skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's the way I started dealing. And the way many others I know (both in prison and out) did too. And I'm certainly not middle-class.

I think pleading "necessity" sounds like excusing the actions. It's very very rarely neccesary to have to deal drugs or similar to stay above the poverty line. Especially here in the UK where unemployment benefits are fairly generous. Unless not having the latest pair of Nike Air Max equates to poverty.
There's a very simple way to avoid feeling bad about someone beating you to the punch- the fact you hadn't heard about it before you got started reflects badly on the incumbent firm's marketing skills (how many other people don't know about it but should?). That gives you a glimmer of hope.
Social Media and my attention span
Some days I wish I could purchase a huge lighted sign, kilometers in length, and place it on the moon.

It'd say "The internet is not broken" I think I'd make it flash.

That's it. It's not perfect, security is a real threat and hassle to those on it, but it's not broken. It does not need fixing by the government.

I am very sorry that the FBI is unable to track communications on the net. Really I am. But this is no different than the problem they had before telephones were invented. In fact, throughout much of our nation's history, law enforcement had no idea what kind of communications criminals had. The universe did not explode. Somehow life went on.

I read last week that although most recent college grads are having problems finding work, there are exceptions. One of those are, sad to say, legal professionals seeking government work. The federal government is snatching up young lawyers and even paying off all their college bills in addition to their salary. In return we're creating an army of legal attack dogs in each agency looking for new ways to "fix" things for their paymasters.

Once again, it's not perfect. But it does not need fixing. What we're seeing now isn't the end of some long civil discussion about what rights everybody should have in a technological world. It's the beginning -- just the beginning -- of a new world where a lot of things we took for granted just a decade ago aren't going to be true any more.
And as someone with the username "planetguy" I hate to be corrected, but you're right. My defense is that I am planetguy, not historyguy. :)

Historical brainfart.
http://priceonomics.com/priceless/
OpenX security vulnerability: Delete affected files, we don't have a fix yet
>you might also want to read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Did you read that page?

"An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.[1] Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy.[2][3][4]"

You do it again here:
"In particular, something doesn't become ad hominen because you feel insulted by it. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your persecution complex."

Neither of your two posts contain any argument, only a (still unsupported) assertion about what the constitution says, and assertions of negative characteristics about me.

Your citation of Article 1, section 8, is an evasion on your part, as it shows that the constitution only authorizes laws to execute "the foregoing Powers". Or in short, Article 1, section 8 proves my claim that the government only has the legal power in the constitution as enumerated by the enumerated powers. You haven't shown the existence of this power either in the enumerated powers clause or elsewhere (in the amendments), and thus you haven't actually addressed my claim at all.

Article 2, section 3, merely requires the president to adhere to the requirements of these enumerated powers. Which is actually further support for my claim, not an undermining of it.

The fact is that these enumerated powers are very specific: "To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;" shows that they are not so broad as to fit anything not mentioned in between the cracks. You can't say the government has the power to establish an Airline and Airports and Air Routes based on that enumeration, for instance.

You blithely quote the word "powers" but ignore that until you show where the constitution grants the power to maintain a standing police force, you haven't even addressed my argument.

You can't make an argument on the points. You have twice pretended like there's an argument to be made, and in the second time, effectively evaded the point and quoted irrelevancies as if it were an argument. I must conclude that you have no argument to make, which explains why you choose personal attack instead. Well, I'm done. You can post whatever you want to try and make me look bad. I don't are. Your doing so only serves to prove my point. Even if you managed to find an actual quote in the constitution that rebuts me completely, your twice choosing to engage in ad hominem rather than debate still means you lost.

So, I'm done. The sad thing is, this is typical of the intolerance for differing perspectives that is exhibited on Hacker News. I was making point where we had common ground-- but you don't care about that. You simply cannot tolerate the existence of someone who can articulate a different perspective. And so you attacked me.

I suspect people like you and the down vote brigade are a large reason why hacker news has become somewhat of a monoculture.
That's between your browser and their server. I'm referring to the content of the SMTP connection over which the mail travels, which remains almost always unencrypted in the modern world. Which essentially means that the FBI doesn't need Google's assistance to wiretap your email per se, they just use and machine they probably have sitting on the backbone pipe anyway.
I'm not a part of Codecademy, but that's part of the Auto-Linting that they run all over the site, you can read more about javascript analysis tools here[1].

I agree that the linter can be over-opinionated at times, and that definitely clashes with the community approach to teaching, where seems every lesson author has his or her own coding style quirks.

I doubt that at this point the decision about whether to have a strict style policy, or to roll their own Codecademy linter, or to leave things the way they are has made it to the top of their priorities list.

