skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
DMAA safe harbor only applies if you are not aware of the infringing content. If you have a bunch of links to the same file and only take down one then you have no protection under DMCA and the standard 'greater-than $3k damages then go to jail' applies.

There is also a red flags test. If a reasonable person would be aware that the site is hosting files that infringe then it's not protected. And also you can't get direct financial benefit from it, you have to close accounts of repeat offenders, and some other restrictions.

Basically everybody knew Megaupload hosted warez, there were red flags, megaupload didn't take down links they knew were warez, and they made money off of it. Case closed. There may have also been legitimate use of megaupload, but they weren't covered by safe harbor and them being shut down is the law working as intended.

> you could combinatorially add random junk into the stream and circumvent that as well.

One could, like how people flip/speed up/record tv to get around youtube blocking, but it would take a lot of work and dedication to keep uploading your 500+ MiB movie rips over and over again.
I tried it for a few minutes and it needs work. Adding a non-Wordpress.com site is awkward and results in getting all the posts and all the comments. I'm hoping Automattic rapidly improves it to become a real competitor to Google Reader.
Running Your Own Node.js Version on Heroku
Math may explain why serial killers kill
Sometimes the HN, Reddit and other crowds forget they're not the only ones on the planet and in fact seem to make up a tiny minority—the enlightened ones. Sure, you/we may be willing to pay for an easy-to-use service though for now, because we're tech-savvy, we'll use a conglomerate of services and have it work on all our devices, etc while the mere mortal, common man struggles to avoid downloading smiley packages.

Why do the common people pirate? Because they want something without having to pay for it which is done primarily out of selfishness, laziness and wanting to pretend our actions have no consequences. On my Facebook feed, in conversations, etc they'll speak of BitTorrent or whatever and smile with an evil glint in their eyes and think they're awesome because they're getting all this content without paying for it.

The other funny thing is, you and others speak of needing to make it easier but for the common people pirating is so usually much harder—they have to keep their computers safe from malicious people and files, they need to figure out how Kazaa and BitTorrent works, they need to have the right codecs for Windows Media Player or Quicktime to play whatever the latest favourite container is, know which crack for Windows is reliable, etc. I know someone who proclaimed to be able to download torrents and she spoke of it as some great achievement and the people around her clamoured for her to download TV show x and music y.

Going down and hiring out a movie is easier for them, the majority. Going to a cinema is easier. Buying software which comes with a license is easier. Buying a CD is easier than them trying to download the whole album (Why is it do you think these people usually never download a full album and instead end up with a poor copy of popular song x and all these unnamed .mp3s?). There is the majority. Sure, the amount of people who use Steam and that is certainly relatively large but in comparison is still small.

It's nothing new to man to want something without having to earn it. Why else are 'get rich quick' or 'get amazing abs now' successful, or rather, even exist?

The post may reinforce the author's sense of moral superiority (And maybe he does have a superior sense of morals) but many of the counter-posts are simply doing the same thing for themselves.
By the obvious typos in the graphic, I don't believe it is a sanctioned contest. Might be a creative way for someone to get their homework done or someone shilling for codeeval.

software engeineer
software egineer, intergration

If it is legitimate, Warner Brothers needs to hire more than just programmers.
"In some cases – tracking down organized crime, say – government officials have an obligation to keep their investigations secret at the moment that they are performing them." -- Julian Assange, in the linked article

Seems like a straightforward statement that he believes there are legitimate secrets for a state to keep, at least temporarily.
See, for example, Hushmail, which has no option but to cooperate with correctly formed legal documents. This means that they use the passphrase (which they can capture within a short time) of the non-java-applet version of their software, or they serve a modified applet.

Being in a different jurisdiction provides a small amount of protection.
In my experience what is being reviewed by your peers are the feature diffs, not the individual commit diffs. What the actual history looks like is entirely up to you as the coder.
I'm curious who your employer is and what your response would be if the parent said "What happens if nobody pays for a copy of <your company's most profitable product>?"
And a link to Heroku Buildpack: https://github.com/heroku/heroku-buildpack-nodejs
It irritates me, because it is at odds with other abbreviations, such as MB and k (for thousand). Surely a single M for million makes more sense? If it were roman numerals, MM stands for 2000.
Taking the fight IRL would also escalate the situation to a point where anonymous members would be seriously hunted down by FBI and (overseas) CIA as a full-on terrorist organization. I don't think even anons really want that.

