skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I really liked this, namely because I had never thought about this from this angle. The interaction most people have with marriage and the state is taxation on income. It would seem like it wouldn't be too difficult to just eliminate the option to file jointly and be done with it -- the state is no longer involved with marriage!

This article does a good job explaining it's hardly that trivial. It reminded me of Steve Yegge's blog post about legalizing marijuana[0], and a simple concept becomes impossibly complicated when you consider all the practical scenarios and edge cases. Hopefully, you'll never be in a situation where the government has to rule on something like a disputed inheritance, but it has and will do so, often basing its decision on previously established precedent.

What struck me was the logical step that this is a good defense against the slippery slope arguments, because gay marriage is ultimately an incremental step. We have laws and legal precedent for marriage between two people, and we're effectively just saying those laws can apply to a marriage of two people of the same gender. A typical Republican counterargument to the legalization of gay marriage is that you open the door for marriage to be between multiple partners, or between children, or animals, or whatever absurdity. It's impossible for gay marriage to trivially lead to say, marriage to an animal, because the state will have to define and rule on an entire cohort of new edge cases. If you're gay and married and have a child and you die, it's pretty uncontroversial that your partner would maintain custody of the child. But if you are married to your dog and adopt a child and die, does your dog get custody of the child? That's basically absurd.

So, I feel this essay gives me a good answer the next time a right-winger asks me if the government allows gay marriage, what's to stop them from allowing other sorts of bizarre marriage scenarios: the government would have to come up with a bunch of different rules that are way more complex than gay marriage, and we probably won't want to do that.

[0] http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legali...
Age is largely irrelevant. I'd argue that no one is truly ready to found a startup.
> I'm not sure any of this is "damning" really.

How about the part where he was in another state on the night she says he raped her?

Or the part where she left a comment on Gawker stating that he has been previously charged with rape and went to trial but got off because he knew the judge

Or the part where she deleted evidence on Facebook?

Or the part where she told Gawker that she hadn't been in contact with him since the rape but he shows a large number of messages in a pattern of obsession

Or the part where every other person who is familiar with the two of them denies even seeing a hint of abuse

Or the part where she has previously made a false accusation, of being pregnant, in order to get him to respond to her

Actually, did you read the post? This is as damming as you can get when defending yourself from a false rape accusation.

I can't imagine what else somebody in that situation could do. He is lucky he was able to track down all this information online, otherwise we could have seen an innocent man convicted.

This woman is unreliable. She also accused Arrington of hacking into Robert Scoble's Facebook account and posting as him to defend Arrington. We should have seen through this at that point, that it had to come to this is an indictment of our culture and the willingness of a few to take advantage of an unstable woman to promote their own self interest.
Dans right (he's my co-founder). Amazon allowed for a much larger period of time between authorization and capturing. They are the only processor that had the technology on hand for us.
I never thought I'd ever say this; but I miss Geocities. And i miss WebRings. There were so many unusual sites out there. In the 90's the web was fun, artsy and mysterious. Now it's all MTV.
Yawn. Fraud is easy, no matter how you define it, stealing a few bitcoins on the other hand merely takes a finite amount of resources.

You're essentially a troll. What you say is true but double spending a few coins (your maximum return is 2x) would take hundreds of thousands of dollars and a lot of luck. Duplicating paper money requires an inkjet printer with good registration and the common sense to separate the eruion constellations into separate layers. It's not rocket surgery, and once the source file is made it can be replicated at any copy shop. Its vanishingly unlikely you haven't accepted a counterfeit bill, and its vanishingly unlikely a bitcoin could be double-spent beyond seven blocks.

Give it up. Bitcoins may not be a sound investment but they're far more secure than cash for both parties.
Google tracking codes are on a majority of sites anyway, and you probably find the sites using Google. They already know which URLs you go to.
Infinity isn't a positive real :(
> It's hard(er) to create new content on a tablet, and I don't really want that becoming the default computer for any generation.

