skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>BBC, Netflix, MS, and--of all companies--Google should be ashamed to be involved in this.

Why should any of them be ashamed? They all have copyrighted digital content or at least have sites that host copyrighted content. They all clearly gain from this.

I know whenever DRM is mentioned everyone likes to get out the pitchforks and yell about "openness" and "freedom of information". But let's be honest, the majority of media would not be made if it was going to be handed out for free. Everyone seems to express this idealized utopian world where content is freely distributed, everyone contributes, and we all live in electro-social bliss. Sorry, until the Singularity occurs or the Age of Aquarius dawns that world doesn't exist.

>Copyright is just a bunch of laws this society agrees on today. The web is not about today's laws, social mores, or profit motives, but of connectivity, sharing, and freedom of information and expression. When I see things like this even being considered, I sometimes think that we don't deserve such freedom.

I'm not going to try and defend copyright completely, it clearly needs a lot of fixes to it, but this is just a bunch of random hogwash. Furthermore how does some sites enabling DRM limit anyone else's connectivity, sharing, or freedom of expression? Just because BBC starts limiting their iPlayer to license holders doesn't mean I can't have my own iPlayer website with my own open content that I share with everyone. You've created a rather weak strawman argument here.

>If we're going to start DRM'ing media, why not just DRM the entire web page and be done with it? Why send HTML over the wire at all when we can send an encrypted blob?

What are you even trying to communicate here?? HTTPS is basically transmitting an encrypted blob. The difference is that it (usually)contains HTML; which is an open standard that everyone uses so that you only need one program(browser) to interpret and display the blob from many sources(websites). Nothing about enabling DRM will change this, it will only limit those who want their website to be limited.

The only thing that is really questionable about this is whether W3C should be using resources to help standardize/implement such a feature. Given that the browsers will likely have to spend a lot of time/resources on making their software compatible with the new standard is a bit unfair.

I'll just say these content provider companies are going to use DRM methods to restrict use of their content one way or another. Whether it's through private plugins like silverlight, flash, etc. or though an open standard, all of the major browsers will have to be compatible to get users. I think it makes more sense from a security and usability perspective to push it into an open standard, but I can see both sides of the argument.
Because you can write web applications without having to use crippled, half baked JS frameworks. GUI programming was solved over a decade ago. The things we do in the browser these days, in terms of complicated web apps, mostly consist of reinventing the wheel. Backbone, ember, knockout, etc are all toys with missing wheels in comparison to a serious GUI toolkit. In contrast, Qt is well tested, very well designed and elegant. It's been around since 1992 - 21 years old!
>'Very acceptable' speed isn't what consumers are looking for when comparing battery life and wall-clock performance between competing platforms.

Where does the idea come that V8s and co very acceptable speeds come at the expense of battery life and wall-clock performance???

Not to mention that people are using far less capable web apps in the mobile and desktop space now (i.e pre-asm.js javascript), so the increase in speed due to the asm.js/optimisation standardisation would only make battery life and wall-clock performance better.
Quaddicted.com admin here. Should be fine since it is just static content. You might saturate the 100mbit/s but the server itself should be fine.
The documentation is indeed problematic because of the way it is written and the omissions mostly around Ember-Data. I don't see how I could develop a web-app without having detailed info on how the Rest adapter works.. (for example I don't know how to change the default mapping). I suggest the guide is re-written following a step-by-step approach, and maybe a screencast. (just see what the meteor guides did!) If you're a beginner, there's no way on earth you can understand what you need to do in order to build a very basic web-app. And because of the changes in syntax (makes sense, it's a pre) most of the other screencasts or guides or blog posts on the web are outdated. Seems to me, and in order to be 100% fair, that most of these frameworks are quite new, and I guess we need to give the devs the time and the space to do things right. Most of them are not even 1.0 so... Patience!
Or we can outlaw DRM and put evolutionary pressure on the content providers and emasculate the gatekeepers.
It does not necessarily stop the web being an open standard in that sense. An open standard is really just a way of saying "if you want to do X in a way that is compatible with Y then your implementation must follow these rules and these rules are published in such a way that any person will be equally able to produce an implementation".

You can propose an open standard for DRM that everyone is free to implement or not.

If you want to have a DRM free browsing experience you can simply use a browser that implements every part of the standard apart from the DRM part. The only thing that changes is that stuff that is built to require the DRM component will not work.

It would be just like disabling <canvas> support in your browser or something like that.
Show HN: Open Source Mobile Privacy Policy
It's more like 10x from Heroku to AWS, then another order of magnitude to metal. AWS has other advantages in addition to convenience, though.
These sorts of cases - in which families accuse the police of complicity or incompetence during suicide investigations - are not exactly unknown.

