skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Personally, if I were the author, I would want the portion that was pasted in to be styled (gray bg/italic text etc) as a quote. To me, it seems like the next two paragraphs are presented as a summary of what Joshua found, not the whole post verbatim. If you really wanted to get on my good side, the first sentence would contain a link to the original.

When I wrote a post that LifeHacker was interested in posting, they asked first about "republishing". When I said they could link with an excerpt but not do a whole-sale repost, they respected my decision.

That being said, I don't think this particular article is that egregious. TNW nearly doubled the word count, so it's not a one-liner + copy/paste job. It's certainly not as bad as other sites I've seen that will masquerade as if the author originally posted the story to their site or not link at all.
Writing Portable HTML5 Server Side Events using the Atmosphere Framework
If I say, "This text is from John Doe," and then I proceed to quote John Doe to the point that the majority of my text is, in fact, John Doe's, then I have plagiarized John Doe.

In other words, attribution does not save you from plagiarism.
> Someone has to explain to me exactly what we should have done differently here.

Since you asked:

Ask the original author if it would be ok to include his contribution in your derived work.

> I honestly [] absolutely no idea what we should have done differently here to illustrate an interesting fact with our readers and reference the original source (we did that twice in the article...even with his full name (a screenshot of which he conveniently didn't include in his post))...and still he comes out guns blazing like he wrote a full-on opinion piece and we decided to just copy/paste.

Crediting someone does not automatically give you the right to copy their work without their permission. That's a misplaced sense of entitlement, and one I would definitely not accept from a site with the visibility of TNW.

Would it be ok with you if I copied TNW and linked back to your pages to credit you? No? Why not? Where would you draw the line of what is acceptable and what is not?

Oh, and you did just copy/paste.

> We work immensely ha[r]d to product original content

So don't cut-and-paste interesting bits you find on the web.

> I'm honestly amazed that this is crawling up Hacker News quite frankly.

The Next Web is featured on HN quite frequently, so it is logical that any criticism of your website would feature here as well. And I wouldn't call it crawling, you've got top billing.

I'm honestly amazed that you did this, and how utterly wrong your stance is. For a person associated with a publication I would expect a much higher level of knowledge of things like 'how to cite' and 'how to attribute' and maybe a dash of copyright 101. How hard is it to ask someone if you can use their stuff? Just ask, worst case they'll say no and then you can always simply link to them to make your point. It's not like he's suing you for $125K per copy, he's just upset that you didn't have the common courtesy to ask.

The fact that people usually are not upset and that people don't care does not change a thing with respect to what's right or not and asking is the normal thing to do.

I've had my content cut-and-pasted so often that I no longer care but it seems to me that if you want to write original content you should simply write rather than try to pick up which bits are trending on certain websites to re-package those for a larger audience. Besides the fact that it does not say much for how you produce your content it also shows that you don't even bother to do your own fact checking. You could easily be set up to parrot incorrect data like this.

Do your own homework, write your own text supported by facts that you have researched yourself and cite your sources. That is original content.
But that's the thing: you didn't do more, and that's the problem here.

I don't see him as a troll. I see him as a guy who posted something he put a lot of effort into and ended up having his work reposted without even being justly credited. He has every right to be upset and share his story, and people deserve to know this.

P.S. Just stop with the Tweets, it's embarrassing not only you, but the publication you represent.
You're making the mistake of assuming evolution is progress; that's not how it works. Evolution is adaption to the current environment, that could be progress or devolving, whatever works better. Older genes are not inferior.

Secondly, evolution works across great timescales, doubling or tripling lifetimes won't stop evolution. There is no evolution problem.

Thirdly, if people could live indefinitely, there would still not be an evolution problem, there'd be a population and resource problem, which would change the environment thus accelerating evolution by selecting those who could survive on fewer resources or those capable of obtaining resources.
Before I get angry about this I feel I need more info. Neither of the screenshots go down far enough to get to the bottom. The currently available article has Joshua quoted under the image of the tip screen and also has Joshua listed as a source at the bottom. Since this "plagiarized by TNW" article only mentions them adding the "here's what Joshua found" line in the middle & Zee seems to think they were pretty clear of sources, I am curious if those other 2 attributions were there the whole time or also added after the tweet. Also, the TNW article doesn't cite the source of that screen shot of the tip screen.. but then neither does Joshua's article. Where'd that come from? Is it stock imagery for anyone to use? or did Joshua take the photo himself?

Edit: oops. it appears Joshua's original article does credit the image (via subtle link "title") and links it back to the source article. However, that is a pretty subtle way to cite a source, IMO. The TNW article gives no credit for the image at all.
Well Zee, I'm glad it is creeping up on HN so I and others will know to stay away from you and anything you and your people are involved in in the future since it is clear you are dishonest, a thief, a liar and someone who threatens the people you steal from - assuming that his citation of your tweet mentions were not fabricated, which I assume they were not since you didn't claim that in your response here.

