that downshifts 40-50KHz into the 10-20KHz range, and get a funky sampling of multiple bands of the spectrum. But no matter what silly buggers you play on the analog or the digital side, you can't escape from the pigeonhole principle.

From here we get the additional mathematical resonance that this sounds an awful lot like the proof that there can be no compression algorithm that compresses all inputs. And there is indeed a similarity; if we had a method for taking a digital signal that could have been 500Hz or 50500Hz despite an identical aliased signal, we could use that as a channel for storing bits in above and beyond what the raw digital signal contains; if we figure out it's the 500Hz signal it's an extra 0, or if it's 50500Hz it's a 1. With higher harmonics we could get even more bits. They don't claim something quite so binary, they've got more of a probabilistic claim, but that just means they're getting fractional extra bits instead of entire extra bits; the fundamental problem is the same. It doesn't matter how many bits you pull from nowhere; anything > 0.0000... is not valid.

Of course, one of the things we know from the internet is that there is still a set of people who don't accept the pigeonhole principle, despite it literally being just about the simplest possible mathematical claim I can possibly imagine (in the most degenerate case, "if you have two things and one box, it is not possible to put both of the things in a box without the box having more than one thing in it").
Yes, i do believe individual humans are way less perfect agents than some free will devotees make them out to be. Making good decisions is expensive... requires both time and prior knowledge/influences. Something someone forced to do jury duty is unlikely to bring. They spend their resources to be experts in other fields.

Btw, if you wanted to go into the free will vs formed by society thing: The reason parents tell their children to "work hard" and "be responsible for them self" is this being an effective influence. Such is necessary by society to provide for people to become better individuals. I know it sounds contradictory at first.
With Greece, Cyprus, and Portugal leading the charge, I think I am seeing a pattern. It's a shame the article doesn't go into a deeper analysis of WHY this is happening.
Are you saying that hundreds of years of ad business has never worked and the billions upon billions of dollars spent on ads were wasted?

Because if you're not, "People did vote for Trump. Without someone twisting their arm." is disingenuous, at best.
The problem of swapping two entries in such a list is also quite funny.
Freedom of speech, even 'hate speech', is a human right.

This disgusts me.
This would be an ex post facto change. The government wouldn't be retroactively making the lenders guilty, it'd be a change in regulations. If this change was unconstitutional then you'd have situations like a company with a contract to dump industrial waste into a river going "oh sorry, I made this contract based on the regulations back then, so it's unconstitutional for you to make me stop polluting"
Adding an optional paid image might be useful.

Also, optional payment link.
Zuck: They “trust me”, Dumb f*cks (2010)
Global Azure Bootcamp 2018 Holds in Nigeria and Other Countries
Quantum communications, not quantum computers. https://www.insidescience.org/news/china-leader-quantum-comm...

You can search ‘quantum communications china’ for more references.

For NLP research:
https://rajpurkar.github.io/SQuAD-explorer/. See the teams behind top algorithms.

For real-world NLP: Xiaoyi (Little Doctor) was the first (and currently the only) AI that passed a medical licensing exam that human doctors need to pass (and rote learning is not enough to pass): http://sites.ieee.org/futuredirections/2017/12/02/congrats-x...
That only goes for very high-profile shows. The vast majority of shows do not sell out in minutes, or even at all.
How safe are driverless cars? Unfortunately, it’s too soon to tell
> Evil Corp could take your code and improve it, but make their improvements proprietary

Yeah, but isn't that what software freedom is all about? People can get the code and do whatever they want with it? Of course it's nicer if they share back, but if they don't, it's their loss, they won't get contributions.

If users truly value the license and to be able to contribute back, users would naturally chose to use my code rather than using the code from Evil Corp, since it has the "wrong" license from them.

Limiting the usage and distribution feels like the opposite of freedom, but I want to re-iterate that my knowledge about licensing is so limited, it feels like I'm misunderstanding something here.

I'm very grateful for the answers, so I can educate myself :)
Less than zero: six months working in low-wage Britain
CBP Expands Air and Marine Operations Center (AMOC) with Technology
Maybe you have distorted view as well.
I do not see how this is different. Because you do not find it funny? Is compating a nazi to a dog not making fun?