One thing is to express your dissatisfaction and disaffection towards the establishment who is "messing with the intertubes"; another is to move every night to a different house and go out cutting telegraph poles.
I disagree that it is really sustainable on an industry wide scale. Who pays the salaries of the free helpers so that they have the free time to contribute?
I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic, or you don't believe in the pretty damn clear political machination at play.
Don't feel too sorry for megaupload, they did manage to rake in several hundred million dollars.
Add me to the list of people who used the site for legitimate purposes only. I used it to send things that wouldn't fit on my VPS's storage, and were too big for any of the other digital lockers.
I'd see'em in Google-themed subreddits like r/android pretty often which makes sense, but in regard to the more popular subreddits, they pop up every now and then in r/programming, r/atheism, etc. kn0thing submitted a post to r/technology the other day in regard to his plans to speak to the committee on SOPA and PIPA. I think I ended up following him on G+ after that one. I also vaguely recall the 'Comcast using tricks to raise rates' post also getting a fair amount of attention from r/technology

That said, I'm pretty sure it's possible to do a reddit search for submitted links to a particular domain if you're looking for more details. (I'm a little hesitant to link directly to a bunch of reddit pages here. Don't want to step on anyone's toes.)

Anyway, it's not like G+ posts are exceeding imgur links or anything. It just seems that based on my completely non-scientific observations, I'm seeing G+ posts linked more frequently than previously (or perhaps I'm just looking out for them more often ;)).
> Facebook would be a monopoly if its user were _forced_ to log in to facebook, use its software, or give it money.

That's not what a monopoly is. By that definition, no company has ever been a monopoly.
Never used the site myself, but I thought this sort of law enforcement operation was reserved for people who were some sort of danger to the public. Terrorists, drug dealers, war criminals, that sort of thing. Copyright infringement? Running a naughty web site? Isn't this just a tad absurd?
Are you wearing your tinfoil hat?
They might manage to fill the connection limit for apache on each system (I think this is default to 256?).
It's funny how people are raging against the "government" who shut down Megaupload, when really the feds were merely the instrument.

The real decision was made in some corporate office somewhere - the real owners of the weak little puppet called "government".
Ooh, I heard about photographers taking to the network, but forgot to check it out. I'll give it a look. Thanks for the heads up!
The other side of this SOPA battle is playing us like a fiddle. This WSJ article took our stance (it's not my stance but the majority here's stance) and attacked us with it by saying we're pro-piracy. That doesn't go over well outside this community. If we just got off the copyright/privacy topic for a minute and focused on the big picture we could fight more effectively.

Point out that SOPA/PIPA are unnecessary because the Feds are shutting down sites just fine without it. Point out that due process is done away with by SOPA. Etc.

They want us to be talking about copyright and piracy but this isn't about those things at all! This is total misdirection by the other side and we all just played into it. What this is really about is the government and entertainment industry trying to grab the power to do the things they've already been doing without having to go do all that annoying stuff like gathering evidence, building a case, or holding a trial. For being such a big group of smart people I'm surprised I haven't heard anyone else point this out before.
Dang. Where was this on the 18th? I was checking HN all day.
This is correct! NSFW!!!
"EDIT: if you charge a fair price and make something available, people will buy it rather than pirate it. Louis CK and lots of other people have shown this."

There are two problems with this assertion. The first is that people's current working definition of a "fair price" seems to be $0.00. Are we really to believe that paying $1.29 on iTunes, or $0.99 on Amazon, for a DRM-free music track is "unfair"? Or that the user experience on either of those services is horrendous and painful? Come on. People pirate, in large part, because they prefer not to have to pay for something if they can get it for free. Let's be honest about that fact. If there's an impulse to "stick it to the man," so be it. I'll be the first to admit that the targets of this mentality -- the entertainment and software industries -- could use a good sticking-to. But let's not pretend that the moral-crusade argument is the sole -- or even the primary -- motivation behind most people's piracy of content. The primary reason is the price, i.e., zero.

Second, while I agree that Louis C.K.'s release shows promise, he seems to be an exception to the rule so far. Who are the "lots of other people" that have "shown" that charging a fair price leads to buying over pirating? Let's take the highly-touted example of Radiohead's pay-what-you-want release of their album "In Rainbows" in 2007. According to the post-release data, 62% of all downloaders of the album paid $0.00.[1] The next-largest segment, 17% of users, paid somewhere between $0.01 and $4.00. If Radiohead were not Radiohead -- i.e., not enormously successful prior to the release of the album -- then they'd not have been able to bear the razor-thin margin on the sale. Essentially, Radiohead gave the album away because they could afford to do so.

When Trent Reznor and Saul Williams released an album online that same year, in the Radiohead model, they gave users the choice between paying $5 and paying nothing. Approximately 154,449 users downloaded the album, and 28,322 users (about 18%) paid for it. At $5 per unit, that's a grand total of $141,610 in revenue for the album, and more likely than not, the production costs met or exceeded that revenue.

And those were hardly releases by big, onerous, anti-consumerist conglomerates, either. Those were pro-consumer, digital-friendly artists willing to put themselves out there to test precisely your proposition: that, if given the choice, people will pay. It seems that, by and large, they won't.

