skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Don't just avoid sending plaintext passwords, also avoid storing them! Storing plaintext passwords makes all of your users vulnerable if someone gets their hands on your database.

Instead, store the salted hash of the password, something like sha1(password + 'this string is a secret!'). When a user tries to log in, compute the hash again, and compare it to the one you stored.
Does anyone know of any other websites for Night Owls besides www.nightowlnet.com and www.nightowlcafe.com? I want to believe that there is a whole group of people who are dedicated towards making my condition more known so that I one day will not have to CONFORM to a way of life that I view as backwards. I use to envy Dave Attell.

Of course there is some sarcasm in the above comment, but really does anyone know of a place or company more centered around the "night owls" life?
I remember in the 2000 election mess, Russet pulls out a whiteboard and on national TV starts sketching out some ideas about how things might play out.

He was so absorbed in his work he was looking at "what's the best tool right now to get from point A to point B" not necessarily what the most or least telegenic thing to do might be.

I believe he's the guy who gave us the entire concept of "red states" and "blue states"

I'm sure he had a lot of faults, but it's obvious he was competing well at a national level, and having a blast doing it.

If I remember, in the last year or two the network bought him some huge freaking interactive map to use on the air. He used it once and then went back to the whiteboard -- the whiteboard was just enough functionality to do what he needed and not any more.

Lots of good startup lessons here -- or at the very least lots of good life lessons.
To clarify--I grew up in central new york and was a vistor to NYC, so you are more qualified to comment re:NYC. I just meant that NYC had had a reputation in that regard, and my personal experience in Boston was worse comparatively.
One thing i thought about was that sure if you don't downvote there could be others later upvoting it so it becomes positive but I rarely see that happen.

So if something is already -2 it doesn't need to get downvoted to -10(ok this rarely happens and of course something racist or similar might deserve it).

And sometimes it seems posts get downvoted because of the opinion and not the quality of the post.

I upvote posts that I like because of the opinion but I don't downvote posts I disagree with if they motivate their opinions well.

I only downvote if it is a slandering post with no argumentation.
To oblige you, here's your chance to downvote me again. :) I agree this shouldn't be here at all. But, given that it's here, we should say what's true about it, instead of letting the conventional wisdom be all thats heard. I thought divergent thinking about conventional wisdom is part of the whole hacker thing?

I don't think not being sad about his death and keeping the harm he did in perspective is anathema to humanity. I believe the things and people he was part of enabling are anathema to humanity. There are hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq dead or maimed because of the way the mainstream media (which he was a leader of) protected and enabled the people who were lying in the run up to war. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people dead or maimed, thousands of American soldiers killed, tens of thousands more maimed or with PTSD or suicide risks, thousands of foreigners tortured under the US flag. Thats the anathema to humanity, and the people Russert was instrumental in enabling caused it. I don't think we should care too much if he brought infectious joy to his work in judging his life.

What you are saying is basically "I was entertained by the way he was part of lying to me on the TeeVee, so he deserves better after he's dead." No. He got way better then he deserved. The ones who deserve better are the people still being tortured and that are dead or damaged for life that are consequences of the deception ho was part of. It should be how dirty these things are that make you want to shower, not me pointing them out.
I usually never downvote, but when there's something I blatantly disagree with, I'll downvote.

I'll upvote for two reasons:

1. More HN readers need to see this.
2. Excellent point.
By all accounts, "having a blast doing it" describes him perfectly. And he managed to not make many enemies, if at all. That's a quite a feat.

It was fun first.

EDIT: Funny to me that this comment and its parent just got voted down. That's some spite. See, bemoan the state of the American media all you want. But Russert was one of its shining stars - a force of good where most is trivial. We should all aspire to stand out similarly.
downvote != disagreement

If someone says something I don't agree with, but says it reasonably and with some sort of support, I'll reply instead of downvoting.
Do you have any recommended reading for the whys of implementing protocols like that?
Error in JQuery.js?
Hi All,
Wondering if any of you have found an error in JQuery.js?

I was writing a script using JQuery today and firebug complains about an error in line 1772. The statement in this line is:

return fn(elem, i, m, r);

The error message I get is: fn is not a function.

Wondering if this is a known issue? Or if there is something else thats wrong with the script I have written?

Thanks
Death is the best time to reflect upon life.

As an interesting sidenote, I didn't know who SJ was, so I googled that quote. Your comment here was the first result out of 850
You are absolutely right, although it seems to me that to a growing number of users Downvote = "I disagree" or "Everyone is downvoting so I'll follow" or "You cannot disagree with this particular user so I'll downvote".

I think downvoting should not be. It is an unnecessary evil. A "dichotomy". Fighting for Peace using nuclear power. The best way to fight comments/posts that add no value is to Remain Silent. If you hit someone, there are very likely to hit you back, but if you ignore them they are more likely to take their rants and stories to Digg or somewhere else.
You can't find other interviews with Dick Cheney, because he only let Russert, Limbaugh, and a few others interview him.

