skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And CNET's side of the story corroborates with the Verge's report: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30677_3-57563877-244/the-2013-best...

I suppose the only reason why she could reveal all of that now is because CBS' PR team is in damage control now

> Ultimately, we were told that we must use the official statement and that we must follow corporate policy to defer all press requests to corporate communications.
I kept waiting for them to explain what was "out of context" but it never came.
Maybe in 1956 computers were "huge corporate things," but by 1986 there was a global computer network for PCs that remains popular in some parts of the world to this very day:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidonet
Technically, the grammar describes the language of the language, where the "language of the language" means the formal language, the set of characters and strings that are valid (wheras the union of all of the characters allowed in every char or string that is valid in the language is the language's alphabet, not all members of the alphabet may be allowed to stand alone as a token in a given language..)
Nokia: Yes, we decrypt HTTPS - but we don't spy
Talk about sell out.
And algebra and alchemy (chemistry) and the list goes on.

We have a lot to thank the Arabic world for.
A sample of moderator approved comments:

Seems like David Miscavige and Scientology are on a roll. Also it appears the media have been missing the real story.

I hadn't realized there were so many new churches opened this past year. Great report!
Better Signup Forms for Your Mobile App
1. http://pornharmsresearch.com/2012/08/pornography-viewing-amo...

2. http://pornharmsresearch.com/2012/08/effects-of-womens-porno...
That's pretty cool for a website.
They typoed "CryptoSeal" in 4 different ways in the first draft online.
> In nature, the optimum is almost always in the middle somewhere. Distrust assertions that the optimum is at an extreme point.

This one caught my eye as being only half right. As you increase something, you may get better performance up to a point but then see it level off and decrease. For instance, you could increase the fuel capacity by a factor of 10, but then you'd need a larger engine, more powerful thrusters to maneuver it, etc.

On the other hand, the lower bound of "don't do that at all" is frequently optimal. A lot of these cases are things that you'd intuitively see as stupid ideas (ie "how many lead weights should we bolt on to the fins"), but in other cases they aren't. Like a fish that evolved away its eyes because they were no longer useful. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amblyopsidae)

If you took the "law" too literally, you'd be distrustful of saying "These eyes aren't doing anything, let's have 0 of them." Don't be afraid to remove wasteful features.
I'm a married male with children, and this is bullshit. I recall at my first job my manager saying, "Yeah, tax the hell out of you young single rich guys". The state should have no discriminatory power of taxation w/regard to marital/reproductive status. If anything, young single people should be taxed less, as they are a lower draw on social services and are more likely to deploy capital rather than save.
UPDATE: Mat Mullen, Disqus employee got a comment past the moderator (maybe he knows someone):

This is the weirdest thing I've ever read on the Atlantic. You're actually letting the Church of Scientology sponsor content on your website?
JSTOR Liberator sets public domain academic articles free
>You need to pass info up the parse tree so that after parsing, you have a new data structure with everything nicely structured ready to ACT UPON.

I (and many others) prefer to keep these passes relatively distinct. Parse tree -> AST -> Internal Representation -> (Generation of Output / Interpretation)
The fact remains that search result numbers are completely useless for estimating the security of a language. Even more so without quotes.

* Search results show visibility on the web, nothing else.

* Without quotes, it may mean that more people talk about Python security than Java security. Or about writing exploits in Python, not for for Python.

* Java is extremely secure if it is run in the same place as Python, and not executing untrusted bytecode in a browser plugin. Nobody runs unknown Python code on their machines. Java vs. Flash. vs. Javascript makes more sense as a comparison, because all three are used for executing untrusted code.

In other news, I get 1M search results for "bieber security exploit" and 27M for "google security exploit" without quotes. But I don't think Justin Bieber or Google have more security issues than Java browser plugins.
"Do you really want to have to re-write all the laws centered around "reasonable person" every couple decades?"

Yes, and in fact, I would like every law to expire no more than 10 years after it is passed. We have too many laws and too many ways to become a criminal; force politicians to spend their days renewing necessary laws and we'll curb our out-of-control legal system. Keep the legal system straightforward, so that nobody is confused about whether or not they are committing a crime. Eliminate plea bargaining. Reduce the power of prosecutors, and reduce the power of the police (let's start by reducing the power of their firearms -- we really don't need soldiers serving search-and-arrest warrants).
I think a lot of people trying to do anything software in arabic get bogged down and indefinitely bike shed over translating technical terms. I think it's just a choice to be made to move along. In your example حرف is just fine.
US court drops charges on Aaron Swartz days after his suicide
Apologies if this is off topic :

I would love to hear what other "no-magic" frameworks people in the community enjoy developing in. Web.py comes to mind, for example - though I've never worked with it.
Why Bandcamp's new fan accounts are a game changer
One (maybe stupid?) reason why I really like getter/setters has nothing to do with encapsulation, but that it makes it easier to search for places where a variable is changed. Often you have lots of getFoo and little setFoo functions - so just searching for "Foo" will return lots of results while "setFoo" helps me finding those faster.
I never post and I never comment, but I had to login to say something.

