skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A few days ago I read this article:

http://martinfowler.com/articles/lmax.html

"10: An interesting side-note. While the LMAX team shares much of the current interest in functional programming, they believe that the OO approach provides a better approach for this kind of problem. They've noticed that as they work to write faster code, they move away from a functional style towards OO style. Partly this because of the copying of data that functional styles require to maintain immutability. But it's also because objects provide a better model of a complex domain with a richer choice of data structures"

The world of software is so large and varied that I no longer can just believe the word of experts can be applied to other domains that they probably are not expert or have experience in before. PG with his LISP/Scheme world. Joel Spolsky with his Microsoft background. Martin Fowler with his OOP, Modeling ecosystem. Joshua Bloch with software correctness. Linus Torvalds with his embedded/OS island.

Are the things they wrote and spoke, within their domain, correct/make-sense? Perhaps.

Can we apply their opinions to other domains? Probably not.

I also feel that it's weird when a person always say "use the right tools for the job" but always push for his/her favourite programming language as if the language is always the best tools for anything that pops up in HackerNews. It feels like someone trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

Then there's the "let's burn the Agile Consultants" movement around here while promoting alpha-geeks that always change their programming language or web framework or their app-server of choice once every 2 years.

Some people don't care with the next programming language probably because they're busy learning Data Mining (Math & Stats), SOA, REST, HTTP protocols, SEO, CSS/HTML, administering Linux server, designing a database model, automating their testing effort, writing i18n-compatible apps, building robust code (in the programming language of their choice). Pretty much getting better in the situations that don't necessarily involve learning a new programming language.

Maybe programmers prefer to learn new programming languages as opposed to other things because learning a programming language is easier as opposed to learning Data Mining. Most programming languages are similar in a way they have a subset of common features: functions, type systems, object/classes in some, pointers/reference, iteration/loop, array. It's probably because we're human: we prefer things to be instant.

I don't think Ruby is more productive than Java in almost all situations. I'll give Rails the credit for being more productive for a simple CRUD apps if you compare it to most Java frameworks (the newer ones like Play, Spring MVC, Spring Roo, and a slew others are on par).

Maybe we shouldn't judge people based on their knowledge of more programming languages.
Damn sorry I'm missing it this year, but I'd be useless for a sold 2 days after it.

I can't remember using the internet much at DEFCON. It was pretty solid partying. Now CCC, that's a different story...
Logarithmic in both directions (from average), or do we throw away information for either the brightest or the slowest students? Do we not have enough storage bits available for a linear representation?
I understand your dislike but this is NOT about mis-using personal data to inflate my network. Think about this: What's the good of having a social networking application without a complete social network??

Its simple: I desire a solid option for creating "passive" profiles so that the early majority of users can see the not-yet-active late majority. See the vision?
Yup, if you (or someone) built that, I'd use it.

Of course, it may not be that popular since not all that many people that are addicted to their devices

It's a growing problem. Every other day I see a mainstream news article about device/app addiction.
No wonder at all, although tech is far from the only field with big heads.
Bussiness processes are already unpatentable.
About Car Shipping Company
"To be fair, economics is to blame for some of the decrease in creativity. A movie studio can make more money with a sequel than a gamble on something creative."

More specifically people want to know that they will enjoy something so they buy a brand that they're familiar with, even if it is repetitive.
Sam Wyly did something similar, set $100,000 per annum for a law firm to slowly destroy Ma Bell.
http://www.charlesandsamwyly.com/sam-wyly-highway-computers....
More about it in his book (which is outstanding for any business read).
http://www.1000dollarsandanidea.com/
Software itself isn't patentable -- software licenses work on the basis of the copyright on the source code, not a patent. Software patents generally describe algorithms rather than their specific implementations, just like ordinary patents describe a method of solving a problem.
IANAL, but I have been way too intimately involved in something. There are many types of threats that can be considered criminal harassment, but threatening to call the cops is not one of them (at least in Canada). I presume the same would apply to blackmail. Calling the cops is what you're supposed to do, so threatening to do what you're supposed to do should not be a crime. It might be different if you were trying to collect something that wasn't yours, but...

Another thing I learned was to never accept any sort of repayment scheme. Once you do that, it then becomes a civil matter rather than a criminal matter.

