skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I hadn't known about Tomcat's security manager stuff. Interesting, and proof that Java's security manager stuff can be extended for practical purposes.

I had thought about using AspectJ to wrap interesting points in various APIs and then do "stuff". The obvious behavior is to restrict usage based on whitelists. However, it might also be interesting to run one's app in an access logging mode, especially when trying to wrap some controls around a previously unrestricted production application.
This doesn't speak to compensation vs. tax revenue, but public employee compensation as a share of state expenditure has actually been in steady decline over the last two decades.

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2011/03/state_b...
How can there be a "last great American genius." Assuming genius is a statistical percentage of the population born every year, wouldn't there be just as many if not more currently than in the past?
Opposite to Korea's Samsung, LG etc, Europe soon won't have much (Nokia) to protect or prefer. In addition France and Germany are traditionally week in mobile and software. so i wouldnt expect any bans .
If you are on x64 Linux and get this:

ld: i386 architecture of input file `first.o' is incompatible with i386:x86-64 output

What you want to do is type this instead:

nasm -f elf64 first.s

On another note, the link to intel's "command listing" has horrible CSS. If you hover over it, it takes up more space, which moved it to the next line with my browser width, making it impossible to click.
> In the end, is GitHub slow? I actually don’t think so. When I use GitHub, I don’t have a perception of slowness or lag.

I definitely do: enough that I tend to avoid browsing code on GitHub like the plague, and clone the repositories instead.
Well clearly you don't know what on earth is going on.

Ireland is the EMEIA headquarters for Apple and yes they do get more then 30% of their worldwide profits from Europe.
There are two big problems with this:

1. You can get a lot of that data and those tools for free already. Webmaster Tools and Google Analytics.

2. Many of the things you'd charge for are things people don't understand anyway. In our little hacker bubble we know how valuable this stuff is and see a fair amount of companies use it but the vast majority of websites are operated by mom and pop shops and mom and pop can barely figure out how to turn on their computer. Expecting them to have any interest in getting or interpreting those reports is like trying to get them to learn quantum theory. You'll end up with a very limited customer base.

These paid options create an unfair advantage. It's the exact reason why Google was so successful. Google is trusted and popular because it isnt a pay-to-play system. People will quickly figure out that the rankings are biased and quit using the engine. This is a step backwards in search.

Saying that charging to unpenalize a site isn't a pardon but a "reset" is disingenuous. Call it whatever you'd like but in the end it really is a pardon. The idea is to discourage sites from gaming the system and your whole idea is to encourage them to. What we'll end up with in the end is that what you call "garbage sites" are just sites without a lot of money and "legit sites" are those with money.

I'm sorry but your plan just takes us back to the pre-google dark ages of search.
When that actor is that largest player on the stage, and the article (and Tim's commentary on it) make clear that many others are simply playing the same game, then your criticism falls doubly flat.

The biggest and most profitable companies are avoiding huge portions of their tax obligations. It's a systemic problem. Both points are made by the NY Times piece and Tim O'Reilly's commentary on it. It's hardly a distraction.

And yes, the underlying dynamics of the problem are manifold. Both statute and regulation should change.
No, the next generation is a "tock" in Intel parlance, which is a whole new microarchitecture.
So, I can understand how the OS could limit access to the network or filesystem, but it can't know that I'm accessing db schema ABC. However, network and filesystem restrictions are probably good enough for most people.
Yes, that's true. Google made the donation and I chose the donee.
Please restate your point with less inflammatory language and more facts.
Still doesn't mean that it has to store the strings in UTF-16. And a bit of common-case optimizing would allow ignoring that case until a string actually ends up with a non-BMP character in it.

Alternatively, if a JavaScript implementation chose to completely ignore that particular requirement, I'd guess that approximately zero pages (outside of test cases) would break, and a few currently broken pages (that assumed sane Unicode handling) would start working.
I'm struggling to believe that you really didn't notice the sarcasm in my comment. :) Obviously you can swap all the names on the list for right wing equivalents; it would be just as horrible.

Also, I must reiterate: Companies are not people. No supreme court decision has so held. And Dartmouth College v Woodward does not so hold. (Dartmouth holds that companies have the same right to contract as people. It doesn't hold that they are people. The logic is that only people have rights, but they don't lose those rights just because they organize their affairs along a corporate form. And to protect the real rights which real people have, it is sometimes necessary to allow corporations to exercise those rights.[1])

Oh, and while we're at it, Citizens United doesn't hold that money is speech. (Citizens United holds that money facilitates speech, not that it is speech, and that any restriction on things which facilitate a protected action is a - potentially unconstitutional - burden on that activity.)

