skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What on earth did he expect would happen, and why on earth would anybody be outraged or otherwise incensed by this?

Does anyone go to prison with the expectation that they maintain their right to tweet?
Ask HN: What are some books that changed how you think?
I'm looking for some interesting books to read to give me some perspective. What books have you read that changed the way you think about career/life in general.
You'll never get it because nobody wants users like you.
#startups on freenode is much more active.
You can also checkout the screencast for mist.io on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZbpz1_sNQ8
The First Book in History You Can Only Buy in Bitcoin
What is abusive? With 1 keyword on the page you will not rank. You at least need it in the body, text, url and h1. Is this abusive?

Google tells you to design for the user. This assumes that Google is just as clever as people - what they love to tell you - but which it isn't. That's the main reason people put text blurbs everywhere, create landing pages, put synonyms and different keywords on their pages, because Google is not clever enough.

And your competition just ranks. If you design your pages for users you don't rank from my experience - e.g. people do not care about URLs, do not care about H1 tags on ecommerce pages, don't care about bold, don't care about explanations on ecommerce sites what a t-shirt is or what trousers are . But Google does.

Most of the current high ranking pages, SCREAM "I've been designed for Google!" right into your face.

see exhibit A: http://www.zalando.de/damenschuhe-pumps/

The text on the page to the bottom and to the left clearly isn't for users.

If you have examples of your SEO work where you rank for keywords and have designed your pages for users and not designed the pages for Google I'd be very interested to learn from you - as would /r/seo.
Portfolios/Certs for self-paced learning
What exactly do Zach Braff's finances have to do with how he funds a movie? This makes no sense. It argues either that Braff's fans would be somehow better off if he didn't make the new movie at all, or that Braff is somehow obligated work on projects for his fans.

The whole Braff kerfluffle seems so aggressively cut- off- nose- to- spite- face stupid; that somehow it's a bad thing when mainstream artists use crowdsourcing platforms as a substitute for the studio system, when in fact that's exactly what we need to have happen to disentangle content from holding companies and studios.
I know this a captain obvious:

Some of this smash-n-grab shovel-app development would be negated if the Apple App Store simply offered more meaningful app discoveries.

Also thanks to author for posting stats like this.
That makes sense, if virtually every update didn't promote the likes of Amazon, eBay, and Google properties. Small businesses are toast and getting toaster by the update
As for tweeting from prison, I have no idea what he was thinking.

Is it illegal to do so? What forms of communication are and are not legal when incarcerated?

(Of course, he certainly could have tweeted via an illegal manner. But it's not clear to me on the face of it whether tweeting while convicted is a crime.)
This is Amazon playing Federal Reserve. Matt Yglesias has a great explanation of this from February: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2013/02/...
I wasn't really complaining about that but more commenting on the range of what people feel shocking. The photo in this case was not in my view problematic.

Death, pain and suffering happen all the time and while it shouldn't be fetishised it also doesn't seem a great idea to hide or deny it either.
It doesn't need reviving. It's not dead. Tons of people use irc. Try freenode, it's alive and kicking.
Currently have over 90,000 emails (~9 GB worth) archived in my GMail account. Any idea how long it would take to transfer it all to my desktop via IMAP?
Google's value will always be search > PPC. Clustering reduces the diversity of the internet in general and this is a much larger negative for Google imo.
Laziness; we already had it installed.

That's what a lot of other people are using.

It's not that we don't like Python3; their ASTs are considerably simpler (e.g. no print statement), they have importlib, and a bunch of other nice things. It's just that the world we interact with mostly uses Python2, so we just follow along.
> If someone is claiming that a girl that likes the dress on the left couldn't possibly like the dress on the right, I think they're the ones with a serious holdup of appearance over substance.

This makes me wonder if you've watched the movie at all. It has nothing to do with arbitrary beliefs of people on the internet and everything to do with Merida in the movie fighting against wearing a similar dress.

In fact said dress was part of my second favorite scene in the movie, and one of the first available clips before the movie's release: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taIFiRD18jM
Jekyll Turns 1.0
As a small post-mortem, one interesting thing we learned while building this library: The reason Apple never included a read/write lock.

They're hard to get right (probably not a problem for Apple), and their overhead usually counterbalances any potential performance gains (possibly a problem for the unwary developer).

We've got some optimization work to do :-)
The problem here in Saudi is indifference. People take it as granted: "Of course its being intercepted" or "they know everything, don't even try." Its a decapitating indifference to the extent that people around me are mystified why I have a VPN connection 24/7 on my desktop and mobile phone; why do I even bother? Even many techies around me think I am naive to be taking all these precautions. Resistance is futile.

