skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Techcrunch article is just outright racism and elitism, dressed up in business-speak. If written in 1930, it would probably lament on the "white mans burden" and how our averages are dragged down by those wretches in society who just cannot move forward.

There was a time when the children of european peasants could get a great education in an urban school, go to well-regarded public colleges for little or no money, and do great things. That's why NYC is a great city today.
Law and morality are most definitely two very different things, but that doesn't mean everyone gets to make up their own laws.

If what Swartz did was a "moral imperative", why aren't you working on liberating journal articles from Elsevier as we speak? My guess: because it is not really a moral imperative. There is a difference between a moral judgement and an "imperative", and you've lazily blurred that line.
No, keeping "informed" is not about knowing what happened in the last hour, or a sting of unrelated events over five years.

It is about the larger movements that shape humanity. These aren't discussed in any meaningful way on the TV news except at the fringe. Books, and long-form magazines are accessible, concentrated stores of knowledge, and you won't have to waste time on daily gossip, which is useless.
That was exactly our aim.
The PC era can never and will never be over. The thing now is that PCs are more ''future-proof'' then they were before so people dont upgrade like they use to back in the days.Ordinary People no longer need more GHZ , Cores and Rams on PCs,what they have does the Job perfectly fine.We can conclude by saying that the PC market is Mature and Saturated and this does not mean OVER.
Sequoia Capital's New Website
It goes away as you do, this all flows from when you liscensed the content instead of purchasing it.

Of course the startup I'm working on is to address this very issue, which is a legal/contract hack.
We just got reported by several users and got temporarily restricted on Facebook.
I use LinkedIn's news feed quite frequently, though through Flipboard. It is hard to compare it to Twitter because I follow a radically different group of people. First five stories from LinkedIn right now on my flipboard:

How to evaluate whether or not you should join a startup
How to Win Over someone Who Doesn't Like You
Why termites explode
Twitter Marketing Software
How Disney Built a big data platform on a startup budget

My Twitter feed however is filled with mostly political and local news stories.
And Google isn't trying to sue Aliyun out of existence, nor forcibly prevent Acer from shipping Aliyun devices.
That still doesn't change a simple fact: no one said "highway speed limits". That was introduced when things started to look bad. "Speed limits are an artificial government limit designed to make people criminals" was the contention. You can't change the scope of the argument when it suits you. If you believe that speed limits are ok in pedestrian areas, you are not categorically opposed to speed limits. You may be opposed to speed limits on the highway, but that changes the scope of the discussion.
I don't think they are useless. They keep the 'mystery' out of web servers. It is self limiting for folks when they see a piece of software and think of it as an impenetrable wall which cannot be breached or changed.

I proposed an internal web api at work for some hardware that needed to call out and test an address against a database of known problems. The initial response was the pain of setting up the infrastructure of a web server just for this one thing, was "huge" except it isn't really huge, its like 12 lines of perl or python code. People need to know that you can do that to see the pocket web server as a neat solution.
Exactly. Mr. "Demand Progress" needs to understand that we are a nation of laws, and that those who knowingly break those laws will be -- and should be -- punished.

And, no, this is not a case of civil disobedience. If it was, Swartz would have publicly violated the law (rather than attempting to conceal the crime) in order to draw attention to its putative unfairness.

Aaron Swartz is a spoiled brat. I hope that they throw the book at him.
Linkbait nonsense with no substance.
Click it....it tells you that you shouldn't be that mean.
>He probably got some money, but did not vest most of his share.

If I had no faith at all in your word, I would consider that very unlikely since Aaron was probably an impoverished student at the time, and he seems rational enough not to throw away income in such a reckless way.

Anyway, now you've got me curious.