At the risk of using yet another car analogy, I see PC's becoming the pickup trucks of the computer industry. There will always be plenty of them around and will be primarily designed and built for utility. Many people who don't really need the utility will still buy them because they like the style. Over the years, the pendulum will swing back and forth between mobility and power -- and there will inevitably be the SUV cross-overs as well.
Yes, Bandcamp was for sure our competitor. Simple to use, and well known. Our added value was the dynamic pricing (which we found out was not a value at all). There are many pain points for artists. The main one is "no one is buying my music". That pain point hasn't yet been solved in an easy way, and as time goes on, it seems its getting harder and harder.
It's funny you should mention the incremental step that legalising gay marriage represents.

The linked article is actually an expansion of an aside in a brief she wrote for the Reason Foundation about how actually gay marriage is a quite small step compared to stuff like no-fault divorce.

http://reason.org/files/an_argument_for_equal_marriage.pdf
Japanese engineers create "Girlfriend Coat"
Sure, the transition isn't happening rapidly, but the agism you see in engineering now, isn't going to last long. You aren't a better engineer when you're younger, so by default the more experts in the field that are older will naturally cause a power shift from 20 somethings to 30 somethings.
And even more important - CUPS.
10 Most Overrated Cities in America
Disagree with the results.
Not sure it'll be a huge consumer hit, but you can't argue that they're innovating, they're continuing to push technology further.
Those are all examples of outliers, not real life.
I created an email address just to weed out LinkedIn spam. There are no verified recruiters. There are "recruiters". You create an a/c and broadcast "hey, I'm a recruiter give me your contact details!". You say 'yes' and LinkedIn gives it to them. Good thing is you've to shy 'yes'.

Now that email "career.linkedin.XXX@gmail.com" has an amount of spam that shames my other (spam friendly) email ID I've been using for 3 years.

All the offers I've received via LinkedIn are well, below below standard. I've received better (a lot) offers from job portals. Or directly dropping your resume at companies' portals still works the best.

I really do not see where LinkedIn fits in my life and I, sure as hell, don't see where LinkedIn fits in with Pulse and Rapportive and elk.
We were a middle-man to the artists. We had it setup so when a fan bought their music all of the money went directly to us, and then we paid out the artist. That is where we went wrong. You need to use "recipient tokens" so the money is split by Amazon. This way the money goes directly to the artist and we get sent a cut directly from amazon.
The Bitcoin Gyration
No. The accounts are already linked! My accounts are not separate. This is a common misconception apparently: my Google accounts are already linked in a single Google Account. I'm not very happy with it, but hey... it's comfortable.

I just refuse to have the social aspects of Google imposed on me through Google+. I don't want my mum to know I liked "Used Panties Exchange" in Google Play. Heck, I don't even want Google+! It's a service I don't need, don't want and feel it's just getting pushed on me.

But well, even then... it's just because I just don't want to! Why don't you use <insert here a service you don't use>? Because you don't want to. Period.

It's like jokes: they're not funny if you try too hard. I might've tried the service by myself, but they just blew away any interest I had. If they're so desperate for users it certainly can't be a good place to be.
Contract law has to be enforced by somebody. In the absence of functioning anarcho-capitalism, that "somebody" is the state, via the courts.

This means that courts must decide on the content and meaning of contracts. This is easy for stuff that has been seen before. It is much harder when you blow away hundreds of years of precedents and start from scratch.
All of these things I DO agree with. And yes, we are young. We might not use the word "shit" on our homepage next time. But Hell, I used the word "fuck" on the title of this article, and it sure turned alot of heads.
The harshness of your reply seems unwarranted.
I think it would be nifty to have for a media PC or in a meeting.

I can't remember—do Star Trek characters use voice commands with their tricorders?
> The current notation has been in use for hundreds of years because it works.

