skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"I'm sure anyone spending more than $750 on amazon is probably happy enough waiting for two or more confirmations."

Maybe, but if I can do it without waiting by just sticking with credit cards, why wouldn't I?

"Given that double spends are reasonably expensive"

I see this being tossed around quite a bit. I am not entirely sure where this idea came from. Can you prove it, the way that ECDSA (on which Bitcoin is based) can be proved secure as a signature system? When I hear this sort of statement, it sounds a lot like, "Nobody has published any way to double spend cheaply, and I cannot think of one; therefore it must be an expensive thing to do!"

I do not mean to be insulting with that, I really would like to know why people think double spending attacks are necessarily expensive. On top of that, how do we know that a double spending attack would be more expensive than the payoff -- especially when you are dealing with a complex marketplace, where a double spending attack may be just one component of a larger scheme. Maybe the point will just be to deny another person the ability to buy something, by double-spending until the merchant is sold out of the item, or as shills in an auction to try to inflate the price (should Amazon revive its auctions system).

This reminds me of the sort of argument I had with Hushmail users back before the infamous DEA incident. Your secret key is sitting there, on their servers; they could read your mail if they wanted to or if someone had a gun to their head. People said it couldn't happen, that the key would only be in RAM for a split second, that using their Java applet solved the problem, etc. Then the DEA turned up in court with a mountain of decrypted email from Hushmail (and then, as if the entire world just wanted to aggravate me, people starting saying that PGP had security problems). Cryptography tends to be black-and-white when it comes to security: you are either secure, or you are not secure, and there is rarely anything in-between (with multiparty computation, that might be changing; people are now talking about the "covert model" and "one-bit leakage" notions of security, which are in that middle area).
If someone has been not-working from home and has never logged into the VPN, why do you even want them to come into the office now? Just fire them.
I don't remember how I got it but I'm sure I didn't go to a store. It really wasn't that hard to get either through BBSs or copying from a friend. It went viral and everyone had a copy. BTW, by 1992 PC clones had won, trs80s were long gone.
Site's down. Perhaps you can put a teaser of what metamed is about in the comments so we have something to read/vote on while you get your site up again.
That's the Agile way, people not processes.

When the people screw up, there's no processes to hold them back, they can really, really screw it up.

Once you hit millions in revenue it's probably wise to put a couple of fall back processes in place, reliability becomes as important as agility.
Ops story:

I worked at a data centre which had an IP KVM attached to all of their machines. When you were logged in as 'admin', there was a mode you could toggle that would send all of your keystrokes to every server, but still only displayed the one you were logged into, so there was no (clear?) visual indication that this was going to happen. Coworker hit Ctrl-Alt-Del to reboot a stuck server, and rebooted every non-Windows server in the data centre (and we only had one Windows server).

Every customer got some level of compensation, the noisy ones got a lot of it, and no one ever logged in as admin again other than to relabel servers in the server list.
I think its about time Apple got challenged on the high end. For the rest of the market to survive they eventually have to pierce the myth that Apple is the upper bound in terms of quality in every market that they operate in.
> The best developers are almost always intrinsically motivated.

Have you managed a large team before? The single best way I know to demotivate a highly motivated developer is to let them see a coworker at the same pay grade do significantly less work without any good reason. (footnote: individuals going through cancer treatment are the tricky complication here, due to privacy issues)

And I should emphasize that for most of the developers I've managed, it wasn't a fear thing like, "oh, he'll fire me if I don't work" but rather a removal of the sentiment that, "why should I keep working so hard when others here don't pull their weight and are being rewarded for it?"

That's a large part of the reason I like semi-enforced distributions in curve-oriented review systems. Many managers, particularly first-level leads, tend to pull their rewards towards the mean (barely rewarding high performers and still rewarding low performers) instead of focusing on doing the right thing at the tails. Though that's certainly no guarantee of success; I got a decently sized development and test organization (~60 of each) merged into our organization and it took nearly a month of full-time work for myself (and one of my peers) to sort out the years of misrewarded individuals to get neglected high performers promoted and HR action started on people who'd been resting and vesting.
It does have a reputation of being a bit more trustworthy as it's (temporarily) harder to fake - but it is orthogonal to privacy. I would be able to disclose your secrets from memory, despite your assumptions.