I recall reading accounts of a similarly "suspicious suicide" several years ago. It also included sympathetic interviews with a grieving family in denial. Read for yourself how that turned out:

Initial suspicion report, 2007: http://www.sfweekly.com/2007-07-18/news/who-killed-hugues-de...

Example of another suspicion report: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18559_162-6599236.html?pageNum=1

Whelp, "independent" (kinda) investigation says probably a suicide (2009): http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/san_fran...

Some continue to push the murder theory (there are many more recent news articles too): http://huguesdelaplaza.blogspot.com/

The fact is, no one really knows. Once you hear the other side of the story, things get more convoluted. It seems that the police have a decent reason to classify it as a suicide, but it also seems that the case may have been a murder. So it's weird.

These sorts of cases seem to pop up from time to time. Most likely some are murders, and most likely some are suicides. I'm not confident in my own ability to determine which is which by simply reading a highly biased account in a newspaper.
I think everyone understands why these companies (including BBC) are pushing for DRM. That doesn't mean it's not evil.

The larger issue here, expressed quite well by Doctorow, is that this push requires converting the web into a closed platform. It's clear why entertainment companies want to turn the internet into something that can only be consumed by, say, the Apple app store.

That's also the reason why this will never fly. Even if/when the W3C gave in to these demands, browser makers other than Apple and Microsoft would never stand for it. And even if they did somehow, it would be trivial for the open source community to release one without those features.

I'm not saying the outrage is entirely misplaced, because it's important to keep an eye out for what those companies have planned for our future. But as far as the fear of actual threat is concerned this should not alarm anybody.
It wouldn't. DRM relies on obfuscation, and open source software obviously can't have that. They'll probably write a horribly insecure Silverlight plugin that will be cracked in a matter of minutes.

ED: It looks like they'll have a "plugin" that does authentication with a remote server, and then decodes the frames sent to it. The browser displays them, or the DRM removal software sniffs the keys and decrypts the content anyway.

This is how they think it will work [1], and the full proposal [2]

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

[2]: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-med...
They have obviously no jurisdiction but they might have access experience, money, human resources, technology and information Singaporian authorities might not necessarily have access to. This kind of cooperation is fairly common in cases involving multiple countries, but obviously they can only conduct an investigation in Singapore with the consent of the Singaporean government. They are free to conduct an investigation within the United States, however.
Is Canonicals Juju along the lines of what you mean? https://juju.ubuntu.com/
>So, you are saying that you fully understand that your post is irrelevant with regards to the post it is formatted as a reply to, and you posted it anyways?

How do you got to the outrageous conclusion that "my post is irrelevant with regards to the post it is formatted as a reply to"?

What part of my comment above, to which you respond, makes it difficult to you to understand that I agreed with his first example but took issue with his second one?

I state my case, that I agree with his first example but not the second in both my original reply and the short comment you responded to. I explicitly write that I disagree with the second example (even use the very words "second example").

It takes a dismal reading comprehension to accuse me of what you did.
Slow down there.

The proposal adds DRM options to the HTMLMediaElement.

It doesn't change HTML in its entirety. It doesn't require DRM. It doesn't break non-DRM implementations.

Getting hysterical and propogating inaccurate information isn't helpful.

The proposed changes are described here https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-med....
Empythoned, the Python interpreter used by http://reply.it/
Only in a hypermale industry can someone bitterly accuse you of missing a phallus for standing up for women's rights, and people will still say, "What's sexist about that?"

> But its not a wild rant saying women are an inferior race.

"For this is the technology industry: there are more men in it because the male mind is, in general, better primed with the sorts of skills the industry values; men are simply better suited to most technology jobs. Women therefore tend to work in roles that require finesse and communicative skills, where they pop up in this world at all."

"Impressive women who can stand their ground alongside men – and there are plenty of them – succeed not in spite of a supposedly oppressive male atmosphere but because of it."

"The best women don’t want your pity and the mediocre ones don’t matter anyway."

Only in a backwards male-dominated culture do we lack the basic reading comprehension to see the sexism in this.
Amen to this. Terrific service and no BS.

I run this https://github.com/ttscoff/Pinboard-to-OpenMeta nightly to import new Pinboard bookmarks to my local machine as .webloc files so I also have a local, searchable, repository.
Has the stuff you've bought off of them proven to be of good build quality?
In communist Poland it was basically the same... The ruling cronies didn't care about you as long as you didn't threaten their power.
>HTML itself is a fundamentally open standard on which the entire op web is built. Adding DRM to that ends that. Period. No hysterics.

Nothing about adding DRM will make HTML any less of an open standard. It will just be an open standard that allows those who use it to implement DRM on their content.

