skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't mean you any offense, but your response is the kind that makes the entire Ruby community look very bad.

It is perfectly normal for responsible software developers, system administrators and business leaders to get angry or upset by security vulnerabilities. The impact such vulnerabilities can have on an organization is staggering.

When they're exploited, there can be huge sums of money lost. There can be serious legal ramifications. A company's reputation can be destroyed by a single incident. And those are just a few of the consequences.

Even when these vulnerabilities aren't exploited, there are still significant costs associated with fixing them, testing such fixes, deploying the fixes, and so forth.

Software is supposed to bring benefits to its users, not problems and costs. Costly problems with software will make many people angry.

Ruby, Ruby on Rails and some related software have had a very bad time lately. They have caused a lot of problems for a lot of people, and this has indeed resulted in anger and wasted monkey. Some people are making a sensible decision to look toward alternative technologies, to try to minimize their losses.

Instead of labeling such people as "trolls", the Ruby community as a whole needs to engage in some significant self-evaluation. Try to understand why people are expressing what they are, and perhaps even try to learn from what they're saying. Security is important, and the Ruby community needs to learn this fact.
Like others I also use HackerNode daily....thanks for building it!

I think my only feature request would be to have it support landscape mode, at least for the embedded browser.

Thanks again for the great app!
I suspect that this attitude directly collides with the notion that there are just fewer jobs to go around because of automation. If they're both true, both problems solve each other.
From what I've seen, people are angry at a certain subset of the Ruby on Rails community, but then they take that anger and generalize it to the Rails community or even the Ruby community as a whole.
This person found something that they didn't know they didn't know and were so happy they blogged about it. Regardless of what I may personally think about the merits of the code before or after, it makes me happy that there is another human being who is thrilled by learning something new about programming.
what do you have against gtk? graphical user environments are very much an integral part of a base desktop system these days
The biggest impact on a kid's future is their socioeconomic status and/or the determination of their parents. Schooling provided by society is not even a close second, though it does make being a good parent easier (you can delegate 6 or 7 hours a day to society, whereas you'd have to make some really tough decisions if that option wasn't available). We know this is true because social mobility is not that great even in the states; your background matters.

Home schooling tends to just reinforce what is already true about the home environment, so there doesn't seem to be any new variable their. Of course, we could argue that schools can have adverse effects and that you are avoiding those by homeschooling, but since home life is so dominant, you'd expect kids to just regurjitate what they've learned at home anyways, at least until middle or high school where teenagers begin to break free.
As a german student who was forced to learn how to use SAP in order to get my Bachelor degree, I agree.
As long as the money is somewhere in the economy, it's a very simple problem to tax it to fund benefits.
Nice, lots of fun.

How about a rating system (Elo) and a leaderboard for ratings?
I was on the cusp of 30 when men were wearing platform shoes and turned 30 with the entrance of disco. I will admit that I was not fashion conscious; my girlfriend would call me fashion unconscious. Those of us in software were into hiking boots and camping in the Sierra and running shoes in the flatlands. Our girlfriends wore long hair and little makeup and never appeared in the pages of Seventeen or Cosmo. We laughed at guys in platform shoes. They were shorties trying to look tall. Annie Hall was a few years down the road but we were all moving in that direction.
> A lot of programmers are insecure.

You mean a lot of persons? If you don't, I wonder where you got this from. Personal experience maybe?

Anecdotic: I have always been good at sports, popular, and confident, and I criticized this article because he used a kind of link-bait title (should have been "Today I learned about inheritance and it's awesome", something like that), and he also turned out to be selling programming books like he was an expert, which is scammy, and reinforces the fact that you can only find good books through recommendations from your peers.
SAP feels kinda clunky. Whats the appeal?

>100lb gorilla

Seems fairly...light.
I wish it supported logins and comments natively... Unless it does and I'm not seeing it...
>Wages have not risen in proportion to the worker...

Employers are paying more per worker except on the lowest tier, it's just that the increases have all gone into paying greatly increased health insurance premiums.

For unskilled labor wages haven't gone up because the job market was flooded with ten million illegal aliens. That's just a question of supply and demand.
In science, there are really two states of being: "false", and "not false yet." Truth implies a definitiveness that science lacks.

Unfortunately, this is a hotly debated topic. Many philosophers of science would argue that science is the search for truth, and an example of this might be logical positivism. My own personal take is that science is a method (and framework of thought) for making statistically accurate predictions about the world. Somewhat paradoxically then, "truth" becomes approximations of correct, rather than the traditional inviolable assertion.
Even densely populated parts of the US are not densely populated. We have huge yards, giant parking lots, and long drives from place to place. Aside from a handful of cities, the US is designed to resist density.
A focus on "beauty" or "elegance" is, for starters, just an updating of Occam's Razor. The simplest theory that fits the facts is assumed best, and people pick different ways of expressing the notion of "simple".