ADDED. "If I had no faith at all in your word," was probably not the best way to phrase it. All I meant was, "Before reading your comment, I would have considered it unlikely . . ."
yeah....someone reported us for our defriend all button; that button is actually a joke and just gives an alert "you can't actually be that mean"
Rochester/Birmingham and other cities have some of the best schools in the state. The northern burbs are on par with any good suburban area in the country.
"temporarily"
You only regret what you choose to regret, that is if you decide to regret anything at all.
That option is a joke and isn't an actual option. If you click it we give you an alert: "you can't actually be that mean."
I agree with you, but I think you just landed the elusive "half-Godwin."
I was making an irony.
That button doesn't actually do that. It's a joke we added in.
The fact that JSTOR isn't pressing charges against Swartz is not dispositive evidence that JSTOR believes it hasn't been harmed.

The DoJ's role in this case isn't simply to right a single wrong done to JSTOR; it's to defend JSTOR and every organization like JSTOR from everybody like Swartz. If Swartz walks from this case because JSTOR --- the victim of a crime --- doesn't put its own reputation on the line to stand up against him, that's a signal that it's OK for other people to liberate documents from other databases.

By prosecuting Swartz criminally and regardless of JSTOR's actions, the DoJ is in effect saying that it doesn't fall to JSTOR to "heroically" defend federal law; that's the DoJ's job.

Again: while I don't like what Swartz did, I hope he wins his case, because I kind of like him. But that means I need to be more clear-eyed about what's happening here, not --- like many commenters on this thread --- less clear-eyed.
Truth^
What do you suggest?
I don't have one in my mind now.
Took me a few weeks ... although I carried a deck around with me and pulled it out to practice periodically throughout the day. I found that the key is to not be afraid to be really creative with imaging the visual representations of the cards. The more 'out there', the better.
This is purely pedantic, but making printing money illegal is controlling the supply of currency, which is different than controlling the money supply.

The money supply is elastic and can't strictly be controlled by anyone. The government will artifically increase it by printing currency or loaning money, however, which has essentially the same effect.
Have you tried wiki.lyx.org/Tools/ELyXer for tex to html? I have used it on my dissertation and was mightily impressed (I am easily impressed):

http://patterns.radekstepan.com/
Dick Cheney has one.
the research we'd already paid for.

Did he only "free" publicly funded research papers? What about all the work that is funded by private foundations or even self-funded? In some disciplines, for example physical anthropology, most research is not publicly funded. You didn't pay for it. What gives you the right to set it "free"?
Great idea, but Pingdom already does this job nicely.
Apple apparently brings in 75% of all profits in the smartphone industry:

http://www.asymco.com/2012/02/03/first-apples-rank-in-mobile...

So it is hard to imagine how any of the other players have anything near Apple's profit per smartphone unit sold.

Samsung was a distant 2nd at about 16% of profits during the period when Samsung was reportedly outselling Apple in total units sold.
Yes, we've got to get past this "elitism" nonsense. The fact is, we all do better when the best students are allowed to soar.

Is it really anti-elitism, or just general anti-intellectualism? We have no problem with "elitism" in sports -- we fall all over ourselves to identify and develop the most talented kids. Maybe I'm out of the loop since I don't have kids, but is there anyone who argues that we should spend most of our efforts on the unathletic and uncoordinated, and leave the high-performers to their own devices? If they do, I sure don't hear about it; it seems quite the opposite. So why does this argument carry the day in the academic sphere?

Side note: have you considered home-schooling?
HN pages no longer expire
Does that really help? Sun offered a different platform for mobile which Android is a massive deviation from. J2ME was rubbish but does that change their rights.

Is the defence of this action that Google aren't quite as unreasonable as Oracle? Is that the standard we hold "don't be evil" to?

The legal tool being used is different but it definitely seems anti-competitive.
Not the iPhone. You can use the SIM internationally but not in the US. Put an AT&T or T-Mobile SIM in your "unlocked" Verizon iPhone and it will not work.

