skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are so many problems with the patent system, it's hard to identify a primary problem. I'd say the worst thing about it is that it is simply non-functional for any individual or small business.

Got a patent? Someone infringing? Sue them! Cost? Astronomical.

Selling something? Patent Trolls trying to make a grab? Defend yourself in court! Cost? Astronomical.

Those scenarios merely address outright abuse; but, the way patents are granted guarantees that those situations will also arise between parties who aren't trolls.
Fault tolerant systems are faulty
Neat little story, despite the grammar and capitalization. Is it common to use _ as an index variable?

Edit: for _ in range(4):
Python significant white space. Really, that's what preventing me for ever liking Python.
Is there anyone who genuinely doesn't think the original site creators who still speak for the site and were found liable for it aren't running it just because one day they said that?

They lie about a lot of stuff.
Lol. At least it's an easy place to start and do business. What would happen if you tried that in North Korea?
the most recent one is also undoubtedly the worst i´ve seen so far... the title is shocking in it blandness and lack of creativity and the post itself long and unexciting. Someone needs to review their job postings for them :

"Multi talented developer wanted for YC company"
It's a start. Browsers were not getting any faster before because no one was pushing their boundaries, but nowadays it's a different story. I think we can expect browsers to get a helluva lot faster within the next 3-4 years, specially when it comes to canvas processing and rendering.
Actually, this is about how music works nowadays. You can download DRM-free files for a small fee. It would be technically easy to redistribute them, but people still buy lots of music. Why is that?

I think it's because people are making a price-convenience tradeoff. Music companies can affect both sides of that: keeping the price low will make people want to buy, but they can also sue distribution sites to make it less convenient to get music illegally, thus raising the price that people are willing to pay before they seek out illegal music.

To a certain extent, DRM aims for the same model - it doesn't make it impossible to redistribute videos, it just raises the difficulty, and thus raises the price that people are willing to pay before they go find illegal videos. But is it necessary to use DRM for that, or would going after distribution sites be enough?
Testing in Agile Teams
Testing is a key component of agile development. The widespread adoption of agile methods has brought the need for effective testing into the limelight, and agile projects have transformed the role of testers. Much of a tester’s function, however, remains largely misunderstood. What is the true role of a tester?
Today, you can build a browser that can render all content on the web that adheres to the open standards.

With DRM built in, you can adhere to the standards all you want, you still can't render all the content unless have access to the secret keys, which can only be granted to you by the powers-that-be.

The only viable client-software will be that controlled by a few major companies in cahoots with the content-industry, and they will dictate terms on the rest of us, tearing down whatever "open" is left. Average users are not going to install an open, non-DRM client if that doesn't allow them to use Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, BBC etcetera.

Thanks to "open", the total monopoly if Microsoft's IE6 was broken and the web moved forward. With DRM, that will no longer be a viable option. Google, Microsoft and Apple together will decide how we experience the web.

If you think "open" will still play a role in that, you must haven been living under a rock for the past 10 years. Even Google's love for "open" and "neutral" has been reduced to mostly marketing.
The problem isn't necessarily with services providing Open APIs/Data Exports, it's with people themselves and the trust they ensure to the services they use regularly. Pretty much all of this advice most of us should know: along with regular backups and different passwords/password manager for different sites; and I am willing to bet a large proportion of people will know this advice, advise it to others, but not follow it themselves. That is until its too late.

Even when following said advice it is not fool proof. So you own your own domain name. But do you really own it? Not really, you are essentially leasing it from a registrar who probably have terms and conditions for seizure of that domain name for whatever reason.
Salt 0.13.0 Released
To "properly" lock it down, you'd have to close the entire stack, and then you'd have to outlaw open source implementations.