You can throw around as much rhetoric as you want and say it isn't open to interpretation, you're still not right.
I think it's more that you'd move the technology out a level - take the same fantasy-ware which is currently in Flash or Silverlight and allow IE or Safari to call it directly. The OSS versions presumably wouldn't get this and would be unable to play such content. Imagine <video> started accepting QuickTime or Windows Media content and passing it directly to the OS framework for decoding & rights control.

I'm in favor of the idea: if we are to have DRM – and there's no sign of the legal sea-change necessary to change that – it might as well be something which doesn't spread a binary plugin with a huge attack surface around much of the web.
'because LLCs are partnerships' huh?
Single Owner LLCs exist specifically to protect the personal assets of a owner from the creditors of the LLC, IFF the LLC was the signatory on the debt, rather than the owner (if you have to provide an SSN to secure the debt, it's probably in your name personally, rather than in the companies name).
Courts will protect the owner, as long as the owner keeps their personal finances and the company finances (and activities) entirely separate - pay a salary to another account, etc. If there's any mixing, you get screwed. C-Corp/S-Corp doesn't change any of that at all from a single-owner perspective though...
Surely that sort of investment is a bet on going public?
3 Yes's out of 37 is not a bad metric to go off of, unless you're in a micro-niche and 37 customers is all there is. What is the market as a whole? By yes, are they bringing out a checkbook and saying "can I get it now"?

As for work, I'd suggest checking out the several freelance sites out there: guru, freelancer, etc. Hope this helps!
Frosty attack on Android encryption
Yes, and let's tar and feather the Tax Collectors!!!
> Adding DRM to that ends that. Period. No hysterics.

Your post is nothing but hysterics.

Adding DRM support allows browsers to decide what to do in their UI in a standard way. It doesn't force unwilling content providers to use it and claiming that it closes the web is like claiming that HTTP should not support passwords because someone could use them to prevent open access to a page.
I absolutely agree with you. It's the story that adds to the fashion appeal, but also the mechanical beauty of an automatic or hand wound watch. In such a digital age where time is so easily tracked with batteries and cell towers, there is something incredibly appealing in a mechanical watch.

I wonder why they didn't mention the Japanese watch market more. I've been noticing watches that used to have ETA movements move to Miyota movements and sell for half price. It even prompted me to recently consider the purchase of a Breytenbach with an ETA movement because so many of their watches are now coming with Japanese movements. The crazy thing, though, is that Japanese movements are practically flawless, I just want the ETA because I know they are going to become rare... Well, that and they feel more solid when worn, but that could just be marketing and the Swiss mystique working on my senses.
But would all browsers and services use the same HTML5 DRM scheme, or would they be incompatible with each other, and then you'd need someone to make a plugin with "all-in-one" HTML5 DRM schemes? Because if they aren't compatible then that defeats the point of doing this in HTML5.
> Also people that want to start a business, there is a huge opportunity here, create software that makes managing Apache, Redis, PostgreSQL, ..., in dedicated servers very easy and robust. Traget a popular and robust non-commercial distribution like Ubuntu LTE, and provide all is needed to deploy web nodes, database nodes, with backups, monitoring, and everything else trivial.

So the pitch is: clone Heroku, which has taken dozens of very smart engineer man-years to build and refine, then charge 5% of what the market will bear?

> "I can only write my Ruby code but can't handle operations" is not the right attitude, grow up.

I handled ops for 120+ Rails apps while managing a team of juniors and making time to write code. What a stupid waste of my time: ops is forever & never-ending, while implementing & delivering a new feature to 100K customers can bump sales' conversions permanently.

If I can outsource relatively-linearly-increasing Ops costs and instead focus on delivering value that multiplies compounding-interest style, that's not childish.

It's great business.
> The fact is, if it's trivial to clone data to the point that regular users can do it (Napster, etc)

It's already trivial for regular users to download pirated data, even if only experts can get around the DRM to copy and release it[0] in the first place.

Case in point: House of Cards. Fully, freely and easily available to Joe The Pirate Next Door Schmoe, now that some nerd (TRIC? BTN? ASAP? Immerse?) has gotten around Netflix's DRM.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warez_scene#Release_procedure
"there is no way larger, and independent studios would allow their content uploaded DRM free."

Then I guess they do not get to have it on the BBC website. You know, assuming the BBC sticks to its guns, which they apparently have not.
And it explains the large overlap among executives of large companies, military brass, and government ministers. They are all the same people: literally a guy is a CEO, because he is also a general and last year he was Minister for Whatever.

I still laugh about the interview I saw with Lee Hsien Loong in which the obsequious (although perhaps rather clever) interviewer asked him whether he had been upset when Goh Chok Tong had immediately succeeded Lee Kwan Yew (Hsien Loong's father) as PM. LHL squirmed and laughed nervously, and stammered, "Well, ah, of course not. One cannot have unreasonable expectations." Even he was embarrassed for his country then.
BTW, I received my Posterous archive and linked to it from this piece, in case anyone wants to explore.

http://threads2.scripting.com/2013/february/posterousArchive
> Everyone seems to express this idealized utopian world where content is freely distributed, everyone contributes, and we all live in electro-social bliss.

