skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think it is well beyond the time when we as a society need to understand that certain words (lynching among them) are just words.

If you want to see racial undertones when the word was used in a different context, that's your choice. It's no longer part of the meaning of the word, just like ghetto does not refer to the area of Germany where Jews were forced to live.
"lynching" has a very well-established racial subtext in the US... I'm sure this person didn't intend it that way, but she pointed it out and he apologized, all of which seems completely reasonable.
This looks really nice, great work!

Setup looks a little more daunting than I was hoping though. Could it be possible to make this work without me having to install your gem and run this through Travis?
Ah that seems awesome.
I suggest you apply some lean principles here and first figure out if the problem you perceive in fact exists and whether or not people are actually desperately looking for alternative solutions.

Your current thinking seems to go a bit long the lines of: There must be a huge demand for shoes in Africa since so many people over there walk around barefoot.
Bypass may be accessible to blind users on Android; I'm not currently set up to verify this easily. But it's not on iOS.

The reason is that on iOS, Bypass implements its own UIKit views. It does use the CoreText framework to render the text into a CoreGraphics context, but that doesn't help accessibility. The views would need to implement the UIAccessibility protocol.
A highly obfuscated and minified JS application like GMail has about the same level of introspectability as Java bytecode. I have little problem consuming Java bytecode written 18 years ago by companies that went out of business.

Leaving aside binary format representation of portable VM code, there's also the issue that NaCl supports multithreading and asm.js doesn't. WebWorkers/Isolates are a poor substitute for high performance games.
Would help to expose padding and box sizing to the user.
I remember reading about this on HN a while back and wondering why anyone would want to use it, but now it totally makes sense. I don't want to go back to writing C/C++ but if you could write your app in JS, and then do the tighter "inner loop" parts in LLJS... that sounds really enticing. I'll be following the project closely.
For the life of me I cannot fathom why PlayHaven went to the extreme step of firing the dev in question.

What he did was certainly wrong, but certainly not a firable offense. A stern warning from HR would've sufficed.

Also, I don't understand the hate and DDoS directed towards SendGrid. I think if any, PlayHaven should've been subject of it and pressured to reinstate the dev in question.

SendGrid should've been pressured to warn her, not fire her like it happened.

We commit mistakes every once in a while, and losing your job is a big punishment. It's like getting your car seized by the government for speeding 10% over the speed limit.

Unfortunately the outcome is that a message is sent that DDoS works to get people that the internet mob doesn't like fired, and that a part of the male tech community is wielding that power.

What if parts of the female tech community retaliate with a DDoS against SendGrid now?

Looks like the male privilege extends to having the resources to perform DDoS.
No, you're misunderstanding Brandenburg.

Yelling fire in a crowded theater is not about causing lawless action; the people fleeing in panic are behaving lawfully. The act of yelling "fire" is outlawed because that panic can result in grave bodily harm to others, and is a foreseeable result of doing so.

Brandenburg deals with inflammatory speech (usually hate speech but also includes seditious speech), which must rise to the level of incitement to be criminal, specifically meaning that you must incite others to actually hurt a third party or to actually take seditious actions against the government. Otherwise, the inflammatory speech is justy the expression of personal opinion, which is directly protected by the 1st Amendment.
> Bars lose about 24-26% of their gross revenue to theft

Internal theft. Shrink.

Do what minimarts do and mount a camera pointed down at the till, but don't bother with entrances and exits. It's not a casino.
This is a great article from a far more neutral and informed point of view than most of us have managed (or could, given what little has actually been said by first-hand sources). Thanks to the author for treating this issue both critically and realistically, and for attempting to make a difference in SendGrid's reaction, whether it worked or not.
Awesome job, Andrew. It's very cool what you've built.

A few nits:

- I didn't realize "Try It Now" was a link to play with the product without signing up. This might do better as a button.

- I think the great Jotleafs that people have created really show the potential of the product and provide the inspiration. It would be great to put that stuff at the forefront a bit like you've done with Your World of Text (the homepage is a canvas).
Amanda Blum apparently has a history of animosity with Adria Richards, while at the same time she also isn't one of those who would stick their fingers in their ears and say there isn't sexism in tech. That makes this post pretty interesting.
If Apple hadn't said anything, in a few weeks we'd see people complaining about evil Apple holding back their precious Google product.
I'm sorry, I think I misspoke. What I meant is: you're right. What we should have done, though, was link to a blog post for you to read, rather than the dev portal itself. It just wasn't realistic to build a mobile enabled dev portal, so we should have posted something mobile friendly instead.
Video Poker – Writing a C++ Game with Box
True. It's a couple acres, a nice trailer, and a lifetime of property tax and utilities in Idaho.
I agree that if that were the case, it would be a problem.