Again, I'm not a lawyer, and this may apply to Canada only.
These emails have been discussed before. Can we leave the speculation alone for a bit and resume when there's new information or a new vantage point?
Beginners Guide : pip and virtualenv
I was also wondering — I hope you don't mind — would it be considered safe to just verify signed messages using cryptojs? For example, let's say the environment (webapp) is bootstrapped using TLS, this includes the public key. Now could this application receive signed messages through different, unsecure channel and verify them safely using the public key received through the secure channel?
I guess that just leaves starting the OS that powers most of the web.
Pakistani Matrimonial Website 'PakRishta' defaced by Cyb3r R3b3linZ
This may get buried but started a poll on smartphone platform usage:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2855717

Please vote!
Scientists do something similar, in that they have to log absolutely everything they do and publish the important parts. Biologists and psychologists are even more on the hook, since they have to demonstrate compliance with experimental ethics regulations. It's a bureaucratic hassle, but it works pretty well.
While you're right that there are some practical issues with this sort of system, one should also recognize that the patent system doesn't current scale well either. You have to check the claims against every publication in existence. Since this isn't possible, this ultimately has to be fought out in court -- yet a granted patent still carries with it a presumption that the patent rights should be upheld.

One could, however, have a system where if two separate teams file patents before either are published, they should not have to license it.
Okay..? What difference does that make?
Google's release of Android parallels Microsoft's release of IE a little too closely for some (I do believe it was mentioned in some report I read).
(Not legal advice, just my opinion)

Not true. It would only be blackmail if he didn't legally owe the money.

Threatening to go to the DA is very appropriate. In fact, it's what you should do so that he knows how serious it is. I would say something like, "If there's not a cashier's check in my hand by x date, I will file criminal charges with the DA."

It would be the polite thing to do, so that he's not blindsided with a criminal record.
It may be a way to prove that google owns this directions if they ever end up in court.
If it can be safe to verify the integrity of a JS cryptosystem at all, I think it's going to turn out to be tricky to do it. Like I said elsewhere on this thread, the number of ways a web page can influence the Javascript runtime is huge, and a lot of those ways are cached.
One click and most of Loadsys's patents are really biz process patents implemented with technology.
this article is total BS (accept for Balmer of course)
it's easy to say "timing is everything" after the fact, but Zuckeberg did an awesome job. as in, series of great and innovative moves .. not just good timing.
and " Last spring, Facebook reportedly turned down a $750 million buyout offer...Bad move" Facebook made 2 bil in 2010.. what am i missing here?
Linux is influential not because of git or Linux themselves, but because he represents to a lot of people how to manage an open source project. And to a lesser but still very large degree, he represents how to manage ANY software project. So the management decisions he makes end up being copied across open & closed source projects around the world.
FWIW, I'd argue they nailed putting both Blu-Ray and HDDVD on there.
B) Would probably best be a handful of small incremental changes. My list: shortening the lifetime of patent exclusivity, raising the patent application fees and using that money to staff the patent office to the point where they don't grant bullshit patents, require disclosure of who has been sued/threatened so that defendants can combine legal efforts, require more disclosure about who owns what patents, so you're not sued from an empty office in Texas, allow for public oversight to contest patents on the grounds of prior art.

These (small) changes have a much better chance of being made than abolishing software patents altogether, and would help reduce some of the abuses that are out there today.
Microsoft bought aQuantive for $6 billion.
1) What stops me from "cleanly inventing" something that is already patented? There's no way to prove that I derived my work from the patent.

2) How do I know which things need to be certified as inventions? Software patents are so vague that even simple applications can infringe hundreds of them. iOS apps are being sued just for having in-app upgrades.

3) Anything that requires more beurocracy or litigation is only going to make things worse because small players can't even afford to make use of the system, especially when they are fighting against dedicated full-time lawyers. The only alternative to solving that underlying problem is eliminating the ways it can be exploited.
I keep thinking about the case where someone has a valid idea for an invention that's worth a patent, but doesn't have the funds to build such a thing.

Let's say I invent a new kind of power generation that requires construction of a large-scale power plant. I shouldn't have to wait until the power plant is built and operational before I get protection for the invention. I should be able to get a patent on the idea and sell the rights to implement it to someone who can.
If SGen is almost production-worthy, then most of my complaints about Mono go away. Looking forward to it.
Our financial system has become a madhouse
Will hackers from Singapore please stand up?
Hello ... I would like to network with fellow Hackers from Singapore.

What startups are you guys in?

I am in the midst of launching my startup by the end of the year and am trying to save some money for web servers and stuff...

If anyone of you have any 'lobangs' (If you're a Singaporean, you'll know what that means) for a job vacancy that does not restrict employees from moonlighting (on my own personal projects), do let me know..

Thanks!
Another potentially good idea trying to solve an open problem with lots of room for improvement...

...ruined by the ever-spreading concept that everything should be solved using web apps. I mean, heaven forbid that they actually have a physical center with employees testing people.
You could have the best technology in the world but the name would never pass the smell test on due diligence.

