skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This suffers from the same weaknesses that your MongoDB resource for Tastypie (from which this is derived) suffers. It hard codes the querying functions, leaves no flexibility for connection establishment, and so forth. It needs more "args, *kwargs" in your function signatures, more parameterization of query fields and less hard-coding.
Talent Insights
>it is likely that whoever created Bitcoin was an amateur.

You're kidding, right? Bitcoin is the single most impressive application of cryptography that I have ever seen in my entire life, and I get to look at a lot of cool cryptosystems. The only entity that could have created Bitcoin is some kind of savant or a group of very talented people.

>ECDSA and SHA256 are referenced but little is said about whether or not they compose securely with the Bitcoin protocol, or even if the Bitcoin protocol itself is secure.

By making only a few basic assumptions about the security of SHA, RIPEMD, and ECDSA, it's plainly obvious to anyone who remotely understands the protocol that the protocol is, in fact, secure. If you don't believe me personally, why don't you ask all the talented cryptographers who could lay their hands on over a billion dollars if they found a critical flaw in the Bitcoin protocol?

>(though Bitcoin is not secure under the security notions used by cryptographers)

You have no idea what you're talking about. Bitcoin makes very strict security guarantees and does not violate them.
Also, deployd https://github.com/deployd/deployd
This Might Be The Worst Teenager On Instagram
Graph Theory as an analogy for Circuit Diagrams
How expensive do you think it would be for the United States National Security Agency (or a comparable organization from another national government) to crack a Bitcoin store, given that we know that some Bitcoin caches have already been cracked?

This would be a reasonable 1~2 weeks project for a pentester with less than one year of professional experience, so I'd put a rough upper bound on that at $20k. i.e. it is trivially within the capability of governments, organized crime, and any intermediate Rails programmer who wants a fun side project.

If you 10X the numbers I would not bet against the outcome "Achieve a systemic compromise of the bitcoin client." (Bitcoin, by design, fans transactions out to every client on the network. The transactions contain executable instructions in a language which is interpreted by C code. Do I need to paint a very detailed picture of the risk here?)
Lady Gaga doesn't seem to be an appealing choice for typical RNC voters, wouldn't she be booed off stage?
You seem to be missing the difference between "can you do it" and "should you do it". The reason that you should not is because doing so is not idiomatic Go. You are completely able to do so though.
do you really have that many friends who put all of their contact information on their facebook profiles?
Dear jhjhjhjhj,

1. Not acting is hurting someone too.

You can look at this from a psychological standpoint. I've read the other comments and I agree with some of them, especially mnicole's in which s/he says "you're opening the door for another or making them step up their game." You may be "hurting" someone, but you have the potential to help many more. So from a philosophical point, you are solid. Just remember that breaking a window to employ the window maker does not add to the system. It actually just leaves you minus a window. If you don't commit to your ideas, you're breaking the window.

2. You don't have enough information. Uncertainty.

You can look at this also from a logical standpoint. What you're saying is you are immobilized due to various reasons. These reasons, we call constraints. You are in a situation saturated with so many constraints that you can effectively do nothing. Start one thing, find bad implications, stop. Start another, stop. This is a signature sign of a bad and failing system. You HAVE to change the rules by default, assuming you want to develop a better system.

As such, forget this rule:

If I "affect someone else badly directly or indirectly, I stop working on it."

This to me is the equivalent of voodoo magic. You cannot quantify or in anyway measure the extent of your negative impacts. This means you are in a system rife with uncertainty. The special quality of uncertainty (as the 2002-2008 WS financial engineers observed) is that no matter what metrics you use, it is unquantifiable and that an overabundance denotes a system bound to fail. Your system of decision is therefore one that fails. It is not grounded in reality, but in uncertainty. You sound like a smart person ("proficient developer and entrepreneur"). You must be able to see why this is true.

Do not make decisions based on uncertainty. There's literally nothing you can do for these people you believe you might be hurting. Make decisions on reality. Go for what you want. Develop your projects and feel liberated doing so.

Now, having reconciled our philosophy with our logic, I hope you can find a better peace of mind to continue onward. :)
That was my immediate reaction upon seeing it as well, although in this case I noticed that it was sent to me+scribd@example.com, which was indeed the mail that I signed up with. Whilst it's mostly useful for filtering/labelling or figuring out which company sold you to a spam list, it's quite useful in this case as a basic 'yep, not just a scattershot phishing attempt' indicator.

