skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The validity of this bill, of course, has nothing whatever to do with its name. That's self-evident. So we should evaluate it on its merits, even if there may be a demonstrable tendency in the past for bills with sensationalistic names to lack substance.
I'd add network cable to your list, I now always carry a 10m one as you can guarantee if you do need to plug in, often the switch / hub is not nearby
>jQuery 2.0 will not run on oldIE. As a result of removing several layers of barnacle-encrusted code, it will be both faster and smaller than jQuery 1.9.

My take here is that various bits of logic have been removed which will also improve processing speed.

Of course, they may have been referring to the load speed, and the increase in processing speed may be negligible.
Yes. The event listeners were not removed with currentView.remove(). Had to use currentView.unbind() to remove the event listeners.
Are there any tools to block these installers for a computer illiterate user but still allow non-crapware installers?
"you make it sound as something bad"

Because you've basically admitted that your post is disingenuous. The DUNS requirement is easily sidestepped in the short term and a complete non-issue in the long term.
But this wasn't like every other crime was it? It was political. There is NO guarantee that he'd have gotten 6 months. NONE.
Do I want a better sentencing system for computer fraud, so that it remains possible for companies to defend themselves without needing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars every quarter finding every conceivable loophole an attacker might exploit, while not leading to a situation where simply using a computer turns a simple offense into a 6 year prison sentence?

Yes, that is what I want, and I don't think it's too much to ask for.

After I wrote the comment above, I worried that it would read as a contrarian barb at any attempt to move forward with better computer crime laws. I don't mean it that way, which is why I went back and pointed out that Lessig thinks it's "critically important". But I meant my first question as I wrote it: would Aaron's Law really have helped Aaron?
Japanese airline ANA grounds all Boeing 787s after emergency landing
This is an extremely simplistic and inaccurate view of California's political problems, which are in fact in large part related to initiatives that passed through California's direct democracy process. Proposition 13 is among the most significant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978...
Federal prosecutors' primary tactics mirror those of the medieval siege. They do their best to fling arrows at the castle by generating enormous amounts of discovery material They starve defendants with insanely over-broad civil asset forfeiture laws. They charge crimes on the prosecutor's whims: HSBC bankers get away with laundering hundreds of billions for Iran, but go after Aaron Swartz with utter malice. Of course, these whims are driven (as always) by personal ambition, outright greed, and a strategy towards personal profit. They strip the defendant of all his most essential Constitutional rights, and then bully him into accepting the arbitrary conditions imposed by one in a position of power, desecrating the right to a trial by peers--a right we gained in the 13th century.

We must pass laws mandating adequate funding for the judiciary, and mandating that after the prosecution's total expenditures surpass $50,000, the prosecution must contribute the amount it spends on its own expenses, minus the first $50,000, to a legal defense fund for the defendant.

This will ensure the government will not resort to dirty tactics like inundation with discovery materials, since they will just have to pay for the defendant's lawyers to read them all. They will not be able to subjugate defendants with their might, because defendants will have the means available to them to stand up to it.
This just means that petition drives will need to be more organized and focused. I think the Carmen Ortiz petition was somewhat of a fluke. You aren't going to find that confluence of anger, focus, and clarity of target very often. And we have yet to see if it will have any effect. The Ortiz petition is only effective because she is a political appointee who serves at the Presidents pleasure. And while most of the presidents cabinet falls into that category; it is extremely rare for one to do something that justifies the intense public anger that we've seen here.
So then Aaron would have gotten the Bradley Manning treatment. Great. I'm sure that would have helped.
>Legislating against what you term "prosecutorial misconduct" is far fetched. Can you imagine how you would word that legislation without hampering law enforcement efforts against the real bad guys? Do you really want that?

Maybe it's less about "legislating against" the specific conduct, and more about oversight on incumbent prosecutors and ease of removal when someone proves themselves unworthy of the considerable power with which they've been trusted.
The Best Product Person of 2012 Announced
It's the other way around. The change to the petition process was affected by the embarrassing pace of the Ortiz petition.
Right on!

Unfortunately, my local campaign for renaming "leaders" to "rulers" has about as much success as RMS' re-acronyming DRM to "digital restriction management". Actually, even less than that.
> Getting rid of plea bargaining doesn't make the problem better

He didn't say that and I hope you know the difference. Reform is desperately needed.
Contacting your representatives can make a difference.
We saw it with SOPA and now we see it here.

Now we, as a community, need to keep up the pressure on lawmakers and make sure meaningful reforms are passed to make sure something like this never, ever happens again.
> For all we know, Aaron got dumped by his girlfriend last week or something.

You mean Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman? She was the one who found his body.

Any other speculations you'd like to share?
it might be an exposure thing.A lot of sites posted here seem to use a design that lacks scroll hints, but I never run into that design philosophy in the "real" world.
That's not how criminal procedure works.