But it doesn't. And that's why tablature notation is far and away more widely used these days. Old-style musical notation is horribly designed and is gradually dying a natural death.
Yes, they do. But when they see the money in front of them, they think long and hard about it. When, however, you introduce all kinds of financial instruments, you are no longer seeing money rather some abstract thing, and THAT makes it easier to rationalize all kinds of actions.
Proof of what? The post you're commenting on makes two claims: (1) mean correlates with stupid, (2) more stupid people watch TV than read. How does your library experience prove either of those things? I guess you meant (2), but how do you know how smart library users that watch videos on computers are and how smart library users that read are? Did you just apply some prejudice you have? I wouldn't regard that as proof. And as a person that greatly enjoys reading, watching TV and watching videos on YouTube, I'll probably be offended by any such prejudice. ;)
It's really low volume. Check out the crazy spreads on https://tradehill.com/

I think we'll stabilize around 100 over the next 48 hours but with crazy degrees of volatility.
Sitting around $74 now.
Across America, creative, hardworking people in coffee shops, dorm rooms and garages are creating the next era of growth. Let’s embrace our future as a knowledge economy and help them — and all of us — reach our full potential.

Mark is talking his own book, he wants an unlimited number of cheap engineers from third world countries. Also a "knowledge economy" sounds great until it isn't. A lot like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banking_crises

Raise the salaries so they want to work for FB, Apple and Google instead of GS and JP Morgan and you'll get more than enough employees. Oh, but that would effect your margins. Why aren't corporations hiring more people, instead of hoarding trillions of dollars in cash (1)? Their earnings are at a record high.

(1) "But they do not have to...maximize shareholder's value...." etc. Fine, then we can keep that in mind and we do not even have to listen to them.
Hah definitely valid concerns. I actually prefer working in my underwear as well ;) We are actually working on some really intuitive privacy features which will hopefully make Sqwiggle an even better option for remote workers like us. Thanks a lot for the feedback!
I hear what you are saying. I have tons of pages of lessons I learned that I will touch on in later posts. I tried to summarize the whole experience in to one page. My experiences took me to business meeting after business meeting, and opened my eyes to the entire tech / music startup scene. The main lesson I learned was not listening to feedback early on, but I also have insight on co-founder issues, legal issues, budgeting issues, personal/work dilemmas, etc.
> Marriage is already the exception, it doesn't follow that a revision of marriage law would reverse that convention universally.

You'd have to legislate to abolish the presumption, otherwise it will continue to be applied. That's how the common law works. And having abolished the presumption, all the law that flows from it is now thrown out and you start from scratch. Actually, worse: some will get thrown out and you will need to make two decisions in all the early cases -- what still applies, and if it doesn't, what is the new rule?

> Marriage laws preventing abuse are redundant and can be cut.. what's the problem?

Her point here is addressed to religious libertarians, who want the state out of marriage so they can impose more onerous terms. She says that they wouldn't get what they want anyhow; if you make it into a contract, then contract laws will come along and void a bunch of religious practices.

The complexity is always going to be there. Moving it from the "family law" heading to the "contract law" doesn't make the complexity go away. It will just jam up the courts while everything is rehashed from scratch.

She often discusses contrasts between Roman and Common law, if that interests you.
What stops me from 'minting' zerocoins by selling them to myself? exchanged with gold? what?
The key problem with the "cash is also vulnerable to smash and grab" argument is that you can be in Romania and grab someone's bitcoins in Illinois, whereas with cash, you actually have to be physically present, which is easier to notice, easier to track afterwards, easier to verify, and harder to escape from.

Also, bank vaults are guarded, you can't shoot a bot and you can't dye-pack bitcoins.
Having NLP at least as a functional option is good though. Even if it's just for accessibility purposes.
I think it was meant as a setting, which could live along side a default to HD setting.
> Oh please. Nobody's ever done such a comparison across more than 2 or 3 languages or frameworks. Have you even seen the benchmarks in question?