We need more naming and shaming.

Mr. Gross did original research and wrote an article of interest to people. Your person stole his research and content, initially without attribution according to him, and including "nearly word-for-word" citations. This is plagiarism and theft. When you were very politely called out about this by Mr. Gross, you did not apologize, instead you stated you would punish him by "staying well clear of anything ur involved with in future", and then lied by saying that his findings were not all original research, lied that your site was not copying his content, and in general justified your organization's wrong actions.

Now if you had apologized and handled it reasonably that would be one thing. But your insulting and unreasonable response to him shows what sort of person you and the people who work for you are. Liars and thieves. A proven fact as demonstrated by your outrageous, offensive and insulting comments towards Mr. Gross.
I'd be curious which things were missing in Node. I realise gratuitous detail doesn't make for a great blog post but if Node.js is missing things that stopped development of an app it would be useful for the Node community to know what they are.

Mentioning "immature packages" and "testing" is fine, but I'd really like to know what makes testing on RoR better than, say, testing with Mocha.

I'd also be really interested in the experiences of trying to cache with Node. I think while it's possible to do it's definitely a place that could be improved.
Apple Drops '4G' label from new iPad (in AUS and UK)
Which one is the original? Both have the same memories; I think they both have a good claim to that identity.
I would say yes, there are objective probabilities. For instance a path integral in quantum mechanics sums all possible paths for a particle along with each path's probability; if the calculations are done correctly, the numbers for a particular calculation will come out the same every time, even if different people perform the calculations. Since the facts and outcomes are observably equal for different people, I would say this fits the definition of objective knowledge. It is what makes quantum mechanics testable and useful.

There are plenty of other examples, like the Monty Hall problem, where many different people have confirmed the objective truth of a probability through direct testing.

The problem I see with this question is that it is couched as a philosophy question, not math or physics. That's what makes it "hard".
Ford Gives Employees TechShop Memberships for Patentable Ideas
Listening too? or just outgoing connections?
This is an interesting use and I like the idea, but I don't think it makes him wrong. You don't actually need an ORM to do this. The same logic could be applied to data sets retrieved through regular queries. Or you could create views/stored procedures with the same logic.
Plagiarism is not about copyright, it is about citing properly. A direct quote has to be indicated as such, a paraphrasing has to include a reference.

I learned this in my freshman year in college, this is so basic that an "editor" cannot claim ignorance of these rules.
Research In Motion Says IPhone May Help BlackBerry
Visualizing Network Flow Data
I guess you can partner with an american to make things easy for you. Offer him/her some equity and ask them to start a LLC.
Did you have a license to create a derivative work from this guy's words? The minimal rewriting didn't elide the substantial structure and organization of the original work. Just linking to the guy did not attribute the paragraph.

For me, it's caught red-handed and trying to stay out of legal hot water. If I thought highly of you, I'd wish you best of luck.
Reminds me of my previous (BigCorp) employer who spent millions on redesigning office spaces from individual offices to a network for cube-farms. These were expensive cubes too, because you could move them around and orient them in different configuration to enhance team collaboration. Of course, in reality, no one bothered to move heavy walls around when they could just walk over. Also management, didn't let people organically disperse, instead they assigned cubes to people in the most inefficient configuration possible.

You should have written this a few years ago. ;-)
Peter Thiel's exact words on the topic:

"The elitist view in the U.S. is that even if people concede that college is not for education, the caveat will be that, well, surely it’s for all the smart people. What we want to suggest is that there are some very smart and very talented people who don’t need college."

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/257531/back-future-pe...

"...are there 20 of those 60,000 who should perhaps not go to college--that does not seem like a terribly controversial statement. That the more talented you are, the more narrow the set of choices you should make? And that if you're a really smart person, the only thing in the world you can do is to go to Harvard?"

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20114584-281/talking-tech-...
You basically did copy and paste. Probably more accurately, you copy-pasted, then went back in and reworded certain parts. So basically high school level plagiarism.

As others have said, you should have either copied the paragraphs exactly and put them in quotes (with attribution), or you should have written up an entirely original rundown using only the facts to guide you.

What's amazing is that you don't understand why people would find this to be shady, unethical behavior.
Despite Stand Your Ground Law, Marissa Alexander Gets 20 Years
Is this the new PR tactic for apology? Post it only on G+ where nobody will see it?
Thanks for your feedback! Well, do try out the framework as well, it's simple to integrate. We would need your feedback on that front as well.
The Fallacy of Choice
"Glenn A. Britt, the company’s chief executive, said in a group interview on Friday that the challenge for digital video was that there was no simple way to get Internet-based video onto the television screen."