Pursuant to constitutional law, you are required to start with the charges first, so the defendant knows what they are being accused of and can prepare a defense.

In some but not all jurisdictions, prosecutors may offer "plea bargains" that reduce the sentence, or reduce or drop some of the charges, in lieu of proceeding to trial. In some jurisdictions (i.e., large portions of Texas), there are no plea bargains; you always go to trial.

Maximum sentence is set by law, as a matter of constitutional rights. Thus, your solution would simply restrict plea bargains to not being any shorter than 1/2 of the maximum sentence (in Aaron's case, 16 years).

Making the counts non-severable is a legal and constitutional impossibility. Double jeopardy requires the prosecutor to charge you with all possible crimes arising from a single act (or intertwined set of acts) in the same criminal proceedings. Once those criminal proceedings have been adjudicated (i.e., a guilty plea, a conviction, a not-guilty verdict, or charges dismissed with prejudice), the prosecutor cannot ever charge you again for any other crimes arising from that act. Your solution would either require them to choose which charges to pursue and which charges to drop forever. That's fine in cases like Aaron's, but that's not something you want when you're dealing with a rapist or a murderer (i.e, cases far more common than Aaron's).

Finally, the last suggestion, is not simply politically unpalatable, it is economically impossible. Most criminals are actually guilty; making the prosecution pay for every defense would increase the costs of the criminal justice system 1000fold. A better solution: make the prosecution pay the defense costs where (a) a defendant that is found not guilty or actually innocent, (b) a hung jury trial, if the prosecution does not refile, or (c) the prosecution drops charges before trial. This would accomplish what you want in a realistic manner (and is actually already the law in some jurisdictions).
... is that first paragraph saying that Aaron couldn't actually have entered a plea on good faith? That, after accepting the plea, things could be flipped on him?
I can give you one good reason: Money

I was a developer at a bank in my youth. I lived in a very rural area and it was one of the only nearby places willing to hire a kid with a half complete CS degree. I dabbled in web development while there and officially made the switch four years later. I make more than five times as much now as I did back then.

Before you say that it's because I was a junior developer, I knew many senior devs there were only making a little more than I was.

For the record, that job was the low point of my career. The developers were terrified of technology. Everything was in COBOL (with occasional bits of assembly), and all data was stored in flat files. I remember one developer proudly proclaiming that she didn't "surf the inter-links." I blew their minds by writing a simple regex once. None of them had even heard of regexes.

A fair number (not a majority, I hope) of companies using mainframes are still on COBOL. The language isn't OO (there's an OO variant, but no one uses it). It doesn't even support functions! Code re-use means copy/paste, and you can forget about metaprogramming and higher order functions.

While it's true that COBOL is turing complete and anything that can be written in C can be done in COBOL, I'd point out that the same is true of Brainfuck and LOLCode. You wouldn't write a non-trivial app in either of those languages, nor would expertise in either of them alone make you a good programmer.

I'm sure there are some places using mainframes who are doing cool stuff and aren't terrified of new things, but I still wouldn't want to work there. These days I'm surrounded by really smart people who love learning new things. The fact that I'm also paid an obscene amount of money to do something I love is a plus.
The Machine that will help end TB
They're people petitioning to secede. They're obviously not the brightest in the bunch?
Wait, the most signatures ever received on a petition is 300,000, and they're setting the threshold for a response to a petition at 1/3rd of that?
The problem itself (taking too long to publish the app because of duns number requirement) can't be solved without waiting (or money), really.

I'm not really solving any problem by open sourcing it, but as I give up developing for the app store my idea is to open source it, build a small group of developers, find someone smarter than me to work with.

I don't think selling apps on the app store is a viable source on income for small developers right now. Yes, we hear a lot of success cases, but the number of failures are enormous.

I created! I'm just giving up selling it.
The mere threat of damaging their political reputations in a hearing is probably enough to make a prosecutor suddenly change their mind given that it's all these prosecutors ever cared about in the first place.
http://video.reboot.dk/video/486788/bruce-sterling-reboot-11

"Four variety of items: Beautiful things; emotionally important things; tools, devices and appliances that efficiently perform some useful function; and category four, everything else."

http://www.wired.com/beyond_the_beyond/2011/02/transcript-of...
This study's benchmark for innovation is "measured by the number of patents filed." It's hard to measure innovation, but going off of just patents alone is ridiculous.

That said, I would actually agree that in general, post-IPO innovation slows at most companies, but a lot of it has to due with the lowered levels of risk that the public is willing to assume as opposed to angels and PE/VC firms. Public companies naturally have more regulations and bureaucracy, making it a lot more challenging to release revolutionary products and features than private companies.
Chrome detects Malware on Techcrunch
I do not know what was sought. But that is what he got after trials and appeals.