In this sense Glass simply replicates a rather unusually good memory - and it may be obtained in natural ways; for example, some people really have absolutely 'photographic' memory due to a genetic or birth 'defect'.

And it is possible (likely?) that I might in future obtain such unusually good memory as well - through brain-improving drugs, genetic engineering or implants that augment my brain . Or, in a rather limited way, through Google Glass.

What I'm aiming at is that by banning such recordings in essence you would be banning people having a better / more accurate memory. And I see that as a Bad Thing - globally speaking, I'd like to see that people have a chance to improve beyond current body limitations. All of them.

Making a law that states "your memory must be fallible, imperfect and degrade with time, since that's how it's Always Been Done Here" seems, well, evil.
I think the wearable tinkering community has plenty of ideas for input devices to draw from. Such as this little one-handed keyboard: http://chordite.com/ . A touch panel (doing the same job as the one on the side of Glass, so you could operate Glass without reaching up to the side of your head) could be located pretty much anywhere and blend in quite well, on a belt or watch or some such. Someone else mentioned Myo (https://getmyo.com/ ); that would be nice too.

As long as the interface makes the number of choices available at each "page" of the interface pretty low, then input devices get small and easy to hide.
Pincus gets such a slamming every time he is mentioned on HN that his name is (fairly or not) basically synonymous with "bad guy" around here.

So when an article like this pops up without addressing the several elephants in the room it's a bit like somebody writing "What it's like to work with Adolf Hitler" without a single mention of the second world war.

If you are trying to challenge somebodies assumptions about something it is often best to address them head on.
Well, I've implemented it personally. Generally, here's what happens:

1. A user loads the first page of the app. There is a small script (index.php) that serves all front-end requests. It checks if the page being loaded has already been scraped and if so, injects the content into the main template, otherwise fires off a queued job to scrape that page and loads the app regardless.

2. The queue job forks out to phantomjs with the page URL, which listens on the page for a "page-loaded" event, and upon a) this event being fired or b) the scrape timing out, returns whatever HTML content in the main content area (as well as any <head> tags) to the queue worker, which updates a database table with url -> content mappings.

3. The next time someone directly loads the page, that content is pulled and injected.

4. Scraped content expires after a certain amount of time. If expired content is pulled out, it is put into the HTML for that page, and a queue item is fired to re-scrape.

The obvious problem is that the page must be primed for content to show up, which you can fix by a) either having lots of visitors :) or b) using/building a simple crawler.

Also, when facebook scrapes our page to look for og: tags, we do the scrape synchronously which takes longer, but ensures that the page's content is always available. The same could be done for googlebot, but it's more dangerous since rankings depend on page load speed.

As for our rankings, they are fairly high (it's the same as any app that serves HTML directly would be since we are literally just serving delayed HTML content).

So no, it's not just theory; we do it on Musio.com quite successfully. The only user-agent logic we have is for the facebook scraper, refreshes are scheduled by user action. The RIO is high because

1. We already have a queuing system.

2. Phantom JS is fairly standalone and our scraper is small and write once then forget about it.

3. We've found a good blend between simple and functional, with the deciding factor being the delay.
There is a huge difference between setting up a business to say, mow lawns, and setting up a business to file lawsuits.

Especially when the possible costs are basically known (you have no customers except yourself, and you control your own costs), you are deliberately underfunding. Maybe that's not even so bad.
Doing so specifically to avoid the intent of an act of congress, is, well, a bad idea.

Courts make factual distinctions between cases all the time when deciding whether to pierce the corporate veil, and i can't see why they wouldn't do so here.