Okay, let me clarify. When I say "you really need to go this far" I mean that stopping at any point before that (but after the simple metric of how many requests a second it can serve which they already do) makes no sense, IMHO. If you are going to compare frameworks and you want to go beyond that initial performance metric, you might as well aim high enough to be useful.

I agree you never see anything approaching that in other reviews/benchmarks. Is that a good reason to not try it here?

> Why not just go do it, if it's so essential and straightforward?

I'm envisioning this as a community process, not a "Go off and write this in 20 frameworks or you're useless" sort or ultimatum. As such, just speccing out a possibly route is helping.

Also, I plan to help with the existing benchmarks. After the second round, I pointed them out to the author of my favorite framework in the hopes he would have time to put together something for the benchmark, otherwise I was going to in the next week or two when I had time. I still plan to.

Oh, and that framework author's answer? That these benchmarks are laughable because all they measure is performance, and there's a clear performance to convenience trade-off shown in the results, and that of course there's a performance hit when the framework handles most the work for you. I have to say I agree. Sure, there's possibly some that are clear winners giving good performance with lots of conveniences for common operations, but is there any way to tell as much from the data presented so far?
I'm sorry, but that guy is wrong when he say that marriage is a contract, is not, marriage is an alliance.
Not that I recall. They only used voice commands when on a starship and communicating with the "main computer." I don't even think they used voice commands on shuttle craft.
“We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error.”
> the probability that a specific Zerocoin belongs to you is 1/n

I think you're missing the subtlety that the parent was trying to get at. Imagine that everyone redeemed their Zerocoins exactly five minutes after minting them; it'd be trivial to match up which coin was being redeemed. Now obviously that'd be stupid, so instead let's say you choose when to redeem your Zerocoin randomly, by sampling a waiting time from some distribution p(t). This makes it harder for the attacker to recover which coin is yours, since instead of just counting backwards five minutes, they now only have a posterior probability distribution spread over a range of possible minting times (note this distribution is really just a flipped version of p(t)). But that still gives them some information. The only way for them to have a truly uniform distribution across all possible minting times is if you had used a truly uniform distribution across all waiting times, but as pointed out below, there is no such distribution! So no matter how you choose your waiting time, your attacker will get some information out of it; the probability will never be exactly 1/n.

> The worst case is then, that your adversary holds all Zerocoins just before you mint your Zerocoin. And a attacker with large resources can continue to mint Zerocoins until he runs out of funds, simulating a working anonymising ecosystem.

Given that Bitcoin's security already assumes that an attacker controls no more than 49% of the network, it seem reasonable to me to make a similar assumption for ZeroCoin. But that is a good point: Zerocoin's anonymity depends on having enough users that you can safely "hide in the crowd", and that's not necessarily something that's easy to verify from within the network (though as you point out, it can work if you have a bound on your attacker's potential funds).
We see people selling at $100 and $200; would we expect people to not sell at $10,000?
I like to live by the motto:

You never know if someone is willing to pay until you ask them to open their checkbook.

The same theory can be applied to most investors. (pre-handshake protocol at least)
Sorry, it could have been clearer. When we say "render" we mean actually output HTML. We do load all the data onto the client.
> I think there should be a third option in the form of a decentralized social protocol.

http://mobisocial.stanford.edu/
I'm sorry, but that guy is wrong when he sates that marriage is a contract, it is an alliance.
It's not "opt out once," it's opt out and monitor that your decision isn't "forgotten" at any point in the future in which case you need to opt out again. So, yeah, "continuous hidden opt out" is annoying.
Using Perl to crowdfund Perl, I love it. Crowdtilt is built with Perl, as is stated on their site's footer, "Powered by Perl Dancer" - https://www.crowdtilt.com/campaigns/specify-module-version-r...
Are you kidding?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/13/genetically-modifie...

http://www.pressherald.com/news/Appeal-set-January-organic-f...

The latter is just evil. Suing farmers cause crops were contaminated through unwanted pollination by neighboring farms [using Monsanto's genetically altered seeds and chemicals]. Finally the farmers are banning together and counter-suing.

