skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The headline for this link is incorrect: the Court did NOT rule that a warrant is necessary for police tracking.

So what was the government trying to do? They really wanted the Supreme Court to rule that installing this GPS receiver was not even a SEARCH within the meaning of the 4th Amendment. The Court said no, this is a search. In the future, they will subject similar GPS installations to 4th Amendment scrutiny.

But on the warrant issue, Scalia explicitly wrote the Court will not answer the question of whether the government needed a warrant on page 12 of the opinion. Why? "The Government did not raise [this argument] below, and the D. C. Circuit therefore did not address it... We consider the argument forfeited."
Diary of a non-tech founder: How Ryan Notz went from stonemasonry to MyBuilder
Sharing Economy - Brian Chesky (Video from DLD)
Thanks. I haven't been keeping up.
I've tried being a morning person. I spent 9 months getting up at 6 am to get to work before 8 am. I made it every day. As soon as that gig ended I immediately, literally the next day, started getting up after 9am again. I can't make myself a morning person.
That's too bad...for Stanford. It must have been a somewhat serious fight.
The advantage of their "unsophisticated" attack is that it works on any website. jquery is often served off CDN, so it might not be a reliable target (for a site-independent attack).
Very interesting. These games in the browser will change the world for gamers.
"We need to educate those in power to make informed decisions on legislation concerning the internet".

What makes you think they are not informed enough? The problem is not that politicians in government are uninformed. The problem is that they succumb to the pressure of lobbies who have the money, and put their interest before those of us, the people. And are those lobbies' interests the reason why we get into wars, our civil liberties are undercut, etc.
Aside from catching the sunrise, none of this has anything to do with rising early as in early in the day.

It's mostly about rising early meaning with ample time so that you are not rushed and have time to start the day in a mentally and physically healthy way.

I think that starting the day in a positive way is very important regardless of what time you wake up. You don't need to go to sleep at sundown and wake at sunrise.
I'd say "focus on the server," which seems to be overloaded and currently unavailable.
Ironic comment?

If you're a day trader, never trust the Canadian press when reading about RIM.
more importNtly, if the supreme court asks them, what will they say.
in this case peosecutors mad it clear they interpreted the law to meanthey could legally gps tag anyone, including then supremejustice's car without a warrant - one imagines this could not have helped their argument, though the supremes, unlike lower courts, are there to be the wisest of the judiciary and keep things on track, iltimately. glad they did.

police need tools to do their jobs, ive lived in lands with police forces that aredysfunctional. they need limits too, it just may turn out that the supreme court decision here changes a. lot of things indirectly, rebalancing things a bit.
Google Voice is not a VOIP solution

Isn't it? I can make calls from my laptop microphone. What else do you need to be VOIP?
Why history needs software piracy.
Scholastica is focused on improving peer review and publishing for scholarly journals. Annotum is also improving the process of scholarly publishing, but more focused on collaboratively authoring material while we support the publishing process of both traditional and open access journals. We also differ in that we aim to:

• Improve the scholarly publishing process for all involved by improving usability

• Eliminate the need to install software on your own server

• Automatic data backups to which also lessens the need for IT Staff

• Not focus solely on the sciences

• Give reviewers better incentives and public recognition for being good reviewers

• Create a global pool of reviewers across a variety of disciplines

• Give scholars a place regardless of discipline where they can share ideas

I encourage you to take the tour on our website (http://www.scholasticahq.com/tour) to see more of these differences for yourself.
This is similar to an issue I've come across in Chrome recently: I get asked to enable the QuickTime plugin every time I access a site with QT (e.g., any trailer on trailers.apple.com).

There's no way to disable this checking globally aside from using a command line flag. If you hit the link for more information, you are taken to this page (https://support.google.com/chrome/bin/answer.py?hl=en&an...), which states:

> Some plug-ins, such as Flash, are used by many websites on the Internet. Other plug-ins are only used by a small number of sites. Since plug-ins can occasionally be a security risk, Google Chrome now blocks plug-ins that are not widely used.

Which runs counter to the conventional wisdom that a larger installed base means a larger attack target and seems a bit anti-competitive especially since Google is trying to push WebM over the Apple-backed H.264 and the deal Google made with Adobe to bundle Flash.
Anyone know how this is squared with US v. Knotts? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Knotts

>United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 was a 1983 United States Supreme Court case regarding the use of electronic surveillance devices. The device in question is described as a beeper and can only be tracked from a short distance. The court unanimously held that the use of such devices did not invade a legitimate expectation of privacy, and was therefore allowed, without a warrant, under the Fourth Amendment.

Is it just a distance thing? Or length of time of the surveillance?