PS: Mobily is my carrier. Discomforting. Maybe resistance is futile after all. Sigh.
That's a very good point. We haven't had the problem of them taking our quotes to our competitors very often. We've had several people who took our quotes to our competitors, they undercut the quote, but then they ended up choosing us anyway even at the higher price, almost always because we "inspire more confidence than anyone else" in our ability to execute.

That being said, it usually only takes us another couple hours to quote a project once we've gotten to that stage, and we have started billing for it when it seems like it will take longer, or if they want more detail or revisions.
I shouldn't have said "You don't know how IP works", because that's rude and it's beside the point. I'm more talking about international law in general. The law that states that the US cannot invade Iraq and that Syria cannot possess chemical weapons.

It's nighttime in China right now, but yesterday afternoon and tomorrow morning there are people working on duplicating every bit of protected American IP that they think is worth it.

Betting future economic security on other countries following the letter of the law against their own interest.. I just wouldn't call it wise. I mean, the UN's been telling the Israelis and the rest of the middle east that shooting at each other is against the law for decades now.
Too bad it's AGPL. I understand the want to make money while open sourcing at the same time, but I fear this license will scare people. Are the majority of WebFWD sponsored open-source projects choosing this license?
Supreme Court won’t let farmer dodge Monsanto’s patented seeds
From the README:

>Please contact me if this license doesn't work for you.

I see no reason why Moxie should give Facebook and Instagram this valuable feature for free. When did open-source hackers become the unpaid laborers for silicon valley?

If they want it, they can either release the source code for their applications and liberate their users, or they can pay (hopefully) through the nose for it. Maybe that'll buy a few more months of TextSecure development, or whatever other cool things Moxie is doing now.
Yes probably I am, because we are talking millions of sites and statisticly your going to get anomolies. Then again if your business model is based primarily on your SERPs then you have a bad business model and should be doing everything you can to mitigate that risk.

It's one of the risks you take which should of been identified if your a competent business owner that wants to survive.
The answer is to change what they're selling. You can currently get whatever it is, say a 16Mbps connection, for $50/month. Stop selling that entirely. Discontinue it; put the existing triple play customers on the new triple play (which so happens to have the same price, just with more allocated to the connection itself), stop offering that tier to existing internet-only customers as soon as their contracts expire. Your new alternative is a) a very slow connection (not fast enough for Netflix/Hulu/whatever) for $29/month, b) a 100Mbps+ connection for $99/month, or c) a "triple play" 100Mbps+ connection + basic cable + phone for $110/month, and whatever premium channels you want on top of that for exactly what the channel itself charges for its content. Or you can get phone from Skype and TV from Hulu and Verizon couldn't care less, because they're not in the content business, they're in the wire business -- they should want you to stop subscribing to their over the top offerings and switch to third party services, because that's not where the money is.

Compare the revenues or market cap of Skype or Hulu to that of Verizon FiOS, and then realize that both Skype and Hulu have more customers than FiOS, and ask yourself which business you'd rather be in. Infrastructure operators selling over the top services is just an invitation for them to interfere with competitors -- let the over the top market be competitive (and therefore have very small margins) and take the margins from the infrastructure where you can hold on to them. Look up "one monopoly rent" theory. If they're going to have a monopoly and collect monopoly rents, just let them do it in the monopoly market and not have to lose the benefits of competition in the over the top market merely in order to claim the same overall margins spread out over more products. It actually seems to be Pareto optimal -- who is going to lose out here? Maybe the cord cutters, but they're doing something which is unsustainable at scale unless what I'm proposing ends up happening. So where's the drawback?
There will always be something to buy (Yelp: http://www.buyyelpreview.com/ YouTube: http://www.ytview.com/, via a quick Google search). Overall it links are a very successful metric (the pagerank algorithm changed the search game), but it's more about the sophistication of the engine to detect and demote abuses.
Although many people hate to see Monsanto win, it seems clear that this case was well considered, and that the license was violated here. No one should be surprised that Monsanto won this one.

However, the passage of the Farmer Assurance Provision aka. "The Monsanto Protection Act" is a much more horrific legislative end-run around the will of the people.
and this is a much larger negative for Google imo.

Eventually. Doesn't mean that Google isn't doing it believing they're controlling the negative effects or doing it "just a bit" this time and a bit more that quarter.