UPDATE: I should also add that if you buy an factory unlocked iPhone from Apple, there is no way to activate it on any CDMA network. CDMA is inherently a locked network.
How does that follow? Their job is to prosecute. They're not corrupt--they're doing their jobs. No one is faulting them. They're just part of a system that is meant to be punitive even in the face of doing net damage to society.

What does putting him in prison accomplish? Obviously they're prosecuting him just because he broke a law. Not because he hurt anyone, or because he stole a bunch of money, or because he is a danger to society. They're trying to put him in prison as punishment for breaking a rule. Which is fine, except that in this case, he's obviously someone capable of making meaningful contributions to society. It just doesn't make sense to lock him up like they're trying to.

And all of this doesn't mean he shouldn't be punished--its just very plain to see that prosecutors have a job to do, and being sympathetic to who they're prosecuting isn't part of their job. If they're particularly good at their job, it would be a net loss to society.
I remember the NOVA special on flushing pig organs of their cells, then seeding that scaffold with stem cells. It's good to see progress.
Ok, so he's like Gandhi.

Gandhi spent several years in prison. He believed in his cause and made that sacrifice. Man up, aaronsw.
Downvoted, as I don't believe adding the link without commentary adds value to the discussion.
I hope that they throw the book at him.

So you think the appropriate punishment for what he did is a longer prison sentence than most rapists and murderers receive?
Salon had an interesting piece on this just the other day: http://www.salon.com/2012/09/14/conservatives_killed_the_lib...
yep. read that. thanks. there must be more to it than just the press?
Finally.
Would like to know the issue and its synopsis.
Try cruise-controlling at 55, even when everybody else is going 75. You'll get 4/3 the fuel economy, and it's so much less stressful, dirty looks or no.
PennApps Livestream. Demos starting 2:30 EST.
The other options allow you to post content on someone else's behalf, without their consent. That is unauthorised access, and probably against their ToS. I would be extremely surprised, and concerned, if it was not.

Your footer is just hilarious of course. You claim that you do condone unauthorised access to other people's Facebook accounts, on a site who's only function is to let you make unauthorised access to someone else's Facebook account.
Your app gives Facebook bad publicity. That's pretty much the gist of it.

See Breakup Notifier[1] and Girls Around Me[2] for services that did nothing else but highlight what the platform allowed people to do.

Breakup Notifier (later Crush Notifier) later managed to get on Facebook again, so if (when) you get shut down, try contacting the guys behind the service to see what they did. There are a couple of HN submissions about them.

[1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2255232

[2]: http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/30/girls-around-me-creeper-app...
Steve Ballmer drops clues on Surface pricing and what’s ahead
I'm flattered the author mentions Crocodoc. Crocodoc is hiring by the way if anyone wants to hack on stuff like this full time: https://crocodoc.com/jobs/
Nobody is suggesting that the outcome of every case should follow what prosecutors think. What we are instead now discussing is the ridiculous notion that nobody should even care what they think. Well, pretty Aaron Swartz cares a whole lot about what they think, despite disagreeing strongly with all of it.

The subtext of this argument is obviously, "prosecutors are self-interested, and what they claim to think has nothing to do with what they really think, which is 'I am going to pursue whichever cases present the best opportunity for career advancement'." This, too, is a dumb way to think, because however much prosecutors may or may not think that way, judges and juries do not think that way, nor do they believe prosecutors are entirely animated by career concerns.
Want to learn Rails? Start here.
Ask HN: Cheap and fast (just CPU) dedicated server?
We need a server to do some very CPU intensive data processing and we are looking for provider which has the best CPU/cost ratio.

The server does not need to have a lot of memory, fast disk or anything like that: we just care about CPU speed.

The data is public so security is also not a issue.
Hm. I don't trust their hosting very much (it's cheap shared hosting, never really expected to), but I've kept some domains and DNS with them and never had a problem. I've thought about moving, but keep staying because there's no compelling reason to change.