Here's the full opinion:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us...
I think the clarification is that it is not just a VOIP service. If I call someone with my Android phone it is routed through normal voice call paths, not as a VOIP call.
That article is massively wrong, as you would see if you spent (literally) two minutes looking at the bill.

Here's an earlier description of what the bill ACTUALLY does: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3497599
I can think of one recent example: District of Columbia v. Heller & McDonald v. Chicago. Lower courts have been generally unwilling to embrace 2nd amendment rights in light of those two decisions.
I respect the sentiment, but let's be fair here: this was a unanimous decision. There was no dissent. If one of the conservative-leaning justices were replaced with a liberal-leaning justice, it would have gone the same, with "A left-leaning Supreme court".

Sure, there's a lot to complain about, but this case shows that there are positive things both sides agree on.
"going all the way" means bringing the endeavor you are leading for to a stable conclusion. A leader is most strongly judged based upon his ability to bring and maintain stability. David failed here because he didn't keep his followers' minds upon the inevitable instability that was on the way, so as to prod another leader to step up to the plate. He did "kinda" with a few posts, followed by talks with a couple of individuals who didn't work out, but it comes off as half-assed at best. This was followed by an "I don't owe you a thing" rant which only makes things worse.

An example of good leadership would be Joseph Stilwell, who led an entire Chinese village through miles of jungle so that they'd be out of the way of the advancing Japanese army. He didn't have to do it; standard practice was to just get the hell out of there and leave the collateral damage behind. But he did, and he suffered greatly for it trying to herd along a group of people including elderly, pregnant, sick, and miserable, who slowed the whole thing down, with a serious risk they'd be overrun. He technically didn't owe them a damn thing, and could have at any point said "screw you guys, I'm going home". History wouldn't have judged him for not leading them to begin with, but it would have judged harshly if he'd only led partway and then abandoned them.

David went against human nature by only posting about an impending end a few months before it occurred, and not giving constant reminders that the end was coming. Technically, he already did more than he was "required" to. But people forget, or people are not privy to the communication at the time it was broadcast, or some other number of things happened where the urgency of the message was lost. That's technically their own failing and David technically doesn't owe them a thing (as he points out repeatedly in his rant), but leadership demands much more of a person than is technically "owed". A leader must cater to all levels of his followers, including the stubborn, the stupid, the lazy, the uninformed, and the unlucky, and bring most of them stability.

In this case, stability means a transfer of leadership to another leader in order to avert the inevitable instability of the site just ending.
Blackouts, as in, they did not cover the story.
Envisioning Post-Hollywood TV and Entertainment
It seems to me that since it can only be read from a short distance, you would be unable to track it in areas where police wouldn't be able to go without a warrant; it's closer to trailing a suspect than anything.
Fell, isn't using a pseudonym something FB allows?
"Facebook users provide their real names and information, and we need your help to keep it that way"

Read their term http://www.facebook.com/legal/terms they are things like "transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook"

As Stallman pointed out in the interview, the scale of the monitoring is on a different level of what you can do manually. No matter how hard you try, you will not know what websites pessimizer has visited, FB got a list of his/her visits on any site that contains a like button (doesn't matter if he/she uses FB).

Beside the scale of information disclosed, that's how it can be used or not. I'm pretty sure I can decide what products are endorsed on my blog, not so much on FB, and if we visit pessimizer site, no one will now. On FB, they could use this information to know pessimizer better. Guilty by association ;)
AFAIK Google only has access to the public information that it can gather by scraping those websites (which isn't an easy feat at all, given the frequency of updates) or using the public APIs, that only give you a limited amount of information.

Until last Summer, Twitter had a contract with Google to give the latter its firehose stream, with all its tweets in real time. AFAIK, it was Twitter that decided not to renew that contract, evidently because they thought they could monetize that information better without Google. But now, apparently, they want their cake and eat it too...
Louis CK only barely innovated on what many artists already do. The reason he was successful and they are usually not is because he already has millions of fans and has friends on television talk shows who brought him on to promote the product. He also painted a picture that this was the new way to distribute content, which "pandered" (not meant to imply something negative) to the community who wants to prove that there is a way to make money by doing things differently. I personally paid for the product as a result, and still have yet to get around to watching it.

Many thousands of great bands are on Bandcamp with name your own price music for sale that is super easy to download, and most make next to nothing on the service. It was mostly the marketing that Louis CK did well that made him successful, and he has resources that 99% of people don't have.

To address the point of distributors changing the laws that shackle them, if you've ever tried to make changes against a union, let alone half a dozen unions, you'll know why that's not possible. They can make almost no headway against unions as powerful as the Screen Actor's Guild, and they cannot hire A List actors without using SAG workers.