Diversity on Google is largely gone on transactional search, big brands rule both the ads and organic search. This is responsible, IMO, for Google at almost $900/share but will eventually ruin Google. They got too greedy and people will eventually bypass them and go directly to the brands Google promoted for short term cash.
She was interested in traditionally masculine activities, such as shooting and fighting.
TeamCity User Guide Courseware
Sure, that's a good way to put it, and I'm obviously aware of this, but it's not the point I'm making. :)
I beg to differ. My Dropbox subscription costs as much as 2 Starbucks coffees and gives me unlimited version and deletion history, plus Dropbox respects me enough to provide me with a Linux client.

Yes, I could move easily, but by supporting the company with monopolistic behavior, I may not have any options left.
I'm sitting on a free 25 GB from Microsoft's initial skydrive offering. Google probably won't increase it until there is some sort of challenger out there. As it stands, they are offering more space than all their competitors, so its doubtful an extra 5GB would do much to attract new users, or even differentiate them much.
You Have an Idea for a Game - And Here's Why Nobody Cares
Well of course it is the problem. The kernel does lots of other stuff.

If you were to ask someone to build a vehicle that can go really fast you might end up with a car. But ideally you'd really want a rocket.

I'm sure that there are systems out there that serve web pages with only bare metal. Where the "kernel" exists only as an architectural stub. Why shouldn't the NIC serve web pages directly?
What are "Google+ Photos"? Are these equivalent to when I make an album on Facebook? If so, I'm not a fan.

I use SkyDrive and have it so pictures I take with my WP are auto-uploaded. As such, my SkyDrive is filled with tonnssss of pictures (I take a good amount of photos on my phone). But the pictures that get auto-uploaded to SkyDrive are a different "type" (at the very least, simply unfiltered) than those which I would upload to a Facebook album/G+ Photos.

I would be annoyed as a Google service user if I had to choose between allocating room for "photos uploaded to drive" and "Google+ photos". They serve different purposes, and a heavy user of both services will have many photos on both.
Can't farmers still use non-Monsanto seeds like they could 100 years ago? My grandpa's small family farm has been doing just fine without for decades, after all.

I get that we're all supposed to hate Monsanto because they're a corporation (something which they apparently don't have in common with the YC-backed companies), but what's the incentive to develop "superior" seeds if the first farmer who buys them can farm them and resell them at a lower cost until the end of time?

Maybe we need a different type of IP protection for this kind of thing: If you're able to independently reproduce this patented gene on your own then by all means utilize it, otherwise buy from us. But I find it hard to find the farmer wholly sympathetic on this whole thing.

And after all, this decision makes its harder to introduce those supposedly-evil GMOs in our American farms, so this should really be considered a victory, amirite?
9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out [video]
Moving to Vermont - perfect downtown Burlington home
Why You Should Mentor at Ladies Learning Code
Your post has nothing to do with the previous message or point, you're just switching arguments. Most e-commerce businesses cannot scale /downscale every 50% + or - organic search traffic changes.
Something that has bothered me for a long time about this attitude:

People don't realize that some girls, in fact lots of girls, in fact I would say most of the girls I know like stereotypical "girly" things. They would like to have a dress that is sparkly like the one in the photo.

The idea that who they are is somehow shameful is disgusting, and it's disgusting to me that the third-wave feminists, or whatever the group is that is pushing this rhetoric, seems to get a free pass on it.

I have five sisters. Do you know what most of them love? Baking, taking care of my nieces, dressing in sparkly clothes, the color pink, etc. etc.

One of my sisters recently took up woodworking. She went to the store, she bought a table saw, and now she makes things for one of her kids.

Know what she still loves? Know which version of this princess she would prefer?

Should she be ashamed of herself for that? Is she not a real woman, is she weak? Is she submitting to the evil male patriarchy every time she puts on a pink t-shirt or does something sterotypically girly?

Because THAT is what people like this are making them feel like. Like they're failures as women because of the things that they like.

--

And as long as we're talking about gender roles, let's reverse it.

I like being manly. I like wearing flannel, I like chopping wood, I like welding, I like using a band saw, I like having a beard, I like having a big knife strapped to my belt when I'm camping, and I like building things out of wood.

Can you imagine if there was a large group of people labeling themselves as progressive intellectuals who went out of their way to decry this "manly" behavior as somehow shameful? Every time I fire up a welder, I'm failing the rest of my gender for it. Every time I light a camp fire, I'm pushing my gender back.

I should get rid of my stereotypically mannish flannel, and get something more progressive. A beard? What, so that people can look at me as some sort of manly object? Shave it off! Don't let them hold you down!

The most jarring thing about this entire subset of discussions is that it seems to happen in communities that otherwise consider themselves intellectual.