If you want to know more, I'd suggest starting with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Morris_(1991), then following links to sources. It is worth noting that precedents set in that case are directly relevant to Aaron's.
We're entering the area of considering charity vs. penalty. The current system penalizes those that have no need of charity doubly. Not only do they have to subsidize those more dependent upon the system, but they are penalized on top of that with more taxation. The problem with that situation should be obvious, as well.
That's just the thing, though.

Atheism isn't a religion. There is no "wrong reason" to be an atheist. If a guy on the street concludes there is no god, whether he got there by reading a textbook or personal whimsy has no bearing on my own absence of belief. It doesn't matter.
Learn, Signal, Network, Party
As I am involved in implementing a banking style system (from scratch) at the moment, I would really like to know what features people are interested in (not) seeing at their bank. Please.
You indulge in too many fallacies here to address individually, but since you bring healthcare into the discussion, the bottom line is that we know that government-run healthcare works. See: almost every other developed Western country, while the US system remains fundamentally broken.

You can engage in all the a priori pleading you like, but until you address that empirical, real-world fact there is no worthwhile argument to be had.
For me there is a different between strangers that "found" you directly and strangers that "found" you indirectly, like from graph search. Somehow you can understand more when you meet them directly, although sometime maybe you'll feel unsafe when strangers start "bothering" you.
I know, right? When else do you get to say "The Administration does not support blowing up planets"? I think that was my favorite piece of the whole Death Star thing.
To put forth that argument, would Swartz have needed to make himself subject to involuntary commitment? Could that have created more problems for him than it would have solved? He gets locked up, even before trial, and it could all be for nothing.
Chomsky also knows the real inventor of email.
"It was driven by a desire to turn this into a significant case, so that some prosecutor could put it in his portfolio."

That's always what these things are about. Aaron Swartz, to Ortiz and her henchman, was not a criminal who needed punishment, he was an opportunity.
You do realize that he's a founding partner of Y Combinator, which is the entity that runs this website, right?
Congresswoman Proposes “Aaron’s Law” In Honor Of Late Internet Activist
Wal-Mart to Announce Extensive Plan to Hire Veterans
Further evidence that we all commit numerous felonies a day I suppose.

Oh crap, that's just intellectual laziness.these things are, on the whole, very well defined. If you read through a whole title rather than just individual subsections you'll see very specific definitions for for what all these terms mean, and where the statute is vague you can look up what the courts have interpreted those terms to mean (or that courts have voided them in some cases).

If I am a prosecutor and I can prove that you're responsible for the individual elements of such a crime - a scheme to obtain the money or goods of another, by deception, using signals transmitted by wire, interstate, then you've committed it. Sometimes (as in this case) the facts are very clear. It might seem complex to you but it's definitionally very straightforward to me.
Thanks. That's the main thing that bothers me about the military too.
DDoSes are far, far easier to carry out. The low barrier to entry means that far more people can engage in that kind of "activism" than would be able even to write the python script Aaron used to download the JSTOR articles.
Everything, including events will break since IE<9 doesn't support addEventListener, thus $(document).ready() will not even run. Basically don't use 2.0 for the web. The only advantage is that it will be smaller, so if you have a mobile specific site, it could be better.
More like they've realized how easy and useless it is to create a petition and have people who "support" it spend 5 seconds clicking thru any petition that comes into whitehouse.gov, so they are raising the bar to cut down on the time they waste responding to nonsense.
The point was that, no matter how apparently ridiculous the conclusion, scarmig would accept it without question because the source was that credible. The more exaggerated the hypothesized conclusion, the more strongly that point was made.

I believe that scarmig's example very clearly stated his position.

I would bet large sums of money that I do not actually have that the conclusion we get will nowhere near that ridiculous. I would bet reasonably large sums of money that Abelson will prove not corruptible on this issue.
Nine Rules for Stifling Innovation
You really need to do some more research before you make statements like "you aren't reading enough". In fact, I don't think I've read or heard of a person more well-read than Aaron. For example, he read 130 books in 2009[1]. That's a book every 3 days.

[1]: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/books2009
Loved Primer when i saw it years ago. Look forward to his new one.
Articles aren't proof. Victims don't have veto authority over plea bargain negotiations in any US jurisdiction that I know of.
This creeps me out more than anything. I already know where I like to hang out and who my friends are... I go to freenode.
Are You Ready for The Internet of Things?
although if you look at the history, Proxima Sans (precursor to Nova) was released several years before Gotham: http://www.ms-studio.com/FontSales/proximanova.html
People on the administration's side make a big deal about the six months the prosecution was offering.

But that was an alternative to the extortion of the administration seeking 30+ years.

