skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Unfortunately, he seems to be well liked here in Auckland. They even made him Santa: http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/whats-on/8073823/Kim-Dotcom-...
I reject the notion that there is something wrong with using drugs

I'm going to guess you don't share your neighborhood with crack houses, meth labs, drug dealers etc
If you are doing this in a startup related context, joint Microsoft biz spark.
and Final Cut, and a whole host of made-for-TV movies, depending on how much you're willing to relax the theme.
I usually don't go in for commenting about the drug war because it's dumb and i'm over preaching to the converted. But I couldn't resist sidestepping the obvious revenue issue here and note that on any number of occasions I've stayed at perfectly straight hotels presumably run by upstanding members of the community that almost without a doubt had more than 15 felony drug offenses occurring just on that day!

If your standards can include 9 years of traffic and a baker's dozen of issues it seems like a vast majority of lodging would be in danger of a zealous prosecutor.

Now I'm sure this guy has in some way separated himself out in the states attorney's mind as compared to the usual econolodge, but that's faint comfort. Working for a time with federal investigators it became clear that pretty much 100% of the population is guilty of something if you're looking, usually something that can be finessed into a no joke federal rap.

It's very unusual that it ever becomes an issue - but you get the right combination of attention, timing and bad luck or malice and then suddenly your world turns upside down. It seems like this happens really often when you're a target or related to an investigation, they put together what they think is a solid case only to find out whoops they got it wrong you're obviously not their guy. At that point god help you if you're stealing cable or borrowing your brother's wifi or were growing a tiny pot plant in the basement.

I wonder what even the theoretical justification for something like this would be. If we seize the hotel then those junkies will stop shooting heroin because they cant get a chill hotel room in town?
Sounds to me to be exactly the kind of property a town needs. Get all that bad shit in one place so the police don't have to work finding the perps. Just station some agents in the hotel and go fishing.
1. There is no reason to think that any university or organization would have given up its JSTOR subscription because an archive was made available on BitTorrent. At the very least, universities would want up-to-date articles, and so anything published after the archive was amassed (which would be a large number in just a year's time) would still motivate a subscription. There is also JSTOR's search service, and the general support universities have for the copyright system (to the point of abandoning their own academic mission when copyrights force such a thing).

2. Why should we care if JSTOR goes out of business because an archive is published? If JSTOR's only value is in their ability to enforce other publishers' copyrights, then they should go out of business because human knowledge should not be restricted by copyrights. Copyrights only made sense for academic publications when we needed the publishing industry to make scholarly writing available on a widespread basis; in 2013, we have this thing called the Internet (perhaps you've heard of it) that is vastly more efficient and costs far less.

So if JSTOR's search service is valuable, great, let's keep them around. If it is not, or if we can get the same thing without JSTOR (I suspect we could if we really tried), then we should let them and all the leeches whose publications they sell subscriptions to die quickly. Considering that a typical scientific journal publisher will not pay the authors of its articles, nor the reviewers, and often not even the editors, what exactly can they claim to be contributing to human knowledge to the point of justifying the continued restrictions on access to that knowledge that copyrights the publishers that hold them are imposing?
You can't do an in-place upgrade from 32 to 64 bit, but you can do a clean install.

The older machines that had 32 bit Windows on 64 bit hardware were usually done that way for software compatibility back when a lot of devices didn't have good 64 bit support. Also out of conservatism in corporate sales.
Are the profiles peer reviewed? Joking aside, one of the featured profiles is for someone who thinks "American" is a language.
The law asks business owners to help law enforcement in this regard, and asks from them a very low bar: not knowingly profiting from the illegal activity. This is not novel--the underlying principles of derivative liability date to the 17th century. Knowingly profiting from activity has always carried with it special responsibilities.

A motel is not like an ISP--the former has far more ability to control what happens on their premises. Indeed, at common law, inn keepers could be held liable for failing to secure their property resulting in theft or loss of a guest's belongings. Moreover, there is a big distinction, both in law and in common sense, between knowing in the abstract that your service is used for illegal activity, and knowing about specific illegal activity and turning a blind eye. E.g. if you sell a gun knowing the buyer intends to murder someone with it, you can be held liable as an accomplice!
it's running in production mode only - verified the log file using "tail -f log/production.log", but I'm not sure what is causing this behavior. (error messages)
Having completed a full course, I agree with you regarding the video content. It went beyond practice guidance and veered into disappointing endorsements of woo-woo.

The nightly videos start out objective and practice-focused, but by the middle of the course Goenka suggests quantum-scariness explanations for the sensations meditators are feeling.

As one retreat participant noted, in one of the nightly video talks [0]:

> [Goenka] mixes quantum mechanics with "psychology of enlightenment"

What makes it a bit more of a breach of trust is that by the time he breaks out the full-on woo-woo, you're deep in the process—the days are flying by—you purposely don't have your critical thought facilities active.