Care to give me compelling reasons to change?
If it doesn't encourage, it certainly enables. The whole point of the site is to let you exploit unauthorised access to somebody else's Facebook account. The footer is a non sequitur.
You guys might like my friends, DJ Morgan's, site for some nostalgic and fantastic mixes.

He owned Lotek Records as well.

Http://djmorgan.com
I would add "Eating" to the list.

I eat at my desk all the time, and I really need to stop. When I eat at my desk, I'm generally eating things that aren't that healthy to begin with, snacking unnecessarily, and/or eating too quickly, and doing it in some misguided notion that I'm able to work and eat at the same time. I'm not actually productive at times like that, it just lets me deal with some illogical guilt I feel when I get up to go eat at a table with other people, or out by myself in the park near the office.

When I get up and go to lunch instead of eating at my desk, I'm taking a real break, I'm socializing, or taking time to think.

I gotta stop eating at my desk.
Your analogy is off the mark.

What right do I have to restrict your access to knowledge?

What if someone went around the entire country and put every book into a huge safe. Then locked the safe shut and let anyone enter the safe for $25 a pop. Would you be okay with this? Would you cite the law and accept your fate?

Yes, this is a country governed by laws, and we're all grateful. But those laws can and are at times abused to create monopolistic practices, like restricting access to research.

Ask yourself, just what value does JSTOR add that's worth $25 per article in the modern day of digital distribution?
Non-replaceable batteries are not okay. And while I've seen plenty of Mac fans here, I can't say I've seen anybody defend this particular anti-feature.
Try

http://www.touc.org/btree.html

This c++ template is fairly simple and I have tested it a reasonable amount.
How did "Applying without Idea" thing work?
Now that next batch of applications are open, I am curious to know how good/bad the "Applying without Idea" work or its still in need of more samples?
I have 2x and have made a semi-serious about the circumstances surrounding the writing and compiling of the various parts of what we call "The Bible"

Examples of how they fit my understanding laid out above

The Torah: How the Earth came about, why it came about, and the best ways to live in society governed by the first two. God, someone made in our image (we're the most intelligent beings we knew of, it was actually good science to believe without more proof that God would look like us), made the world, put us in charge purposefully (as we operate purposefully) and now here are some things that will keep society from falling apart. And you HAVE to do them because God said so (makes sense, keeps things simple and in order)

The Prophets: Why the fuck is everything so bad for the Jews? Because of something that will happen in the future, so don't give up faith. This makes sense given the context of the Torah and given the need to not give up hope.

The New Testament: The prophets said we'd have a savior, and he delivers: but only in the way he could. Leading a military uprising wasn't feasible at the time, but leading a spiritual one was: hey guys, given the context of the Torah and the Prophets, we're going to have a revolution but not of this world. Of the next.
The article assumes that given that the U.S. thrived in the post-war environment with a K-12 system subpar on a given set of metrics, those metrics don't matter. It fails to acknowledge that today's environment of several emergent, competitive countries viably aspiring for at least global significance is very different from one where every viable competitor raced to outdo each other in the orgy of self-destruction that bombed much of the first world to the third.

An educated population, as measured by PISA scores, "has powerful effects on individual
earnings, on the distribution of income, and on economic growth," e.g. a "one country-level standard deviation equivalent to 47 test-score points in PISA 2000 mathematics higher test performance [yielded] around one percentage point higher annual [per capita GDP] growth rates", with broader evidence quoted in the same paper pointing to a 1.5 to 2 percentage point effective size. From a social perspective, test score inequality and earnings inequality across OECD countries have a simple correlation of 0.85 [1].

The link between schooling and test scores is not 100% causal, with the aforementioned study [1] conceding that "cognitive skills may be developed in formal schooling, but they may also come from the family, the peers, the culture, and so forth.". That said, the data suggests that "strong accountability systems that accurately measure student performance; local autonomy that allows schools to make appropriate educational choices; and choice and competition in schools so that parents can enter into determining the incentives that schools face" have been shown to have a significant positive effect on the economically relevant metrics of cognitive skill. It should be noted that there is little evidence of education expenditure per pupil and any relevant metrics being related.