There's nothing wrong with that as a starting point. Problems can arise, however, when you take that further and make simplifying assumptions. Economics has been particularly prone to that problem; I believe the famous can opener joke dates to the 1960s.

(http://netec.mcc.ac.uk/JokEc.html gives the simplest :) form of the can-opener joke I know: A physicist, a chemist and an economist are stranded on an island, with nothing to eat. A can of soup washes ashore. The physicist says, "Lets smash the can open with a rock." The chemist says, "Lets build a fire and heat the can first." The economist says, "Lets assume that we have a can-opener...")

By way of contrast, simplifying assumptions in physics have usually gone better. In particular, relaxing them has gone fairly smoothly ("Assume all the mass is concentrated at a point of zero diameter ... oops, I mean in a small sphere of finite diameter ...") On the other hand, one of the core critiques of string theory is based on the suspicion that a key simplifying assumption (only the early terms of certain Taylor series matter) is badly mistaken.

And in climate science, predictions are necessarily based on simplified models; debate can then ensue as to whether or not the models are misleading.
Ask HN: What company would you trust with the security of your javascript app?
Specifically, with the proliferation of client-heavy javascript apps, assuming a new hacker can master html/js/css, is there a provider out there that provides a secure backend-as-a-service for them to build on? What I mean is, figuring out ssl, getting the site to work on https, setting up, configuring, and managing the servers invovled, pretty much everything other than client side development, is there a best in class solution that provides all that? Let's assume that the app is usuable without signing up, and is designed to be used in one-off use cases where there is no point to save ones progress or past work, and now their is a feature request to be able to store the result of the workflow for future loading/editing. What's the simplest way for this developer, assuming they have money to throw at the problem, to get all that boring but necessary backend/security stuff handled? Obviously if billion dollar companies we can only assume use best practices can still get hacked, any provider of a service such as I have described is selling a promise they can't quite keep, but anything is better than not being able to finish my app for a year while I teach myself all the backend/security stuff. What would you recommend someone in my position do? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks! On the general topic, here's a link to my most recent psychology article:

http://arachnoid.com/trouble_with_psychology
Aaron's won't be that. I don't think his goal is the same as was with The Social Network.
Seems strange to leave out the iPhone product announcement, especially since the iPod announcement was pretty low key ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN0SVBCJqLs ), and was not an obvious hit at the event. Compare that to the iPhone announcement where everyone went wild right then and there, and truly felt like the culmination of Steve's vision of what computing should become (the iPod in retrospect seemed more like a side project that didn't really "mesh" with his general philosophy on computing).
What makes you ask?

I don't know why @incision asked, so I can't speak for him or her. However, I know why I would ask you the same question: I would be curious whether you were simply speaking out of profound ignorance and entitlement or whether there was actually any credibility to back up your stance.

That I respect kids more than quite a bunch of folks who are actually raising some?

This has nothing to do with respect and a lot to do with hard-earned experience, which you don't have. And I say hard-earned because there's no decent parent out there that doesn't regret a whole lot of mistakes they made while they were bringing up their kids. Your attitude of moral superiority is not only undeserved, but it's also quite insulting.

Or is that just an attempt to dismiss what I said without addressing it? That shit is getting real old.

Is it? Funny, from where I stand, it looks like you were coming up with criticism and theories you never bothered to verify in any way, just because you feel entitled and I can tell you: that shit has been ancient before I was born.

I suggest you read Steve Yegge's "Have you ever legalized marijuana?" [1] or, if you're short on time, a relevant XKCD [2].

[1]: http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legali...

[2]: http://xkcd.com/793/
If you like Vestas have a look at Enercon.
Someone sent this to me, and I wrote about its non-, half-, and full-truths here: http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2013/02/02/a-fools-errand-and-... .
Not currently, but it would certainly be possible to add something like that---exposing the running stats for partial subsequences of the input sequence would just be a matter of replacing the "reduce" in the definition of calculate with "reductions" (well, and at least one other change, but at a similar level of complexity). That wouldn't give you ten, sixty, etc. minutes in to the data gathering, because it wouldn't be tied to how long the actual computation of the elements of the input seq---something outside calculate's purview, ATM---was taking, but it would start delivering running answers right away.
This is like inception misrepresentation. An article about Wozniak condemning the accuracy of a movie, which is itself very misleading.