Your understanding of these cases seems...lacking.

[1]: If you want an example: I get a second mortgage and sink all my savings into a start-up. You can't now come and seize my company, nor my company's assets, without depriving a real person (me) of real property. But I have the right to due process, and by necessity that extends to my company's assets. On the other hand, you can restrict my company from voting (as is, in fact, done) without impairing the rights of any real person. I would lose everything if you take my company's assets; I lose nothing if you don't let my company vote. Every single right that the courts have extended to companies follows this logic: That companies need this right protected in order to protect the rights of real people. The New York Times has free speech not because the Times is a person, but because real people with free speech rights wish to exercise those rights via the Times, and restricting the free speech rights of the Times would be an unconstitutional burden on the rights of those people.
I guess so, but most of the problems I have with it aren't ones that most people will have.
Why do you feel that a web of contracts with specific interface should pay the same % of profits as tax that you pay as a % of income?

Note that the people who own Apple generally do pay a similar percentage - some of it in the form of corporate income, some of it as cap gains.

As far as what they consume, they're based in the US, with the best technical workforce in the world.

I'd bet good money that Apple's workforce is received a disproportionate amount of education outside the US. For example, the US government didn't educate Jonathan Ive. Besides which, the workforce was already charged for that and Apple is paying a wage premium to compensate for it.

Since you seem to believe Apple consumes more than just police protection, please be specific about what you think they consume. Which of the major services do you believe enabled Apple to be an "only-in-America" story? Was it redistribution from the young to the old, or was it the war on Iraqis?
The code is open sourced: https://github.com/kateray/tytc
I think people are thinking too much about beating Google solely with technology, which users clearly don't give a crap about. The best play against Google lies in branding a search engine.

I'd love to see someone to pony up and purchase a first-generation search engine (ie: Altavista, Lycos, Hotbot) that still has some nostalgic branding left. AOL, Yahoo, MSN have all been around since that generation but they've all gone through failed re-branding issues in a struggle to keep up with Google.

Pair it with a solid technology backend (DuckDuckGo) and you might actually have a chance to pick up the biggest US internet user demographic (Gen-Y) that happened to grow up with those sites.
This is so awesome. White hat security not only to make the internet more secure, but to make the world a better place. Hats off to you man, this is really fantastic.
Money is fungible, so any trust fund or lockbox is an accounting fiction. SS being "fine" is irrelevant if the rest of the budget runs huge deficits, especially if raising taxes isn't viable because Social Security's (regressive) taxes are already taking so much.

Medicare is the big problem. And the problem is costs.

Agreed. More specifically, the problem is aging. We should do something about that.
That video gave me motion sickness, and I couldn't see the slides very well.
Ad hominem is not a valid form of argumentation.

The government is massively inflating the cost of education. They back student loans with an unlimited supply of printed currency, and increase the backing every year, making it possible for the universities to conspire to increase costs. Which explains how EDU costs have continued to skyrocket through a intense recessionary period.

The TSA is a US Government issue. It is not similar to what exists elsewhere, unless you're talking about countries dominated by abusive police services. In my observation, Europeans are typically shocked at the abuse and ridiculous hoops Americans now jump through just to fly.

Infrastructure in the US needs work? We had 22 major power outages in 1992. We had 344 in 2011. Such has increased on average every year for 20 years. It doesn't need work, it's collapsing due to the misappropriation of tax funds. Or call it what it really is, theft by taxation and standard issue political lies.
I'd like to see what percentage of American's tax is paid for building roads and public education, versus military. You make it sound as if U.S. government (or any other government for that matter) is really interested in people's welfare and companies like Apple are robbing people of their deserved money. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather $3B spent in tech R&D than intercontinental ballistic missiles.
I take my hat off to the guy undertaking this. I wish there had been a Google summer of code when I was at Uni. University was some of the best time for programming I ever had. There is so much hunger and energy, and now there are sponsored projects to match. I am very glad that these programs exist.
2012 Toyota Yaris 3-door Liftback
News! Some wannabe journalist just discovered what has been the norm everywhere around the world for ten years!
So, you explicitly ignore the P/E ratio in your assessment? Because, if not, here's a graph of Google's P/E ratio (currently 18.64): http://bit.ly/Jk8VAj – compared to FB's projected P/E ration which is predicted to be over 5 times as much.
I'm a developer at GitHub.

