skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Three broad points.

First, the supply side: if you read this article through, you saw the demand curve inflections at the classful-classless change and at the NAT change. Downthread someone already mentioned carrier-NAT, which is one more potential inflection. But there are others; the biggest could be a liquid market for routable blocks. There are large companies pointlessly squatting on huge allocations; some of them assign routable IP addresses for every desktop in their network, despite (sanely) firewalling them off entirely from the Internet. A market for IP addresses would make that waste expensive and return potentially large numbers of addresses back to general use.

Second, the demand side: It will no doubt enrage HN nerds to hear this, but most Internet users do not need a first-class address. In fact, it's possible that most Internet users are poorly-served by first-class addresses! They never take advantage of them, but holding them exposes them to attacks. Because mass-market application developers in 201x have to assume large portions of their users don't have direct Internet connectivity, technology seems to be trending away from things that require it, and towards tunneling, HTTP-driven solutions, and third-party rendezvous.

Finally: Who says IPv6 needs to be the future? Bernstein's summary[1] of the problems with transitioning is getting old, but the points in it seem valid. If we're going to forklift a whole new collection of libraries and programs onto everyone's computer, why don't we just deprecate the whole IP layer and build something better. I don't think I see the reason why IP can't just be to 2020 what Ethernet was to 1990: a common connectivity layer we use to build better, more interesting network layers on top of.

The core functionality of the IP protocol has served beautifully over the last 20 years, but the frills and features have not. IP multicast is a failure. IPSEC is a failure. QOS is still a tool limited to network engineers. We barely have anycast.

These are all features that would be valuable if they work, but that don't work because the end to end argument militates against them --- their service models evolve too fast for the infrastructure to keep up, and they're pulled in different directions by different users anyways.

We can get new features and unbounded direct connectivity with overlay networks. We have only the most basic level of experience with overlays --- BitTorrent, Skype --- but the experience we've had seems to indicate that if you have a problem users care about, overlays tend to solve them nicely. We should start generalizing our experience with successful P2P systems like Skype and pull in some of the academic work (like the MIT PDOS RON project) and come up with a general-purpose connectivity layer that treats IPv4 like IPv4 treats Ethernet.

Special bonus to that strategy: Verizon and AT&T don't really get a say in how those overlays work, and nobody needs to wait for a standards committee to agree on whether things are going to be big endian or use ASN.1 or XML.

[1] http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html
Because we'd be talking about something closer to ipv4+1, something that allowed core equipment to not have to process packets in a different way and maintain completely separate routing tables for granularity of traffic that only matters at the edge.
Try Charis SIL[0].

[0]: http://scripts.sil.org/charissilfont
Ask HN: What IRC channels does everyone find interesting?
This is strange to me. It was just 3 sentences, and you were the one who asked them for a response.
> Remember, if you allow for identifying servers by ip:port instead of just IP, you have roughly 65536 times as many "addresses" available. That's enough to last pretty much forever.

I see you're using historical precedent:

640k of RAM ought to be enough

32-bit memory addresses will always be large enough

2 digits is enough to encode a year since it will be the 20th century forever

All the characters anyone would want to use fit within 8 bits
I'm three months into my half of our evenly-split year of parental leave. If you have the legal ability to do this, do it.

Most cough civilized cough countries allow both parents to take some form of leave - here in Canada it's 12 months to be divvied up, with only 4ish of which are required to go to the birth parent. The EI system pays you EI benefits (half your regular wage or $25k/yr, whichever is less), and your employer's only responsibility is to keep your space available for when you get back.

Let me tell you, staying home with my kids and doing the stay-at-home dad thing has been Goddamned magical. I'm constantly exhausted and exasperated by my three little juggernauts, but I'm loving it.

And yeah, I'm getting all those instincts out the yin-yang. I can perfectly understand my two-year-old's incoherent babble, I can distinguish a cry at a hundred paces, I've got the lightning parental reflexes, etc.

