skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's true that they are similar on their expressiveness approach and at the end core.logic could have an SMT making them identical. But when we add SMT we are talking about a different beast.

For example, imagine that you want to implement a professional chess software. One romantic approach would be to find the best and nicest algorithm(s) to do that. SMT, idealistically, adds some "ugliness" trying to reach to a conclusion using every heuristic available. It's an algorithm too but it doesn't end on a good expressiveness but in inserting every heuristic available inside the resolution process.
But people just don't want to believe that. Renewable energy also has caused more deaths than nuclear power, even if you (completely unfairly) count the deaths resulting from the use of nuclear weapons. And the public reaction is to simply ignore this, and even deny it.

I find it easy to believe : mounting slippery glass panels on rooftops ... not very safe, maintaining and cleaning them, again obviously not safe[1]. There are also recorded accidents with solar panels falling off rooftops into people (they are large, heavy glass shards by the time they hit the ground, so you can imagine what happens, let's just skip the photos). Putting generators on poles 50m or 100m above the ground (or 150m above the sea surface) is not a safe occupation and those generators cannot be as safe as the ones on the ground. So maintaining those is generating a steady stream of death and disfigurement[2], and catastrophic failure means the tower collapses, you don't want to be below one, like a catastrophic failure in the UK where a wind turbine locked up and crashed into a school playground, thankfully an empty one. Or just search youtube [4][5][6]. And dam-based electrical power has the same problem as nuclear power : if it works, great. If it fails, it can fail catastrophically, taking a lot of people with it[3].

[1] http://asiancorrespondent.com/54571/green-deaths-the-forgott...;
[2] http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100200909/...;
[3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWcdDwECZU0
[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMNqjirbWoQ
[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ovHFTSBQ54
[6] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCyQD83NLDc

Also keep in mind the EROI of the different solutions. Meaning how much energy is produced given input energy. Renewables (except hydro) are in the 0.5-2 range (and "small" renewables, like solar recharging bluetooth headsets, are 0.1 at best), oil used to be 20-30 but have dropped to 15 at best and is rapidly decreasing (a fact that has been accused of being the real cause of the global economic slowdown). Coal is also around 10-15 range average globally. Nuclear, is at least 150000. Whatever disadvantages nuclear power has is related to the amount of material used, and that amount is tiny.
Why the hell should we trust James Clapper after this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRhjgynfhag
The FreedomBox Foundation[1], headed by Eben Moglen[2], is trying to build a plug computer based on Free Software so that "anybody, regardless of technical skill, can easily enjoy secure, private, even anonymous communication".

[1] https://www.freedomboxfoundation.org/learn

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Moglen
It was actually 12 days.
Exactly. This kind of technically correct, but utterly unhelpful resposnse reminds me of the Adolf Eichmann trial. Where have they been the last 10 years? Where are their values and spines at?

You see, if you don't stand up, you still get counted. "Little Brother is watching you, too"
PAO sounds like a great idea, but I think at this point in time it places a lot on the user's shoulders that is unfeasible for the vast majority of people. Your writeup is quite long so I haven't read it in its entirety, but have you given any thought to failure states? It seems to me that there is a single, very critical point of failure and/or vulnerable to being compromised - your home Internet connection(and everything that supports it).
How do you know now?

Time zone info doesn't just pop into your head. You have to look that up too, or at least receive it somehow. Sunrise data could be obtained the same way. The difference being, of course, that you wouldn't need to look up anything that didn't care about the sun, while time zone info needs to be known to make sense of any time.
Mary Meeker's misinformation has influence
I hope so. But we have no insight into how much information was put in the "locked mailboxes." From what we do know, it's reasonable to assume the NSA has been gathering as much information on as many people as is/was legally permissible.
Wow. Just wow.

Not only do we have a star chamber, but we can't even be allowed to see what laws they have concluded are Unconstitutional.

Any facade of a functioning democracy, or of a commitment to transparency by this government, is swept away.

It also gets to something Scalia said in oral argument in Clapper v. Amnesty International, namely that we should trust the FISC to address 4th Amendment issues. It makes me wonder if he knew about the decision before the case reached the court.