Note that limited liability corporations are fairly new. The world got along just fine when shareholders were responsible for the actions of companies. It made the shareholders more careful in investing.
Nowadays, there's two different things: the core language, then the numerous frameworks. The core language is the first thing you need to know and a lot easier to learn than any of the frameworks. So just study the core language in case it comes up on a job interview, you can study the frameworks(a lot of which suck) later if you have to(like it's part of your job or you really need it to pass an interview). Study some C# too, it's cleaner, and besides static typing is awesome.
While your site is down, let me make one OT comment: I nearly had a heart attack when I saw that the username was 'rms'.

Unsurprisingly I suppose, you're not that rms.
SimCity is being released soon, VPN for getting access 3 days early if you're in Europe may be the case.
Much more drastic are searches for seedboxes https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=seedbox&geo=US&#...

edit: for those that don't know, seedboxes are servers you rent that just run bittorrent. Makes it easy to skirt around these 6 strikes programs
My guess is that that gradual decline over time may be related to more people getting online. Put another way - when the internet's use was limited to more tech-savvy people, this term was searched a higher percentage of the time than today.
I am a very cynical man. The current phones are toys, not tools, and I see no reason for google glass to be any different. Toy's make more money than tools.
Mutant Tadpoles Sprout Eyeballs on Their Tails
I think it's more to do with the USA's new six strikes program.
SEO CONSULTING FIRMS|AFFORDABLE SEO PACKAGES::SWA Web analyst
A painful tale of SEO, spam and Google's role in all
Simple and Dwolla are also backed by banks. But I guess the reason why every bank rejected them is coming in part N.
Does this compare to BSD Jails and Linux containers. Does anyone have comments on the comparison?
Sarcasm because... nobody has ever made money riding the wave of fads. Hmmm.
And replaces it with the problem of converting between real money and Bitcoin.
Software Internationalization, SIMS Style
But were you using Lisp to build the system?
So if I call the White House right now and made threats, there wouldn't be black helicopters showing up outside? I find that hard to believe.
From Google Cache (was going to link to it, but the text-only version has a lot of over-laid text and is hard to read):

> We work with you and your doctor to figure out how advances in medical science apply to your personal health needs. Our team of researchers will do in-depth, personalized analysis to find new technologies, read scientific journals, talk to experts, and separate real medical breakthroughs from media hype. Whether it’s testing, prevention, treatment, or nutrition, if you have medical questions, we can help inform you about what the options are and what a rushed, ten-minute appointment might have overlooked.

Pricing:

> $5,000 (Surface); $25,000 (Depth); $250,000 (Comprehensive); $1,000,000 (Original Research)
Vint Cerf: 'The Internet of things needs to be locked down'
Let me try an analogy.

Let's say you are an allied soldier in the early parts of World War I. You're in your trench in dirty clothes, you can feel your feet rotting away inside your boots as you stand in knee deep water, mud, and filth. Most of the buddies you had a year ago are dead or gone away, having lost limbs or sanity in the war already. You spend your days watching your squad mates shit their guts out from dysentery. You've been over the top before, you've run across hundreds of meters of cratered moonscape filled with mud and barbed wire, all the soldiers around you are getting ripped apart by ferocious machine gun fire. And you know how futile it is to attack enemy trenches head on. You've seen thousands upon thousands of men killed by shelling and machine gun fire before they even got close to the other trench, it's a suicidal strategy and yet it is the only strategy the commanders have come up with. You think about deserting. You think about getting a group of friends together to rise up against the officers. But your friends are dead or gone, and desertion or rebellion are a certain route to execution. You start to think seriously about acquiring some sort of injury that would send you home, maybe if you shot your own foot. But your thoughts are interrupted by the announcement that tomorrow morning there is another attack planned, you're going to go over the top and attack the enemy trenches again.

Your morale, and everyone else's, in this situation is obviously low. The solution the commanders have for this problem is that if you don't do your job you'll be shot. The result of this genius was the destruction of a significant percentage of an entire generation. The problem in this situation wasn't the soldiers. As many historians have detailed many of them "fought like lions", and many of them were intrinsically motivated to fight the enemy to the utter limit of their abilities. But morale was still low and a lot of people deserted and some even rebelled. The problem was the strategy and the commanders. The problem was that the actions being undertaken were hugely wasteful of men and resources without having any reasonable chance of success.