Giving a few questions that skirt the real issues is exactly the problem. Then, Dick Cheney can say he had a tough interview with a legitimate journalist. When really, he acted the part of the legitimate journalist and then let Dick Cheney manipulate america. From Glenn Greenwald:

"When I talk to senior government officials on the phone, it's my own policy -- our conversations are confidential. If I want to use anything from that conversation, then I will ask permission" --
Tim Russert, under oath at the Lewis Libby trial, citing the textbook function of a government propagandist to explain his role as a "journalist."

"I suggested we put the vice president on 'Meet the Press,' which was a tactic we often used. It's our best format," as it allows us to "control the message" --
Cheney media aide Cathie Martin, under oath at the Libby trial, making clear how well Russert fulfills his function.
The Intel-Nvidia dispute heats up with USB 3.0 standard fight
Modified:

Upvote = "I'd like to see more comments like this" || "I agree with this".

Downvote = "I'd like to see fewer comments like this".
My guess would be that if you've never had trouble keeping things running either they're not real complicated or you don't have a lot of users. And that statement applies to any technology/platform. If you build things long and big enough, you'll fight the technology at points.

That said, even if you have a ton more professional experience than your response suggests, I don't trust people who say never glibly, nor does your question seem genuine.

You're implying the guy's a newb and it's him not the technology--just say as much.
Well said edw519. Silence is louder than Downvoting.
That's pretty much my take too.

Although I would further add that I often take a particular pleasure from upvoting a comment that I disagree with, if it is suitably thought-provoking, challenging, and constructive.
Read up for the part where we discussed Visual Studio Express being free.

The amusing part about the free tools argument is that the cost of tools is such a non-concern in the professional world. I work for large customers on large projects and tools, whether they be Microsoft, Oracle or IBM, no one's worried about that.

Then again, you might be talking about little side projects, my frame of reference is mostly multi-million dollar systems.
The problem with a direct downvote mechanism is tuning it properly. If it's too weak then it won't do much good and if it's too powerful then it could potentially do harm.

I think a better idea would be to allow the editors or leaders to have some way to enable the story downvote button for the rest of the community. Perhaps after two or three leaders downvote an article, the button would be enabled for everyone.
There's most likely a large genetic component. I doubt I had formed many beliefs about the universe when I was only 5 or 6, but my tendency to stay up late and sleep in appeared as early as then, if not sooner. If I'm free to set my schedule, which has been possible at times, it's not a problem. But inevitably outside factors -- job, school, relationships, etc. -- interfere.

That said, I find that the night does have a certain aesthetic appeal -- a sense of freedom, of wonder even -- that I find absent in the cold, hard light of day, which likely contributes to my return to a "night owl" pattern when possible.
Add More Speed Dials in Opera 9.5
I disagree (although I upvoted your comment because it's a worthy contribution), if you're going to downvote a person at least share with us why you disagree and help us all glean some sort of understanding of your viewpoint.

No use adding flame infinitum.
I don't think that you should be required to explain a downvote. This would result in a bunch of comments saying 'this sucks because...<reason x>'.
I think the mentality that programming has more to do with knowing your framework's features than it does with --- you know, how to program and stuff? That's part of what pisses people off about Rails devs.

The reality is, learning framework features is no different than learning how to mail-merge with your word processor. Sure, it's important. But it has nothing to do with whether someone's going to do a good job coding for you, 2 months in.
I read the paper, and I must be missing something. (I'm not a computer scientist, so there's probably something important here that's flying right over my head.)

The paper mentions "fault tolerance" a number of times, and I'm thinking, "fantastic! They've got some magic in there so that if a node goes down, there are automatically some number of nodes that can instantly take over its place." Except, they don't ... their fault tolerance sounds like they just expect to use servers with really good data recovery. It does mention a primary backup server that's supposed to shadow each other data server, but now we're talking about an effective 2n nodes. Also, it doesn't sound like it would be all that fault tolerant in the event of network problems (broken pipe between nodes, denial of service attack, etc.), or if the root node goes down.

Since they're only storing actual data in leaf nodes, they're not outperforming a classic balanced binary tree in search time.

It does sound like they've done some good work in making sure that they keep data integrity in the event of client-server communication problems, but that's also been solved by a number of database and file systems already.

So ... can someone explain the novelty here?
I think the problem is the interface forces the projection of two dimensions (agreement and quality) on to a single dimension (score).