Aside from that sour note, I'd still suggest this course to others. Hitting a stride with practice and tuning your ability to focus your attention on minute sensations is a fascinating experience, especially if you've taken any courses on proprioception, sensation and perception.

If you're a rationalist who already firmly rejects the ideas of mind-body separation and reincarnation then you have nothing to worry about.

[0]: http://www.vipassanaforum.net/forum/index.php?topic=1871.0
> similar services

for those who don't know, hushmail is probably the best known example of this.
This is pretty cool! Looks good on mobile too.

I'll write mine up in the next day or so. I may send you an email then with some user questions.
> And the second reason is that you can try to direct your money more to the people than government by staying and eating in small family establishments rather than pricy hotels that are almost always are controlled by the government.

When Myanmar opened up for tourism a few years ago, I was living in Thailand and considered taking a short trip. But I'm sure I read tourists were only allowed to stay in designated hotels. Am I wrong, or did those rules change?
>They tried to halt progress because they thought progress was taking their jobs and making their lives worse.

They didn't just "thought it". The experienced it objectively. They were out of a job.

>And if we gave in to that sort of extremely short-sighted and regressive view then we'd be no better off today than we were 200 years ago.

It depends. The unemployed guy fired because of automation would be better off.
Expect More From Product Managers
Pro tip from them: "Lose your heart, NOT your cash" ;)

Wonder how the male/female percentages on those platform are...
> the message that US attorneys are going to hear is "don't fuck with young affluent white hackers with powerful friends"
U.S. Attorney Annual Report - 93% Federal Conviction Rate [pdf]
>But the changes in human societies that are commonly called "progress" are the result of purposeful decisions by individual human beings.

Purposeful doesn't translate to "progress" any more that "natural determination by the laws of physics" does.
Among many such articles: http://www.google.com/url?q=http://tewksbury.patch.com/artic...

a search for "tewskbury motel 6 drug crime" turns up quite some data. Without access to the police logs (as the defense has used) I can't provide specifics and comparisons, but it is clear that this motel is not the only neighborhood problem
If you aren't going to have a cut off point for what is considered solving the problem and what is considered ancillary, then you can define new languages where a zero byte input stands for whatever solution you want, simultaneously one-upping everyone and contributing nothing to the conversation.
How do I cite a tweet?
I find it troubling that it remains acceptable to steal people's property on the premise that it is "blighted". This is nothing more that social engineering. Using violence to do away with something that you don't like is not morally acceptable.
مسلسل على مر الزمان الحلقة 158
EDIT: I managed to find the answer to this question myself.

I want to generate a bunch of bytes programmatically, then have the user click on a button, and allow the user to save a file containing the generated bytes. This should run entirely client-side, with no talking to the server (except for static loading of the HTML page, JS files, images, css, etc). I've been wanting to do this since I wrote my first Java applet way back in the 1990's, and haven't been able to find a way; it's a personal long-standing unscratched itch for me.

Apparently with HTML5 it's possible to do this, since this project does it! I wasn't able to find where in the code the downloading happens, and I'm not sure what this concept is called, which makes searching difficult. Thanks!

EDIT: Browsing commits instead of the source tree was fruitful [1]. What I'm looking for is called Data URI [2]. The inverse operation -- programmatically processing uploads on the client side -- can be achieved with the File API [3]. Now I need a few days to think about what startups will become possible with these capabilities!

[1] https://github.com/manuels/texlive.js/commit/b7b7eef27846473...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_URI_scheme

[3] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Using_files_from_we...
That works today, but won't work tomorrow (or next week) when there's another article at the top of his blog.

Anyway, he seems to have fixed whatever was wrong.
One more thing. Change the name. Change it to: "WhenYouAreGreat.com"

Trust me on this one. Then resubmit to HN. There is massive potential here.
First, you seem to have made yourself an expert on what this proprietor could and could not have done. That amuses me. You're making yourself into an apologist for a guy who profited from a business relationship with known drug dealers and pimps.

The owners of the motel are not limited by the constitution. The motel owner has been in business for a long time. You think he doesn't know drug activity when he sees it? He can and should refuse a room and ask offending or suspicious guests to leave. Of course, that would be bad for business. And that's why we're here.
This was great until he started confusing sex with porn.
This seems like the physical equivalent of mega.co.nz, a "dangerous property".

The owner may be upstanding, but the people we expect to protect us (the gov't) see it as a nest of thieves, regardless of who owns it. But if that were illegal, it seems to me Vegas would have been plowed under a long time ago.
Sure! All our conceptions about it being a crazy, dysfunctional country were absolutely correct. But I also had the prejudice that its citizens would be cold, humorless people hostile to us Americans.