[1]http://financeprofessorblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/study-free-...
yes, otherwise making a pirated copy of windows would probably "cost" a billion dollars.
Russ's articles are an excellent write-up and explanation.

However, many finite-state automata regex implementations have existed for years (e.g. Java http://cs.au.dk/~amoeller/automaton) without the backtracking feature, of course. Also of interest is the benchmark data at: http://tusker.org/regex/regex_benchmark.html
Essential Hacking Software - Hacking for noobs
That's not really the way the harm actually plays out.

The free rider problem generally won't affect entities that are very large, rich, and established. Microsoft has a ton of profitable relationships that won't just go away. Besides, they have so much money in the bank that they could easily fund the development of Windows 9 even if they did not receive a penny of revenue from Windows 8. Likewise, Radiohead is not checking the latest rates of piracy before deciding whether to put out another album. They have a big enough fan base that it doesn't really matter.

But, if the free rider problem is bad enough it harms the ability of new entities--who do not have deep cash reserves or established relationships--to grow large enough to challenge the incumbents. To go from garage to professional success means making enough sales to either bootstrap or convince investors to buy in. If most customers are taking the product and not paying, that obviously is going to be a lot harder to do.
Introduction Into Hacking - Hacking for noobs
GMail really got 90 million new users since October? Why? Seems like an especially random time.
I think that is does benefit Quora for content providers to see how much traffic is being generated from their site. If I knew an article was getting a lot of traction on a site I would spend more time on there, perhaps participate and continue to improve and generate content itself, thus benefiting Quora with more data and more links for everyone.
I think you have a point but it's totally irrelevant. You're basically sayng that good artists should stay poor and work a day job so they can keep in touch with their roots and make good music. Well, maybe they should, maybe not but there's no connection to copyright here at all.
I do not think it is relevant to separating ads from useful content. They are probably just calculating place of content which is relevant to search keywords in the screen. This would works for images and other graphical content too.
Actually, it did result in economic benefit for Canada, and also in job creation in Vancouver, though not for a long time.

As for the more general discussion about the economic benefits of investing in foreign entrepreneurs, I'm not sure you're looking at it quite the right way. I would expand on this idea some more but I'm not sure what you mean by "noise in the media," who exactly is investing, (private entities or the Government?) your definition "quick win," and what's your opinion on this matter.
This ... doesn't help. Especially right now.

If I worked PR for SOPA/PIPA, I'd try to associate the anti-SOPA/PIPA movement with Anonymous. Let's see: Megaupload is a foreign website being taken down. SOPA is about taking foreign websites down. Anonymous responds with vandalism as a result of Megaupload being taken down. Therefore, anyone opposing SOPA are criminal vandals. Yep, that logic should be strong enough for the American public.
Amit is also extraordinarily generous. A lot of why he's "famous" is for giving stuff away... his products, his events, his space, his time, etc. I don't think all "famous" people would've received the same outpouring of support.
@pg are you giving founders psychometric tests?

Resourcefulness might decompose into several well-defined traits or aptitudes. If I had to guess, I'd expect successful startup founders to score low for neuroticism, high in conscientiousness & openness as well as having an internal locus of control.

This could be invaluable, both in selecting the companies as well as for coaching and teaching.
Some of Anonymous's early protests were impressive. But this is just cowardly vandalism. The DoJ is not thinking, "Whoa, we better not arrest any more copyright infringers so our web site is safe."
I still don't see anyone offering a viable solution..

There are a lot of variables that come into play for a generic copyright or IP law that encompasses all creative works. The first of which should probably be scope.

Physical and non-physical creations; a painting or a jpg; a photo of a painting in jpg format; a photo of a photo of a painting in jpg format.

The digital work - the internet - has changed the world forever and we're not going back. Some form of "SOPA" or "PIPA" is inevitable.

The question is simple: what are you going to do about it?
You may be right. When you think about it, what were the odds that the 100,000,000th file would be something funny worth mentionning in a post?
So, MegaUpload.com has two links to a movie file, each created by a different user (user1 and user2). The copyright holder files a DMCA notice against the link created by user1.

Should MegaUpload.com remove the link for user2? The rights holder has not claimed that the second link is offending. It's possible that user2 has the right to distribute the file, but user1 does not.

It's a dicey issue.
"Cash" and "revenues" are largely interchangeable (modulo financing and billing practices).

Did you mean "revenues" vs. "gross/net profit"?
Google Misses in Q4: Where’s That New Revenue Stream?
In a sense, yes, but they're also proving that the products they are "boycotting" are so important to them that they cannot do without them, even to make a point that supposedly is very important to them. It doesn't tell the MPAA "you need to provide a more valuable product", it tells them exactly the opposite - their product is so important to them that they can't live without it.

It tells them that if they can manage to game the political system to push the risk of prosecution and/or cost of conviction high enough, then many of those people will pay. In other words, it motivates them to do exactly what they
are doing.