Not foolproof, of course; the people who stole hashes & emails would be the obvious choice to attempt a quick phish, and they now have all the account emails. I wonder if I'll see an uptick in spam...
Ask HN: Is e-commerce the easiest way to make money online? 
Hi,
I have been reading a lot about setting up an estore & drop shipping since coming across this thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5377821

Just wondering, is ecommerce and drop shipping one of the surest and most direct ways to make money online?
I understand that it is unlikely that it will make you a billionaire, but it seems like with a bit of tech/SEO work and the right niche you could make a nice living for yourself.

Is this a fair assumption? I would be very interested in hearing from anyone who is running an ecommerce site or has tried and failed.

Thanks
I'd be hard-pressed to call this algo as "working". If you look at the PnL, it makes most of its profit from Sept 15 2012 to Nov 15 2012. The rest of the time, it's either drawn down or chopping back and forth. 2 months of gains over a one year period sounds more like noise to me than anything else.
>people are hoping that its USD rate climb to $1000 or even $1 million, which is pretty ridiculous.

Is it really? Not too long ago, a Bitcoin was worth about $.0007.

130/.0007 = 185714

It's only four more orders of magnitude to get to the $1M range.

I don't think it's going to happen, but it's not all that far-fetched.
One would assume that at her level, $1 million is pocket change and that if she doesn't support the republican cause, she would decline that offer without skipping a beat.
Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme in that everyone is counting on someone else to want them.

However this is no different from any currency or monetary commodity with no use value. With bitcoin, the "bag holders" at the end of the scheme have something for their trouble: a global, secure, low fee transaction settlement system. Given that such a network would be quite valuable, there's no reason for it to crash to 0, barring threats of violence. Perhaps speculation value will come out over time, but this is fine.
And the first computers were humans (women) doing things like plotting missile trajectories for the military. Technologies drift.
If you read this as a story, it's actually really well written--it's a great progression. There may not be one clear, overall thesis, but each section seems to have its own thesis and each is supported quite well. I never knew Jody but from the story, I have two takeaways:

1) Jody was a great person. The reason why I mention this first is to make it clear that the article really strives to show this. And he truly seemed to have a big heart.

2) Always be as open as possible. Many times, we don't want our problems to become others' problems so we hide it. And then it builds and it leads to a large amount of secrecy that could have been avoided. It goes back to the childhood saying we all hear, "No question is a dumb question." This phrase ultimately is saying that you might as well ask a question so that you are not falling behind in knowledge--whether it's academic or not. And please don't assume that I am saying Jody's suicide was purely because he didn't disclose Ecomom's financials; I just believe that if he would have been more open, more help could have been offered--financially and psychologically.

Of course, I gained more takeaways than this but these are the two I thought were most worth sharing.
The ban filter is getting very wonky.

I cannot even submit the wordpress 3.6 annoucement from wordpress.org, apparently any url with wordpress in it is considered spam?

Still hoping to get back my _ck_ account someday.
By all means, please, show us peer reviewed sources that contradict it.
So are you saying if you are a man, that talking to a woman makes you a 1/10x developer? Or am I missing something?
I tried to take the quiz but the app the OP built it in on FB kept asking over and over and over for permissions I wasn't willing to give it. :(
The graphics in this are not very helpful, inconsistent and in some cases wrong. Your 3-d size/cpu/memory was impossible to read, there was no origin.

Secondly, the intended uses and paradigms were wrong. Lisp can do object-oriented programming with the CLOS and I'm pretty sure C++ was designed to be a general purpose language. In the intended uses, you have so many categories that are one off or very similar to others: what's the difference between web, web application and client-side?

Also, the graphics were not sharp and looked hazy. And the languages choices were not consistent, you have Clojure on some of them but not others. And in general, benchmarks don't mean anything without context.

This article has very little insight and has quite bad presentation.
From gitsum, who is linkdead:

"I mined about 13000 bitcoins in 2010 when it was possible to mine with a single quad core CPU. It was worth about $100 when I stopped mining in August 2010, and I was ecstatic that I had earned a nice steak dinner for doing absolutely nothing. After I missed the first peak at $31 in 2011, I was determined to sell everything if it ever hit that price again. Unfortunately, little did I know the price would surge to $145, and I sold most of my stash at the then all-time high of $40-50. Not quite a bitcoin millionaire, but still a good chunk of change (of which a sizable amount will be going to the IRS)."
> So I would venture that, for any pair of moderately experienced developers, it's almost always possible to find a pair of tasks such that one of them is twice (or even ten times) as fast as the other.

I completely disagree. The FizzBuzz syndrome is very real: when I do developer screenings, the majority of candidates simply can't program even tiny problems. There's no way they're faster than anybody on my team at any development-related task. And yet, they all have long resumes and a lot of experience. All those people are working someplace. And I've watched these 1/10 developers at work: they copy/paste lots of code, program through trial and error, and spend most of their time in the debugger. Eventually, stuff gets done, but excruciatingly slowly.