Until it does, the linter will be helpful most of the time and annoying some of the time.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSLint
For $50? College students have done much weirder and stupider stuff for less money than flipping a coin twice and answering a straightforward T/F question, even if it were twenty questions. The technique has been around for a long time. You should consider it a solved problem.

Finally googled the names. I also discovered the original formulations do it with only one coin flip (or one roll of a die).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_response

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmatched_count
"The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,

and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States,

or in any Department or Officer thereof."

Whatever, I'm done here--repeating myself until I'm understood is not my idea of fun.
I find that slightly vague questions are actually helpful in interviews. In the real world, finding requirements and interpreting specs require these skills. So I will ask questions that can be understood a few ways to gauge the prospective hire's requirements gathering.

This can backfire, and requires a bit of fluidity in the interviewer's part -- no cargo cult questions, just open problem solving. In a really good case, me being open to what the interviewee was saying about ambiguity led to a fascinating attempt to solve a different problem than I had originally structured, but we found out we work well together and solved a fun problem. At the same time he showed me his skills, and I showed him my skills. Result: both of us decided working together would be beneficial -- the best possible outcome of an interview (although just as good would be mutually deciding we wouldn't work well together and amicably parting ways).
That's good to know. Maybe I have my postfix misconfigured, I'll check. Still, the MitM hole is present. Without destination host verification, the FBI could simply sit outbound on the network insert themselves into the transaction.
It's still a counterexample to all the startups that had one big unifying vision from the outset. Obviously you need some idea before you start making a product, that much is a tautology, but it's equally clear that Microsoft more or less winged it from there.
It'd definitely dry humor, as it was in the context of a conversation with an industry rep who presumably wouldn't be interested in making more work for his constituents.
Ouch. It's one thing to have your idea panned, but to say "nobody gives a shit about your team"? That's harsh.

It's an unfortunate fact about any creative industry that a person with clout can completely put the brakes on an promising idea just because it doesn't fit neatly into their worldview. This reminds me of the story when Meat Loaf and Jim Steinman pitched Bat out of Hell to CBS. Clive Davis, the executive, says "Do you know how to write a song? Do you know anything about writing? If you're going to write for records, it goes like this: A, B, C, B, C, C. I don't know what you're doing. You're doing A, D, F, G, B, D, C. You don't know how to write a song. Have you ever listened to pop music?"

Hurtful. But even though this guy was a pretty successful A&R person, he wasn't clairvoyant, as the album was a huge hit. It's unfortunate that it demoralized their team instead of serving as bulletin board motivation material.
I don't think he's overreacting. I read further, made it almost to the end, but stopped when the author kept re-iterating his "stealing" BS.

So he's against DRM. Fine. He's still repeating the same bullshit propaganda / newspeak that serves to justify draconian "anti-piracy" laws and the continuing attack on civil rights.

As slowpoke says, he continues to discredit those who are opposed to copyright in its current form (which by its very definition violates civil rights, it's just that we never really noticed until technology changed) as thieves and pirates.

The insults and accusations make it pretty obvious who's side he's on.
POP, IMAP, and SMTP access to Gmail servers all require TLS. https://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answ... and https://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answ...

Edit: oh you mean from e.g. comcast.com server to mail.google.com server. Never mind.
I don't doubt that there are people who start dealing in exactly that fashion, I just don't think it's the most common way. Looking back at the article however, I see you said 'many' and I probably read it as 'most', so we're probably both right.

As for my use of necessity, I certainly don't mean to excuse their actions -- perhaps 'believed necessity' would be more appropriate.

Last thing, I was also speaking specifically to what I know of American drug dealing, and I have absolutely zero knowledge of how well that information travels overseas.
Just subscripted to one to a wikipedia feed. Would the feed to have a summary attached to the item, or at least give an option for a full feed?

Great work!
Better. Congrats!!
i'm not sure what you're working on, but in many enterprise problems, the business complexity is ridiculous: see < http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WhyIsPayrollHard >. functional programming techniques eliminate several classes of bugs that I see all the time in large codebases, and the quality/correctness benefits make maintenance much less expensive.
"eyewitness testimony" being wrong is vastly different from someone intentionally fabricating credentials. "That's before we even get to intentional manipulation." I know you're aware of the difference, but the terminology is, to me, pretty clear.

'Lying' implies some intentional deception. While saying something that is not factually true is part of that, the intention, motivation and awareness of the person would constitute whether it was a 'lie' or not. At least, to me, it's always been that clear.
Human rights shouldn't get revoked, no doubt, they are still human after all. I'm referring to citizenship rights, like the right to a minimum wage as an example, or the right to have certain foods or religious needs met. At the end of the day most inmates took rights away from another, like in the case of rape, a girls right to say no. Or murder, a persons right to live.