On the other hand, if very large group were to simply stop consuming they would be in a much stronger bargaining position. I don't see that happening though. I just don't believe enough 1st world humans have it in them to pull off something like that.
I think the GP was talking about belief in the usefulness (or reliability or validity) of Myers Briggs. Note that the MBTI doesn't just classify people into 16 categories; it classifies people into discontinuous binary categories along 4 axes, obviously resulting in a total of 16 categories. It's certainly useful to think about peoples' positions along those 4 axes, although maybe there are other axes more useful for describing personalities in some situations. However, I find the idea of absolute binary classification (i.e. you're either an introvert or an extrovert, there are no shades of gray) hard to swallow.

For what it's worth, Wikipedia has some interesting summaries of criticisms of the MTBI's validity and reliability. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator#Val...
>> - It doesn't let me search for untagged messages.

Yes it does (I think I must be misunderstanding what you mean by untagged)

>> - It doesn't let me search or auto-tag by contact.

Yes it does (you can search for a contact, and you can setup a filter to auto tag)

>> - It doesn't let me view messages in a fully-threaded, rather than flat-threaded format.

Why would you want this? Gmail's threading system has been widely copied and I've always thought of it as obviously superior.

>> - It doesn't let me read my mail in a two-pane format, where headers are in on pane and the body of a message is in the other.

Fair (though there is a google labs feature which lets you view message bodies without leaving your inbox by double clicking).

>> - There's a lot of functionality for which there is no keyboard shortcut. E.g., displaying inline images.

Do you really think there should be a shortcut for something like that? This example is especially worrying because it's a security feature.

>> - The built-in GUI editor often doesn't do the right thing. I.e., it routinely just does weird stuff.

I have no idea what you mean by this, but I'll assume you mean the rich text editor, and I haven't really experienced "weird stuff."
Modern Principles of Web Development
So MS would announce that it is no longer making Windows, and companies would then have to decide whether they want to stay in business by moving to another OS or not. I'm sorry, but I think there is a STRONG argument that if something can be obtained easily for free, or worse can be obtained MORE easily for free, then trying to defend the model by making free illegal is much like trying to make people pay a wave tax or it's illegal for them to touch the water at the beach...
Surprised that they didn't incorporate any ASP.NET MVC in there. I was under the impression they were a Microsoft shop?
A trip to the Voxel Farm
Except that in the vast majority of cases, not following them really hurts your chances of getting into the App Store.

Try to find a few other apps on the App Store that you can exit from within the app, to get a sense of just how much of a "guideline" this really is.
> Are not all the people who choose to download content without payment already carrying out a form of deafacto boycott?

but they're also proving that the products they are "boycotting" are so important to them that they cannot do without them

That seems like a rather strong conclusion to draw from seeing someone willing to pay no money and assume a negligible risk in order to acquire the product.
Ah, yes, I knew that there were some other biggies that I was temporarily forgetting about. Yes, it drives me crazy that I can't tag a message while I'm composing it, and it also drives me crazy that I can't delete the attachment for a message without deleting the whole message. What's up with that???
Cost breakdown for Stripe, Braintree, Chargify, Recurly and Saasy
It's hard to believe there are people who regularly use vim and still use escape.
Donate to find a cure by signing up for this site
But it also gives you the excuse to say "see? we don't need SOPA, overseas websites are already being closed down".

It doesn't matter what "the American public" thinks, as long as senators' phones keep ringing an people keep organizing. The copyright mafia will never be able to take the streets, TeaParty-style, so whether they brainwash a moron here and there doesn't really matter.

EDIT: btw, I do find the timing of this operation quite "funny". Conspiracy theorists will go wild.
The first one doesn't fit, either. If the Earth were round wouldn't the people on the other side fall off?
Thanks for sharing.

On the web version it feels that the highlighted hotels are too few now. For example, over all of Paris, it shows only 10 highlighted hotels, with a bunch of gray dots all around. It gives me the feeling that there isn't much availability or that your catalogue is short.

When it's at the level of a neighborhood, it makes sense. But at the city level not really (IMO), since you'll have hotels of different styles/atmosphere but of similar quality overall.
It is interesting that this article appeared today:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3484419

On HN's frontpage, hours before the take down, then this.
Primed by expectations: why a classic psychology experiment isn’t what it seemed
SOPA Compromise Proposed by Harvard Law Professor
It really is a biased article over a trivial amount of bandwidth. I'd like to see the percentages for Facebook or YouTube from corporate addresses. I'm certain that they're astronomically higher yet I don't see anyone making a fuss over it.
I don't really want to get meta but it's possible you were downvoted not in disagreement but because someone felt your post contributed little more than a "+1" post.
HN is a political organization now?

Protesting a law that threatens one's own existence doesn't mean one has to then express an opinion on every political fact under the sun.