The web should be designed as if we were targeting a utopia. The web as a technology doesn't care about today's laws or profit motives, but burdening it with them will only hinder what it can become in the future.

> Furthermore how does some sites enabling DRM limit anyone else's connectivity, sharing, or freedom of expression?

Baking in DRM software into what should be an open medium of exchange is a first step. If the standard continues to evolve in that direction, the web will become something much different, and I think worse, than what it is today. W3C should be thinking about the future it wants to be in, not the profit motives of today's entrenched media interests.

> HTTPS is basically transmitting an encrypted blob.

HTTPS protects communications from eavesdropping, but both parties are still fully open to each other. DRM is not the same--it closes off the communication from one of the parties in the "discussion" and puts one party in total control. This is fundamentally different than being able to ensure two parties can communicate without being overheard.
Discourse on the Arts and Sciences (1750)
How is outlawing something evolution?
What the hell are Wikimedia, the EFF or archive.org going to do with a blog hoster?

Idk, but people really need to stop hyping this. It's just some company hosting _blogs_ get over yourself.
I feel like Heroku is punting on this one in a big way.

I think this really means that for a small app, Heroku is fine, once it gets bigger, you probably want to get a real scaling strategy.
"The fact is, if it's trivial to clone data to the point that regular users can do it (Napster, etc), the business model for online rental vanishes."

Yes, and if it is trivial to send photos without first developing them, the business model for Kodak will vanish! Why, if it were trivial for people to move a carriage from point A to point B, the business model for buggy whip makers might vanish!

Why should we be concerned about obsolete business models failing? Why should we be concerned about inherently bad business models, like "renting" bits, vanishing?

We need to eliminate anti-circumvention laws as a first step, and then 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.
Microsoft Win8 causes Linux shops to close; abusing monopoly again
From the jobseaker's perspective having a salary range listed, even if it's a broad range like "various positions $40k-$100k", tells me whether it's worth my time applying.

If the range of numbers doesn't cover what I want my target salary to be then it's simply a waste of my time to spruce up my CV, write a cover letter and get the process started. Chances are that I won't be in a position to ask what the salary range is until I'm in an interview, but by that point I've already invested a not insignificant amount of time into applying for the job - especially since I've had to take time off work to come to the interview.

Frankly, I feel that any job advert that doesn't include solid indications of what the company might be willing to pay is either a company that's arrogant enough as to believe that my time is worthless, or it's a purely speculative advert with no real job there. Either way, I'll be passing them over in favour of companies with some more respect for their applicants.
Caigan World - A new upcoming social network
A Story to Explain Genetic Algorithms
Opera: go to opera:config#UserPrefs|EnableOnDemandPlugin

To enable all plugins on page, click the play/puzzle icon in the address bar. To permanently enable plugins on certain pages: right click -> Edit site preferences... -> Content.

I have this enabled both in Opera and in Chrome. Certain sites are permanently whitelisted. Much better browsing experience.
I actually really like the KnockoutJS + SammyJS approach to building single page apps. Angular is probably closer to that approach.

MVVM is awesome and will save you a lot of time IMO.
> a horribly insecure Silverlight plugin

This is about the HTML5 spec, so I don't even know where you get that idea from. They want to be able to lock down content which is embedded with the video tag.

Personally, I don't like the idea of it tying into the operating system. I'm willing to accept any solution that can be built into browser binaries, cross-platform. I don't like the idea of a solution that doesn't work as well on Linux or Macs, but if media companies think this sort of solution is necessary, we should meet them half-way.
A Silex application (which uses Propel, Silex Web Profiler, Behat and Atoum)
silex-bootstrap is nothing more than Silex with some stuff already set up for you:

Template rendering with Twig
Database interface with Propel
Directory structure for your project
Silex Web Profiler
Functional test environment with Behat
Unit test environment with Atoum
Hangings, limits on speech and intolerant politicians in India
>The fact is, if it's trivial to clone data to the point that regular users can do it (Napster, etc), the business model for online rental vanishes.

But it already is more trivial than Napster, so if that's your bar, the business model for online rentals and digital sales would already have vanished. And yet Netflix and iTunes seem to be doing OK.
There are many more possible customers, but those 37 is all I could find since yesterday. "Yes" means: yes, I would buy such a product...

Freelancer.com is full of cheap asian programmers, and I really can't work at such low rates ($3-5/hour).
By supporting such thing, when the web has always been about being "open".
So why can't the browser save the frames then? That's not DRM.