skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I emphatically disagree.

If you look within those pyramids you'll find that most of the time the innovations that made the larger pyramid succeed were the result of small, focused teams. For instance consider the famous aircrafts designs for the U-2, the SR-71 Blackbird, the F-117 Nighthawk, and the F-22 Raptor. Large pyramids, right? Wrong. All were the result of small teams at Lockheed under Kelly Johnson. (Who had a famous list of rules for successful projects, the third of which was, The number of people having any connection with the project must be restricted in an almost vicious manner.)

Was this unusual? No! You brought up putting men on the moon and Space X. Both were utterly dependent upon the efforts of a small community of people studying liquid rocket fuels in the 40s-60s. What kind of people were those? According to http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pdf (that copy didn't load for me right now, but http://web.archive.org/web/20121013085952/http://library.sci... did) there were at most 50 men scattered across multiple companies who understood the field, all of whom were "howling individualists".

The same is true in computer science. Major projects with huge impact created by a handful of people. Examples include Lisp, Smalltalk, C, Unix, patch, emacs... Companies which, when you tear back the curtain, truly were dependent upon very small numbers of people. Ask anyone who follows tech if Apple would have been Apple without Steve Jobs. Ask anyone who has worked at Google whether Google could have become Google without Jeff Dean.

Large groups working together on a known goal are essential to our society. We could not have the world we have today without them. But find me an example of great engineering that requires those pyramids, and when you tear back the curtain you'll find in technology after technology, in component after component, that critical pieces were absolutely dependent upon small groups of people. And those people, far more often than anyone in charge would like to admit, were rule breakers.

Those rule breakers who were the ones who got things done are, for technologists both then and now, heros. You may wish that the world of technology was better behaved. But you cannot understand or appreciate it without accepting the fact that it really is that messy.
Sterne Agee analyst: iPhone 5 demand 'remains robust'
3 Things I Wish I Knew Before Building a Hybrid iPad App
Test it on Lion.
I can't help it.

It's Wikivoyage, not WikiVoyage.
This inspired me to finally sign up and read some of the other popular petitions. I am now vehemently in favor of this one.

(I like the one that wants to repeal the Bill of Rights so that you can't make fun of Moses, Mohammed, or Jesus. What? Who let these people onto the Internet anyway?)
I've spent time doing both, and I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree.
Orin is a good prosecutor (though retired). But let me drop two fine pieces of evidence to refute his statement that Aaron was going to put all of JSTOR into the public domain based on a manifesto.

1) Aaron's previous escapade was making PACER file available through huge downloads. Those files were all non-copyrightable and have become the basis of awesome open-source systems including RECAP and Justia.

2) Aaron had also downloaded some 400,000 Westlaw legal articles and then analyzed them to figure out which were sponsored. The resulting study was published in the Stanford Law Review in 2008. http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/sites/default/files/article...

A very large percentage of the files Aaron downloaded were out of copyright. Other than a manifesto, what proof did the prosecutors put forward that Aaron was going to publish in-copyright material?

Furthermore, without any evidence, Kerr says Aaron broke into the networking closet. It had no lock and no sign saying no entry.

But Kerr's clearly in prosecutorial mode. I much preferred his mindset when he was fighting the feds abuse of the CFAA in the Lori Drew case.
Unless ER and catastrophic care including lab tests go through a radical changes, I doubt US healthcare system is going to change significantly. But still this is a first step towards towards a bigger goal. At least people will be able to afford some primary visit and preventative care.
Is it not possible to realize the lesser of two evils while still calling out the lesser evil on its faults?
"If you want to build a formidable business for the long term then you need a ubiquity strategy, not a mobile strategy."

I like this idea, matches up with some of the strategies in robomartin's comment at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5068777 .
Private was meant as "the source is kept private". In this case it's less of a problem since only people with access to the source get to see the source. In any mid-size team those probably have access to the servers anyways, so they have access to the secret in any case, so they're implicitly trusted.
You're certainly right that there are other ways to store the secret and if you read my posts in this thread you'll see that I'm aware of that, however, keeping the secret in the VCS is a simple solution that works without any further magic. If your requirements dictate that you can't do that, chance it, but that doesn't mean it's not a working solution for many other people. And that's the reason things are as they currently are and I don't expect them to change soon.

To answer your second question: depending on the case, I store 3rd party passwords and API-keys in the repo. If an employee leaves the company I'll have to change those anyways since he probably had access if he had access to the project at all.
Great. If you get a timeout, though, what do you do? You will either end up with the possibility of double transactions or no transactions, depending on how you try to recover...
Nice and clean interface.

Would be great if I could delete a task (after adding a bunch of test tasks for example)

Would also be great to be able to enter "1h" - it switches it to 1m.