Do it.
Equally? How so?
As important as DNS is for the Web, the Internet doesn't currently (and shouldn't) need DNS (or a DNS-like coordinator) any more than cupcakes need candles. If I know your telephone number, I shouldn't have to dial the operator and ask for their help (and implicit permission), I should be able to help myself and dial direct. We are re-imposing an unnecessary middle layer that has all sorts of social equality/neutrality implications. (People with global addresses have more power than those who don't.)

That's the point of direct addressing: removing ambiguity and allowing direct connections.

Edit: The cost of patching IPv4 is just another reason to move deliberately to IPv6 (or something that allows direct addressing again, but for the sake of argument, IPv6 is the leading candidate).

Edit: Deleted confused nonsense about NAT-PMP.
Four sentences constitutes a "novel" now? What is going on in the world that people dont have the time, or worse seem not to care, to communicate in a normal way?
I think that knowing your audience goes a long way, particularly when using "You're doing it wrong" in the title.

The audience of this article was a lot of people that knew of the problem, and knew of research into cache-oblivouis algorithms. This is a long ways from not citing somebody, it's preaching to somebody as if they are ignorant when they're a fair ways ahead of you. Quite annoying when encountered.
if you want a nicely preconfigured openbox http://crunchbanglinux.org/ (debian)
Products that have low cognitive overhead:

- Original iPod

- Fender Stratocaster

- Roland TB-303

- Casio F91W

- Unix (Ok, it's not a simple product, but "everything is a file" goes a long way.)
Point. I've been dithering on purchases of a DNLA client for my iPod because quite frankly everything I've demo'd and tried has sucked. Crashy, buggy, poor format support, etc. Now, maybe these problems are also coming from my servers, but the programs are terrible at explaining what I'm doing wrong.
Hehe. Yep. That was pretty much how it went.
Oh. This is why we suddenly got a huge flood of mail on a Sunday night. Well, hello again.

A reminder: $20 to Watsi for each person who finishes all six sets.
Yep. My premise for the project was that there are lots of these kinds of apps on the store (about 6 or 7) but I wanted to build one with no ads and a 'juicier' UI.
The rise and fall of AMD: How an underdog stuck it to Intel
I have to say hats off to WindowMaker. It's more resource-heavy than OpenBox or FluxBox, but I love dockapps.

Can't live without them anymore. They're live tiles way before Microsoft even thought of them.

Also, it's more functional than OpenBox by a mile, as well.
I actually did it at the end.

Just went back through the Git history, found milestones and checked out those commits. Ran each commit in the sim and took a video. First time I have done that and pretty happy with how it turned out :).
Interesting to hear the other side of this. I'm a PhD student in Computer Science right now, and a lot of the appeal of the job is the ability to get paid for working on projects that interest me. That said, I have a nice government fellowship for my PhD and a generous funding package from my university - if I was missing one or both, things would be harder.
You were offered evidence; you are not offering counter-evidence.
That would be a problem between you and...you.

People are more important than "your time", and a failure to realize that is a dehumanization of the other party. The latter response demonstrates emotional sensitivity towards the other person in the conversation. Among most people, that is important. It makes the other party feel good. It reinforces that you do care about the other party enough to ensure that they are not potentially affronted by terse communication. This is why normal people, lacking in the self-absorption your post exudes, do this sort of thing.

And in any case it doesn't take more than a few seconds to write or read; when the hell did four sentences become a "bloody novel"?
VC Firms Don't Back You, VC Partners Do
If you can point me to a university curricula (and, especially, a syllabus) that has hugely better coverage of practical attacks on cryptographic implementations, I'd be interested in seeing it.

Nobody is going to come out of these challenges qualified to pick SHA-4 or AES-ng, or for that matter, prepared to design a new cipher or even a novel crypto construction. That's not the point of the challenges.