However, I don't think we will see a 6x slowdown here. JavaScript engines are already very fast on compiled code, because they have already been optimizing for typed arrays and so forth for a while now. Google even added a compiled C++ benchmark to Octane, for example.

In current benchmarks, asm.js gives you a speedup of anywhere from 1x (where normal JS optimizations already got us very close to native) to 6x. So 6x is the worst case, and there are plenty of cases in the middle. A 2x-3x difference is not big enough to make something a false sense of portability, the web has tolerated 2x-3x speed differences for a long time now, and these things also change a lot in terms of who is fastest, on what, and by what.

Furthermore, I would not expect a 2x-3x difference to last very long, again, because browsers have been competing on performance of this type of code for a while now (Octane, etc.), and will continue to do so.
This is exciting. I hope Google (and eventually Microsoft, Opera and Safari) jump on this.
Wow.

A couple of my black friends said they were more sensitive of their race when they would visit their home, and that they felt more at ease in their work and silicon valley social groups than with their relatives and childhood friends. One of them spent her holidays alone, rather than go home, or visit with other people's families because it was too distressing.

IMHO, it was really a class issue masquerading as race but regardless, it sucked. People need to grow the fuck up.
Thanks for the answer. I'm not sure. Doesn't something like what you are saying only happen if you are diabetic?
Death threats and the rage of a thousand misogynists is hardly a "tit for tat kind of situation." She may have misunderstood the forking comment, but that does not constitute abuse. Publicly shaming obnoxious behavior may be an overreaction, but it's nothing like the true, actual sexist and racist abuse that Richards has endured.
"WebWorkers/Isolates are a poor substitute for high performance games."

Have you tried? (genuinely curious)
I'm with you. "It's all just chemistry" is sufficient for me for most things, but I worry a lot more about epistemology, which is why I have spent some time studying it.

Until recently, there were two basic camps on "how we know stuff." The Rationalists and the Empiricists.

The Rationalists thought that knowledge was came from mental abstractions, not from reality. For example, Plato believed that we could all access the "ideal" world of "forms" by just introspecting. The medieval scholastic philosophers tended to be very rationalistic - they made arguments about abstractions not connected to real experience, like how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. Decartes was a rationalist - "I think, therefore I am" is rooted in the idea that we look inward to perceive reality.

The Empiricists, which are somewhat more modern, were a reaction to Rationalism, and rejected all of that. They said that all we can really "know" or "trust" is sensory experience. We can't build up complex mental models, and we can't have principles - we just have to be pragmatic all the time and do what seems best, because we can't really "know."

Kant tried to improve on both of these approaches by saying that we can't really know anything about "true" reality, because reality has to be filtered through the senses. There is only subjective "reality."

Ayn Rand, of whom I am a big fan, went in the other direction from Kant, but also rejected Rationalism and Empiricism. She said that you can build complex models of reality, but they have to be based on actual observations of reality (i.e., sense data). To do this, she proposed a new theory of concept formation (i.e., how to form abstractions based on observation of reality). Her approach is very Aristotelian, which is interesting because Aristotle was the main guy who disagreed with Plato at the very beginning. I'd highly recommend "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" if you're interested in this approach (although you may be better served by starting at a less advanced level... still, the book is short and very accessible, albeit kind of a mind trip).
CISPA and Surveillance Culture: Who Has the First Amendment Right Against Whom?
> Fraud and embezzlement cause actual material harm to people. If someone pirates a game, has the publisher been harmed? No, they've just missed out on what might have been a sale.

This is a ridiculous trope. Say I take a Luis Vuitton bag from a store, leaving an amount of money that precisely compensates LVMH for the cost of replacing and restocking the bag, along with the fair rental value of the bag during the time until it is restocked. No harm no foul right? LVMH has not been materially harmed, right? They are in exactly the same position they would be if I hadn't taken the bag. Since I compensated them for the marginal cost of the bag, all they have lost is the potential profit on a potential sale, and there is after all no guarantee I could have afforded the bag anyway, right?

In our system, we don't measure harm in terms of the cost to put someone back to the status quo ante. We also include the expected profit. E.g. if you breach a contract with someone, which causes them to lose $200, you don't just owe them the $200, you owe them the $200 plus their expected profit on the contract. We do this because in our system, people are entitled to the benefit of the bargain. People are entitled to profit from the difference between what the market will pay for a good and the cost of producing the good, even when the marginal cost of that good approaches zero.

