skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Amazon is, in effect, bringing attention to this issue and I am glad that they are.

> What you say ("The whole point of choosing a permissive license is that you want others to have the right to profit off of your work and give you nothing in return.") is obvious in hindsight, and should go without saying if you start a project with the express intent of commercializing it.

Even if you do thoughtfully choose a license with the express intent of commercializing the work, some competing project elsewhere - student projects, in your example - will eat your market. It is about time players entering our industry be warned of the effects of such "pissing-in-the-pool" activities.
All politics is identity politics. The difference is the left embraced it without trying to sugar coat it.

It’s too bitter and now there’s some backlash.
knowing the wireless network name and key is only worth anything if you know where that network is, and can actually go there and do something

The AP's MAC address would be the same, which you can just plug into https://find-wifi.mylnikov.org/
US State Department begins social media screening for nearly all visa applicants
It wouldn't be a waste of research on that game. But for the broader community it might effectively be. I think it'd be a great way to setup a competition among grad students though.
Exactly, I've seen for a long time that cops have the most toxic online forums. I mean, I've felt that they're often as bad or worse than the Neo-Nazi ones I've come across. But how do you know that these are real cops, and how representative are they of the force? Proper study shows that they are real cops, many of them are of higher rank in their departments, they make it hard for their coworkers to be treated with respect, they disproportionately harm civilians, and they cost their municipalities tons of money.
I would make student debt dischargeable through bankruptcy and I would also favor the federal government no longer providing, subsidizing, or guaranteeing student loans.

The "cost" of higher education is a sham; with no incentive to ever reduce costs, the cost will always rise to match incoming revenues. Meanwhile, student loans are a predatory mechanism where teenagers are encouraged to take on tens of kilodollars of undischargeable, unsecured debt. This combination has allowed the cost of higher education to grow out of control, backed by the cheap, subsidized credit of millions of Americans. Very reminiscent of the housing bubble, in fact.
And what is minimum wage? When are they actually "working", especially if they are working multiple gigs at the same time? Dumb grandstanding lawmakers did not think about these.
My train of thought is similar, but couldn't you say the same about social roles? Similarly to having different strengths in different contexts, you'll also take up different roles.
I'd much rather have a security camera over my desk than a manager's head hanging over my shoulder. Yes, there's a privacy tradeoff, but for me personally it would be worth it to cut down on workplace drama. No more he-said she-said fights that end in both people being terminated. No more false accusations of sexual harassment or racism, and a lot fewer genuine instances of both. I'm especially in favor of them if the footage is archived and only viewed if there's a specific need to, as opposed to being available live.
Adults sink most of their lives into work and raising children. There's not much time for hobbies to define them, relatively. So they define themselves by their work.
Do the tapes persist forever? I'd assume they only keep it for a couple of days at most. For the stated reason, incident response, you may not even need recordings at all, just a real-time view.

I also assume the NYT doesn't meet with sources in their offices (in full sight of everyone from the summer intern to the person restocking the fridge, all of whom you could try to bribe), and instead meets in a crowded public location like a cafe.
If you make your project open source, your goal should be maximizing people using it, not maximizing how much you profit from it. I know they may seem identical, but they aren't: Apple makes a lot of money by making software that has huge roadblocks to using it. And as many people are now realizing, open source has the ability to not make lots of money by making it incredibly easy for anyone to use.

We all benefit greatly from Linux, and I think most people have not contributed back to it in any meaningful way, monetary or otherwise. A lot of these projects only exist because they were built on top of other Open Source solutions with no expectation to give them any sort of "cut". Had Linus decided he actually wanted to start a hardware business and then got angry that IBM was better at putting Linux on metal than he was, it would be similar to this situation and I think most of us would be unhappy about a bunch of turmoil resulting from that. But when it's someone else's ideas that are being used for free, they always seem obvious and fundamental, when its your own, it's unique and unfair.

As others have said here, it is OK to say "wait a minute, I want something different", and then do something different. What is not OK is wanting to water down the definition of the term open source so that whatever thing you want to do still gets to use it. The OSI's position here is perfectly reasonable -- that doesn't mean you can't invent some new kind of license or relationship. People forget that OSI had to work to get into industry in the first place, it wasn't automatically accepted. It is somewhat funny and ironic that others now want to benefit from this work while doing something completely different.
i bet you would definitely do it if you are able to do it dude.
> and Source Available, a set of licenses that allow users to see and modify your source code provided they meet some kind of criteria you set up, such as not using the code for commercial purposes or not doing things you don't like with it.