The CEO has never heard of HDMI or VGA cables??
How can you not understand what you should have done differently here? You may have linked to the author's post, but by not quoting him, you were passing his work off as your own to anyone who didn't click through to the link.

One of your employees fucked up in the first place, and then you made it worse by not admitting what happened was wrong and apologizing. Had you done so, that would have been the end of it. But now here you are.
Really cool. Any chance you would want to use https://github.com/amoffat/pbs in the script? I know how painful writing anything in bash is :)
But will JavaScript be able to scale? It has come a long way from the days of onMouseOver but it seems like it's going to be hard unless it gets turned into a different language (i.e. Dart).
MailChimp looks promising. I'll take a look at it.
Random Hacks of Kindness - Reinventing Corporate Citizenship
Hackers of the world, UNITE.
You do not understand plagiarism.
I'd honestly rather you not be a dick than use the "brutal honesty" cop-out[1]. I mean, yeah, sometimes the truth hurts. But I'm not convinced this is such a case. And the fact that you see nothing wrong would seem to reinforce that lack of conviction.

[1] Not that brutal honesty is always a cop-out, mind you.
OP explained things improperly, then. It's an important detail, because Rails currently defaults to single-threaded. This makes an operation such as fetching and returning a twitter feed in a single request (assuming it takes hundreds of milliseconds to get a response from twitter's servers) expensive.
A CEO is not an average consumer. It's his job to understand how and why people watch video. If he thinks his job is just to understand video on cable, he'll never be able to maneuver his company in this era.

The irony is that cable TV is still doing pretty well. If the industry ever completely implodes, people will blame the men and women in charge at the time. But it's often the decisions made when things are going well that ultimately seal a companies fate.

Getting a head of TV over IP is the smart bet. The best time to do it is when profits are healthy and R&D spending is easy.

The problem is that many of these guys are old and rich. They don't see why someone would want to watch video differently, which is exactly why they shouldn't be in charge.

Being really wealthy is an excellent way to not understand a market.
I was working on a similar idea earlier this year, but wanted to see the line changes from one version to the next. See http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1184374/chat-server.js.html and https://github.com/WilDoane/GitDataCollection/blob/master/an...
This. It makes a huge difference whether you credit someone right from the beginning or just after he points it out to you.
False dilemma. The third and correct option is "don't be a dick".
30 minutes is not efficient at all, it takes time to internalize something complex, and get into "the flow", pg talks about this in his essay about "The Maker's schedule".
Here's my impression of the sequence of events, based on the blog post:

1) You post an article which includes several facts that are taken directly from Joshua's article. No credit is given to the original author.

2) Joshua publicly calls you out on this.

3) You quickly edit in a credit and a link to the original article.

4) With the awareness that future readers will see this credit and assume that Joshua is making an unfounded complaint, you send a series of aggressive tweets attacking him for bringing this issue up.

Now, it's possible that this isn't an accurate timeline, and now would be a good time for you to clarify what happened. But understand that the issue here isn't (entirely) the fact that you paraphrased another person's article; it's that it looks like you didn't give him credit, acted very deceptively to conceal that fact and save face, and that you did so in a particularly childish way.
Nobody rationally torrents a CD rip and then goes to the store to buy the real version.

I do all the time. Well I don't go to the store, since I have this internet thing that's quite useful for buying stuff through, and sometimes I buy a legal digital download instead of a physical CD, but otherwise I do exactly what you describe all the time. If I find music I really like I want to pay the person who made that music, but I'll leave it up to other do decide if that is rational or not.
Who do you think a comment like this is convincing? Wouldn't you have to have no real-world friends to believe that people who download music for the overwhelming most part DON'T go on to buy those tracks? All you have to do is ask anyone sitting near you to find out how message-board-fake your argument is.
With respect to the author of this post, the testing environment and the ease of developing a CRUD web application are things that should have been looked into before a single line of code intended for production had been written.

The former: Golden.
The latter: Eh, not so much.
>Someone has to explain to me exactly what we should have done differently here.

Well, besides writing an original content or asking the original author for permission to republish the article:

1. Don't copy an article word for word. Change the words and the structure.

2. Once caught, don't back-paddle and be defensive. Apologize.
> Most HTTP servers are written in C or C++, so they cannot execute Python code directly – a bridge is needed between the server and the program.

Are there any HTTP servers written in Python (rather than modules)? I'm struggling to think of any.
Little Value
Plastic Eating Fungi May Solve the Worlds Waste Problem
Not defending this at all but I am reminded of my experience doing some freelance writing. I wrote a number of health articles. Several referenced published standard guidelines on how much exercise a person needs per week. In spite of stating the reference and altering the phrasing, I had articles come back to me for revision on the idea that I had copied and pasted some article I had never heard of which happened to also use the same source and cite the same figures.