Once you reach a certain level of competence, then I think what you're saying is true. But there's a huge number of developers who don't reach that level.

On the other hand, I agree with you about this article. Some sort of insight on where this dev spent his time might have been interesting. Whenever I read things this vague, articles based on vague impressions rather than any hard metrics, I'm left wondering which side was actually incompetent here. Maybe this was one of the 1/10 CTOs, completely incapable of effectively communicating with people who don't fit his favored personality type. And if the feature the dev was working on was replaced with something else that only took 30 minutes to implement, maybe the original design was simply unworkable.
Walgreens Becomes 1st Retail Chain To Diagnose, Treat Chronic Conditions
Submit ideas you want to be made and how much you'd pay. Calculates total demand
I understand that Hacker News likes political stories mostly leans left on the political spectrum, but this story isn't true(1). Susan Ferrechio needs to update her story or put a disclaimer on it.(2)

(1) http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2525899

(2) "To be clear, the RNC neither asked, offered, thought of or ever considered the idea of Lady Gaga performing at our convention. And clearly, we didn't offer a million dollars. The story is actually referencing an event by American Action Network, an independent group that is no way affiliated or connected to the Republican National Committee or Republican Convention."
They use their existing technology platform to launch a new brand. Or else they just keep buying small new social networks as they gain popularity, like Instagram.
Once again, "Black Keys and Mad Men" is different to "your personal history, your friends, what you look like, what your friends look like, what you like, what your friends like, who you talk to, what you talk about, what your friends talk about, which services you subscribe to, where you went to school, where you worked, when you worked, when you graduated, when you began a relationship, when you ended a relationship, your sexual preferences..."

Facebook doesn't need any apologists, least of all from the HN community. Whether the article is linkbait or not, Facebook does need constant critique. Om Malik points out that Facebook Home means a new kind of persistent data-gathering wrapped in a trendy (?) skin that most facebook users will want to try out. It is bad enough that a billion people blithely use their web and phone apps without them having something that sinks its hooks in deeper
Are we to suppose that Fabrice Bellard, Steve Wozniak, and John Carmack are merely proficient developers, who are experienced with their stack and problem domain?
It's a simple sequence of opcodes: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script The code has been thoroughly audited by many people with substantial experience. Finding an important flaw in Bitcoin would be a major feather in any Whitehat's cap, and a major skull on the mantle for any blackhat.

Script adds extreme flexibility to Bitcoin, allowing the complete decentralization of services which would otherwise require trusted servers like escrow. It is statically validated and purposefully not turing complete. For extra conservativeness scripts not matching a set of standard forms are ignored by the unmodified reference software until transactions show up in blocks.

This is important because its what makes it possible to build other safe distributed transaction systems on top of Bitcoin... it's also what will allow Bitcoin to backwards compatibly upgrade its signing primitives if ECDSA begins looking weak.
I don't see how this platform can lock you in, they are just Linux VPSs, they are everywhere.
Learn About Google Glass And The Mirror API On YouTube
I have to agree, in that the bulk of this story was news to me as well. Granted, my only prior exposure were the discussions here on HN immediately following his untimely passing.

It's inarguably tragic. What rang the truest to me were the mentions by McClure towards the bottom about keeping problems & ambitions, magnified by our own bubbles and echo chambers, in perspective.
Thoughts on blink
You're no doubt aware that HTTP servers routinely did buffer overflows leading to arbitrary code execution early in the development of the Internet, and it is only years of work by thousands of people which makes them safe to use currently, right? HTTP servers are also diverse, old/battle-tested, and do not fan out every HTTP request to every HTTP server. Bitcoin is theoretically a protocol but in practice is a client monoculture (so much so that a bug in a point release of the official client forked the transaction chain), has probably less development hours total than Apache has spent on auditing parsing HTTP headers alone, and does fan out every transaction to every node on the network.

Transactions most certainly do not "contain executable instructions".

This is contrary to technical fact. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script
Apparently strip clubs see a 3x boost from GOP conventions compared to the DNC, so it's just as likely they'd throw money at her.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/politics/tampa-gop-strip-clubs (slightly NSFW)
I know what you mean. I have tangled with multi-billion dollar corporations in the past. They way I put it was that, beyond a certain size companies can almost create their own laws when it comes to dealing with smaller entities. In other words, they could be completely at fault and even engaging in illegal actions yet get away with it because the smaller entity can't even begin to play the game. This is one aspect of US law that is really bothersome: At some level you only get the justice you can afford to pay for.