HN needs to "man up" and accept that the majority of the attitudes in the original post are exactly why things ended the way they did. People bitching about the styling of payment buttons? Telling someone to "man up" or exclaiming (with plenty of IANAL disclaimers) that no one would get jail time for something like this is typical for your average HN discussion thread. This thread (and the subject of this thread) is exactly what I've come to expect from HN - a bunch of (mostly) know-it-all hyper-competitive hyper-critical 20-something assholes trying to backstab or one-up each other to the top.

And Ed, "Not here, and not now" is such a cop-out I'm not even sure how to react to it. Own your shit.

Edit: Said differently, with friends (or family) like these, who needs enemies.
How do you compare to Hamachi, which is the original zero-conf, one-click-install managed VPN service?

https://secure.logmein.com/products/hamachi
I think we have different ideas about what constitutes optimization.

Sure, putting const in parameter declarations is easy to do. It may even buy you a little bit of speed because the compiler is a little bit clearer about pointer aliasing and whatever. But it's not going to make a difference in the equivalence classes of slow code / fast code / Really Fast Code.

Serious hardcore optimization usually involves changing the way the problem is solved to something different than the way the old code thought about it: either constraining the problem space further, or attacking it from a different direction. This usually involves rewriting everything since there are so many cross-cutting concerns. Sometimes one has to do this several times to figure out which way is really fastest. Microoptimization things, like whether you used const somewhere or not, are much smaller details that have correspondingly small effects.

For code that one isn't specifically optimizing, speed probably doesn't matter. There was an exception to this, where we hit a little bit of a bump in the late-2000s on platforms with in-order CPUs like the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, because they have such a high penalty on cache misses; this tended to make general-purpose code slower and result in much flatter profiles. But now we are pretty much out of that era.

In general, const is more of a protection than an optimization. This is especially true heading into the massively parallel future, where const just sort of tells you whether some code is known for sure to run safely in parallel or not... and running safely in parallel matters tremendously more to overall speed than the number of instructions in that bit of code, or whatever. (Anyway, C++ is not at all a viable language in the massively parallel future... so that is going to be interesting.)
I keep looking to see the April Fools disclaimer or any indication this is a joke, but I am not seeing it.

Perhaps I am a victim of Poe's law.
if you go watch the 'upvote' count on his comment, it is flickering rapidly, up two, down one, up one, down two - fascinating.
Get rid of marriage from the tax code entirely. If you both make near-equal income, there's not a marriage benefit, but a marriage penalty. My wife and I pay $5-10k more a year in taxes because we decided to get married. The tax-code still encourages the old paradigm of one breadwinner and one person staying home to take care of the children.
Memorial for Aaron Swartz
I'm on the same page regarding ORMs/DAOs. It's quick enough to throw some handcrafted SQL in the model or to write up a handful of stored procs.
Totally agree and I was really surprised by this. One line patches can turn into 30 lines just to reformat the surrounding code.
No honest person would call this the theft of millions of documents. This is akin to jumping the gate at a theme park and riding for free, a bunch of times. Nobody stole a rollercoaster. Harm was done but there's no need to reach for emotional terms to exaggerate it.

It'd take a lawyer to call this theft. I mean, by a word in a book it is but realistically it isn't.

For instance, I've had a forum post quoted word for word, and not as a reply. Of course I hadn't registered the copyright, but if I had I could have sued, as I would have been robbed - in your eyes. The same nothing would have happened but by virtue of a piece of paper you and yours would see it differently.

You talk about the closed mindset of hackernews but fail to see the emotionally isolated world inhabited by those who act as if morality flows from law instead of vice versa.

So again, no. I don't think an honest person would agree with that characterization of the events, at least not until a lawyer 'clarified' it for them.
I don't see any of those as being correct tbh.

Wrong - morally not, legally maybe.
JSTOR backing out - MIT didn't back out.
An example is justified - absolutely not, given that the act is not morally wrong.
Aaron won't serve serious time - well, we're seeing the time he's serving now. He's lost his life and he isn't the first under these circumstances.
The prosecutor brought a case within the letter and spirit of the law. What was the judge supposed to do at that stage, exactly?
Rather poor mathematics they did, and they should have consulted someone who could the maths a lot more accurately. Financial differences are just part of the way that singles are discriminated against - here is a longer list http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/marriage-rights-benef...
Congratulations.