GPL is source available, then?
> nobody will judge you, nobody will call you evil

I don't think this is true. Lots of people will call anything other than their preferred licenses evil.
In the US, a "state" came to mean, well, a US state, and a "nation" (or "nation state"), a country. ('State' in the original sense, a government, is still used in some research contexts.)
AI definitely doesn't imply Artificial General Intelligence, but I'm pretty sure no-one's saying that. The common confusion is between AI and sexy Machine Learning.
I think the question is whether the amount of innovation Uber has spurred was in line with how much money it has taken to get there. From the article:

"Uber not only lacks powerful competitive advantages, but it is actually less efficient than the competitors it has been driving out of business."

For reference, Intel, which arguably represented foundational innovation, raised $6.8 Million ($42M in 2019 dollars) in their IPO alone.
I think you might want to look into, if you have not already, a topic referred to as "gift culture"[1]

The hard reality, that someone like myself believes, is that open source works because most actors try to be considerate of others. It falls apart when everyone acts selfishly. I personally believe the world is better off because we have open source software(as generally defined by the OSI and other groups). So my concern, and I'm guessing the concern of others like the author of this article, is about losing open source as we know it today. The fear is that as actors like Amazon behave in a very anti-social and self interested way, other actors in the ecosystem will be drawn into behaving similarly. Eventually we'll return to the era when software was almost always closed.

Of course, you may not find any real value in the spread of open source software. If that is the case, then I would imagine this situation seems strange to you.

[1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/homestead...
Surveillance cameras in an office are fundamentally no different than having a manager's office that overlooks the factory floor. But maybe that's exactly it: journalists who work in an office are used to thinking of themselves as being of a fundamentally higher social class than factory workers.
> The creator of whatsapp cared a lot about privacy. So even after selling the company to facebook he warranted that facebook could not read the messages.

While that's true on one hand, it's also misleading on the other. When whatsapp was acquired in 2014, it wasn't e2e encrypted. Only by 2016 that it was utilizing full e2e encryption.

So while founders did care about privacy, for first 8 years of product life e2e encryption wasn't a thing. It's much easier to add very complex feature like e2e encryption once you have infinite amount of money, coming from facebook.

>In the end the man left (losing a lot of money in the process)

Not earning extra 100s millions of dollars, after you earned many billions, is not something easy to get a sympathy for. Amount of money they left on the table is mostly a rounding error for their bank account.
Often a key problem with interdisciplinary study, as you described it, is that the people who know A and the people who know B are often both bad at communicating outside of their expertise. Sometimes terrible. Even worse sometimes when they teach A or B, because they incorrectly believe they are good communicators due to having some success as lecturers, but don't realize how narrow that is.

So getting them to talk to each other often isn't nearly enough - you need a translator in the conversation, or you need to teach them to be more effective communicators.
Right. I think it’s a bit rich of companies such as Elastic to extend existing open source projects, surf on the goodwill of open source, and then turn around and complain when other companies use elasticsearch as open source.

The real issue with OS today is that it is too difficult to reward authors and contributors with actual cash money. Until this is fixed, “open source” is doomed to be a bunfight between well funded companies and self appointed governing bodies.

Let’s find a way to pay hackers!
>All politics is identity politics.

That's only true if you define the term broadly enough to be useless. What about, say, anti-war demonstrations during Vietnam?
It's still true even with that kind of multiplier. Would you rather see a homeless person a thousand times, or be a homeless person? It's no comparison.

But you're making a fine argument for charity. If a thousand people don't want to see a person go homeless, it doesn't take much from each of them to make it so they don't have to.
The ML problem involved, for a set of points on a line, computing the sum (over all the pairs of distinct points) of a function d(x_i,x_j) that is, in some sense, well behaved. The purpose was to compute the similarity of two sets of real numbers.

It turns out this can be done (to sufficient accuracy) in nearly linear time using something called the fast multipole method.

http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/labs/cvl/pirl/vikas/publications/F...

I wouldn't consider the "O(log n) chunks" trick all that complex, btw, although Tarjan did have to point it out to me when I should have used it.
First: I said it’s very unlikely, not impossible. Second: the failure of AF447’s pitot tubes was detected immediately and the system switched to an alternate law as a result; this contributed to the crash because the pilots were less familiar with how the system operated in that mode. Third: AoA sensors operate by a completely different mechanism so even if this was what happened (it wasn’t) this demonstrates nothing relevant.

You’re just badly arguing details while ignoring the actual point here.
There are examples of Beal Aerospace, which closed not long before SpaceX founding, and Kistler Rocket, which also didn't survive around the same time. According to success of SpaceX, the way was there - but somehow not nearly everybody succeeded. Even Virgin Galactic was thought to be easy after successful demonstration of flights in 2004 - the was the way - but today in 2019 we have Stratolaunch closing and Virgin Galactic still not flying with regular passengers.