Please help me understand why. Why is okay to tell my sisters that they should all be ashamed of themselves?
According the the article, it appears that he tweeted by using the (legal to access) system for sending e-mails, and someone else tweets them for him. Unless he has a restriction on using computers / the internet as part of his sentence, I have a hard time imagining how that is illegal.
While it's not her fault that Disney decided to make stupid changes, she did give them those rights when she signed her contract with them. That's the small part I'm talking about.
Google punishes people that buy links, just like our government punishes people that buy votes. That sets up an incentive to not do it. I would say, this problem is not in the "can't fix" category.

Just like in real politics, Google must tread carefully. You can't arrest the president because someone bought votes on his behalf, just like Google can't nuke a site because it has purchased links.
FTC Complaints Allege Yelp Favors Negative Reviews Until Advertising Purchased
That Swiss 2004 song sure is comical. I'd think a song that bad would gain a cult following and actually get some points.
So far it's only Weev (and his lawyer) saying that tweeting is the reason for being put in solitary.

Like the article says,

> According to the National Institute of Justice, "administrative segregation" is a synonym for solitary, and is reserved:

> for violent or disruptive behavior. AS typically involves single-cell confinement for 23 hours daily; inmates are allowed one hour out of the cell for exercise and showers.

That disruptive sticks out. It fits Weev pretty well.

I wouldn't be surprised if he's alone to protect himself.
Why do people eat themselves into morbid obesity? Why did soviets reverse rivers? Why are American prosecutors trying to jail kids for sexting?

Is eating not obviously beneficial? Is there something wrong with large-scale engineering? Shouldn't we fight child pornography?

Drives, rules, and organisations outlive and outgrow their usefulness all the time. Why would surveillance be an exception?
I've had no issues with my Nexus 4.
> First of all, what a disorganized article. Who the hell edited this?

I have to agree. It didn't really turn out as well as I wanted. The talk is really good, but I could never make this read smoothly.

Fortunately I think the content is excellent and that will hopefully save the day.

My take is along the lines of the earlier embedded systems comment. This is the sort of thing you would have done in a real-time OS snagging packets directly in an ISR and queuing them to a task for later processing. The processor and memory suggestions are just common practice in that arena.

But that kind of sucks for numerous reasons. It's great having a widely supported OS that you can leverage while replacing the bits you need to meet your goals. That's pretty genius in my book.
>That sounds an awful lot like "it is a crime to illegally enter the country"

I think your position is shared by many if not most, but that does not make it a crime, it just encourages and justifies treating undocumented immigrants as criminals. For example the wikipedia article you cite, cites section a.) of 8 USC § 1325 - Improper entry by alien, but if you actually read the code it continues to section b.) it continues...Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of— (see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325)

>Immigration is not criminalized; illegal immigration is

It is not criminal. It is civil in nature, just like a speeding ticket is not criminal it is civil but results in fines. The imprisonment is a little misleading, because undocumented, or even documented, immigrants facing removal proceedings (deportation for the layman) can be held in "detention centers" during the proceedings, so while in fact they are similar to jails or prisons, legally they are not. I have even had cases where my client was staying at a hotel (paid by the government) during the removal proceeding bc the detention center had no more open beds. The reality is many immigrants are eligible to "elect voluntary removal" if they can purchase their own travel out of the country and generally the Government agrees and allows them to voluntarily depart without having to go through the proceedings/detention.

>"Criminal", the noun, is defined as "A person who is guilty of a crime, notably breaking the law."

The key is guilty of a crime, but immigration status is not a crime it is a civil issue.
If he hadn't taken the time to publish this code, you wouldn't have even known to try to zing him for using the "wrong" license. Perhaps the most rational solution for people like Moxie would simply be to never publish their code, and simply continue to write forcefully and effectively about technical controls and privacy.

Then they wouldn't have to jump through silly hoops to prove whether they "really want the world to be a more secure place".

Or, how about this: if you really want the world to be a more secure place, why don't you take the time to learn how to implement certificate pinning for Android apps and publish your own MIT-licensed implementation? I'm sure Moxie would join the rest of us in cheering you on.
I don't think the photo they show is very clear. The waist is now impossibly thin, the boobs are more up-front and perky. Also the dress is not just pretty but sultry, which seems inappropriate for a young girl (this character especially). I don't know if you've seen the movie, but the character specifically acts against conventions that don't suit her. Dressing her up this way implies that the style suits her, and her creator disagrees.
HTC First, the Facebook phone, to be discontinued
OP and author here. This a post about the tools I've been using to learn python.