Is this somehow compatible to your App Store App "Zone"?
One somewhat-relevant thing I would like to see is a cheat sheet for the phone menu. For example, under Verizon, you provide the phone number but I'd have to sit through a long message before figuring out what information I need to go through the automated system
I think it’s important to realize that what happened in the Swartz case happens it lots and lots of federal criminal cases. Yes, the prosecutors tried to force a plea deal by scaring the defendant with arguments that he would be locked away for a long time if he was convicted at trial. Yes, the prosecutors filed a superseding indictment designed to scare Swartz evem more in to pleading guilty (it actually had no effect on the likely sentence, but it’s a powerful scare tactic). Yes, the prosecutors insisted on jail time and a felony conviction as part of a plea. But federal prosecutors use those tactics all the time.

That doesn't make it right.
I'm a bit suspicious that I can't find a press release from BA about receiving delivery of a 787, and that BA's site doesn't mention it being in their fleet:

http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bafleet/public/en_gb

Given how LOT only received their first order halfway through November, which was widely announced as being Europe's first 787 delivery (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/picture-lot-takes-...), I think your skepticism is misplaced.
agreed. Squash is finely tuned with a set of features to fill in gaps found in another very popular commercial tool in the same vein.

tl;dr: don't knock it till you try it!
Facebook Photos For 15 Days = Internet Archive’s Storage For Two Years
From the reviews: "Aside from the odd quirks with using Ctrl+W on bash, emacs, or vim..."

Sounds like fun. ;)
Ideal for use on chromebooks. Looks like it has been around for quite a long time too (91k users)
I'm torn because they do help with weapon retention when holstered (which is generally why I hate open carry), but they do seem to lead to ND into the thigh.
I applied when the site first launched, but my profile is still being approved... It would be nice if they had a section to highlight side projects. Most of my software work out side of my day job is in side projects, and not open source.
I'm curious: Is there any use case for this beyond Chromebooks?
Not directly marketing, but is there a good reason for requiring 6+ character user names? That was almost a ragequit->close for me.

EDIT: Further, I'd assumed it's a JavaScript game, but you support my platform, so it's not as offputting to discover my error as it would otherwise have been.
What a fantastic way to get people to give you the private key and tell you what host it's for.
>If Ortiz or Heymann are fired or resign under pressure, the only signal that really sends to other prosecutors is that mob justice is effective for those with a mob at their backs.

It is this kind of argument that seeks to undermine the call to action mentioned in the (rather brilliant) grandpost. Unfortunately, it is often the case that if any action at all is to take place, it must be drastic. Subtle actions tend to fall apart.

Perhaps Ortiz's career will be ruined by this. Let us say that's unfair. But what if that outcome leads directly to a change in the entire system? What if, because she lost her job, prosecutors no longer bully defendants into taking bad plea deals by throwing the book at them because we made Ortiz into an example? Would that be worth it?
That's odd; at every tech company where I've interviewed, the majority of the interviewers were potential peers on the team (or from another team, to have an "outside voice"). The hiring manager is usually mainly there to judge culture fit and, if they like you, to help sell the company.

At the companies where I've worked and have interviewed people, the hiring manager would of course have veto power, but would never hire someone without the agreement of the team.

At my current company (Twilio), even the first phone screen (after a possible initial recruiter call) is done by a team lead or member of the team. But often the candidate doesn't end up on the same team as the phone screener, since we don't always know what team would be the best fit until after the screen.

I think of hiring as everyone's job, as it's right up at the top of the list of things that will determine the course of company culture over time.

(Shameless plug: having said all that, if you're an Android developer who enjoys building frameworks and APIs, email me at my HN username at twilio.com.)
I don't normally take sides in these arguments, but I think you're misunderstanding the economics of this situation. This isn't analogous to file sharing, because file sharing doesn't affect the availability of the original file. Consider these numbers (made up, but probably not wildly inaccurate):

- Access costs $10

- Total bandwidth available is 5Mbps

- 10 users purchase access for an average of .5Mbps per user

If 10 more users pay for service, the original 10 are getting half of what they used to for the same price. In response to this (see other comments about "gouging"), airlines raise the prices of access. This act preserves some minimum level of service for those who are willing to pay.

If, instead of the scenario above, the second 10 users go on to use the service without paying, the first are "cheated" out of being able to get their minimum acceptable level of service even if they would choose to pay a higher price. When this happens, prices can be set arbitrarily high without having the intended effect of reducing the strain on the network.

Based on this logic, I disagree with your analogy to file sharing, but I also agree with you that this is not theft. It's more akin to pollution than anything else. If one chooses to smoke in a bar that doesn't allow smoking, everyone else suffers. In the same vein, if I access this service without paying, all of the paying users really do get less than they're purchasing.