Professionalism means as much as technology when it comes to things I would base a product on.
WP7. The design really grabbed me when I saw it. I like the way the live tiles function and the app selection is fine by me as I don't really go on the marketplace looking for a lot of apps. Even though i'm using a Mac for my desktop I really like the Zune/Zune Pass and it works well with the phone. The integration with social networks on the people hub is pretty nice and it will get better with Mango. With that said I am really looking forward to seeing the Pre3 and enhancements to WebOS.
You can buy and rate an app through iTunes without actually having a iPhone synced, right? 400 scammy 5-star reviews don't represent 400 iPhones out there, they represent 400 PayPal accounts — shoot, it might even be the same PayPal account — and a bill for $800 less $560 earnings.

I just confirmed this by creating a new Apple ID, linking it to my real PayPal which has been linked to a different account in the past, and buying and reviewing a (different, non-scammy) app. (Sorry Apple!)

Seems like the quick fix here is to require you to rate apps on the device itself. It would raise the barrier to entry significantly, at least.
I'm a .Net developer and I have tried to use Mono in the past for a few sites, but there are always a few minor problems that are a total turn off.

I just stick with Windows hosting instead.
Comcast Now Offers $10 Internet Access For Low Income Families
Oh I thought you meant, "Let's not legalize marijuana. Think of all the DEA agents that would lose their jobs!"

Yes I would agree. I think lawyers are generally pretty smart people and we're losing the prosperity they could be creating.
You're just using five words to say "ignorant".
You should try virtualenvwrapper, it makes the process of activating and changing between virtualenvs a breeze.
New Song: Chris Brown Featuring Justin Bieber, 'Ladies Love Me'
Unfortunately, scams like this aren't new on the App Store. Ever since the App Store has been around there's been seedy apps perpetrating to do things that just aren't possible. You just have to do a search for apps like "location trackers" to see how widespread it is.

I saw this particular app in the Top 100 around 2 months ago, and noticed it had an average rating of 1 star, how this has evaded being on Apple's radar for this long is beyond me.

Apple has taken a lot of flak for being too stringent and strict with the App Store review process, but this is one area the whole process was designed to fix. This is literally a case of a single guy falsely advertising his app and, by all accounts, having hundreds of thousands people fall for it and pay $1.99 for the privilege of being screwed.
I don't really understand what you are asking
upcoming post :P
The current state of the art that I've noticed for App Store review spam is to:

1) Create accounts well ahead of time

2) Use the accounts to give nearly-always-five-star reviews to several highly-rated and frequently-reviewed free apps, such as Angry Birds Free, Instagram, etc.

3) Age the accounts for a while (weeks maybe) while continuing to repeat steps 1 and 2 to create more accounts.

4) Having collected enough seasoned accounts, use them all at once to pile on fraudulent downloads and nearly-all-five-star reviews to maximize chart impact.

The result is many fraudulent positive reviews for not just appspam but popular legitimate apps as well. Many popular free apps end up with many more reviews that are overwhelmingly positive (a rich-get-richer effect) and have the trademark brief and too-weird proto-English that characterize fake app reviews.

It's a strange phenomenon -- try reading a few pages of Angry Birds Free reviews sometime (preferably morning hours in North America) and you'll see what I mean. The developers of top free apps are receiving (and benefitting from) spam reviews they never solicited.
Give me a break.

> And, Google's secrecy and self-isolation erodes trust.

Many, if not most, tech companies are much more secretive than Google (Apple?). From the few times I've read Google's blogs, I thought they were quite transparent and open.

> the current interpretation of Delaware corporate law states that a corporation must maximize shareholder value.

That would make a great tagline for a dystopian Hollywood film. There is a good reason why Google takes good care of your data and won't sell it to evil governments or corporations: they would go out of business if they did so.

Your comment is more a criticism of NDAs, corporate secrecy and capitalism than Google itself.
Obviously I do not belong to the "early-adopting crowd": I do not own a smartphone. Why? Because I find the 80 dollars per month too high price to pay for something(access to the internet) that I have almost everywhere I spent my time: work, home, bookstores. Even though I am seriously tempted everyday to get an iPhone.
I use an iPhone but, like zmonkeyz, I'll get a pre3 if the hardware turns out to be up to scratch. I tried 2 original Pre units but returned both because of hardware problems.
Paksitan Matrimonial Website Defaced
"Another words"... Really, Cuban? At least we know this is really him speaking, because that's pretty damn embarrassing to put out to the whole world. It's a great post though. I agree 100%.
I have an Android phone and recently bought an iPad. After experiencing both platforms I think I'll be buying an iPhone 5 next.

If I we're going to do android again I'd get a phone where I could install stock android (like the Nexus S).

Oh also, I really hope WP7 doesn't take off. The new wave of smart phones run webkit almost exclusively right now and I'd like it to stay that way.
I think the right thing to do here is to realise that they are outside your current means. Either pick them up for some contract work at the market rate or if they do really believe in the idea maybe they should be a cofounder.
Don't use one. (Shouldn't this be one of the options as well?) (Disclaimer: I've also never owned one.)