I was at the talk, and I can say first hand that the tone of the talk never came anywhere near the way this editorialized paragraph would suggest:

> "Totally wrong. Personalities and ... the ideas of computers affecting society did not come from Jobs ... . His idea was to make a $20 PC board and sell it for $40 to help people... build the computer I'd given away ... . [H]e always saw a way to make a quick buck off my designs (this was the 5th time). The lofty talk came much further down the line."

The theme was closer to how he and Jobs were a great team because he would come up with designs and Jobs always had a way to make them money from it even saying explicitly, "...and we'd always split the profit."
Where I grew up the men still wear high heels. We call them "cowboy boots".
I so agree with you. There are few programming mistakes that consistency in use does ameliorate. On the other hand, no matter how "good" the code, if it's inconsistent, it's bad.
Qaher like the english 'anger'?
I'm not a social media manager. I'm an engineer. I was making list from casual testing and giggling.
Let's argue about whether Haskell...
> I don't see how you can dismiss the notion of truth and then invoke falsification. What does "false" mean but "not true"?

I will let philosopher David Hume explain it: "No amount of observations of white swans can allow the inference that all swans are white, but the observation of a single black swan is sufficient to refute that conclusion."

To summarize, we can never say that all swans are white (a truth) but we might be able to prove that claim false.

> What does "false" mean but "not true"?

The statement that an assertion is false follows different rules than the statement that an assertion is true. And a theory that's supported by evidence can always be proven false by new evidence -- the point being that no theory ever becomes true in perpetuity (except in mathematics). More detail here:

http://arachnoid.com/doubt
> "I'm looking at the plane on the ground, x looks like it has broken off, what do I do?"

Having sat in an airplane seat for two hours while this exact thing happened, I sure hope their response times are faster if the question is "The pilots are dead, how do we land the plane?"
I've played WAAAY to much tron to be bothered to collect the blue dots :P If nicknames are added, mine's gonna be Mongoose.
Could someone give a brief example of what kind of SAP work require? I see constantly recruiters searching for people who know how to work with SAP, but I have not clue what it involves. ))
+1.

Look carefully at this picture from the article:

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2013/01/ff_superca...

Check out the orientation of the "bridle lines" from either end of the wing, and the keel. When I saw that, it all went "click" in my head. This is just a wing tethered to the keel - like a kite, or a paragliger - the hull/fuselage and the spar and pods/floats are all just "unnecessary" bits, only used to hold the wing and keel in the required orientation to get up to operating speed. (I wonder if someone will build a version of this which jettisons all of the boat-like structure when it gets the keel and wing up to the speed needed?)
hey Zjonsson, I think this is awesome, have you considered having a webworker run in the background to send the data to the browser and then switch once it has finished? The time to interactivity (and visibility) of crossfilter is a problem, and I think you did a great job solving that problem, I just don't find the interactivity to be as great as I was expecting (then again I'm on a slow connection currently).
That's weird. I didn't think humans were susceptible to "natural courting poses". Is there any scientific literature on this that isn't based purely on speculation?
Thankyou!
Not having lived through an era does make it difficult to know these things
...by revenue

that's missing from the title.

Growing up I found that a tremendous amount of software I used was European, and most of it was free (as in beer). Not to disparage German software developers, but almost none of this software was German.

There's absolutely fantastic software from all over the continent, but due to various economic/cultural aspects doesn't revenue in quite the numbers boring SAP does.

edit upon further review I've found a bit more German influence in my software than I remembered, sorry Germans!
> the disorientation of G-forces

Speaking personally, this is the point at which I start vomiting and panicking, not necessarily in that order.
In "Drills" mode it is impossible to tell the difference between lowercase L and capital I.

Doesn't seem like it should be that way.
Really enjoyed this. The speed up was a bit annoying. The first step up in speed would have been great through out the game.
100 pounds is much smaller than an actual gorilla.
Why police lie under oath
or yet another visualization that lets you conclude that people actively do things when they are wake, and aren't quite so active when they sleep
It's as if some sort of patent "tragedy" would need to happen, such as an extremely popular application used by multiple voting blocs be shut down, an application whose absence would set off a larger popular response. However, the owner of such an application would have to somehow be vulnerable, and I'm not sure what's out there that would match this criteria. Certainly not a Google or Microsoft, to state the obvious.
I understand your feeling of helplessness, but supporting the people that stand up and fight against these patent trolls seems like a good place to start.

Signing the petition costs nothing, and there's a chance that it could have a real and lasting impact on the patent system.

Donating to Austin Meyer's legal defence fund is much cheaper—both financially and emotionally—than having to defend against a patent troll yourself at some stage in the future.
I think these are great insights, especially about comfort not equalling happiness.