And this are just 2 examples. Do further searching and you'll find many more cases going back decades.
Tab is only used by guitar players.
This is a great example of an internally sold and shared vision. I think that can be a powerful thing. I wish more places I've worked had this strong a vision of what they're aspiring towards down the line.
"Job portal"

A what?
Please try to differentiate between dropping or bumping the device and shaking the device. Google's iOS maps app uses this interface for feedback, and isn't very smart.
I thought that at first too, but then I thought maybe most of the support is inside, not visible.
I totally agree with that! There are tons of companies that "win the lottery", and build a product with no validation and succeed. It is obviously not the "right" way to do it, but sometimes it does work.
Please elaborate. Backloaded? In terms of what?
So you counterfeit the Zero Coin and trade them for Bit Coins and the system breaks.

I am not buying that they are impossible to forge. Especially if they are computationally easy to create.
I'd say 90% of us are out of there by 5:30.
I guess I was a little confused about the title of your work, Pranav, as opposed to the title of the article about your work. I still think the the author of the news article should hang his head in shame. (Actually, think that your title has a rather nice ring to it)
Apart from some basic functions like replication (including a message in facebook posts/messages, copying to accessible network drives and usbs), avoiding VMs, and setting itself to run on startup, it looks like most of the work is handed off to 2 payloads embedded in the compiled autoit file. There are also 2 other binaries mentioned (net2 and net4) but I'm not sure what the purpose is right now.

Payload 1: binary image that is in the shell() function.

Payload 2: between "\\carbons\\" and "//J_Y//" in original exe. It is encrypted with RC2, the password is in an INI which should be elsewhere in the exe - the script refers to @ScriptFullPath->"crypted"->"key" where crypted is the INI section name and key is the key name.

Both payloads are converted to DLL format in-memory, then Payload 1 is executed in the context of another window using CallWindowProcW, passing a pointer to Payload 2 to it.

Decompiled version of Payload 1 (embedded hex): http://pastebin.com/kxT9NskV

There is an area of null bytes at 0x1c...0x53. I deleted 1 byte, 0x00, from it so that the beginning 'call 0x54' lines up with an instruction. Not sure if that is correct.

If anyone gets a chance I'd appreciate a copy of the original AutoIt binary package (email in profile.)
Poll: What is your age? 
It would be interesting to know which age group(s) HN readers consist mostly of. Please be honest and click one answer only!
under 10
16 to 20
21 to 25
26 to 30
31 to 35
36 to 40
41 to 45
46 to 50
51 to 55
56 to 60
61 to 65
66 to 70
71 to 75
76 to 80
81 to 85
86 to 90
over 90
I keep hearing about the supposed cheapassery of Silicon Valley, but I simply do not see it.

Speaking for myself, I've been able to achieve ~20% raises every single year since I left college by leveraging the explosion in tech salaries. I do not believe I am grossly exceptional by any means. I am out-earning most finance-industry coders (though obviously not bankers).

I just don't see it. When it comes to writing code, the startup scene here in NYC (and in SF, and in SV) are competitive with finance. Short of being a quant your comp packages don't get better than this - at least not if your job description is software engineering.

In fact, I've witnessed the opposite of what you describe. In the engineers I've met there is no shortage of GS/JP Morgan refugees - people sick and tired of the ridiculous hours and being treated like cattle, and jumped ship into our side of tech. I've yet to meet anyone who's bailed from Google/Facebook/et al into GS, but I've met plenty going the other way.

I've met many engineers imported from outside of the US, especially by the likes of Facebook, Google, Amazon, et al. I've never met one that was cheap - every single one earned comfortably into the mid-$100Ks and were worth every penny. In fact, the majority of H-1B holders I've met don't come from third-world countries - they came from developed nations, and they didn't come cheap.

But don't let me get in the way of a convenient narrative, where the only purpose of immigration is the exploitation and oppression of hard-working Americans by evil corporations.