Personally I think the upvote/downvote should be for indicating quality but there should be a separate counter for agreement that would not affect the overall ordering. A separate agreement counter would also allow for some interesting options such as showing the comments of people who tend to strongly agree or disagree with someone.
Good point and therefore, upvote.
I think melatonin works really well for some people. If I take one mg melatonin, I sleep great, natural, and wake up 8 hours later, refreshed, ready to go, feeling like it's morning no matter what time it is.
But see, your concerns are more broadly addressed to the American media. Russert was the best of the bunch, and you seem unable to separate the disease from one of the doctors. Why?

As for "controlling the message", name one government on this planet that doesn't.

Russert, in the lead up to the war, WAS asking the critical questions. Few were listening though. And as the highest rated Sunday "news" program, he used his pulpit to the best of his ability and profession. Shoot, name one American TV journalist that did better during that time.
It is if you're trying to write about 5 separate stages, giving less than 200 apiece + intro and conclusion.
I have to admit, I've often been in that cycle myself. But there are companies where that doesn't happen, so you have to ask yourself: why am I always ending up in these lousy companies?
Google To Develop ISP Throttling Detector
I agree that there has been more capricious and unnecessary downvoting lately, and that it has a chilling effect on conversations. But pg's comments indicate he does not agree, so what can we do about it.

If the situation gets really dire, perhaps he'll notice.
A few things:

1. Many have rightly noted that Davis Square in Somerville is a cool place to hang, yet no one has mentioned its crown jewel: Redbones. Do you people really live here?

2. For excellent pizza, check out Emma's on Hampshire near Kendall Square.

3. Flat Top Johnny's near the Kendall Square Cinema is an OK place to play pool and have a beer. But watch out: their computer keeps track of how much you drink and you will get cut off if it thinks you have had too many too soon. Infernal Machines!

4. Games People Play on Mass Ave.
Actually, it would result in one person giving a reason and a bunch of people upvoting that. Whether or not that's a good thing is still up for debate. I do think people should feel compelled to give a reason, though.
All these attempts at

1. distinguishing multiple metrics for comment evaluation, and

2. declaring that up/down voting should not be used for some of these metrics

are doomed to failure, so long as

1. there is only one dimension on which to express anything, and

2. the interface for voting lacks any obvious affordances/constraints on how it should be used, even if those affordances/constraints are merely rhetorical (e.g., a JavaScript popup that asks you to confirm your up/down vote only if complies with some set of criteria).

I suspect PG is unlikely to complicate the voting interface to map to multiple metrics until some threshold of community deterioration has been reached, so a lot of this debate is pretty pointless. The only way to enforce norms about how generic up/down voting should be used, that are not implied by the interface itself, is to constantly comment on uses of voting that are suspected to be illegitimate and to start threads like this one.

After seeing several such threads, I suspect that, at best, you will only be able to convince a fraction of the community to conform to whatever norms you think are best. Everyone else will simply use the up/down arrows as a catchall for any positive or negative sentiment they feel like expressing. Total conversion is pretty much impossible, partly because some people will disagree with those norms, and newcomers will be oblivious to them.

In my opinion, there are much bigger problems here than how up/down votes are used. Constant submission and upvoting of news that's utterly irrelevant to hacker-entrepreneurs is one.
Unable to separate the disease from the doctor? A doctor would not assume that all information he got from direct contact from the disease was not to be used in fighting the disease. It was his personal rule to have communications default to off the record. Don't worry if you're talking to Tim and you screw up. He'll even take it off the record after the fact. That's why Cheney's communications office thought his show was the best alternative to control the message. That's why, and how, he got access, and that's what made him so useful to those that were granting him access. That's not being one of the doctors treating the disease.

Did Bill Moyers or Jim Lehrer do better? I bet, but then they don't get access.
"That kind of brazen disregard for humanity is anathema to any organized conversation, in my opinion."

We hackers often get so caught up in the little details of what we do, it's easy to lose the big picture. And the biggest picture of all, IMO, is other people. The bits and bytes are cool, but it's the difference they make in other people's lives that keeps me going.

I don't know whether this thread is appropriate for hacker news, but I do know that some of the comments here are totally inappropriate in any forum. Frankly, I'm a little embarassed for our community (I'm glad he's dead - wtf?)

Politics, religion, sports, and popular culture belong on other boards. But the few times they rise to the top here, could we at least act like the smart people we are supposed to be.

Thanks, Daniel, for saying what a lot of us were already thinking.
"be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others"

As a commenter, you have the responsibility to raise the level of the discussion. As a moderator (with the down arrow), you have the responsibility to be generous with where others are taking the discussion.

Slashdot does meta-moderating, but it works because downvotes and upvotes have categories that it's possible for a relatively neutral observer to agree and disagree with. Here, there's a lot of ambiguity when you upvote or downvote.
Why We Love Email from Amazon and Hate Email from Barnes & Noble
the problem with downvotes is that the parent of this comment being downvoted is more likely to be because someone didn't know what || means rather than because someone wanted fewer comments suggesting minor, helpful improvements on the parent idea.
The only thing that makes sense to me is two sets of dropdowns, instead of the up and down arrow. The dropdowns would have various positive categories "agree", "insightful", "humorous", etc. and various negative categories, "disagree", "inane", "troll", etc.