What's the protocol here?
Oh, he's suddenly so thoughtful and considerate.

I think edw519 is a common example of a celebrity case who feels obliged to condescend his important opinion on any mildly prominent case, in a know-it-all, bold manner. And there's no lack of readily available supporters willing to nod and upvote their idol.

I have respect for his technical background, but with fame comes a greater responsibility, which not many carry out well.
There is going to be a lesson here over the next few days about how some advertising decisions can ruin a brand.
I also care about const-correctness... but once in a while in a dark hour I wonder if I really saved or lost more time by it so far.
I'm really surprised they haven't done such a mission on Encke yet. It's a fairly obvious target for various explorations because its period is so short (3.3 years).

(When I taught in an aerospace museum, one of our simulated space missions was launching a probe into Encke's tail: http://www.museumofflight.org/education/challenger-learning-... .)
Tax rates are set based on a person's ability to pay, not on their expected use of social services. You could argue that this discriminates against young wealthy singles, but then you'd effectively be arguing that the impoverished or the chronically ill should pay proportionately higher taxes because they are more dependent on the state for their day-to-day wellbeing. The problems with this position should be obvious.
edw519 is allowed to have an opinion, and his opinion does not, at least to me, seem unreasonable.

Not everyone is going to agree with your civil disobedience actions, or you asking for help with the consequences. That doesn't make them bad people, or wrong people, for saying they don't like your approach, think you should accept consequences, or whatever else. For example, MLK didn't hate the clergymen that disagreed with his direct action approach. He essentially told them to man up, join the movement, and accept the consequences of sitting in jail sometimes as a result.
Not that edw519 is quite as eloquent, but none of edw519's comments are patronizing, they were his description of the situation as he saw it, and the outcome he thought should occur.

Characterizing this as "spitting in the face of someone asking for help" is pure hyperbole.

If everyone agreed on a course of action and outcome, you wouldn't actually need a movement. That a person died tragicallly does not mean that everyone who did not see eye to eye with that person is an egotistical patronizing dickhead who spit in their face because they did not want to help the movement. It just means they did not see eye to eye.

Acting as if it is more than that is, as others have said, a circular witchhunt. Sometimes tragic events are just that: Tragic events.

The whole "news" story is ridiculous. One can be sad and feel it a tragedy that a young man committed suicide, even if you disagree with the approach that person took.

Lastly, I'll point out that if edw519 were to meet an untimely demise, your post is exactly of the same tone and impression as his.
I think a few Hh participants back in the our day would have had nice navy blazers with brass buttons and wrote COBOL for Computer Asociates.

Can we have a HN old farts T shirts for us old timers :-)
well this is a newly created account, but I've been here for four years. I remember when people were missing comments by nicb, when patio11 wasn't a lead karma recipient. Ed fucked up man. And as I've said it now in three other comments, this guy sold a freaking book of his comments from this exact site. I've been an asshole. I've said things I really, really shouldn't have. But the people calling for Ed to publicly apologize have the least of it. And for the record, I'm not a regular contributor hiding behind a new account. I've commented less than a dozen times before the last few days, from two other accounts that I promptly forgot. Just because we don't have high karma doesn't mean we don't have relevant opinions and arguing the opposite sounds pretty shameful.
There is nothing wrong with defending his comments. Who made you judge, jury, and executioner? Anonymity has made you bold.
The presence of a quota system that requires that the government bring a certain number of cases and provides bonuses and rewards connected to "bringing more cases" means that honorable and honest prosecutors fall behind and cannot compete and dirty and heartless prosecutors are able to meet their goals and get ahead. It is not possible to fight the federal government, only a man of enormous strength and enormous balls can successfully do this. Most capitulate, the others lose because the government burden of proof is a joke.
In 1986 large computers were still "huge corporate things" which is almost certainly what Congress was targeting with the law rather than Fidonet (hence the trouble).
How convenient that all the examples use digits in the 1-3 range. This looks painful for normal numbers with a mix of large and small digits.

This method always made more sense to me: http://www.ehow.com/video_12244670_solve-multiplication-prob... as it combines the idea of the diagonal lines in the "japanese" method with the mnemonics of the [1-9]x[1-9] multiplication tables that everyone should also learn.
Surely Scientology's army of Astro-turfers are working overtime tonight
You can call outside speculation "a statement of probabilities" in an attempt to make it seem legitimate, but that doesn't make you correct.