ORLY? How does encryption work then? One could say "in order to properly encrypt your stuff, you actually need to make sure nobody is outside your window with binoculars", but that's not the job of encryption is it. I guess it would ultimately boil down to possession of private and public keys, and making it illegal to transmit those. So? As you said, they can deliver their stuff in proprietary apps already, what is lost when they use proprietary keys instead?
Slow cooked rabbit (Montaneise Style)
Problem is that those vendors offering the proprietary solutions may not have interest in offering their solution for all platforms.

Let's take Flash as an example. I remember days from the past when I was happily watching MythTV recordings from my Nokia Internet Tablet. The tablet had no problems playing the content, since I was able to use software optimized for the tablet.

Using the same hardware to watch some Flash content was painful. Flash implementation was not nearly as good as the video player that was able to utilize the platforms hardware capabilities.

Open standards make it possible for companies like Nokia, Blackberry and Canonical to implement the video players themselves. They don't need to rely on Microsoft or Adobe to provide support for their platforms.
Just wondering who had more at stake here: the Chinese Gov't or the US Gov't? If he was the one guy with the skills and knowledge (at IME) capable of operating this device, and his work was a potential national security threat to the US, then wouldn't they have more motive to kill him than China?

I don't think it would have come as much of a surprise to the US that China is interested in cutting-edge semiconductor tech, nor would be the details of what IME was up to. I don't see much of an upside for China killing him, shedding tons of light on his work, and Huwei's dealings with IME, plus losing their top specialist. They tend to just blanket deny things when caught red-handed anyway.
I would be interested in hearing how much interest there is in an alternative, and if there are any medium to big users who are looking into migrating away now.
> The letter also recognizes what many consider to be the agency's central financial crisis, that the USPS cannot continue in its current state of paying $5.5 billion every year for 75 years' worth of employee health care benefits, the result of a 2006 law.

Please just remove that onerous restriction, which no other organization has. Then without the pressure of bankruptcy we can have a reasonable discussion about the other types of services which the postal service might do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Regulatory_Commission#Ch...
Do you believe in unions then? Unions are pretty much the same thing. They inflate wages and force companies to pay workers a wage that would otherwise be much less. Unions have also prevented some jobs from being automated (IE: making them obsolete).

"start talking about the possibility of completely upending the copyright system and replacing it with something that makes sense now that we have the Internet."

If a company pours millions of dollars into something that many people enjoy, why shouldn't their works be protected?

You talk about changing the system and I feel like what you really want is no protection for content creators.
The currentl proposal [1] mandates content decryption modules that are not part of the browser but rather plugins akin to current NPAPI ones (Flash etc). Those will most likely be platform-specific binaries. That makes operating systems like GNU/Linux or BSD-likes unable to decrypt content depending without the correct CDM.

[1] 1https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-med...

More reading

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20944 http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/02/unethical-html-video...
So it's dying, but not visibly? I can't really parse that, but I bet the answer will contain quite a few Perl 6 references…
very slow in rendering
Source of HNs own 'Save to Pocket' link on every item?
I'm not able to look it up at the moment, but this 'Save to Pocket' link I'm seeing on HN today: http://i.imgur.com/ntciQmS.png

Is this native to HN now or did the pocket developers just add an update with special attention to adding these links to HN.

Either way, whomever's responsible, i love it.
Good! Let's start with Intellectual Ventures.
Yes, really. Encryption in the browser today works exactly the other way around. It's sole purpose is to ensure data integrity on my behalf as things are transmitted between me and my chosen endpoint. The endpoint is not protected from me, and I can do whatever I want with this data once it arrives in my browser. DRM would be the antithesis of that. The problem is not they keys, it's what they keys can control or not.
Except this doesn't help a large (compared to erlang) real world user base of Ruby and Rails.
CPAN ~ pypi ~ rubyforge. Ruby allows you to write decent one-liners too, though people don't like to use it this way.

the only argument I can extract from this is "Perl has a much nicer syntax for working with regexps", and I agree with this (and I hate it when other languages don't fully embrace regexps and treat them as first class citizens).

but that's the thing, not even the "reasons not to use it" are unique to Perl any longer: heck, if you want to write incomprehensible code for "job security" reasons, Ruby gives you enough rope to hang the whole neighborhood (and Python too has a "dark side", but fortunately most people don't know or want to learn about it)
To be clear, it's mandatory to pay for a "TV license" if you consume live broadcasts in any way, regardless of the platform on which you do it [1]. Getting rid of your TV isn't enough if you keep your web browser tuned to BBC One on www.bbc.co.uk.