Instead, I was greeted by warm, friendly people. Waitresses would giggle as they sang karaoke, smiling as they tried to get the tourists and their guides to dance with them. Our driver, who didn't speak a word of English, would occasionally crack a joke and cackle to himself.

Sometimes I almost forgot that I was in a Communist dictatorship for a bit, only to be quickly brought back. During a visit to Pyongyang's finest maternity hospital, my father (a doctor) had a lengthy chat about various medical techniques with the doctor that was showing us around. Seemed to be a completely normal conversation until she would add in that these machines were there due to the kindness of Their Great Leader Kim Jong Un, who visited x years ago.

Kids at amusement parks wanted pictures with us. Preteen girls giggled to themselves at my sight. Our guides had fun play-swordfighting with my dad in medieval Korean costume at a movie studio. Even the local guide who showed us the USS Spy Ship Pueblo was very friendly while describing the imperialist crimes of America. Our guides seemed genuinely pleased to share their culture with us.

Now, this might all be the result of selection bias -- most of these interactions were with tourism employees--guides, waitresses (in the special for-tourists-only restaurants we visited), and flight attendants. It's possible these men and women hated our guts and pretended for our money. As I said in a previous comment, their curiosity at our opinions of the war was rather fishy. But I think it'd be exceptionally hard to fake it that well. At least I hope it was genuine, as it made me really feel for these friendly people trapped under a terrible regime.
When I Google "dating website for scientists" my first search result is Science Connection. They advertise in Scientific American and probably other places too. If you go to their website:

http://www.sciconnect.com/index.htm

the copyright notice at the bottom says "Copyright © 1991-2012." Does that mean they've been around since 1991?
"no one is going to force grad students to prove that they legally obtained every paper they ever read"

Nor would anyone hesitate to prosecute one of us (yes, I am a grad student) if we were to share an archive on BitTorrent.

"Universities aren't stupid"

Really? Part of my introduction to grad school was an annoying quiz about complying with copyrights and a bunch of reminders about the penalties I would face if I dared to infringe. Yes, really, my school takes copyrights that seriously, and guess what? My alma mater also subjected me to that sort of treatment during my undergrad orientation.

Do you really think universities are prepared to stand up to the copyright system? Do you think any mainstream university is going to suggest that people download an illegal archive of scholarly publications? I can tell you this: I would be shocked if any respected university official endorsed the use of an illegal archive of scholarly articles, textbooks, or anything containing even the tiniest amount of human knowledge.
> No, it's not "just like" at all. And that's for the not-difficult-to-discern reason that people and pigs are not interchangeable

You're arguing against something I never even claimed. However, what you said still doesn't change the fact that pigs are being used. Problem?

> And I'm sorry that think that getting the artists out of art and just handing the satisfaction of the human intellect to machines is a situation where "everyone wins." I mean, that's just embarrassing.

What's the problem with this? People who are creative can stil create things as much as they like, while people who prefer consuming things can get the said things for cheaper and for less effort. Of course this sounds like a dystopian future for an artsy person who would love to get paid for their hobby. But just as radio amateurs with their love for analog electronics have gone underground, so will happen for those who can't adapt to the ever-accelerating technological progress we're going through. And the fact that we can now share information so effortlessly is a great sign of that.

Of course it would be ideal that I could create X, set it a price Y and then people would pay for it if they consider my product worth it's price. However, because of the way the world changes, it isn't possible in a strict sense. It will never be possible during this digital era, at least not without sacrificing liberties and creating some godlike authority over information sharing. Now how would that not be a dystopian future!?
I don't know of any place in the world where $500k/year in profit with zero employees would be viewed as a modest goal.

I never said it was a modest goal, and I don't see how that's relevant to what I said. The OP may be ambitious, but that's fine. What I'm saying is that I disagree what the OP is lazy.

Maybe just poor construction of an ESL speaker, but the title and other details look to me like he wants some easy answer handed to him.

That was just the title, you have to look at what he actually said in the body of the post, and he clearly did NOT ask anybody to just hand him the answer. That's what the body of a post does, ya know, it adds to / clarifies the point(s) from the headline.

But if finding a "pain point" and, moreover, good solution for it were as easy asking, I imagine we would all be millionaires.

Nah, because most people are too lazy to even bother doing the asking bit. The OP has already shown more initiative than probably 99% of the population.

Further, I don't know what difference you think there is between "needs some motivation" and "lazy". I don't get your point B at all.

Wow, I don't even know what to say to that. But whatever, believe what you want to believe.
Cheap smartphones are already flooding through the porous Chinese border, along with other blackmarket goods. South Korean soap operas are quite popular. The "military first" policy replaced "two pillars" (military and economic), because North Koreans realised how much worse their economy is. The problem is, North Koreans just don't care. They are told that they are a special, pure race. They actually believe they are better off than South Koreans, because they aren't being corrupted by foreign influences.