I think reality is that doing business with space is tricky, and requires complex combinations of luck, money, perseverance, experience - approximately in this order, but still tricky.
or even worse - some sort of external hacking that produced fake targets that the Navy proceed to chase around.

Over and over in the articles, pilots were quoted as saying they never actually saw the UFO despite the radar sensors saying it should be right in front of them
Agree. But OP is saying in a battle wits, its hard to factor out the battle of wrists.
From Software to Soft Serve: Bill Gates and Warren Buffett Serve Ice-Cream
This is highly misleading, the demographics of the USA were quite different 23 years ago which means that 18-35 cohort of today isn't comparable to the 18-35 cohort of 1996 in any coherent way. These changes can only be understood in the larger context of a dynamic system, not just comparing static snapshots.
> What you say [...] is obvious in hindsight

It was also widely known for many years before Redis was a thing, i remember Slashdot comments from early 2000s about how BSD proponents are taken advantage of and they seem to like that whereas GPL proponents are taken advantage of as much as they take advantage those who take advantage of them (weird phrasing because the original quote i remember was a bit more explicit).

So it isn't really something you only knew in hindsight, it is also something that comes by ignoring people who were warning you about the consequences of your choice (royal you here).
The parent’s comment is tautologically true: if nothing kills you first, cancer will eventually kill you.
I have read the new wealth of nations by Surjit Bhalla recently. He describes this phenomenon and also includes the reasons of educational and international mobility. Education has been as accessible as never before in the last decades. Further, emancipation (rated "good" by the author") has contributed to more women studying and entering the white color workforce. And globalisation has contributed towards people moving globally to where the jobs are. This has lead to an oversupply of highly qualified people and the stagnation of real wages worldwide. Exceptions are developing countries where demand is still higher and yet is leading towards increasing wages.
"I leave a large tip only in a non-medical emergency." lol
1. I fully agree with an investigation into Google.

2. Why hasn't any federal agency looked into Apple's behavior, where they sell hardware (and here bestow it's ownership to the consumer), but continue to play middleman in what apps the user is allowed to run. It's contrary to the fundamental concept of ownership, and worse, to the tenets of decades of general purpose computing

And before regurgitations of "it's unit sales aren't a majority" gets thrown at me as a justification for monopolistic behavior, please note the truth [1] that iOS install base/usage in the US is almost 10% more than Android, AND iDevices constitute a majority.

[1]: http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-stat...
> some competing project elsewhere - student projects, in your example - will eat your market.

If a student somewhere is willing to do the same thing as your company for free and release their work under MIT, why is that a problem?

This smacks to me of Microsoft complaining that projects like Linux shouldn't be allowed to exist, because its unreasonable to expect them to compete with free.

If eventually we get into a state where Open Source development really isn't viable, then people will stop doing it, fewer people will be eating your market, and then Source Available projects will become commercially viable.
.docx (Office Open XML) isn't propertiary, it's an open standard.
No, but they mostly die with cancer(s), iirc.
The SSPL "debate" was indeed a shit-show hijacked by people either abusing permissive-license ideologies with a corporate interest in mind, or so blinded by that ideology that they are unable to grasp the idea that freedom is an inherently contradictory concept, and that to maximise overall freedom across space and time it is necessary to restrict freedoms that result in a restriction of more freedoms.

Good on these guys, I hope they build a licensing model or some other thing that can stand up to Amazon. I still consider SSPL to be "free software" very much within the ideals that movement, regardless of what the OSI says.
The graphic does say that the demographic aged 18-29 was the only one to see an increase in turnout between 2012 and 2016. But anyway, millennial voting was a lot more impactful in 2018.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/5/29/18644145/v...
That you are not Microsoft? How is this any different from vendor lock in?
Unless you're the NSA / CSIS / Etc.
Why only two AoA sensors, then? Why not a hundred?
I have much greater income security and compensation than my parents achieved and at a far younger age despite having less education. The biggest difference is a practiced skill. It takes lots of time, often without compensation, to build a desired skill.
It’s almost like giving 18 year olds unlimited access to debt for unmarketable degrees was a bad idea!
Infographic: Apple’s Biggest Acquisitions
The article talks about people switching to source-available licenses as if it were a bad thing. I'm unconvinced. If you have commercial ambitions and are uncomfortable with Amazon using your software, maybe open source is the wrong choice for you?
Parent should have been more specific: all politics is identity politics in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious state. The USA of the Vietnam war no longer exists, and isn't comparable to the USA of today.