Not the same thing as what happened here but I can relate to the situation. I think it is generally getting tough to avoid, given the sheer volume of material going up on the web.
Good question. My best guess is that the law of large numbers averages out the weirdness so that you never spontaneously tunnel through the floor or whatever, but that's only a guess. And there's a lot of weirdness to deal with.
funnily enough...that is actually exactly what just happened and I literally (only seconds ago) discovered it. Will be putting a piece up about it soon.
This isn't plagiarism. It's laughable to say that it was, they cited him. I know this is an insanely simple comment that will lead people to think I didn't read this conversation or really think about this topic, but I did. And it's not. The internet is ridiculous sometimes.
You copied and pasted the article and changed a few words, then made it look like Harrison Weber wrote the text, even though he did not. The attribution is great but in this case not enough.

Either the text should have been created independently, or it should have been made clear that it was a direct quote (fair use) from Gross.

You should have learned why this was wrong in high school.
Fundamentally, plagiarism is about passing someone else's work off as your own. Note that this is possible even if you cite that work.
TheNextWeb is basically a content farm whose business model is to rapidly push out rewritten posts as soon as possible and as often as possible. Your story doesn't surprise me at all because I see it every single day with many other websites, both popular and not. All you have to do is look at Techmeme to see this in action, every single post is rewritten by some TNW writer, and sadly Techmeme's human curators favor TheNextWeb as a preferred source despite their post model being 100% spinning of existing content. The best case scenario - if the original creator is lucky - is a tiny link to the original source in the footer of a TNW spun article.

To be fair, Huffington Post, Mashable, etc, do the same thing.
IIRC, extensions are considered trusted because the user has given up-front permission for whatever the extension wants to do.

In the case of sockets, the manifest needs the "experimental" permission. And I would assume (but have no idea if this is true) that once it's not experimental, there'll be a separate permissions flag for web sockets.
How many people in the U.S. do you think follow a career path like Mark Cuban's? Don't use an extreme outlier to make a general point.
> we couldn't have done more to reference him

Obviously you could have done more: reference him right from the start, not only after he made a stink about you copy-pasting his material verbatim. Timing matters, earlier is more.

This is unless he's lying that you did it only after the fact. Care to explain this point? Edit: I see you already did elsewhere in this tread.
"I hate set-top boxes"

I hated his company's crappy set-top box, the lack of TWC support for 3rd party boxes, and the efforts TWC made to kill the cablecard.
Please pay attention to what else we're saying - that the second piece isn't acceptable, either.
The Key to Getting to ‘Yes’ in Bus., Rels. & Everywhere Else: the No-Sale
There should be a facebook for those teachers.

One math teacher managed to bring a group of lazy failing monkeys to volunteer for supplementary classes on saturday morning. So much passion, inspiration, and efforts towards us .. there's a threshold above which `bad students` will start to surrender and bring good will into the game.
I've asked UPS/Fedex to leave it with my landlord, but they don't (my super is, ahem, "very friendly" person - so he sternly told me it is not "part of his job" to collect a package, if I am not around, even if I request him). This after calling them, being put on hold for 20 mins, and then patiently requesting them, more than once. Now I have to ship everything to my work, and carry it back to my home, an hour away :( good luck to me if I decide to purchase some heavy item.

What I can't understand, is why the delivery people don't carry cellphones. It costs almost nothing to own a cheap cellphone. Plus I'd think a phone call is much cheaper than coming back two more times to deliver, no? What am I missing here?

It would be nice to hear their side of the story too.
IMO giving SEO juice doesn't excuse plagiarism.
Congrats on the launch.

Quick tangential question: why the rename to Cloudfuji? Also I'm curious if the domain + social media accounts for 'cloudfuji' were available or had to be acquired?
If you had used more quotations as supposed to plain copy and paste it would of made a lot of difference.

For example, .NET magazine covered one of our blog posts:
http://www.netmagazine.com/news/startup-argues-dont-use-mp3-...

We were very happy they did this, and they did it in a very upfront and honest way. I didn't get that same feeling from your coverage of the OP's original article.
Zee from TNW again.

There's been some confusion.

Will post a follow up to this shortly to explain the mix up...but basically this HN commenter nails it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3972875
They mention p2p, so incoming connections are likely to be supported.
Didn't Machiavelli already write this?
I think it's important to note as those sockets are NOT standard. Albeit with Nacl and the chrome store it seems that what Google wants, is that users do everything via their extensions, and via their store (bypassing the standard web while thinking they're on it)