[1] http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/
For sure. I don't have experience in large server farms but I would imagine one could do far better going that route than Heroku in the $5k plus range.
I don't know what Pocket is, but I don't see those links.
Great talk! I've never posted before, but I'm inspired to today. Forgive me if my code is formatted terribly this post.

I used Perl back around 2000, like everybody else, to make CGIs. Then went away from it for a long time. But I've used Perl over the last year to create a large DMCA takedown system, the bulk of which is spidering and analyzing web pages for infringements. Torrent trackers, one-click file download sites, etc.

It's been a beautiful experience. The code runs quickly (for a scripting language), and CPAN is AMAZING. I feel Perl was the best choice for this project, and since I enjoy the language--and trust me, it's NOT line noise: these aren't little scripts, this package-based, documented, modular software development, the likes of which people normally associate with Java (for instance.

I have to say I disagree with one point in that talk. I don't think there are "too many" ways to do OO in Perl--and this sort of ties into his gripe about "@_" and slurping in subroutine arguments, which I think is pure joy. I'm not certain, but I think Larry Wall got this from Lisp. Please correct me if I'm wrong on my history there.

Anyway, in one package that I use as an object, I have this code:

#/ @param object $this an Offense::Analyzer
#/ @param string $event an EVENT_x constant value
#/ @param int $targetId a target id
#/ @param int $obvious TRUE for obvious offenses, or FALSE
#/ @param int $same TRUE for offenses found on the same target, or FALSE
#/ @return int the value for the given event, or undef
sub getEvent($$$$$) {
my ($this, $event, $targetId) = (shift, getEventFor(shift), shift);
my $obvious = getObviousKeyFor(shift);
my $same = getSameTargetKeyFor(shift);

return undef unless $this->hasTarget($targetId);
$this->{'data'}{$targetId}[$obvious][$same][$event];
}

And I supplement that code with the following convenience getters:

sub getIgnored($$$$) { shift->getEvent(EVENT_IGNORED, @_) }
sub getNotified($$$$) { shift->getEvent(EVENT_NOTIFIED, @_) }
sub getQueued($$$$) { shift->getEvent(EVENT_QUEUED, @_) }
sub getRemoved($$$$) { shift->getEvent(EVENT_REMOVED, @_) }

I love the convenience of being able to use the incoming arguments array in this manner. In fact, because you explicitly pass the object reference as the first argument to methods in Perl, I even have this:

#/ @param object an Offense::Analyzer
#/ @param string an EVENT_x constant value
#/ @param int a target id
#/ @return int the value for the given event
sub getEventTotal($$$) {
int(getEvent(@_, TRUE, TRUE)) +
int(getEvent(@_, TRUE, FALSE)) +
int(getEvent(@_, FALSE, TRUE)) +
int(getEvent(@_, FALSE, FALSE));
}

Those are not static method calls (so to speak--package sub calls), but are object method calls. I love that convenience.

Does your fluency need to be very high for this to seem like a good idea? Probably. And in this manner, Perl can never compete with Python. But I guess my argument is similar to the argument a lot of Lisp dialect programmers make: I'm an advanced user, I don't need to be babysat, I can take care of myself, and I'm ok with exploiting the expressiveness of the language.
This is the first conclusion I came to as well. Some entity in the US would have the strongest motive. Possibly number two could be IME, if there's something they're trying to hide. Claims that it was perpetrated by China and/or the Singapore gov't hold less water for me.
I would never you a browser that had a "Sorry, cannot perform that operation now" dialog box (as many DVD players do to keep you from skipping pre-roll advertising.
Why All Browsers Should Move to WebKit
The proposal is (probably by design) very vague at this moment but it's possible the platform-specific CDM binary could bypass the browser completely and paint a programmatically inaccessible overlay over the video element, using standard OS protected paths.
Yes but that's not proof they're lying about this.
Nice of you to say so...
I had a string of similar requests with Heroku between Feb 2011 and June 2012, before we migrated off their platform.