But we're covering what I think might be an odd corner of cryptography. Our approach to crypto is from a software security perspective. In a similar sense as 2013 software security researcher might be able to tell you a great deal about how Javascript objects are allocated a browser but not have any idea about best practices for organizing actual working Javascript code, we're covering an idiosyncratic set of implementation details but leaving all the theory out --- not least because we don't have the theory background.
There is a mechanism called showdead that allows you to see hellbanned comments. It's in your profile.
Nah, it's South Brisbane. They knocked down the old exchange for the hospital extension, Telstra installed fibre, supposedly eventually it will be rolled into the official NBN network, but until then, we get rates way worse than ADSL and I'm forced to pay $30/mth for a "landline" which I never use... still, it's worth it for the latency.
You may be right. At that time we will end up introducing or requiring some kind of horrible port multiplexing scheme, like maybe port knocking (using a pattern advertised in DNS) or maybe even... HTTP/1.1's Host: header :)

Separately, I think addresses are slightly different than those other measurements. I'd think the number of needed public server ip:port addresses is roughly on the same order of magnitude as the number of humans, or perhaps less. By that measurement, 4 billion is almost enough, but clearly not enough.

I wouldn't want to have to bet on that, but I don't have to. There's always another layer of indirection possible. And that layer of indirection will always be infinitely easier to deploy than a replacement to IPv4.
Video: How Chevron Richmond Fire Happened
What's an example of sophisticated class of attacks we have poor coverage on? (If you like, mail me directly; we're not publishing exactly what the challenges are).

I'd appreciate leads on places we should expand our coverage. Sean is already working on set 7, and we're pulling attacks out of the recent literature to do that.

Worth mentioning: we're not cryptographers.
And in reply MVCE (Many Verbose Comments Expected).
Mattel Releasing 'Back to the Future' Hover Board
Potential for elitization of the Singularity
2012 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
Wow, all of the fathers are coming out of the woodwork to justify their decisions. I, for one, agree with him. Some levels of dedication aren't possible when your attention is diverted to offspring constantly.
The value prop for App.net (in my opinion) relates to User Privacy. This all ties back to the "You are the Product" model of existing Social Networks that leverage the Advertising Industry as their core (or secondary) revenue model. The implication here is that the User's Privacy is being subverted during the process of collecting and storing User Related information/data for 3rd party entities, which are usually Advertising related. This information is then commonly used to provide more personal or relevant Ad's, which in theory should increase ROI / Conversion. Not everyone will agree with the implication stated above, as a Privacy Policy does explain this process, and thus it is assumed that the User is Aware of this (and therefore must agree with it to be using the Service).

With this said, the Value Prop for App.net is to build your App on a Platform that leverages a Business Model that does not relate to User Privacy in any way. In theory, this should allow you to build your App in an Ecosystem that provides more respect to User Privacy. Furthermore, the User Experience should be better because there are no Ad's interrupting the consumption of content and/or taking up screen real estate.

But here's the Kicker; Even though I do see this as a positive thing, and I believe I do understand the value prop, I still don't see it as a viable alternative to App Development in a world where the Freemium Distribution Model has skewed the User's Perception of "worth". So while the App.net Model does provide some cool and interesting alternatives relating to User Privacy and User Experience, it also (on the flip side) makes it impossible to release a "Free" version of your App, simply because Users must pay to use the Platform it's built on. And for me this is a big deal, because most of the feedback I get during customer surveys and validation indicates that they want a 'Try before you Buy' type of Model. Most Users simply won't pay for something when there are free alternatives available. The end result being, if you Develop on App.net, you are Developing specifically for App.net, as your ability to acquire new organic users outside of the App.net ecosystem is greatly compromised.

Even with this said, I commend Dalton Caldwell for taking a stand and building something new that provides alternatives to other Platforms. If I ever find myself developing a Paid App targeted towards a curated User-base of Users that don't mind paying for stuff, then I'll definitely be looking at App.net
I think you may be misunderstanding NAT-PMP. Done correctly, that protocol can open a port through multiple layers of NAT without having to know how many layers there are. And then you'll have a well-defined public ip:port that other people can connect to you on. (You could, for example, advertise that ip:port in dynamic DNS or a bittorrent peer discovery protocol, just like you do today for dynamically-assigned IP addresses.)