I won't go into the details here, just rough strokes. I had a serious dispute with a multinational that cost me eight months of work (three engineers) and about $800K in cash. I sought to find an amicable solution but they really didn't care. They didn't even want to talk to me. I also learned that they were doing similar things to other companies. One of them was about to go broke because they could not deliver product to their major customer due to what happened. Anyhow, in a telephone conversation with one of their VP's I told him that I was planning on visiting them at an upcoming trade-show and that I would not leave the booth until we had a meeting about the issue at hand. The entire conversation was 100% relaxed and amicable. A matter-of-fact dull business conversation.

A week before the trade-show I was served with a temporary restraining order to keep me away from the convention center. They made the radius so large I couldn't even go see their competitors. I drove from Los Angeles to San Jose in a hurry to challenge it in court. Only one of my accusers showed-up with a lawyer from the company. They lied through their teeth. The judge saw it. I didn't really have to say much of anything other than "Your Honor, they are not telling the truth and are using this TRO to bully a small business.". The judge looked at them and said something like this: "You folks ought to be ashamed. You are going to have to walk on water for me to uphold this TRO and make it permanent. And you better not say a word or there will be consequences". I did pay them a visit at the trade-show and they had no choice but talk to me. They still screwed me and a dozen other companies.
Toosell blog | Clean LED Monitor Screens Carefully
>When someone sends me an iMessage, their client sends as many copies as I have devices?

Generally how this works is that the sender encrypts the message with a symmetric encryption algorithm (like AES) and then encrypts the randomly-generated AES key with RSA with each of the receivers' private keys. So you only send out a single message, but it can be decrypted by any of the intended recipients.
As a side note (because your way of thinking is very interesting), here's a small thought exercise. I would love to know what you would do in this situation. (This might further convince you that the way you think fails some tests). I think taking the time to really understand this train of thinking is important, as it will dictate many of your decisions in the future. :)

ActionA hurts 1 person.
B,2
C,3
D,4

Which one do you chose? A or no choice? To compound the problem.

ActionA hurts 1 person you really like.
B,2 ppl you kinda like;
C,3 ppl you are ambivalent towards;
D,4 ppl you utterly dislike (each emotion containing logical reasons, e.g. A is your girlfriend, D is a cruel warlord.)

Now your decision might change, might it not? This is how I demonstrate to you why uncertainty destroys any chance you have of effectively making decisions.

So in all, I believe your way of thinking fails at 3 levels.

1. You believe your actions always hurt someone, though not realizing that because you're a capable and well-meaning person, your inaction may hurt many many more people.

2. You believe firmly (so firmly that you don't commit to anything you want to do in life) that you are dealing with information when you are in fact dealing only in pure, non-founded speculation. You have NO basis to believe you are hurting people. You speculate. I would say you have information that you are hurting people when you can tell me the names of who you're hurting. This is a bad illusion to live under. It gives you the feeling that your making an active decision to do something when all you're doing is absolutely nothing except believing you've made an active decision. You set yourself a devious little trap.

3. You do not have enough information to use the system you are using. Even if you had enough information (as demonstrated above) you would need additional rules and ways to rank the impact of your actions and who they impact, which you currently completely lack.

I know this is going to help you. Let it. If I was in your situation and someone told me this, it would've helped me. :)
i'm sure he will bend over backwards to do the bidding of a self-appointed internet expert.
Why I'm going to be avoiding Facebook Home like a plague
C not for applications? (or LISP for that matter) A little bias showing there.
In my opinion it was an attempt at "dog whistle politics" to hire a pro-gay or more accurately a pro-human rights singer to make the RNC look inclusive.

Reminds of a quote from a politician in California named Jesse Unruh: "Everybody can be bought. I don't care what the price. For some its wine, women, or drugs but for that rare individual who can't be bought, well.. They can be leased."
tickdata.com has split adjusted, survivor bias free data. It isn't cheap however. You'll still need to go elsewhere for the SEC filings though.
'According to the American Action Network website, the organization's purpose is to "create, encourage and promote right wing policies."'[0].

Of course the RNC wouldn't /sully/ their names with it. They just let the money that runs their engine do it for them. Mis-titled and flamebaity, of course, but still rather valid.

0. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Action_Network
The Absurdity of Fitness
My latest irritation is manager types getting too obsessed with Unit testing, it reminds of XML and the way it was abused.

It's a bit of a tangent but I've also observed this. So much that I've started calling it the "cucumber-complex".

Once infected the team not only writes excessive unit-tests to validate things like that
a method-call to 'foo' does indeed call the method 'foo'. But they also wrap these unit-tests in quite elaborate parsers in order to "express" them in pseudo-english.

The hilarious (cucumber-specific) aspect is how they usually start by writing their tests in plain RSpec or Test::Unit and then go at implementing the parser to make it "tell a story".