In fact, maybe the best approach to killing the problems with Hollywood (not the industry itself), is to create a platform for studios to hire non-union film professionals, to source music fully owned by the original artist, which comes with boiler plate licensing and employment agreements that are designed for the digital world, with proper 21st century royalties, etc, and that provides a turnkey distribution platform that can put your movie on nearly any country's most popular movie viewing website on the same day.
What I find interesting about The Bull is how Picasso's initial breakthrough is to reduce the prominent head to a small insignificant shape. Only with that done can he go on to reduce the rest of the body to such a degree. To me that demonstrates how attacking a problem from an unusual angle can yield an unexpected development, when trying to reduce the more obvious components first would probably result in something more like a bull and less like a work of art.

cf. http://synthcode.com/blog/2009/06/Small_is_Beautiful
I know about the DMCA takedown requests. But as I understand it YouTube has to do their own investigation with each upload. At the rate of 60 hours per minute. That seems a bit difficult if not impossible. In that respect YouTube should be taken offline like they did with mega upload and many other sites. So, why is YouTube not burned like many other websites. There are complete series seasons on YouTube. I guess i was just expecting more commotion around YouTube then there currently is. (For the record, I oppose to Sopa and Pipa)
Probably because I'd never trust that the start of it tells me that they're really giving me the standardized EULA and not something else entirely but just saying it's the standardized one.
I'm interested in this question too. Two of my classes both sent the same type of email. I'd be very surprised if these aren't related.
Can anyone point to some strong points for CentOS over Debian? I was surprised that CentOS has been in lead, always preferred Debian myself.
Europe's Driverless Car (Driver Still Required)
seems a bit anti-competitive especially since Google is trying to push WebM over the Apple-backed H.264

Google Chrome still includes H.264 support. They said they were going to remove it a year ago, but never did. There's no need to install plugins to play H.264 video with Chrome.

PS. Pushing a royality-free standard over a heavily patented one is anti-competitive?
I have a love/hate relationship with Google+
Garry Tan: 2 Parts of an Idea That Matter
2 Things That Should Scare You About Microsoft's Earnings Report
Perfect example of the amateurization of design.

Projects like this have been started before personal computers, by people with a deeper degree of dedication and expertise, only be abandoned by future so-called "disciples" of the same profession. I doubt these people even know who Henry Dreyfuss is and what he tried to do, or they might bother continuing his mission.

No, more is not better when what you need is someone who actually knows something about gestalt, symbology, disabilities, etc. I cringe at the thought of crowd-sourcing our street signs.
I agree. A problem is that the search results are below the fold on a 800px high screen, and the text would be more descriptive if it said "type to search for features" or something like that, and not be selected on page load (in Chromium at least)

Of course, besides that I think this is very helpful. Thank you very much for making this.
Starbucks lists caffeine per drink which I think is a good universal reference point. 400mg is 20oz, i.e. a Venti, http://www.starbucks.com/menu/drinks/brewed-coffee/pikes-pla... .
I found workcaptcha's profile[1], and I found them on GetAFreelancer.com [GAF] quotes page[2]:

"This company help many poor company. I am received big position for gaf help so pls maintain gaf term & condition. I am really Love gaf & must going lifetime relation. Gaf best in this world. Trusty, Reliable & more. Thanks" - workcaptcha, Bhai Bhai Data Entry Service

[1]http://www.freelancer.com/users/feedback_674411.html

[2]http://www.freelancer.com/quotes/
Although CentOS and Fedora both come from Red Hat, so maybe Red Hat is the most popular?
I actually had it complain about dl.dropbox.com also when grabbing a file for work this morning. That's what made me post it here. IE wouldn't let me download a file from "an untrusted site" without jumping through a few dialog boxes.

EDIT: It looks like it's gotten some attention from MS at some point as it seems to have cleared up now.
I would advise you to stop working on this project immediately, and instead focus your efforts on creating a game with original game content. EA owns the trademarks and copyright to the material.

You'll be much better off by starting your own project, instead of cloning a commercial product. Yes, the source code of command and conquer might have been released by EA, but EA still owns the trademaks.

(speaking as someone who as tried recreating a popular turn based strategy game using HTML5..)
Canadian Engineer Building a Real Android
It doesn't stop the exploit, as it is still possible to use ptrace to essentially dump the binary, even though it's not readable.
Many software companies don't have service divisions, or have a service division that consists of people answering the phone and providing basic "talk you through the installation" type support.

I assume that the software your company sells for large amounts of money is not GPL , if it is pure GPL I would be very interested to know who they are and how they manage to get people to actually pay for it when they could just download it for free online.

If a company exists to make money, why would you discount one of their profit centers as invalid because of another of their profit centers?