Dressing up speculation doesn't change what it is.
So much of cultural is contextual, and on closer inspection the hero and villan are rarely who you thought they were. I saw your manifesto a long time ago, in a small town far, far away, and it played some part in making a bankers son want to be a hacker. Thanks for that.
> YOU STILL DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS.

No we do not, but everyone still needs to decided if and how they will act differently going forward with this new data point regardless of what we do not know.

Jumping to conclusions is bad not changing at all is also bad.
This is a crock, the social purpose of marriage is raising children that are properly socialized to inherit society the financial benefits are there to help partially defray the cost of raising children. And as was stated below throw some kids in and see how the numbers work out.
The Atlantic editorial team is not involved in the creation of this content.

I imagine the editorial team are currently drinking a shit ton of whiskey praying that nobody associates them with this.
"> Feminism benefits men as well.
It depends on how it's applied, doesn't it?"

Destroying systems of entrenched privilege may not be viewed as beneficial by all men that cling to these systems, no. But equality does provide for a healthier system, if one appreciates women healthy in mind and body.

Harping on straw "Feminists" won't improve our situation.
Can we start with shaming the prosecutors? Just pull public records, say with PACER.
I don't know; consciously recognizing this tendency in myself is one of the reasons I deleted my reddit account and seriously scaled back my contribution here. I observed behaviour in myself that I found distasteful, but it wasn't before that behaviour had become entrenched and I had become a top-100 poster on HN (by overall karma) that I noticed it. I can easily postulate a reality wherein others, as I did, unconsciously adopt hivemind opinions so as to maximize the social validation of karma without realizing that they're doing so or intentionally gaming the system in that way.
As long as it is not about using real money it is not a problem.
Yeah, I just saw it, it is offline
I don't know if you remember 1986 (I know I don't), but from what I understand from the history books, computers communicated at around 300 baud and even if you exclude the mandatory freon compressor, the amount of energy required to run a computer with processor power equivalent to the phone in your pocket would still have been measured in tons of coal per fortnight.

I do remember 1986--I was in college then--and it wasn't that bad. (Though your description was very entertaining.) PCs with modems existed in the late 1970's--a friend's father had a Commodore PET at that time. Certainly by the mid-1980s, with the IBM PC and clones going strong and Apple having released several different lines including the original Macs, computers were no longer just "huge corporate things".
Would you take my word if I say it is not spam?
I learned something today. The limited concurrent requests by domain surprised me. The in lining of header CSS is counter intuitive as well.
interesting, could this be his Disqus employee "privileges" allowing his comment to bypass moderation and if so, how does that bode for websites using Disqus? They control the discussion unless someone at Disqus wants to talk? Although ~~from what I can tell it's a free service, so they can't do much damage by leaving.~~ nevermind, there is a disqus premium service.
This really did happen. And we're totally cool.

I refer to that as the Night of a Thousand Australians. Good times.
The prime stack is going to have some real problems as Rails 4 goes threadsafe by default, as haml isn't threadsafe. I guess this won't be a problem for those on process-based servers, but it's going to be an issue for those embracing multi-threaded app servers.
I've never actually used Hamachi (although from what I've heard, it's good); I'll check it out more.
Glad to see there are others that are just as confused as I am. It looks like a fancy, general interest forum. Why?
The better question is: what do they have to lose?

The winners get advice, contacts and promotion. They give up nothing as far as I can tell.
Technological misunderstanding isn't at the root of this problem. Maybe a misunderstanding of motivations, or a zeal to prosecute people who don't follow the rules, or just a criminal system that's too punitive overall.

None of the discussions I've read offer real political or social insight. What everyone's doing, instead, is the typically American thing of trying to work out how to respond to a crisis that has already happened.
Honestly hamachi has got nothing on evolve [0]

[0] https://www.evolvehq.com/welcome#welcome-features
Cool tutorial and introduction. In my toy languages, I prefer PEGs to CFGs because I believe in ordinal precedence of choice -- this means that your grammar can NOT be ambiguous. I also enjoy that you can skip tokenization.
AddThis vs ShareThis
And alcohol of course.
I'm sure that I'm going to be caught out for mis-remembering this... but I recall something from Richard Feynman's auto-biography where he's describing a piece of advice from when he was working on a mechanical analog computer (for ack-ack aiming) you pick the gears from nearer the middle of the range if you possibly can.

I've worked on projects that were burned by incorporating too many bleeding edge components, when things are too new, you often don't know what you don't know.

I'm sure if I had this list to point to on my last project, I'd either have been shown the door sooner, or we might have had a better chance of success...