I think a major factor behind it is that the US has no historical culture, just a popular culture. I think American's don't realize it at all unless they spend time outside the US to see how the important the historical context is. There was no USA 200 years ago, while many countries have thousand year old cultures.
What? Rainbows are as thick as an entire cloud.
Zuckerberg found The Social Network to be significantly less than 100% accurate, but perhaps a better movie because of it.
Superbowl Preview for Non Football Fans
For an idea of the kind of challenges they faced in the past:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ow8QbXhZJU
I think you can make an even stronger argument in the case of The Social Network that what we got was a less entertaining story because of it. I think the story that was told was a much lazier one, forced to fit old prototypes and thus was simultaneously less entertaining and had less to teach. The story behind Facebook, and the people that participated in it, is probably pretty interesting, but instead we got the tired trope of "ostracized nerd channels social frustration to super ambition - only to find himself alone". The characters were flat and one sided, the lessons were obvious. The story has been told countless times already, it is boring, unrealistic, and doesn't leave much to learn from.
Riddle me this, how is it not possible to tell your kid you want them to be not yell so loud when playing computer games impossible

Oh, it's possible. Nobody claimed it's impossible. The question is, what do you do when (not if, when) it doesn't work? And by "doesn't work", I mean that they stop yelling for 30-90 seconds and then they start again.

and in what situation is it preferably to deceive them?

What people have been telling you over and over is that these decisions aren't as clear cut as

if A and B and C then deception.preferable = true

What's going to work best depends on a lot of factors: age and psychological makeup of the kids, environment they live in, etc.

If they actually respect their toys more than their parents, that's clearly a FUBAR situation.

That statement reveals a profound lack of understanding of the subject matter, which is why so many people are criticizing you.

I say bollocks to that, and am still waiting for a single argument that actually applies to this situation, instead of just hiding behind generalities, strawmen and logical fallacies.

Which just goes to show you haven't actually bothered to look for those arguments. If you had, you would have found an explanation I offered, based on my experiences with my son, on observing other kids and on talking to other parents and educators: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5155974

Feel free to disagree with the explanation, but please stop throwing hissy fits because people called you out on your lack of credibility.
Smoothing Jagged Edges on an Image in GIMP
I'm having a lot of trouble following all this media storm due to the Swartz suicide. The guy obviously did something illegal against a very big organization. It could not come as a shock to him the consequences would be severe.

And yet, when caught he commits suicide. And now he is a martyr... Can you imagine the pain his family is in right now just because this guy had to commit illegal acts and couldn't pay for his crimes?
Many-to-Many Relationships & NoSQL? Problem solved
I cannot lie...
It's not defeatist because it doesn't imply you just can't do anything about it, it implies you should be responsible for your own key management and encrypt sensitive data appropriately. Government agencies silently seizing an appropriately setup truecrypt container are not a threat.
Extract zip verbosely from file? The order is important and not very intuitive in most languages :-)
> Many philosophers of science would argue that science is the search for truth ...

Yes, but because the stakes are so high, and because of the critical role of science in modern times, the views of philosophers aren't compelling on science's definition any more.

As just one example, society needs to keep superstition out of science classrooms. To do this, and with the aid of expert witnesses, a court of law has recently defined science this way:

Source: McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mclean-v-arkansas.html)

Summary -- science must have these properties:

1. It is guided by natural law;

2. It has to be explanatory by reference to natural law;

3. It is testable against the empirical world;

4. Its conclusions are tentative, i.e. are not necessarily the final word; and

5. It is falsifiable.

The above is why Creationism isn't presented alongside evolution in Arkansas science classrooms. If you think that's important, then it follows that science should be defined clearly enough to avoid that outcome. BTW the above is only one of many nearly identical legal definitions of science.

Based on the foregoing, a falsifiable idea is not a truth, it is merely an idea that has survived falsification so far.

> My own personal take is that science is a method (and framework of thought) for making statistically accurate predictions about the world.

There's a bit more to it than that. There is the responsibility to test one's ideas against reality, and abandon those ideas that fail the comparison. There is the responsibility to candidly consider alternative explanations for the same observation. There is the responsibility to design experiments sufficiently rigorous that independent, similarly equipped observers are drawn to the same conclusion. And many more.

> Somewhat paradoxically then, "truth" becomes approximations of correct, rather than the traditional inviolable assertion.

For philosophers arguing over tea, no problem. For those who understand the deadly serious role of science in modern times, no way.
Why does this sound like Push 2.0 to me? And it's ironic that he happens to mention books -- that's the antithesis of a "stream." A book would be like a river bank, somewhere to get the hell out of the stream.
AT&T Will Force Your Data Plan For Your Unlocked Out-of-Contract "Smart" Phone