The airlines are left with two choices here:

1) Plug the hole so this is no longer possible. This is the path they'll choose because it's profitable and it satisfies the already-paying users.

2) Open it up for everyone. This is impractical. If you've ever used Wi-Fi on a Bolt or Mega bus, you know that it can be painfully slow. There's no incentive for the provider to upgrade, because they can't profit by doing so.

This isn't really about taking from the big, bad corporations. It's about taking from your neighbor. It would be great if we had in-air broadband, but until that day, we'll have to find some way to regulate the use of a limited resource to prevent it from becoming over-saturated.

-----

Edit: formatting, clarity.
Does not. That's the first thing that came into my mind when I saw it.

At least now we all know who gave this crazy idea to some secret agent agencies if this indeed happens.
If someone tried that, it would be easy to turn it against them. The two problems with that attempted line of attack are (1) Swartz was not wrongfully accused, and (2) his treatment wasn't really different from how most other defendants facing Federal felony charges are treated [1].

The counter ad could emphasize that Swartz was young, rich, and white, and paint Ortiz's opponent as someone who thinks rich white kids deserve special treatment. That could be a powerful argument with poor, lower middle class, and minority voters.

[1] See Orin Kerr's article for a detailed look at how Federal prosecution works: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-agains...
Live-coding an eye in GLSL
Well, democratic governments are inherently mob driven. So we could think of effectiveness of the referred mob justice in terms of a legit and faster method of geting the government (or it's agencies) to take action than waiting for the next, different, government to get elected.
Measuring innovation solely by patents seems like a patently bad idea.
Then we must increase the liability. When patent owners want to sue for damages worth $1000000, make them pay $1000000 in a 3rd party bank account BEFORE that.

If they win, then they get their money back plus the damages. If they lose, then the defendants can pay their legal costs from those $1000000 (and the reminder goes back to the patent owner).
You've managed, in two posts, to state almost precisely my own thoughts on this matter. It is indeed something of a shame to hold Ortiz personally liable for the system in which she learned her craft; and yet it seems that there is no better way to signal a strong, popular desire for that system to change than to end her (and Steve Hymann's) career. Given that their actions lead to the death of Aaron Swartz, personally, I wouldn't feel too bad for them. No-one is calling for disbarment, after all, so they have a cushy private practice to look forward to.
And I think that was his point about using "innovation" to bypass a system that is almost immutable.
That's why the issue is contentious. Was the government of South Africa justified in taking special deterrence measures to deter Nelson Mandela from pursuing his anti-democratic efforts to unlawfully oppose the government? This is absolutely crazy talk. The fetishization of democracy cannot be allowed to undermine principled opposition to bugs found in its operation. I agree with Kerr that civil disobedience merits punishment -- that's kind of the point. But he's completely wrong about prosecutorial discretion. It's completely correct that the prosecutorial indiscretion of treating civil disobedience as if it were traitorous to democracy is a political act, and should be answered by political means.

An "Al Capone" approach would be more like some of the actions of Anonymous -- performing security penetrations to collect, say, secret government or corporate data and then publishing it. Accessing publicly-funded research or public-domain documents and making them available is much more Rosa Parks.
>When someone engages in civil disobedience and intentionally violates a criminal law to achieve such an anti-democratic policy goal through unlawful means — and when there are indications in both words and deeds that he will continue to do so

I thought Swartz signed a deal with JSTOR that said that he was to never again going to download more articles. What indications existed then that he was going to continue with the specific crime he was charged with? The Manifesto, while provocative, is generic in form and should not override a more specific document stating a clear purpose of not continue with the violation of this law in this case.
Pretty sad this needs to exist...but it does need to.
Thank you for pointing this out. I believe there are still some good reasons to question whether this is good evidence against the power of central banks to burst the gold bubble.

First of all, if you look at the price of gold in real terms at the time of this gold sale, you'll find that it was on the low end, but still went down quite a bit, considering the relatively small volume of the gold sale.

Second, speaking about it in terms of volume, around 2700 tonnes of gold are produced every year, while 34000 tonnes of gold are held by central banks, around 18000 tonnes by the US plus European countries.

Who would vacuum up that supply?

There are two honest questions in this regard:

1) Are there any good models for this type of problem? Basically, what we're asking here is how commodity prices are affected by hoarding of non-users of the commodity.

2) Given that there are discussions of a ban on artificial hoarding on other commodities (e.g. rare earths) in the interest of protecting the industrial and productive use of those commodities, wouldn't it actually make sense to do the same with gold?
I'm not about to install that extension and find out myself as that could cause some... serious problems... but that was my first thought as well. What's to stop this from doing something nefarious? Its sandboxing privileges are not remotely clear from what's in the app store, and I don't see of any reasonable way to contain what it can and cannot do.