That's not what I'm saying, what I'm saying is that I've never seen a company create GPL software as a profit center in itself and I really can't think of a business plan that would make that feasible.
The Basics of Software Transactional Memory
"Other locations have different characteristics."

That's rather obvious. I'm talking about places where it works well in Japan, along the same lines as the parent talking about places where it works well in parks.
attorneys on both sides, plus juries hearing this will do wonders..... judges dont rule alone necessarily (you have the right to trial by your peers, corect?)

Appeals courts will follow the supreme court if a similar cae hits the judges desk - they are not goung to throw the same case at the supreme cort, bad mojo, it would just be rejected saying "we Alredy ruled on that".

also.. while i am pretty sure the supremes are in office for life ( or until they step down voluntarily orprobably a few other things like commit a felony or become incapacitated, etc) - are other judges as secure? The supremes take their duties very seriously it seems to me. they dont rule lightly, and they are not stupid.
Those first two sentences of yours capture the essence of the trouble we're in. That idea -- that trying to control information in the same way that we control physical things is fraught with ethical and legal peril -- needs to be said over and over again in these discussions.
Worst. Advice. Ever!

Go read some classic negotiation texts instead. If you're in the process of getting a job, you owe it to yourself to spend at least five hours reading about and grokking negotiation.

Do yourself a favor and never share your salary info with someone looking to hire you. They don't share their numbers, do they? So why put yourself at a disadvantage?
The majority (Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, Kennedy, Sotomayor) distinguished Knotts on the basis that in that case there was no trespass onto an owner's property to install the device: "The beeper had been placed in the container before it came into Knotts’ possession, with the consent of the then-owner. Knotts did not challenge that installation, and we specifically declined to consider its effect on the Fourth Amendment analysis."

The four remaining justices (Alito, Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan) would've made a stronger holding, instituting a new general principle that pervasive, long-term monitoring requires a warrant, regardless of the method: they summarized Knotts as "relatively short-term monitoring of a person’s movements on public streets" as opposed to this case's "use of longer term GPS monitoring". (The're a need to come up with some kind of dividing line, because short-term tailing of people on public streets has long been considered something police can do on mere suspicion, without a warrant.)

Sotomayor's concurrence indicated a potential willingness to join those latter four in an appropriate case, but she didn't feel it was necessary to deciding this case, since it was enough for this case to just hold that the physical installation required a warrant.
Sed and awk are two underused unix tools. One you learn how to use them well, you'll constantly surprise yourself with what one can do in a simple shell script.
>A right-leaning Supreme court upholds tennants of the 4th Amendment - the go-to civil liberties ammendment - at the same time a Democratic administration seeks to weaken said ammendment.

This isn't topsy-turvy; it's exactly what we should expect when we consider the two sides as "Judicial branch" vs. "Executive branch" rather than 'right' vs. 'left'. One should expect professional Defenders of the Constitution, however they used to vote in national elections, to care deeply about 4th amendment protections.
The best advice he had for getting up earlier is not to rationalize. If I give myself the chance to sleep a little more it turns into another hour worth of snooze. Jumping straight out of bed works every time.
Just a guess but I suspect it's both the distance and how it was placed in the vehicle. The police did not put it in themselves, they placed it in a container that was loaded into the vehicle by the seller/suspect.
@pg I wrote this as a reflection of our conversation and where I was at in that moment. Thanks for taking those few moments to give me what I needed to push through.
It is not those lobbying organizations who created the crippling regulations, it is unions designed to protect the rights of the workers in the industry, which include guarantees for certain types of payments and royalties, which are legacy agreements that do not account for a digital world as well as they should. I understand that the goal should be to change these rules, but if you've ever read about any union negotiation in the paper, and consider that the film industry has several unions that make up its lifeline, you'll know why the industry struggles to adapt.

See my comment above for what a true disruption in film might be based on this issue.
Do any devs here have to submit EODs (End of day reports)? 
The software company I work for were recently acquired by a larger services firm, and they're introducing EODs as a requirement for developers.

I can see where they'd be useful for sales people, talking about new sales prospects contacted and "closes". For software folks, it seems pointless as you'll often be working on the same project for a prolonged period of time and giving a day by day breakdown would involve lots of domain-specific terminology which won't be relevant to non developers. Is this common or do I work for a pointy haired boss?
Next month, ChatRoulette!
This is one of those things that can kill itself if widely adopted. Several recent articles have touted the benefits of early rising. Being able to start your day in peace and quite is truly a benefit of waking up early. But if everyone adopted the strategy, if everyone was there with you to watch the sunrise, the gift of temporary solitude would be gone. I tend to like to work alone, whether early in the morning or late at night. The asynchrony with the rest of my immediate world is the key.