What right does anyone have to decide if your joke is unfunny enough to charged and convicted of a crime?
What about using linked lists? If the write performance is more of a concern than read performance then it is a possible option too.
I meant if you suspect you are a suspect
Senate to Approve Bill Limiting Immunity for Internet Firms in Sex-Trafficking
From the abstract of the Nature article (open):

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03281-1

There is :

>In comparison with other insects, expansions of gene families in P. americana exist for most core gene families likely associated with environmental adaptation, such as chemoreception and detoxification.

And from the body of the paper:

>In contrast, the increase in gene number in cockroaches is mainly attributed to their expansion of universal genes in the 12 species we analyzed

Specifically, for the American cockroach:

>The gene sets of P. americana and B. germanica contained 13,555 and 10,107 multicopy universal genes, respectively, while the highest number of such genes in other insects was only 7708.

So it seems like it is both that 60% is repetitive elements, and there are multiple copies of these 'universal' genes, where 'universal' means:

> Universal groups represent common gene families across all species analyzed, but absence in at most one genome is tolerated;
> Still hoping Oracle will be so good to allow TruffleRuby download without all the signing up and agreement

This is definitely coming very soon.
Your comment points out something very interesting about modern marketing. I think it is still ethically questionable even if you voluntarily hand over your data and not in a sketchy let-me-mine-your-friends-data-through-this-quiz way.

I feel like you used to be able to avoid getting swindled by ignoring the swindler, ex. close the door to the saleman, or ignore the gypsy pear salesmen at the market.

Today, marketing is engineered at such a level that it is difficult to awknowledge it's influence. That, and you are constantly bombarded by ads, either explicitly or implicitly.

I don't think I am saying anything novel. I guess I am curious what this mean about society and our political systems. People with power and wealth could still be toppled when you exposed them to the truth. How in the fuck does that even come close to happening today? How do you overcome marketing that is engineered to exploit the psychological vulnerabilities you are not even aware of? How do we patch our society and governing systems from being pwned?

This isn't meant as a rant. I am curious, because to the best i can tell we don't live in a society where voting matters and we have a say in our governance.
Why would relevant content challenge someone's opinion and not simply reinforce it?
I think part of the issue is the way FB allows you to use 'dark' posts that are hidden from public view, and also to set up multiple anonymous pages for your ad campaigns.

Together this means you can not only use laser targeted advertising, but show ads to one group you know will appeal, without a second group who would be put off by the message ever being aware of it.

There is also the potential to break rules on election advertising and false claims as the only people to see your ad are the small, well targeted group and an FB reviewer who is checking the ad against their own T&Cs, not the electoral rules of the country the campaign is in.
That's a hilariously naive view of judges. Judges totally have emotional and political motivations, and a huge amount of discretion. It's less "following a rule book" and more "trying to squeeze this scenario to fit the box I think it belongs in". If you think adjudication is anything like running a computer program you're dead wrong.

One of my favorite lines about judges is: "it's the responsibility of every person to know the law, except trial judges, who simply have to consider the arguments presented and have appellate courts to set them straight"
From what I have seen, a lot of companies have very restrictive IP clauses in employment contracts (at least here in IE).

The first draft of my current contract wanted a claim to all creative work produced, at all hours, on any equipment, in any medium. (e.g. the copyright on a photo I took on holiday would technically have been owned by my employer.)

They also wanted me to give up all "moral rights" which meant I could not say I created anything I did while being employed, and more worryingly, I could not say I didn't create something that the company said I did.

That clause got removed pretty damn quickly.
No. You aren't being denied your freedoms on someone else's computer because you have no right to exercise them to begin with---it's not yours.

It's the same concept with the AGPL---I have no right to modify the source code on someone else's server; I'd need to install it on my own.

If you had to have access to the source code for everything you used, it'd be an almost impossible burden. rms takes public transportation in Boston, for example. Those terminals are interactive touchscreens, required for payment and printing tickets. He'd be unable to use the transit system.

From stallman.org:

> However, if I am visiting somewhere and the machines available nearby happen to contain non-free software, through no doing of mine, I don't refuse to touch them. I will use them briefly for tasks such as browsing. This limited usage doesn't give my assent to the software's license, or make me responsible its being present in the computer, or make me the possessor of a copy of it, so I don't see an ethical obligation to refrain from this. Of course, I explain to the local people why they should migrate the machines to free software, but I don't push them hard, because annoying them is not the way to convince them.

> Likewise, I don't need to worry about what software is in a kiosk, pay phone, or ATM that I am using. I hope their owners migrate them to free software, for their sake, but there's no need for me to refuse to touch them until then. (I do consider what those machines and their owners might do with my personal data, but that's a different issue, which would arise just the same even if they did use free software. My response to that issue is to minimize those activities which give them any data about me.)