I would say in regards to rehabilitation that we teach them exactly what they need to know about society in order to cope with coming back in, I do agree that if someone spent that long without freedom, and they served their time, then they should be free when they get out, with all rights given back.

I get that it's a terrible punishment to, sometimes worse then death for people that enjoy their freedom, I would argue that we continue to evolve what is the "correct" length of time for people to be in prison for one. And yeah we shouldn't be against someone turning their life around, but not to the extent that we waste resources on people getting a second chance, when there's a plethora of people still waiting for their first chance.
These numbers are useless. Things to keep in mind:

- This research is provided by a company that sells an app marketing service.

- No detail on methodology and how value was assessed. Are part time/garage developers tallying their opportunity cost? Multiplying their hours spent by an idealized consulting rate? What about free/low cost apps that leverage an existing paid service? How does that fit in? What about long-term ad revenue?

- Reported backing evidence is anecdotal.
Why should they be accountable to you? The law enforcement gives them their salary, it protects them, it puts food on their table.

What do ordinary citizens do for them, except create work for them to deal with?

Edit: Just so you dont think I am nuts, I realize the insanity of the system, and I wish this was a world where intelligent, compassionate people made the decisions.
Ala Field of Dreams: if you tap it, they will encrypt. Encryption was much harder to obtain on phone-like devices for 'common-folk'. On data-oriented medium, it's pretty much par for the course. Not sure how this is so readily justifiable.
We're actively working on a project to make it have a more-flexible schema. It's definitely a useful thing to have.
Some thoughts:

Jury nullification: Discrimination in some form or another plays such a large role in who goes to prison that we actually have a term in th U.S. for the process of trying to combat it with what amounts to legal civil disobedience.

When a regime falls: I have heard it said that when a regime falls, the first thing that gets done is to release all the prisoners. Why? Because being in prison isn't about being a bad person. It is about violating the rules.

I knew a man for a time who went to prison in his youth for his political activism. He was extremely idealistic. Like me, he was prone to being too honest for his own good. He was very clear that laws are written by humans and there is nothing inherently moral about them. They are, at best, only as wise and moral as the authors. Unfortunately, in most cases they are less wise and moral than that since getting passed at all may involve politicking and compromise. And in many case they are writen with no intent to be "fair" (such as Jim Crow laws).

Best of luck in coming to some meaningful, informed conclusions.
This is a powerful approach when you can quantify your regret. For many startups, however, it's important to understand the tradeoffs involved in moving one metric upward or downward. To take Zynga as an example, they care about virality at least as much as engagement (or perhaps moreso). Adding or removing a friendspam dialog is likely to trade some virality for user experience. What percentages make or break the decision? Sometimes this is a qualitative call.

In environments where you need to look at the impact of your experiments across multiple variables, and make a subjective call about the tradeoffs, it's really important to have statistical confidence in the movement of each variable you're evaluating. This is a key strength of the traditional A/B testing approach.
I wouldn't just blame the unions there. In the places that I've seen this dynamic, it's paired with exploitative management.

Without the unions, the managers would be running people ragged in the name of profit. So the natural counter-reaction is FU, I'll do as little as possible for the dough. Totally pathological, but in high school I had a couple of shitty minimum wage jobs that put me in that mindset.

For those interested in the dynamic, I strongly recommend the "This American Life" episode NUMMI:

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/403/n...

It describes one of GM's worst plants switching over to a Toyota joint venture. Same people, but it went from this kind of bullshit (and worse!) to a place that everybody loved and worked hard at.
Memrise is pretty cool, I've been using it to learn the lojban gismu and it seems quite effective so far.
We bought our lottery ticket last week. After releasing our app we got picked up by some big blogs but when the buzz died down, we immediately saw a dip in sales. We don't have a budget for marketing but we did notice that when your app is of a sufficient quality and you tell passionately about it, reviewers are willing to write about you.

It's a roller coaster ride, but nothing beats seeing people enjoy your product.. America watch out, next week we will targeting you with our marketing :)

Plug: www.invyapp.com
The Objective-C syntax doesn't look strange to me, yet its verbosity make the whole picture more difficult to grasp than in Ruby in my opinion. It's somehow like difference between a document and a bullet point reppresentation of it.

However, I haven't made my mind yet about RubyMotion. There are some propositions for it and some against and a lot has to come in the next weeks. Let's see what will happen.

Note: I have been coding in Objective-C for two years and in Ruby for 1-2 months.
That does not make it a lottery. It makes it a business.