I would complain about h12 errors, they would tell me to upgrade my resources and/or that it was my problem and there was nothing they can do. We ended up with a solution that was easily 10x as expensive (over-powered DB, too many dynos) as our initial configuration, and it still didn't fix the issue.

I'm happy to provide the full text support requests, but they don't tend to be quite as juicy as the one you posted.
I believe they still are. Backbone is a library. Angular and Ember are frameworks based off that library if I understand correctly.
The arrow was very misleading.
YARLY! If you encrypt content, it's not DRM-protected. When you use a normal everyday encryption solution, you send me the encrypted data, encrypted with my public key and I decrypt it with my private key and then I CAN DO WHAT I WANT with it. That is what the entertainment companies want to protect against - the ability to move the plain bits once you have them decrypted. With any open-source software, you can change it to do whatever you want with the decrypted bits. Honestly, the only way for them to get what they want is to have a piece of special hardware, which you install in your pc, that does decryption of the media and outputs it only via secure connection to an a/v setup that contains a camera which does facial recognition to make sure only you are sitting in front of the PC.

Fortunately, that's still a bit too expensive to consider. Also, it will be broken by the first bored hacker with a soldering iron.
It's a pity they didn't put sarcasm tags around what was said. I'm pretty sure they don't give a hoot about who copies their stuff. On another note if anti piracy groups can pirate they're lowering themselves to the level of their opposition. So they are essentially saying this is ok which could easily come back to bite them in future situations.
How the heck does this hit the front page when so much other good stuff is in the "new" category. Baffling.
We like content. There is a business model that (most people agree) makes it so more content is created.

You are saying "why should we care about that business model being wiped out" [1], and the reason is because most people agree that that business model makes it so more content is created, which is what we want.

To convince us that we in fact shouldn't care, convince us either that:

1. Content (of similar quantity and quality) will in fact still be created, in spite of that business model dying. You're not likely to convince people of this, I believe.

2. Content (of similar quantity and quality) will in fact sill be created, because another business model will take its place.

[1]: Not a direct quote.
Buffer does that,too. They annotate onto the existing DOM when HN is detected.
Why not link directly to the actual announcement?

http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/194776
Good Lord, man.

Facebook is both. Which is to say that the word Facebook can be used in reference to a corporation or the application that kicked off that corporation (and still forms the core of that corporation's method).

I thought it was obvious from the context which we were discussing. I'll try to make it less ambiguous in the future.
I use "visibly dying" for a technology that people are migrating away from - this usually generates things like blog posts titled "X is moving away from RoR because it's crap and rewriting their stack in new fangled scala framework".

But there are other ways something like a language can die in: no new projects get written in it, no new programmers learn it etc. ...this is a slow "death in silence and darkness" (think Pascal).
I keep wanting to try Ember, but honestly, it drives me crazy every time. Why is there not a simple "quick start" that shows how to get it up and running. You have lots of good documentation but you skip over the most important part!
It's a very fun language to begin with. Which is not unimportant if you want to keep being motivated after three decades being a programmer. Peter Norvig described 7 features which made Lisp different. Perl shares 6 of them. Important features like first-class functions, dynamic access to the symbol table, and automatic storage management. (source "High Order Perl" by MJ Dominus).
The web is still open by default and can always be made more closed by deliberate action, just like Flash is closed by default and can always be made more open by deliberate action.