Instead of clicking up or down, you click the positive or negative attribute you use to categorize the comment.

What with clicking the drop-down, it's a two click system instead of a one-click system, but heck, to me it makes a lot more sense.
Yeah lets all keep our heads in the sand and only talk about how much dead propagandists loved puppies and eulogize them without mention of their flaws or extensive and subtle manipulations. That will show everyone how smart we are.
Bartering on the Internet
Not at all.

If I am trying to reverse engineer a bread recipe, and find CO2, I will have confirmed yeast may have been used.

It's logically equivalent to "Scientists confirmed yeast could not be ruled out." That happens all the time. There is absolutely nothing to be bothered by. Running an experiment and getting a maybe is important and valid scientific information.
Working Productively in Bash’s Vi Command Line Editing Mode (with Cheat Sheet)
I don't know if anyone goes back to old threads, but I just saw an article about using the vi command mode: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=217787

I'd forgotten to mention this as another important place to help learn vi. Command line sessions are almost all heavily editing-based, and vim really shines here (which, in addition to using zsh, gives you unbeatable command-line-fu).
Saying that you're glad someone is dead is a lot different from simply refusing to eulogize him. The former carries a certain amount of malice that's not there in the latter.
Vote things up when they are something you want the community to see, and down when it is something you don't want it to see.
Speaking of Randy: http://wiki.xkcd.com/geohashing/Boston
A modest proposal: Markets for corporate control
If all of your comments are getting upvoted, and none are getting downvoted, you aren't being contentious enough. Divide people. Argue your point, forcefully, and let the people you think are wrong downvote you. It tells you more about them, then you, if you are right, and if you are wrong you can learn things. Win-win.

Who cares about Karma? Vote me down, please. I got 325 Karma. Vote them down, I don't care at all. Why should you?
It is very difficult to get upvoted but it is far easier to be downvoted, if that is what you mean I agree but if there was no downvote, then there would be nothing stopping a mass flood of useless posts.
Support grows for universal power adapter
Personally, yes. But this is standard scientific nomenclature.
I'm getting an "Address not found" error.
Yeah, its inconsistencies like these in the article that make you question just how much of the article is a good depiction of Z and how much of it is just pure spite.
You are right. I do have a certain amount of malice towards him. Because he was on TV tricking america and laughing and playing and making people like the parent comment think he was all sunshine and jolly ranchers while at the same time he provided cover for people committing crimes against humanity.

Having malice towards people who let people like Dick Cheney get away with hurting hundreds of thousands of people is part of a well developed, integrated sense of humanity.

My hatred for people like him flows from a deeper place of great love for all beings.

(BTW: For what it's worth, One less fevered ego... and the hate parts were based on bill hicks quotes I liked. I don't know if that changes the implication or not.)
Good example of Google using their power to defend their users.
Score is relevant to things like business plans for sure. They'll know who to talk to in your area for Grants and VC. They'll have a few business plans for you to look at. While YC says 'make something people want' (they mean monetize later); most businesses have to monetize to stay afloat. This is where score will help you.

Your work with SCORE will (probably) not help your product. They'll help you with your business, which in the long term, as an entrepreneur, is more important if what you're doing is not just a pet project.
Personal and Professional Development Through Reading
Ten Commandments of Egoless Programming
Did you even watch that show or read the transcript? That interview was hardly controlling a message. And you're taking those quotes out of context and perverting them. The show is broadcast live. It was impossible to take any said "off the record".

Where Russert was non-partisan (despite his roots), Moyers is, by contrast, hyperpartisan. And neither him nor Lehrer have close to the same audience or influence. Why do you think that is? Cause they do such a great job at informing the American people?

Again, you're placing all the blame for the system on one man even while that same man has done more with what he's had, to be fair and critical, than anyone else in that system. That perspective perfectly explains the reaction to his death - from Fox to CNN to CBS to NBC to senators and presidents and bloggers alike. Again, bemoan the system all you want. But the happiness you've expressed at his death is really just sad reflection on you and how misinformed you are.
Being a morning person has its drawbacks. Morning people get sleepy just when all the fun begins. What I really wanted when I started this experiment, I now realize, was to be one of those crazies who functions well on just five hours of sleep. That's never going to happen.

Remarkable. I've thought a lot about this issue, and this is exactly the conclusion I've reached as well.

O, to rise when bright,
And bed past dark.
To be both an owl
And a lark!
I'm just seeing it like this:

High school ==> College ==> Networking with interesting people

Thanks for the insightful opinion and sharing your personal experience.