Give them 5 years to think about it, and might change their minds.
> Crack dealers are not "nice people", they are generally well-armed and their customers are not always white Wall St. execs, they often are criminals (other-than-drug) themselves and that can endanger other motel guests, neighboring homes and businesses, and more.

They could just as easily threaten owners of a motel, and tell them that if they don't get to do their thing there will be more trouble than the motel owner can handle.

Having a fixed place of business makes you vulnerable, and the neighbourhood this motel is in makes me sceptical about it being easily sold to new owners. I think there is an element of making an example out of this particular motel to scare the rest into compliance. "Look what happens if you don't clean up, you lose your business". But unfortunately if you do try to clean up you find yourself facing armed gangsters. Tough choice.
However you feel about copyright, profitting off of the distribution of other peoples work, without their permission, is not something that should be encouraged or tolerated.
It would be lovely if HN could be a place where people could rise above their petty self interests and help the community move forward. Thomas is at the wrong end of this spectrum.

TheAmazingIdiot is correct BTW. Its hard to imagine Thomas posting his ridiculous views unless he is a paid shill. Probably on your team.
Sublime Text 2 - Groups and Views
How about just linking to the tweet on the twitter.com website:
https://twitter.com/ReallyVirtual/status/64780730286358528

Or the JSON API, which gives _exact_ times including timezones:
http://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/show/64780730286358528.jso...
And realistically, what could the owners of the motel have done to curb illicit activity in their rooms? I mean specifically, what could they have done, that would have actually curbed abuse? What it boils down to, is that they can take all the security measures they want, but if someone can rent a room and do/sell drugs, prostitute, and leave no evidence behind, it's outside the purview of the owners, and realistically can't be stopped. This is a function of the neighborhood, not the motel owners.
Appomattox -> Wickard v. Filburn -> Drugs.
I've seen this sentiment expressed over and over here this week, and it's really frustrating to read.

Want to stop people speeding on a road? Issue tickets. In some sense, that's not fair -- people still do it and get away with it, why single out one person? But having a non-zero possibility of a negative consequence is a net disincentive to the behavior. Even if it's enforced somewhat randomly.

Hypothetically: let's suppose that our goal is to stop "the system" of prosecutors threatening multiple felonies against citizens for behavior that most other citizens do not consider worthy of a consequence as serious as jail time/felony conviction. Let us also assume that some prosecutors do this to get prestige/promotions. If there are well known examples of positive consequences, and no examples of negative consequences, then the incentives for our hypothetical prosecutor are pretty clear.

It seems fairly obvious that if Ortiz and Heynmann face seriously negative career consequences, it changes the cost/benefit calculation for other prosecutors, even those whose main concern is career advancement.

There aren't many ways to hold public officials accountable besides public outcry.

I do agree that the root problem is the human psyche. We have all kinds of bugs/heuristics (depending on how you look at it) for social behavior. These lead to group behaviors that us abstract thinkers find frustrating. Unfortunately, this isn't going to get fixed until 20+ years, and that's if you're on the optimistic side about transhumanism. So in the meantime we have to use the tools (and brains) that we have.
It seems to me you are arguing four separate points:

1. JSTOR has a commercial value of $50mil/yr.

This is a fair point, if that is indeed JSTOR's revenue (though "commercial" isn't exactly the right word to describe a non-profit organization's activities).

2. Aaron's intention was to destroy JSTOR.

Unless you have another source beside the Guerrilla Open Access Manifesto[0] and the recent summaries posted online by those close to the case, I don't believe this at all. Aaron's intent, as expressed by the manifesto, was to increase access to knowledge. I also do not consider a federal indictment to be a reliable source for determining the frame of mind of the indicted.

3. Aaron's archive would have been a substitute for JSTOR access, and thus capable of destroying JSTOR.

The other responses to your comments have disproven this claim fairly effectively. JSTOR provides legitimacy to university libraries, it provides an active, searchable index, full text search, online viewing, and a continually updated collection. Aaron's collection of PDFs would provide none of that.

Furthermore, the original purpose of JSTOR was to free up space used by archived print journals, so your claim that print journals in the library stacks would substitute for JSTOR is demonstrably false.

4. Destroying a business model (of a non-profit organization, no less) is equivalent to stealing (e.g. your "if I rob a bank" analogy).

Despite arguing against the idea that Aaron wanted to or was even capable of destroying JSTOR's business model, I will briefly address this point.

Making a particular business model obsolete is not in itself criminal. This has been argued to death online, so just search for "buggy whip manufacturers."

[0] http://pastebin.com/cefxMVAy