There's no doubt that direct addressing is simpler and more appealing. Yes. But it requires worldwide 100% deployment of a replacement to IPv4, which is not simple at all.
Breaking news isn't broken
What you've described is not a "solution" at all - it's just a series of hacks. I'm not a purist and I accept the need for some hacks (e.g I recognize some people will still want to use NAT with IPv6) but the future you're describing, where end users won't have routable addresses, and where it will be difficult/costly to get IP addresses for new services, is totally unacceptable. Transitioning to IPv6 is well within what humans are capable of, and frankly I find comments like yours extremely regrettable because this sort of sentiment is partly why we can't have nice things.

You're also underestimating the difficulty of deploying some of your proposed "solutions." DNS SRV has seen no adoption outside of a few services like SIP and XMPP. Getting web browsers, and every other last client out there that speaks HTTP, to support SRV won't be easy. Just look at the glacial pace other web standards move at.

And factoring in the port number doesn't give you 65536 times as many "addresses." Things like routing and ARP happen at the address level. Under your "solution" you wouldn't be able to migrate/fail over services just by moving their IP addresses between hosts. DNS-based solutions have never worked well for this.
If you write something down on acid free paper today and store it away from sunlight, bugs and high humidity, there is a very good chance someone will still be able to read it 500 years from now. If you store something in Evernote, who knows? I have letters my dad wrote in Wordstar and stored on an 8" floppy 35 years ago. If I or my kids wanted to read those letters now... I wouldn't even know where to start.
This is surprisingly fun and relaxing
Fair criticism, I was too vague. I'd love to just describe the details as is my typical MO, but I am not convinced yet that is wise.

It means sharing ideas and opinions in the most efficient and effective way possible. So, sharing your opinions, seeing others opinions, and interacting in a way which hopefully will be constructive to everyone as they determine their own version of what they think and believe. My goal is to optimize this process so there is less wasted time and cognitive energy fighting ignorance and intentional misinformation, with the result being a more well-informed public, and all of the secondary effects that brings. We have already seen this effect in action (arab spring and twitter, for example), and I want to do whatever I can to promote it further.

There are a few fundamental tweaks I would make to current methods, which will allow me to provide an interface with distinct advantages which I believe far outweigh the capability given up.

Hopefully that is at least slightly more clear.
Moving to America: Why I left Sydney for San Francisco
I don't think overpopulation should ever be a factor in determining if you want to have a child or not. A layperson has no responsibility nor influence in that matter - that's something for policymakers and implementers to handle. You should decide on a child based on your situation and desires.

Also, more people isn't always a bad thing, even in an overpopulated world. If a person is a net gain for society, then it would be a loss not to have him born. If you're healthy and are willing and capable of raising a child in nurturing family, please do so. A well raised person can offset his impact on the world and contribute even more than they take.
According to Cambridge Police, neither brother had a gun permit:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/04/21/ma...

Massachusetts does in fact have an assault weapon ban in place (similar to the 1994 Federal AWB), although you can get modified/MA-compliant versions of many "assault weapons" such as the AR-15/AK that are legal, however you are limited to a 10 round magazine. They would have needed a Class-A LTC to even contemplate owning such a weapon -- this involves fingerprints, a full background check, references and a "letter of purpose" along with permission from your local police chief to get.

However, the younger brother was too young to get a permit, the older brother was in fact not a US citizen and was here on a green card and thus is ineligible for a gun permit. Having said that, even if he was a US citizen his previous arrest for domestic assault would've rendered him ineligible for/and or revoked an existing LTC-A had he had one.