Re: analogies, analogies are tremendously valuable. They show us how things that seem different can actually be understood in terms of familiar concepts. The harm from copying is actually a perfect scenario in which analogies are useful. The common refrain among people who are pro-piracy is that the marginal cost of a copy approaches zero, so "no harm" is done by copying. This is based on the fallacy that digital copying is somehow sui generis. Yet, analogizing to other situations shows us that in the rest of the law, we don't protect the marginal cost--we protect the sale price. We protect peoples' right to profit from the market price of their products. The fact that the marginal cost of producing a good is 35% of the sale price (iPhone) or 5% of the sale price (LVMH bag), or 1% of the sale price (textbook) or 0.1% of the sale price (an MP3) is irrelevant.
I'm still holding out some hope that we'll be able to get to a reasonable middle ground. All parties gainfully employed again. Coming together to show more empathy and restraint about creating hostile environments, public shaming, and rushing to judgment.

In a way, since so many people acted so badly, it should be easier for everyone to apologize and de-escalate while saving face.
The ability to distribute a OS to everyone on this planet at less cost than the annual salary of one dev is certainly innovation. Piracy is not violation of a property right, since the creator would not have any stake in what I do with my copy anymore than VW has a say in who borrows my car and technology can certainly change which laws are reasonable or not.
Check out http://transloadit.com There is the competition in the market. And they have also nailed the client-side security thing.
I can't say that this is a problem specifically in the web.

The landscape is littered with C frameworks, C++ frameworks, Java frameworks, .NET frameworks, and so on for every other language, that serves to abstract so much from the basics that it becomes so difficult to do basic things the <insert framework here>-way. The problem is that instead of being ancillary and supporting productivity, they are opinionated and try to do EVERYTHING for you, which just makes them really crappy DSLs.

This just happens to occur on the web a lot more because what we have to work with is inconsistent, sometimes poorly implemented, and confusing as hell to new players. So everyone and their dog tries to "solve" developing web applications by making you believe the DOM doesn't exist (jQuery, MooTools, etc). Some think HTML and CSS are too complicated and try to get you to believe those don't exist either (Ext, etc). Then some want you to forget that Javascript ever existed, or to make Javascript less Javascripty (GWT, Prototype/MooTools, etc).

The end result is a lot of opinionated dogma that rarely actually help us get things done (or get in the way more than help). If you pick a big framework, it's usually very good at whatever it was designed to build. But if you want to build something even slightly outside of that set, it becomes a massive cluster-fuck of WTF-inducing horrifying debugging and pain. Only the lightweight libraries that are massive value adds without enforcing a specific dogma on the user have been extremely successful.

The problem is that everyone is too opinionated and makes their software try to do your job for you. It's not really about the ease of use, it's about the ease of integration, extension, and whether they make our jobs easier or nightmarish. Yes, the web foundation is far from perfect, or even great, but most of these frameworks are far, far worse, since they massively and arbitrarily limit what you can do for the sake of some vision of simplicity.

The same problem exists in the native world. There is no consistent presentation layer that rivals the web, and even it isn't fully consistent (all browsers are different, and even the same browser on different platforms can behave differently). But it's a far cry from anything else.

As an aside, since JS isn't assembly, using it as a compile target to build applications foregoes a lot of the other fundamental technologies in a web browser. Sure, you might be able to compile <insert language here> into JS and have an application run in the browser, but that necessarily implies you're doing things like building the DOM manually, and sites like this tend to have significant performance issues. If you want it to work well, the best way currently is by using HTML/CSS/JS and by not letting a gigantic framework pretend that those things don't exist.
What I find interesting (not judging here) is that people's attitude toward the immutability of the constitution seems to be inconsistent. The same people who invoke the 2 amendment to block any discussion on gun control are willing to "reinterpret" the 1st amendment if it fits their purpose.

Note: My point is not at all about gun control, it's just the first example of inconsistency that I had in mind. Not starting any debate here.
The NRA has the advantage that it is aligned with the interests of a major domestic industry and everyone who works in it. The ACLU and EFF don't really have that kind of alignment, which one would assume makes it harder to raise funds, etc.
I am following the definition given by many dictionaries (and, by the way, 28 Code of Federal Regulations Section 0.85).

Terrorists don't all wear beards and have TNT strapped around their waists while piloting hijacked planes, you know?
Counter: The Constitution is a suicide pact. The notion that individual rights are more important than Government is a pretty clear thread though out the document, and that one should not conflate the Government of the particular day with The Nation as a whole. I think it's pretty clear with even a cursory reading of such documents as the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the Constitution that the standing belief was that Government should be destroyed and rebuilt if it ever stopped serving the people.

Such as when it falls into a perpetual state of war. Like they complained about England doing. I think it was well envisioned and it's well on script. However, the Founders believed the separation of powers between branches would create adequate checks and balances to prevent it from happening. I think they failed to envision the case where said branches would collude and ignore the rules to protect each other's power quid pro quo, and most people would not notice and not be bothered.
Using Arduino to change the world for non-profits and charities
Ask HN: Wondering why YC team wont email for questions on application
Just submitted our YC application and was amused to read that YC wont email us if they have question "If we have a question, we won't send you an email. Instead you'll see a a link to it on this page and at the top of Hacker News (when you're logged in). So check HN regularly after submitting."