The administration was telling Swartz to go to jail for six months before he ever had a trial.

That's not justice.
Was this posted in an attempt to compare his struggles to Aaronsw or what?
No, there were other mechanisms used to deny Aaron access to the JSTOR archive (and he made several attempts). I don't think this law change would have affected Aaron's case at all.

What he did was still plausibly wire fraud, computer fraud, unauthorized access, and computer damage.

Edit: To those downvoting me, please read Orin Kerr's take on this case here: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/

The charges against Aaron do appear legit, and I don't see how changing the definition of wire fraud to exclude TOS violations would have affected Aaron's case. Set aside the issue of whether you think the prosecution pursued Aaron's case too aggressively (I think they did) or whether you think the permissible sentences for these crimes are fair (I think they are not).

Interesting sidenote: Kerr himself defended Lori Drew in the so-called "MySpace suicide" case (2008), in which Drew was convicted of computer crimes and wire fraud for violating MySpace's TOS by "cyber bullying" 13-year old Megan Meier, resulting in Megan's suicide (the conviction was overturned on appeal). http://www.mail-archive.com/volokh@lists.powerblogs.com/msg1...

There is no federal law against cyber-bullying, so the prosecution in that case used these same computer and wire fraud laws to go after Drew for her role in Megan's suicide.
I'm confused - if you opened a company, then there is obviously going to be a lot more paperwork/hoops to jump through than if you did this as an individual. Maybe I'm missing something here - why didn't you just publish the App as an individual?
You know, after looking at these, there's a bunch of stupid and petty petitions there. I wonder if this one will just simply get lost in the noise of idiocy.
"social engineering" is a euphemism for con artistry
Aaron's own lawyer said he didn't believe that Swartz would have received a custodial sentence even if he had been convicted.

What's vindictive isn't the outcome. The outcome never had a chance to happen, so it's hard to discuss it. What was bad about this situation is a prosecution that had taken such a hard line that a 6-7 year prison sentence --- a life-changing calamity --- would have seemed like a real possibility. Swartz was being required to swear before a court that he committed 13 different felonies just to get off with ~half a year's prison time.
It's entirely possible for a state to have reasonable policy w.r.t. current and future expenses given a certain tax base, then lose that tax base and get stuck with unsupportable obligations. If NYC became Detroit over a period of 10 years, just pension liabilities would destroy it going forward.
This is pretty cool. It seems like 10 seconds is still a pretty long time to wait for a response when connections over the max limit are being dropped. Is there a reason for this or some way to tune it?
Botnets don't usually include a low-prominence opt-out link / checkbox / something that might not look quite like a button. Maybe they'd walk free if they did...
I read the Granick piece. One thing that strikes me as completely absurd is that the plea deal is for a substantially lower sentence and that if the plea deal is rejected the prosecution will go for a much higher punishment, sometimes as much as 10 times as much as offered in the deal. It would seem to me that if you offer a guilty plea that is 10% of what you intend to seek that if such an offer is on the record that a small multiple of that (say twice as much) should become the new maximum sentence. It's utterly frivolous to mess around with 90% or more of a sentence just to put pressure on people, that's poker table tactics and we're dealing with people's lives here.

The most worrying bit is the part where she says that people will plead guilty to things they did not actually do just to not have the chance at a much worse sentence during a trial stacked against them. This is not about justice at all, it's just a numbers game.
Also, "uses electromagnetic radiation to" -- let's not be limited to particular technologies.

And maybe strike "intentionally" too, or you'll have lawyers arguing about the intent of a piece of networking equipment.
The author is quite explicitly saying that the problem is the volume and variety of information. There is no mention of the 'shallowness' of any one particular reference.

The author justifies this by saying no reader can reasonably be expected to be "familiar with" the references Chomsky uses. So what? The references are all there and available for the reader to look up. Once looked up, the reader is familiar with it. No problem. Incredibly weak argument and one that can only be accepted if we accept lazy reading as a given.
Forgive my ignorance, but I thought the whole point of Node.js was not to meltdown.

Are there some recommend resources I could learn more from about the out of the box scaling vs tactics and strategies that benefit growth? I love learning how this problem is tackled anywhere. :)
Highly unlikely http://www.nij.gov/journals/259/prison-rape.htm
Ask HN: what URL shortener do you use?
I need a shortener to get links into text messages we're sending. There's like a zillion shortener services. I need one with a decent API. Any suggestions?
The main repository is for free software, the non-free repository is for non free software, and the contrib repository is for free softwre that you must agree to some non-free license to actualy use (because they depend on non-free software, they are just installers, or for any other reason). Those are not different tiers of software stability.

Debian has the unstable, testing and stable distros, that move on different speeds and are subject to different amounts of testing.
The petitions all say peacefully as I recall.