I have not seen anything yet reported as to what kind of long gun(s) they had or where they got them. The FBI warned agents responding to Watertown on Thursday night that they had "fully automatic AK47s" [along with grenades/dynamite and IEDs]. It is my understanding that they only recovered two handguns at the scene of the firefight in Watertown and one handgun and a long gun were found on the boat after the final surrender [aside from the IEDs scattered over Watertown].

It is interesting that despite the incredible firepower the brothers had access to (handguns, long gun(s), multiple IEDs), that when there's someone shooting back, the brothers plans were pretty much shut down and the loss of life/injury was very minimal considering the circumstances.
Popehat is a group blog, FYI. Members don't get veto powers over other people's blogs, and often you can find other members of the group disagreeing in comments.
Open Sans is not a Helvetica replacement / poor man's Helvetica just because it is sans-serif. It belongs along side other beautiful sans faces like Avenir, Frutiger, Myriad, and others that have their own styles and worthiness in design.

Helvetica is indeed cool (the Neue family cooler, IMO) and has been since the 50s, and _Helvetica_ is also cool. Thinking of Helvetica as the only worthwhile sans-serif typeface is less cool :)
The next comment was also very "unpolite": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5399305 Perhaps it triggered the hellbanning.
I have mixed feelings about the way 'int' works in Go.

I share your annoyance to some degree and think it gets even worse when you mix CGO into the equation since people writing CGO will often leave C ints as Go ints when porting structs and function signatures, which is a terrible idea (because on a 64-bit system with a 64-bit C/C++ compiler and a 64-bit Go compiler, int will be 32-bit in C but 64-bit in Go).

OTOH, having int be variable-sized allows you to easily have maps or other int-indexed structures that naturally grow in capacity with the current architecture and I'm glad they didn't just peg everything to 64-bit as a 'modern' shortcut because I do a lot of Go programming that targets 32-bit ARM CPUs and the performance would be shit if the Go runtime just assumed a 64-bit baseline.

In any case, well written Go code will generally use the specific int type that makes sense for the data at hand, int16, int32, int64, etc, and not simply int. A programmer declaring a lot of un-qualified 'int' variables (for things other than loop indexes and such) in his or her Go code is (in most cases) doing Go wrong.

"It's like somebody from the 70s tried to come up with a better C than K&R."

That's basically what Go was meant to be and I suspect the Go team would consider your description of Go to be more flattering than you perhaps meant it to be.
I just append ☎ to my signature.

(I know it's a rotary phone. But it existed pre-emoji so renders most anywhere, where U+1F4F1 [📱] doesn't.)
You are right. Whether buyers, sellers, or eBay pay the tax is a function of the price sensitivity (elasticity) of the varying group. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_incidence
This is a little different from the standard model because eBay is a third party.
Have you tried running your dock stuff on those other WMs? You might be surprised.
Mileage varies. I was reasonably tuned to a lot of this stuff, and I was working 60-80 hour weeks. Part of it is just feeling that it is your responsibility to deal with this stuff.

My wife was definitely _more_ aware, but I wasn't far behind. She could leave for a weekend and it wasn't a problem, I needed a rundown on where stuff was and schedule but I handled the kids just fine.

Yes, I did sleep through more of their crying. But the time my daughter woke screaming from some nightmare, I was up the staircase before I woke up. Seriously, my first conscious memory was my foot pushing up a stair. My wife appeared three minutes later asking if the baby had cried. When the daughter wandered into the woods and lost herself I was looking for her five minutes before any one else noticed she was gone. Et cetera.

Which isn't to knock what you are doing, just to say it isn't the only way.
How hard is it to implement your idea? I don't know the details of your situation, but if you can build it yourself, and you are confident in its ability to succeed, you can move somewhere with a cheap cost of living and just do it all yourself. It only costs like 15k to live frugally for a year in some parts of the country.
Training Like Tesla: Week One Review
I meant paternal instinct, I wrote the comment whilst on the train and now can't edit it. But definitely not saying that crying is purely a mother thing.