I dont mind logging in to see status as I log in pretty regularly, but does anyone know why? Is it just to bring some extra traffic?
So Adria Richards has pulled shit like this before? Seems like she just does most of this stuff for attention... too bad she took it too far this time and bit off more than she could chew.
Apple Design Teams Get Cozier
I think a lot of people (myself included) spoke out against Adria Richards because of her bullshit - not because she was a woman.

One can argue against what she did and not be a "mysoginist man-privelaged pig". (<--- I've seen women write that against people who spoke against Adria Richards)
The website rejected my email address as being invalid (j@ckjennin.gs)…
I'm not sure how any of these examples necessarily reflect money as the root systemic cause of the vulnerability of the political process to being co-opted by factional interests.

If money were somehow removed from the equation, surely the same concentration of political power would exist, and the same parties would possess the same interest in directing its use; it doesn't seem that itself is a source of influence, but just a means employed in applying that influence.

So how does removing money from the politics actually prevent the MPAA, RIAA, and other cartels from using politics as a means to alter market conditions in their favor? I think we might need significantly more fundamental reforms; trying to restrict the role of money in politics, with all else being equal, might even backfire, and cause something even more concerning than money to become the dominant medium for influencing politics.
"What do you think HN community?"

Terrible plan that serves mostly to enrich current bitcoin holders.
It's relevant because it's an example of pop culture, and pop culture mirrors culture's values (hence, "pop[ular]").

There are a thousand shows on TV with a thousand examples, not to mention advertising. It's a trope: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BumblingDad
PyCon aftermath: Can we simply establish the Red/Yellow card system?
I wasn't the original poster, sorry.

Having lived under US government-provided health care, I'll skip it and try something else. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsf9QvZD1Ic
Paul Graham's Participatory Narcissism
Haha. Forgive my spelling.
Because his plans connect with plenty of people around here who are thinking of disconnecting as well. That would be one reason.
Big Brother/Big Sister could use the help of the tech community
One of the hallmarks of technology, and especially the internet, is that almost no actions an individual takes can be regarded as truly private anymore. Nowadays, doing anything in some way has an effect on interstate commerce in a way not contemplated by the Founding Fathers.

Raich and Wickard are not unreasonable extensions of federal power--they simply reflect the fact that technology has changed the nature of commerce since the Constitution was drafted.
There are shitloads of other general interest forums on the web that have strong moderation and less juvenile content. They're all just small forums - they don't get the critical mass of Reddit so they stay small. It's far from a wasteland out there.
The Ideal Praise-to-Criticism Ratio
"working within fictitious enterprises in hypothetical industries"

They could have as well written "In a galaxy far far away...."
I agree. That's why I carefully used the word "perceived."
Gold can't be eaten. Why is it so expensive?
Sure thing! I don't know if hold-to-record would make it easier. I think recording it in sections would make it easier. For example, the beginning of the video was pretty easy and straightforward. Only when I started talking about selectors and derivation did it get hard to keep it flowing. So break it up and get a good mic. I'm not really happy with the macbook retina mic - change the angle or distance of your voice a bit and you your audience will be able to hear it.
"The constitution is not a suicide pact."

How do you know? It seems to me like the people who wrote the constitution (and authored/ratified the Bill of Rights) were willing to risk everything to achieve the freedoms enumerated in the constitution and its subsequent amendments. While I'm probably projecting my own opinions onto them to some extent, it seems to me that the founders of the United States would rather see the nation fall apart than become what they set out to destroy.
Did you fail to understand my point? Dart is cross browser too. You write a Dart app, it runs in the DartVM on Chrome, and runs as JS on Firefox. If Firefox runs it slowly, it's because Firefox is worse at recognizing the patterns of transpiled Dart code, right? I could define my own spec, "dartjs.js" which has specific style of writing JS that a VM could be tuned to recognize. Same issue.

I'm not attacking ASM.JS here, I'm just pointing out that if it isn't supported by other browsers, no one seeking high performance can depend on its portability in that regard.

None of this makes any difference to a developer who is trying to ship a game, he has to deal with the world as it is. And if the world is Firefox has asm.js, and Chrome has NaCL, then they will write their games in C/C++, and use Emscripten+Asm.js for Firefox, and NaCL for Chrome, so NaCL still won't go away.

The point is, rather than just dumping a new spec and VM module on the community, it has to be a cooperate effort so that there's a stable platform to target that isn't a pathologically bad performer elsewhere.
Read you loud and clear. We are split across all 4 US-East availability zones currently, but its true that we are not multi-region - yet.
After reading this article, it really has painted a picture that this person really does belong in the extreme feminist camp. She would fit right in at /r/shitredditsays.
Misogyny.md