This is a really good writeup and touches on many of the frontend issues we've had our eye on for a while. In fact, the <script> related bits are already dated. We've just rolled out defer support for these for instance.

I really liked the wrap up section on choosing which aspects of performance to concentrate on and can maybe answer some questions here:

> Yet, I am wondering what would be the performance business
> case for GitHub? Even if GitHub does not feel slow, faster
> is always better.

We want GitHub to be insanely fast and are pouring a significant amount of time and energy into this. We think it's more important than a lot of feature-type additions we also have planned.

(I also left a similar comment on JP's blog that's waiting for moderation.)
You are confusing cost and price. The cost of education has risen at a pace comparable to other labor intensive fields. But the price has sky-rocketed due to decreased state support over the past few decades.
Well, that's another thing that nobody is arguing. Maybe that really is where you misunderstand Tim's position: He does not say we need more taxation, he says that there are actors in the game that do not pay their fair share.

You're doing your own argument a disservice by trying to modify the position of your opponent. That's not how discussions work.

The position that Tim (and I) argue is simple: There is X amount of money that it costs to run society. While, yes, we constantly have to figure out what that amount is, there is no question that it should be paid by everybody in that society. And that the stronger players (who both benefit most from a well funded society and who have the most to give) should be decent enough to step in appropriately.
As I read the article it is more about the military's access to the source code, as opposed to protecting local businesses in this case, therefore they allow android which is open source.
I think we love hating incumbents because of the history. Modern incumbents arguably aren't that bad at all, but in the old days incumbents were always the ones putting a handbrake on progress.

For instance, a whole city rioting to break new looms because it was putting "honest weavers" out of business.

Or the publishing world rioting against anything that smells of sharing ... since forever.

Google surprisingly doesn't act like an incumbent at all. And that's good. We shouldn't hate on them because they are incumbents since they're doing a damn good job at it.

edit: Also the whole idea that "When a market is dominated by a single player. That market is ripe for disruption."
I was recently at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC, and I saw many paintings that were, in my view, works of genius. One in particular was a 19th century, full-length portrait of what was clearly a bored teenager. That is, I could clearly tell, through facial expression and posture, that this young woman was bored. My claim is that the artist who made it had a genius-level understanding of how to paint people. He had to be able to consciously recognize the visual cues that most of us unconsciously process, and he had to be able to convey that in paint. Because of the thought processes required to create it, I consider it a work of genius.
"Everything about Apple is an only-in-America story."

That is so ridiculous. Maybe you need to take a deeper look at a Mac and see where much of that innovation comes from.
Nokia's sales for 2012 Q1 are depressing...
On the other hand it's a Feynman story, so take the 122 figure with a huge grain of salt.
You're right, there are some trends in the right direction, which is terrific. But these are early. By and large scientists only get credit for publishing papers, which means they aren't taking advantage of the full interactive power of the web.

It's rare for scientists to share things like data sets, or other things like a video of a certain physical process that is going on. Most graphs or tables in scientific papers are non-interactive: you can't change the x and y axes, or other properties of the graph, as you can with graphs in Google Analytics, or generally data that is displayed for native web consumption. Similarly the code that scientists use to run on their data sets, which generates conclusions that end up in their papers, doesn't get shared.

I think the key to opening up richer sharing is to provide credit metrics that incentivize this kind of activity. When scientists can get credit for sharing data-sets, code, videos, and a wider array of rich media, they will start sharing more, and taking greater advantage of the rich media power of the web.
Tech bubble for everyone, or just me?
Just kidding, fellow HNers, please think very carefully before upvoting.
Of the items you've mentioned, only education forms a significant part of the government budget (15%). Roads are 4% of the government budget, protection (police, fire, etc) is 5%.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/piechart_2010_US_total

If you want to defend taxation, defend the things it actually pays for: redistribution from the young to the old and the military (redistribution from workers to non-workers is a distant third).
But I think there is something to be said for "The less you think about being great, the more likely it is to happen." If you're more focused on "am I great?" than the task at hand, it'll just be a distraction.
cf. Talent is overrated Geof Colvin, 2008 & "Deliberate Practice" in the making of an expert, Harvard Business Review, K Anders Ericsson, 2008 http://www.coachingmanagement.nl/The%20Making%20of%20an%20Ex...
There's some editorializing in the title here. The ban only covers two buildings, and any phone that allows them to add the monitoring they require (not just Android phones) would be acceptable.
Funny, just watched monsters inc last night and saw a guy named Jonathan Null in the credits. Also, Tom Duff was there too.
I'd agree the P/E isn't the be all and end all of company valuations and I think you make valid points.