People have implemented crypto algorithms in JS for over a decade which would enable this kind of thing if you really wanted to. DRM is just formalising it and again is not the default for video or audio.

(BTW I already posted BBC's position on this last week - no response http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5200917)
Get an editor that shows whitespace.

(Non)Problem solved.

Not to mention you should indent your code exactly the same way (in a consistent format, either tabs or spaces) with how you'd indented Python code.
Yes, the AMT is the one case where you could end up with less take-home. Its an exception to the normal functioning of the tax code, though, and it works by prohibiting most permissible deductions. Thus, while the statement about the AMT decreasing take-home with increased is factually correct, this does not happen through the bracket system. GP was clearly addressing the misconception that people move into tax brackets and must pay higher tax rates in all their income as a result.

Your welfare example has nothing to do with taxes. Welfare benefits are set by gross income level with some COL and other local adjustments. Your tax status is irrelevant.
Could we get the names of these people? So that they can be rightfully shunned into quitting their quest against civilization and progress?
Not sure how common that is, but I've seen it used before where the index variable itself is not referenced inside the body of the statement.
Ah ok. Must be my pocket plugin. (It's a 'read later' plugin).

Thanks!
"Forgetting who is right and wrong"

The right vs wrong issue here is not the proper way to architect a router. The issue is that Heroku glossed over an extremely important aspect of their engineering documentation, because it painted their platform in a bad light. This is particularly damning, because as an engineer working on their platform, I could design around their shortcomings as long as they don't hide them from me.

Furthermore, I believe we could make an argument Heroku intentionally misled (both in documentation and in their support responses) clients as to how their router worked.
A new goal for the Parrot Virtual Machine
Awesome. That was my guess. I didn't think pocket was that widespread enough that HN would implement something site wide like that... but I wasnt sure because they havent done anything site specific that i've noticed so far.

Thanks!
Universal on NIX systems.

Python has a few 2.x versions depending on the Distros. Some distros may opted to go 3.x only.

Ruby isn't necessarily universal on NIX systems.

Perl is.
3D Printed Chocolate Valentines in Japan
_ is a typical name to use when the language requires a variable name that the program doesn't otherwise need. In this case, the program just needs to run some code four times, and doesn't care about the index. The language doesn't have a plain "run this code X times" construct, but it does have a "iterate over this list" construct, so the code iterates over the list [0, 1, 2, 3] and puts the current element into a dummy variable since it's not being used.
...don't get mad for the question, but: anybody has any arguments for using Python instead of, let's say Ruby, these days? (besides the "I already know it incredibly well" argument)

...cause the lack of an answer to such a question has only one conclusion: the language is dying, even if this is not already happening in a visible way!

(don't get me wrong, I'm not a Python hater, and fyi, I think the world would be a much better place if David Heinemeier Hansson would have learned Python and written a nice Python web framework instead of inventing Rails :) )
This looks very promising.
Well, there is 'Moose' if you want to do OO Perl: http://moose.iinteractive.com/ Some folks I know swear by it. I just find Perl hard to read and not very intuitive. My perl loving friends, on the other hand, claim the opposite. I guess it depends on how your brain works and what you are used to.
That's a good point; I don't. I assume not, though, because I view YC as a program for those without much experience. Otherwise, one wouldn't trade so much equity for being but one out of a huge crowd of YC companies.
I've got a standard for DRM: don't use it. It's easy, cheap and doesn't require any laws or draconian software requirements on end users. I've been using this DRM standard for decades, and yet the people who make the software I use and the music and movies I enjoy are still rolling in dough!
>Support him? By bailing out?

Support him BEFORE he bailed out. Ie. he supported the VC thing, although he didn't like the direction.

As for the "skill-set", it's not as if building a web service, and such as simple one as posterous (or twitter, or tumblr) is rocket science.

Scaling it is a little harder, but still, thousands of companies and websites do it on their own. So what What ireplaceable skillset?
I've seen it before, but it's a little jarring. Not sure what's wrong with just using i.