Granted this is equally a problem with any terminal emulator that you didn't compile yourself after examining the source code, but I have quite a bit more faith in Apple and the various Linux repo maintainers than some random guy publishing to the chrome app store. I don't know if Google even claims to vet its contents, but if they do I know they do a terrible job because I've ripped open some extensions to confirm they're doing some sketchy stuff (nothing insecure or worrying, more like adding affiliate links to your entire browsing experience)
Everyone does it because there are no consequences for doing so.

If there are consequences, then suddenly everyone won't do it any more.
It's also a matter of which OS you use. :) ST is cross platform and it's great to have a good text editor available when you have to use Windows.
New one
Good one
Great point regarding private keys. Even if you trust the extension (no reason not to, really), a future bug in chrome could expose local storage to sites you visit, other extensions etc. /paranoid

I don't troll interwebz from my terminal/putty, so I'd say there's a smaller risk of that happening there.

On a side note, add passwords to private keys :)
Yeah, definitely agree there. Just because "everyone does it" doesn't make it an excuse. Living in a country where bribing is pretty common, that's what you here all the time about it, too - that everyone does it.
Misdemeanor rather than felony would be a good direction.
As long as you have an electoral system that erects such high barriers to entry for 3rd parties, there will not be adequate competition and the customers (citizens) will suffer.
If you bring Sublime into a unix environment, please make it add line endings.

Could you clarify this? I work with text files on both Windows and Linux all the time, and

View -> Line Endings -> {Platform}

seems to convert between EOL conventions on the different platforms as I would expect.
I'd love a non-technical co-founder, if I could only find one. Most business-oriented people I meet like being employed. The only people I meet that are interested in startups (interested in building one, rather than having built one, successfully) are engineers with less panache for sales than I have.

I'm in a similar situation as the OP, and to be honest I'd be willing to give a lot away to have someone handle the sales & marketing end.
This is why: http://i.imgur.com/QspUu.png

You're getting overwhelmed by 1000 free versions of the same game.
Ballsy article in light the Swartz case. How many felonies is that?
doesn't ChromeOS has a built in SSH terminal? I received a Cr-48 (original beta) and I remember that was the feature i used the most
I've been using this for quite some time, and there are basically two use-cases: a)alternate to putty for windows and b)an actual shell in your browser (You press Alt+1 instead of Alt-tab).

The source for the extension is available at http://git.chromium.org/gitweb/?p=chromiumos/platform/assets...

Also, handing it private keys is completely optional.
It usually takes a tragedy to actually accomplish anything in government (occasionally just a wildly outlandish remark, but I digress).

Progress is still progress, even if the event that got the ball rolling should have never happened.

Also, "our martyr"? Now I'm insulted.
The problem is that the alternative to not accepting guilt is a ridiculously lengthy prison sentence. What do you do then?
Interesting, thanks for that. Guess the problem is the people doing it don't remember, and their systems aren't advanced enough to make the link between $sandwich_shop and $other_sandwich_shop having similar menus. A good problem to solve.
This is not some random guy publishing on chrome app store. This app is officially developed by Google.
It is an official Google extension. I doubt they would try to steel any private keys.
The OP has a point, however I'll add Supercell doesn't appear to be doing too terribly with their mobile only strategy.

http://pandodaily.com/2012/11/16/supercell-the-cash-rich-lit...
You're forgetting supervised release. This is mandatory even after a short custodial sentence and could be for a period of up to three years. During this time he could not have computer access; this is a standard condition. It was a violation of this supervised release condition that sent the Egyptian national who made a scandalous film about Islam back to prison.
I don't care if Ortiz suffers an unjust end to her career. She'll still be alive. And I'm not suggesting the problem is that the action is too drastic. It's that the action sends the wrong message. The most likely outcome of Ortiz getting fired is that prosecutors are more cautious about bullying the well-connected; they'll judge each defendant on the likelihood of their martyrdom and act accordingly. It won't make defending oneself against federal charges any more cheap or accessible; it won't make a prosecutor approach you in a measured way. And the less powerful defendants are still going to get screwed--which is to say, those who most need federal prosecutors to treat them reasonably and decently. Firing Ortiz (or, more accurately, Heymann) will just make others more cautious when dealing with the rich and the famous.

Prosecutors bully defendants into taking bad plea deals because they're judged on their conviction rate. People act according to their incentives, and federal prosecutors are incentivized to get quick, cheap convictions the way they do it now. You want change? Change the incentives. Crucifying one out of a hundred doesn't work.
The context justifies the means.

Yes to forwarding resume/cover letter email to others who might seek to hire the applicant. No to sharing others' credit card numbers. Human beings - creatures capable of judgment and discretion - don't need to reduce every decision to predefined deontological criteria.