> That's my policy about using a machine once in a while. If I were to use it for an hour every day, that would no longer be "once in a while" — it would be regular use. At that point, I would start to feel the heavy hand of any nonfree software in that computer, and feel the duty to arrange to use a liberated computer instead.

> Likewise, if I were to ask or lead someone to set up a computer for me to use, that would make me ethically responsible for its software load. In such a case I insist on free software, just as if the machine were my own property.

https://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

So using someone else's computer is a similar problem to SaaSS---you're relying on someone else for your computing:

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s...
Google broke many android apps yesterday: Cordova/ReactNative/Android Stdio
You're not comparing the same thing. One is a commercially supported product... that ships HIBPv2 in a ~400MB bundle, the other one a PoC... that suggests that doing a binary search over a 30GB+ dataset each time there is a password change is a sane thing to do.

https://github.com/JacksonVD/PwnedPasswordsDLL/blob/master/P...

I wouldn't recommend to anyone to seriously consider deploying that code in production!
Frankly you have no clue about web development if you think they are learning every "this week’s hot crazy brain-bending quasi-DSL JavaScript framework"
Ever notice how much slower building software using configure is on MacOS than Linux? The results here point out why: Fork + exec is ~10x slower on MacOS.

However, this isn't exactly new information. The general slowness of the OSX kernel has been known for years, via other benchmarks like lmbench. Its one of the reasons they were the first to implement a vdso-like interface for things like gettimeofday().
Sci hub seems like the perfect candidate for ipfs, I'm astounded the mirrors haven't implementated that yet.
Surprising that they do not address the issue of derivative works for instance in relation to the EPL. The documentation correctly states that modifications to EPLed code must be made available. But it is also the case that any work that in itself is a derivative work of EPLed code must also be licensed under the EPL.
Mr. Robot wasn't bullshitting.
People would discuss facts if China was more open.
A light field allows you to generate dense 3d point clouds, even when static.

segmentation of foreground/background, becomes much simpler.
[Slightly off-topic]

> Some higher-level jobs like engineer can amplify the value creation by designing new tools for the job, but the value itself still stems from the actions of those manual labourers.

This is a nice variation of the Chinese Room argument https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room

Who is creating the value, the one that is writing the instruction or the one that is following blindly the instructions? [In real life it's more complicated because the designers have feedback from the operators and also because usually the instructions are underspecified.]
The freedom is for the user of the software, all users of the software, to be able to see and modify and use the code not just the developers.
I guess that means I'll switch to the EUPL now...
For the sites monitoring for outside breaches of their user accounts, doesn't that indicate that they are likely keeping cleartext passwords so they can rehash them to match the hacked databases?
The rich never deserve the benefit of the doubt; if they need their side of the story told, they can, and do, pay for it to be told as sympathetically and skillfully as possible. We are only to look on with as much discernment as possible.
(IANAL)

These so-called "clickwrap" or "browser-wrap" agreements have definitely been found to be enforcible. However the details of exactly how the agreement was presented and what the user had to click can affect their enforcibilty.

Source: https://www.americanbar.org/publications/communications_lawy...
Reducing "the West" to NYTimes seems to me as a much more severe oversimplification. Alexandra's viewpoint does not only contradict NYTimes, it contradicts basically the whole political spectrum of liberal democratic countries, except maybe radical left and radical right (die AfD and die Linke and the respective media in German context for example).
Of course her standpoint is not without nuances, and so is everyone's. But it is still not incorrect to call her anti West and pro Putin, and I believe she herself would not object this definition.
And of course that's not to diminish her positive role in protecting the freedom of humanity by maintaining SciHub. It is really thouht-provoking that otherwise non-free countries still contribute to common freedom by being less involved into copyright-protection system.
Personally, I consider code I don't understand after reading it thrice a much worse code smell.

Less sarcastically: I think you're being too dogmatic. I don't like the idea of 'code smells', because it encourages you to judge code not by performance, maintainability, or readability, but by the property that someone has decided it's a code smell. Often it's true that the pattern can be used to write utterly shit code. Code smells are, IMHO, being used as a substitute for common sense. My common sense tells me that the first example is most clean solution. If the code keeps you from obtaining the performance you need, or if you add more checks in other places which make the code unreadable, by all means, refactor it.