I think whats more odd is that the article's argument starts out with something that I see as more of a straw man argument. I think if you're going to throw P/Es into the tech bubble discussion, you have to at least address the very high P/Es of the notable SV IPOs and why they are justified. I guess the initial point just comes off as somewhat off-point and disingenuous to me, whether its a bubble or not.
Now I'm profoundly confused - That is precisely what he is doing: Arguing that we should establish that tone of conversation in order to get some change going.

The real problem is that it is somewhat presentable to pay as little taxes as you can. Tim is trying to spark a conversation where that changes.

Before you can change tax law, you have to get people engaged in caring about tax law. Because for the last decades, big corporations have invested a lot of money in having people either not care, or care in a direction that directly hurts them.
Where is the PL/I?
What good is software "blocking" hardware functions?! Enemy countries could go around this in no time
Most NATO countries already ban phones in similar buildings.
What on earth does "processed as such" mean? UTF-8 can be "processed" anywhere ASCII can, that's the whole point. The only point to the BOM is to distinguish it from UTF-16 (or UCS2, which is usually what UTF-16 degenerates into). And UTF-16 is broken garbage and shouldn't be used.

Given that, your last sentence is basically an ode to complexity. Taken to the logical conclusion you'd support any rule, no matter how ridiculous, as long as it is agreed upon as "correct" by ... someone.

But I don't agree: the BOM hurts, it doesn't help.
because a Macbook Air is probably the nicest looking computer on the market right now.
"GENIUSES PRODUCE"

IMO that's the best section of the article. Einstein learned by failing and reiterating. That's exactly the type of mentality that entrepreneurs should have.
you do realize the article is talking about the S. Korean Defense Ministry, right?
Show HN: Javascript Keylogger
It'd be nice if smaller investors (I could probably invest up to $10k or $15k without too much pain) could reasonably be paired up with small percentages of lifestyle businesses.

But nobody is going to get rid of the friction in that market until much, much larger markets have significantly reduced friction. Whoever is de-frictioning needs to make enough money for it to be worth it. And small-to-medium investors willing to tolerate high risk combined with stable, successful businesspeople opening new small businesses has got to be a small total market.

At least, compared with startups, VCs and large tech businesses.

Still, somebody will eventually make some money by making that market work.
Many of the descriptions aren't nearly as good as they could be. I think if they were made to be editable like wiki pages they would be much better.

I have another idea: what if the link data were stored in the git repo, with pull requests to merge them, and only the votes and comments were added with the website?
1) You can't get any of those things from Google at all. You can get a few little morsels of vagueness from GWT which is free because it doesn't do anything worth paying for. And GA is a whole other service that has little to do with anything I described. Probably the only decent tool they offer is the AdWords keyword research tool and again ... it's not worth paying for, you have to come up with the keywords yourself... that's not useful. There's a whole industry of SEO tools like http://ginzametrics.com/ and of course http://seomoz.org/ that aren't cheap and compensate for the lack of 1st party tools.

2) There's a whole SEO industry that operates on a hazy interpretation of what Google is supposed to be doing these days ... lots of companies know what SEO is, they know what it does, they know why they need it, and they pay out the arse for it. This brings clarity to that industry and those companies instead of letting them reverse engineer the changes you make and speculate on what matters. If they're willing to pay $100s/hr for SEO they'll surely pay $1000s for a roadmap straight from the source. That's like a printing press for money because that data expires when you act on it.

Money creates an unfair advantage right now. Pay people to spam backlinks to your website and you'll rate higher. Pay people to write summaries of blog posts and eventually you'll rate higher than those blogs you're sourcing your content from just because you can afford to generate more content faster. Pay people to submit and vote on digg, reddit, bla bla bla. Pay people to write about your product and create content. Pay people to market your site by writing content tailored for social media communities and get 1000s of backlinks. Pay people to do viral marketing stuff. Pay people to link to you. Pay Google to feature you above the search results.

The 'pardoning' is a little scammy and would be difficult to implement but the goal isn't to encourage them to take advantage of the system, the goal is to get your share because they're going to take advantage of it regardless. Google does this already via AdSense.