The business of making and selling apps is not very different than the business of making and selling shoes, clothes, radios, or hardly anything else you can name. Standard business practices apply.

If you make one app and throw it into the marketplace hoping to get rich, then yes you are treating your business like a lottery and your business will probably fail. If, however, you understand that 9 out of 10 apps lose money, you should either make sure that you have done your homework on the niche you are targeting so that you can ensure your app is as good or better than everything else in that niche, or you'd better market the heck out of your app via every medium you can afford to do so on.

Alternatively you could do what early-stage Venture Capitalists do and spread your risk with the knowledge that most of your investments will never turn a profit, but with the hope that one or more of them will be so successful that they more than make up for the failures.

Again, the app economy is not a lottery. It's a business.
Computer use has shifted from calculating tables for ballistic missiles to manipulating gigantic amounts of state. And (pure) FP is the answer because it doesn't have the ability to manipulate state?
And again, that's between the client and the server. The path between Gmail's mail server and the sender/recipient of the mail's server is not always encrypted.
The Brydge
Not quite yet...

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120504153813681
Unity in Precise: from the view point of a Lucid user
Elect their boss?
> I am very sorry that the FBI is unable to track communications on the net. Really I am. But this is no different than the problem they had before telephones were invented. In fact, throughout much of our nation's history, law enforcement had no idea what kind of communications criminals had. The universe did not explode. Somehow life went on.

A gem, so I wanted to highlight it from the rest of your post.
I assume it is humor.

But the implementation of this still "raises massive questions".

Anyone who creates a communication mechanism now has a legal obligation to create a feature allowing the state to listen?

Today, you can create a communication mechanism and you don't have an obligation to make it work reliably if your users don't care. But your obligation to the state suddenly becomes the creation of an effective surveillance mechanism. That could easily cost more than the rest of the system.

I mean, would "Chat Roulette" suddenly have to be able to stream everything to FBI headquarters?

This absurdity has been gone over many here of course but its still awe-inspiring...
Any Privacy Protection is Too Much Privacy Protection for Cell Phone Tracking
Nvidia GeForce GTX 690: Just how much video card do you need?
Whoops, I missed that. The commits are fairly recent so I'm guessing the new version is pretty well up-to-date.
This article was written by a publisher, O'Reilly, and they are obviously against copying. They don't use DRM because they know that it simply doesn't work, it would be a wasted effort, and as a bonus this way they can look "free", "open" and "cool". Of course they use the words "copying" and "theft" interchangeably, they don't really know or care about the difference, they are just bullshitting.
I thought I was. There's only a few dozen people on the planet who should be insulted by being told that they're not as good at mathematics as Roger Freaking Penrose.
The Forbes author has never used JIRA.

I'd say Valve is to software as Apple is to design, but there are probably far better examples. And I'm not a gamer (but I do use JIRA and SourceTree).
SketchPatch: Livecodelab
"To protect and serve" is the motto of the LAPD. Otherwise, it's a TV trope that arose out of the fact that most television in the US comes from southern California; it has never been a generic police slogan.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StandardPoliceMot...
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SoCalization
That won't compile under ARC unless you declare +_enableRemoteInspector somewhere:

objc_msgSend(NSClassFromString(@"UIWebView"), @selector(_enableRemoteInspector));
From a pool of candidates being presented to you as choices, preselected to be there because they are all corrupt?

If you add a predetermined winner, you have your presidential election system. :)
Really? Because if so I'd be happy to sell you lottery tickets in which you have a forty percent chance of breaking even...
Stumbling Across a Rarity, Even for the Rare Book Room
Great idea! Are you drawing your inspiration from http://thedailywtf.com/?
Congrats on the round and really great post, guys!
This is an amazing offer and I am going to pick up a few titles I have had my eye on for the price of one.

No Starch Press is absolutely one of the best publishers in technology books, period.

Bill, their founder, also has a fine taste in scotch, so you should trust them based on that alone.
It would seem they are more obsessed dealing with the symptoms of the problem than the real problem.
Infographic: "52% had $0 set aside for marketing, despite 91% believing marketing is necessary for success"

Can people talk about their experience using paid marketing for their iOS apps? So much depends on "top 25", "featured", and App Store search. How can paid marketing really help bring about success?
Ha!

How did you get that result? The javascript should autocomplete to our cars guide if you type in "car":
http://cl.ly/0x0z2F393U20383s3b2G

You can manually override if you want to, but if it's not doing it by default that's a bug.
Pedantry: The telephone predates the FBI by about 30 years or so.
Why I am Majoring in Computer Science