In a nation state, politics tend to be divided more on ideological and regional lines, because everyone shares an identity.
I just made a Rust port of it https://github.com/Recursing/sunfish_rs if anybody's interested (would love some feedback)

You can play against it at https://lichess.org/@/sunfish_rs and see its strengths and weaknesses
True, that was a bad example, but honestly it's irrelevant. Same point could be made about .doc when it was reversed back when. I thought there was even a court case about someone reverse engineering .doc a while back, but I can't find it right now.
UK:
"
https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/surveillance-the-legal-iss...

- If an employer wishes to use CCTV in the workplace, the ICO must be notified as to why they intend to use it. This is part of the registration process for a data controller under the DPA. An employer cannot then use the information collected for any other reason. For example, if the organisation is using CCTV to monitor crime, it cannot then use it to monitor staff. Employers should, before using surveillance cameras, carry out an impact assessment, decide if alternatives are possible and only go ahead if the use of cameras meets a legitimate aim.

- Staff must be informed that they may be recorded and where cameras are located. To make this undisputable the employer should use clear and visible signs.

- Levels of CCTV surveillance in work must be proportionate to the reasonable expectation of privacy. In certain areas with a higher level of expected privacy, such as near toilets, changing rooms, kitchen and break areas, it is unlikely to be acceptable to have cameras.

Maintaining integrity in these areas is essential. Employers need to be aware that staff can request to see the recordings kept of them by making a subject access request, and the data must be provided no longer than 40 days after a request is received.
"

It seems that the UK law is reasonable. (At least for a country that has a high level of surveillance)
Honest question: how isn't this dumping? I thought that anti-dumping measures were a thing. Couldn't it be argued that nine years of losses mean fares are being sold below cost to push out competition, and therefore this is not ok? In particular in the context of Uber being a US-based company operating in lots of other countries (as in, being international trade, etc).
Well, after losing in the Great War, Germany, too, "had very good historical reasons for having an aggressive stance toward her neighbors." Which is the reason Hitler came to power in the first place.
Banks don’t have security cameras for monitoring the tellers in other countries?
Amazon should ignore other people data. Amazon has plenty of its data from its own products, no need to create false dichotomies.
Which is itself part of Injustice Watch: https://www.injusticewatch.org

"a non-partisan, not-for-profit, multimedia journalism organization that conducts in-depth research exposing institutional failures that obstruct justice and equality"
That and the comments on their previous projects are pretty poor. Reading those, I got the impression they tend not to support products after launch, which ultimately led me not to back it.
Total nonsense. In the manifest document it claims that the change is for performance reasons, not privacy/security. Is it for performance, or privacy/security as he says? If it's the latter, then why aren't they deprecating the observational parts of the webRequest API?
The major innovation is being able to book shared rides through a smartphone app.

Ambiguously legal gypsy bus services have been around for ages.
In the Shadow of Big Brother
Are you saying that choosing a permissive license is like "pissing-in-the-pool"? As if do so contaminates the market for everyone?
Show HN: Daily creative exercises that take 10 minutes or less
The basic argument is that Amazon is Free Riding because they get massively more out of the resource than they put in, by virtue of their scale alone.

The free-rider problem occurs when those who benefit from resources, public goods, or services do not pay for them, which results in an underprovision of those goods or services.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-rider_problem
Well sure, some people will call you evil for choosing GPL over MIT.

But the developer community as a whole, which has already shown themselves to be basically fine with proprietary software existing, is not going to be thrown off because you call yourself Source Available.

And the people who would judge you for choosing a Source Available license are not going to suddenly be OK with you using SSPL just because Mongo says to call it Open Source.
Of course if you'd use Lisp in the first place you could make a new syntax to input those things in the visually safest manner without waiting for a language revision.

Compile-time computing is precisely about this, e.g.
https://medium.com/@MartinCracauer/a-gentle-introduction-to-...
The cynicism that pours into threads like these is kind of depressing, though. People are increasingly more tolerant to predatory business practices.
They are truly innovative in the sense that they finally exposed the fact that much of tech startup funding is just a ponzi scheme by pushing it all the way to the IPO with no plan to ever make money. That's a new thing, usually only microcap companies were able to pull off that scam in the past.

Get out between series A/B if you want maximum return, the only losers in these phony companies that never make money are the last round of investors who get left holding the bag.

And if you're an employee looking at stock options in a startup just say no. Stop surrendering real money for fictional money. Get a higher base salary instead. Employees with equity plans are always at the bottom of the list to get paid out.
> If a student somewhere is willing to do the same thing as your company for free and release their work under MIT, why is that a problem?

There isn't a problem with that. The problem is when such projects aspire to commercialize their work, find it hard, and then complain when other commercial entities exploit their work.

The hypocrisy I am pointing out is that to get a software adopted initially projects choose overly permissible licenses; then when they try to monetize the project, they run into issues and cry foul.