Half of my reasoning is specific to the various platforms. I don't want to use an iPhone because of Apple's usual obsessively controlling policies. WP7 is probably not good at all (judging - I'll admit - mainly from its popularity). Blackberry and Symbian just aren't hip. Maemo/Meego is too hip. I've never even /heard/ of Bada. Android ... Android would be my choice, if I had to pick a platform - but I've played with several Android devices, and they feel slow. Laggy. With the better ones, it's not really noticable except as a slight feeling of discomfort. It's as though I'm fighting with the phone, just a little bit, to get it to do what I want. And it wrecks the experience. (IIRC iPhones were like this too a few years back. Some Android vendors will figure it out, eventually.)

The other half of reasoning is that I can't imagine what I would use it for. I hate reading on the small screen. I find 98% of all games incredibly boring (the other 2% are only mildly boring). I hate the idea of being constantly tied to the rest of the world via an electronic leash. I don't like cellphones! Pesky things, always buzzing at you when you're trying to get something done.... (I keep mine off most of the time.) Most importantly, everything I use my computer for involves either typing or fully exploiting every last square inch of real-estate my screen has. Smartphones are only good for consuming information, and at a slow rate at that.
I don't know that I agree with you entirely. Debt prison just seems kind of dysfunctional to me; if you imprison me because I'm late paying you back... there's no chance I'll be able to pay you back!
Main reason I have an iphone and would probably continue with them as long as they stay reasonably close to state of the art is that app eco system. Pretty much every company I see with develop for iphone first and then maybe Android later if they are successful enough. Despite not being the biggest user of apps I know if something new and interesting comes out I'll most likely be able to take advantage of that.
Well the integrity of the JS cryptosystem would be no worse than the integrity of the webapp itself.

I understand that one cannot trust the JS crypto for handling the private key and doing any singing & encryption because of the possibility of leaking information through side channels. That's why I was wondering if it'd be possible to use JS crypto in only one way — that is to verify messages against public key received through the secure channel.

If the JS crypto only does verification, it wouldn't matter if the _public_ key is cached, as long as it can't be arbitrarily changed by another process. If the server is taken over or there's an XSS or other client-side vulnerability the bidirectional TLS would be similarly useless anyway.
Something I would add to this list: require that patents be actively enforced in order to remain valid, similar to copyright and trademarks. This would prevent submarine patents.
How does this play out with the multiple ratings firms though?
Intellectual "Property Tax". Have everyone declare the value of their intellectual "property" (patents, copyrights, trademarks) - each and every item, for that year, on their tax return, and have them pay 1% of the value as "IP tax".

That amount is what one pays for a compulsory license or if successfully sued, and up to 3 times that for willful infringement, per year -- and no more. (But of course, patent owner can always negotiate a lower payment)

All of a sudden, everyone has an incentive to state a reasonable value for their patent. Copyright catalogs that are not being published (old music recordings, old books, old movies) would be assigned 0 value by copyright holder, to avoid tax - which means anyone can freely make a copy. If they believe -- at the end of the year -- that someone is making a profit at their expense, they can set the value as high as they want at the end of that year, pay the tax, and sue the profiteer.

Simple, elegant, and coffer filling.
Minds returning to India
That makes no sense at all. IE was bundled with the OS which was licensed for money, forced down the PC manufacturers' neck with anti competitive terms and conditions along with proprietary technology (ActiveX/VBScript) to further Microsoft's monopolistic grip on the PC market.

On the contrary Google is distributing an Open Source OS with well documented APIs (that RIM is using to run Android apps as-is), they aren't requiring any anti-competitive agreements/royalties from anyone to forbid them using alternative OS etc. They are betting on good-will and competence as far as I can see - that manufacturers can use it on its merits rather than being forced to do it. Of course in the process they are making money but it's win-win for everyone.

IE killed Netscape - that was anti competitive for some but having lived through Netscape 4.x I can assure you that Netscape's incompetence was also a big part of their failure.
That's a great concern, but I don't think we're talking about requiring an exemplar to patent so much as a "use it or lose it" system.

And "use" doesn't have to mean implement. In your case, you'd just tell the truth: "I've been making a good-faith effort to license this generator technology to power companies, but they keep turning me down because they're waiting for my patent to expire instead so they get it for free." If you can document that effort, there's no reason we couldn't consider that a valid use and sustain the patent— and so the power companies have no incentive not to license your technology, and so the generator gets built and everyone wins.

Remember also that the only case this comes up in is if a power company sues you to get your technology for free on the grounds that you aren't using it. If you offered to sell it to them first, that's a pretty open and shut case.