You don't win this sort of war by ordering yet another mass assault backed up with the threat that anyone who doesn't comply with the order will be executed. You fix it by changing your strategy and tactics.
Yeah, all this article says is that broad measures are being taken which affect the productive and unproductive alike.

I've seen that road, and it leads to utter and complete disaster.
> It reminds me of what the high frequency traders say about liquidity: Even if it could theoretically be true under some set of artificial constraints, in practice the cost of allowing it pretty clearly exceeds the supposed efficiency benefits.

I don't get the ire against HFT. The only ones who should be worried about HFT besides regulators are the human traders who are going to be put out of work by HFT shops.
It's doomsday
I wish I could say I have some sort of prescience about bad working environments. In reality I'm just good at getting out while the gettin' is still good.
The Unfortunate Inventors Who Were Killed by Their Inventions
Having said that, I've just seen https://plus.google.com/100479847213284361344/posts/QhmBpn5G... and learnt that yes, it is possible to run Ubuntu/etc including kernel on the newest Chromebook.

Although “there's no way to set the legacy boot as the default option” so it still sounds a bit of a pain.
How much original research will my kaiser Insurance cover?
> ”We’ve checked and some people who work from home haven’t even logged into the VPN…”

So why were they still employees? No Yahoo, that is why you can't have nice things.
I've found http://newrelic.com to be fairly indispensable.
If anybody feels like explaining something else that's also puzzling about the Zend engine and PHP arrays; I had a few hours spent the other day on a WTF moment writing a PHP extension in C and querying array zvals.

I was doing something fairly simple, trying to extract values passed as named argument to a function and turning them back into simple C types (char * and int):

// capturing hash keys as zvals
zval **salt_hex_val;
zval **key_hex_val;
zval **iterations_val;
if ( // getting values
zend_hash_find(hash, "salt", strlen("salt") + 1, (void**)&salt_hex_val) == FAILURE ||
zend_hash_find(hash, "key", strlen("key") + 1, (void**)&key_hex_val) == FAILURE ||
zend_hash_find(hash, "iterations", strlen("iterations") + 1, (void**)&iterations_val) == FAILURE ||
// checking types
Z_TYPE_PP(salt_hex_val) != IS_STRING ||
Z_TYPE_PP(key_hex_val) != IS_STRING ||
(Z_TYPE_PP(iterations_val) != IS_LONG && Z_TYPE_PP(iterations_val) != IS_DOUBLE)
) {
php_error_docref(NULL TSRMLS_CC, E_WARNING, "Could not extract and check types on required values in hash: salt, key, and iterations.");
RETURN_NULL();
}

char *salt_hex;
char *key_hex;

if (Z_STRLEN_PP(salt_hex_val) != salt_length * 2 ||
Z_STRLEN_PP(key_hex_val) != key_length * 2) {
php_error_docref(NULL TSRMLS_CC, E_WARNING, "Key or Salt length incorrect.");
RETURN_NULL();
}

salt_hex = Z_STRVAL_PP(salt_hex_val);
key_hex = Z_STRVAL_PP(key_hex_val);

int iterations = (Z_TYPE_PP(iterations_val) == IS_LONG ?
(int)Z_LVAL_PP(iterations_val) :
(int)Z_DVAL_PP(iterations_val));

The part that I still don't understand (but that I figured out by trial-and-error) was why `zend_hash_find` takes a `void••`[1] as argument, which should actually be a `zval•••` cast as `void••`. What's the purpose of the triple pointer here?

zend_hash_find(hash, "salt", strlen("salt") + 1, (void**)&salt_hex_val)

[1]: Imagine the • there is a star / asterisk.
There's a new type of microphone-attachment for non-audible murmur recognition.

http://library.naist.jp/dspace/bitstream/10061/7966/1/EUROSP...