TechCrunch quotes a Nature article that asserts that the “average test scores are mostly irrelevant as a measure of economic potential". Unsurprisingly, the original article [2] is mis-represented. Far from arguing that we can sit on our laurels the commentary in Nature argues that given "90% of the variance in the scores is within countries rather than between countries" we need not drill our students for hours as they do in Singapore or India, but "should [instead look] at how our best schools educate top performers". The argument is thus on how we improve our education system rather than whether we need to.

TL;DR Just because we got to market in a jalopy for the last half century doesn't mean a tune-up isn't in order. Even if we have a larger population that hedges against trashing up a good portion of our human capital so long as a lucky few succeed, an under-performing school system, hinted at by the U.S.'s PISA scores, leaves potential growth on the table. This is unfair and inefficient.

[1] https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/7...

[2] http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7191/full/453028a...
A prosecutor's job is to seek justice, not convictions. If a prosecutor believes a conviction would be unjust despite being technically compatible with the law, it would be unethical to pursue such a conviction.
However, over time we've begun to be able to explain the phenomena described in the Torah better, have been able to understand each people's place in the world better, and have become able to understand secular law and order.

So we've replaced many of the understandings that, dozens of centuries ago, made sense.
It is a good idea. Unfortunately, the Obama administration is STILL fighting for indefinite detention powers[1] even after Judge Forrest's NDAA ruling[2]. The owner and users of a legal defense kickstarter could be at risk of indefinite imprisonment without trial if a cause was somehow linked to 'terrorism'.

1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/14/ndaa-case-indefinit...

2. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_ZWg1DMub...
This was not civil disobedience, which involves publicly breaking a law in order to demonstrate that it is unjust. Swartz, lacking the courage of his convictions, tried to commit a crime in secret. Now he wants us to help him pay the piper! Despicable.
I don't understand; nothing has changed.
I am an engineer working on Platform Integrity at Facebook. Just as friends can't consent to transferring friend data outside of an app, they also can't consent to an app taking actions on their friends' behalf (such as posting a story when the friend didn't consent to it). Even if it's funny.
Google is threatening Acer to not make phone based on Aliyun OS while Haier Group who is another member of OHA have already shiped an Aliyun OS phone[1]. No question of "fragmentation" were asked back then. Hypocrisy at its best.

[1] http://www.generalatlantic.com/en/news/article/1838

Edit: See http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html for list of OHA members.
Ask HN: Is it still a developer's job market?
Over the past two or so years, the developers job market has seemed quite hot. Looking through Stackoverflow and friends, Indeed and its competitors, the Board of Labor (US) statistics, etc. it looks like the job market for developers is still very much alive with a great deal of negotiating power on the side of said developers.

Does it still feel this way on the ground? For developers: do you still feel you can change jobs easily, pick whichever one you want, negotiate your salary easily, etc.? Recuiters and businesses, does it still feel hard to find even decent developers at market rates (not below, that's ridiculous)? Do you have to offer extra perqs, signing bonuses and such?

My personal experience in the NY Metro area says absolutely yes, but I'm wondering if others are seeing the same thing (both here in NY and elsewhere in the US.)
Huh? What right does a museum have to display that painting?

No reasonable person questions that the laws get things wrong or create opportunities for market abusers. But hopefully, most reasonable people don't believe that the antidote for those problems is vigilantism.
I totally agree with your point that he should be willing to "do the time" and that he shouldn't be calling it a "silly mistake". Civil disobedience is noble BECAUSE it comes with a cost.

That said, the legal system is setup in a way where it costs a lot of money to get a truly fair trial. A lawyer will tell his side of the story; without a good one he won't be properly heard by the legal system. Aaron would be a disservice to his cause by putting up a poor defense.