Another gadget to wear, but better design and miniaturization can help.
Full Schedule for Made in NY: Austin
With anything as elite as MIT there is bound to be a few very self centered narcissists.
Definition of Done – 10 Commandments (Agile)
So you're saying it might be better if anyone anywhere had any idea what Yahoo was actually trying to be?
I am a rare convert, I went from PC to MBP and back again. And deeply regret moving back to the MBP. Currently on an Asus UX31e (Zenbook), and whilst it looks quite cool and industrial, the keyboard sucks, the LCD is defective (and I'm currently arguing with Asus about warranty claims, but that's another story). So, excuse my cynicism surrounding the real 'quality' of other high end devices.

The hard drive is a pretty good point, the LTE/3G data connection + 1TB cloud storage could overcome this, but I live in Australia, so the data costs would be enormous. Also, I did run Ubuntu for a while on my MBP and it was ok, but there were some hardware issues (power management mostly).

I wasn't aware of the kernel issues, this could be a problem. Damn. :P
Nope, I'm not trying to be cagey, I'm trying to find a way not to don the tinfoil hat. But thanks for pointing that out, I guess I should be more explicit about that.
I don't like to wear glasses. Please explain how this will be more useful than an "absurd" table or a iPad to me.
I'm interested in knowing some more details regarding the architectural setup and organizational structure that would allow something like this to happen.
That is f'ing awesome. The only thing holding me back from completely jumping in is Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop. Right now I'm dual booting Mac and Ubuntu and it is a massive pain. It crashes frequently enough for me to think about it and switching OS just to touch up some photos or cut some assets sucks.

Disclosure: I have financial interest in Apple succeeding. I also have worked on a project for Google regarding the new Chromebook pixel.
If "patent trolls" are formed as shell companies (located in the eastern district of texas) that have no assets other than the patent and enough to sue (i.e. corporation whose shareholders form it by merely contributing the patent and a nominal amount of funds), then this bill is useless unless it also permits piercing of the corporate veil (or equivalent for other limited liability entities such as LLC) such that the shareholders or directors are also liable for the attorney's fees of the defendant. Otherwise, why would a patent troll place assets other than enough to litigate in their shell companies?
The end of the Third Republic
> "Why can't I view the smartly-pulled-up, contextual information on a smartphone screen?"

You can, it's called Google Now.
A crazy password-less login system
These things have nothing to do with each other. Women approaching guys or being approached, romantically, has nothing to do with their ability to be leaders in the workforce. Zero. And to take the attitude that they need to "step up" in order to earn equality, is totally wrong. Equality is a legal and ethical thing, it doesn't mean you have to do anything.

The fact is, women like to be approached, much more than they like approaching. It's not even very much a cultural thing as far as I can tell, since it's like that in pretty much every country (there are plenty of exceptions, of course, but I'm talking about in general, overall). It's just how people are.

On the other hand, it can be unfortunate. Take OkCupid -- guys will generally message lots of girls. They have to, because the girls aren't sending many messages. There's no kind of inherent problem there, most girls just want to browse their inbox and occasionally write back to a guy that seems all right.

But when girls complain about how OkCupid "doesn't work", I tell them that's also because they're not being proactive. A guy might browse through 200 profiles in an hour; a girl might get messages from 200 guys over the course of a couple of months (it varies a lot). It's going to take her a lot longer to find the "right" guy. So while there's nothing inherently wrong with women wanting to be approached, at the same time they have to realize that if they want to find the right guy, they're going to have a lot more success if they learn to approach, too. But it's their choice. And it's never something for guys to judge.
I'm not really arguing about the details of how current laws are, I'm arguing about the morality of technology and how the laws should be.

If I'm talking to you over the phone, I'm allowed (both morally and legally) to remember your conversation. I'm allowed (both morally and legally) to write it down, to remember it better. And I'm allowed (both morally and legally) to remember it perfectly forever, if I'm able to.

Should we legally forbid to actually fulfill that if I need some assistance to remember it exactly as happened? My fuzzy memories and notes are allowed, why should better, exact memories/notes be forbidden?

I'm allowed and may be even required to remember past events in courts - should we forbid remembering things as they actually happened and require them to be stuck in the noisy, lossy and distorting channel that is homo sapiens memories?