But without such access to case law determining what is Unconstitutional, how can we know what the law is? Where is due notice in this?
Bram Cohen's comment on this story: "The really misleading spin is the claim that mobile is taking over computers. The actual numbers in that report indicated that smart mobile has basically killed off dumb mobile, but only had a modest negative impact on regular computers."

source: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ui7ak5pz6wi8c5o/bram%20cohen%20on%... also hat tip to falon for finding this story -- i don't know her HN username
If you know how DNS works, why do you say that data is being routed through totalitarian regimes? Not even the DNS replies have to be.
Yet there is evidence they investigated "liberal" groups for the same sort of thing.
Well, way back in the day (around WWII) Arab opinion of the US was rather high. One of the key initial moments in the disenchantment came with Sayyid Qutb[1]'s journey to the US and writing about it. He had a lot to say about the moral degeneracy of the US, where men and women mixed together socially even sitting side by side in church etc. He later helped found the Muslim Brotherhood from which splintered the Islamic Jihad under Ayman al-Zawahiri which later made up half of Al Qaeda.

But while it is true that part of their beef with the US was things that we would consider freedom a much bigger issue would be America's support of Israel or the stationing troops in Saudi Arabia. And then 9/11 happened and the West invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and this became very much beside the point. So Bush's famous mention of Al Qaeda hating us for our freedoms, while true in some sense, was very much a red herring.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb
One has to wonder how the world's governments will react to this, especially since they won't be publishing blog posts in a similar manner to Google et al.

There are two major trade agreements[1][2] that are written and negotiated in absolute secrecy, and we can only speculate what will be on them. The world's governments may quietly support the surveillance systems the USG operates, and the USG may use it to appease her opponents by adding stipulations to the trade agreements that will grant them unfettered access (putting an end to any and all state-sponsored opposition) just as the UK receives access.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAFTA

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Strategic_Economi...
Well, it might be a good method of keeping the readers identities Anonymous(provided they use Tor or a VPN to connect). But "saving a draft" is definitely keeping a copy on Google's servers, an interested party would have no trouble getting their hands on the content.
Thanks, that's what I had read.

I also found this set of tests http://jsperf.com/asi-versus-msi

My results on Opera Next (v15) http://imgur.com/hkAopfX shows MSI fastest FWIW.
You earned the right to not be spied on? What, specifically, did you do that exclusively grants you that privilege?
Are you surprised that the Constitution is venerated more than the Declaration of Independence? The former is the supreme law of the land (or rather would be if it were not ignored without consequence so frequently), and the latter is rhetoric. It is lofty and high-minded rhetoric (or rather would be if its authors had actually meant that all persons should be equal) but rhetoric nonetheless, void of legal value.
Remember when Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg sweat over privacy issues?
After knowing what these companies such as Verizon, Facebook, Google, have done for years, now we know Mark was sweating over the issues brought up in the interview.
Agreed, the "saving as draft" method is more hiding in plain site than anything. It doesn't protect the content of the data, and if you're not paying attention it's easy for someone to see who's been accessing the data. It's more a defense against people that aren't really looking that hard.
This should be in every country's constitution. Well said.
A DOM tree is rather a pain to implement in practice. You need fast foo.childNodes[i] and also fast foo.nextChild. And fast inserts and removes. And APIs that use (parent, offset) pairs as their basic concept (like ranges) and other APIs that use (parent, prevSibling) pairs (like node insertion). Oh, and memory use needs to be minimal. And the code needs to have low constants, not just low algorithmic complexity.
Technology neither brings us together nor drives us apart. It rather gives us tools for specifying social activity in greater detail. It used to be that I had to wait until I saw one of my friends at the coffee shop in order to share something with her, now I can just do so via Facebook.

We tend to think of "before Facebook" as some pre-2000 state that's never returning, but that's not really the case. I have friends where we might know each other for a month before we take the step to friend each other on Facebook. Some people I won't interact with on Facebook. Lots of my relatives I block. If they want to talk to me, I'm readily available via chat or message on FB, it's just the daily flow of stuff they're publically sharing I'm opting out of.

I think a lot of older people who lived significant parts of their lives without social tools tend to make the effects of having them out to be more than what they are to those of us who grew up with them. Most people I know use them perfectly naturally, they don't waste hours and hours on Facebook or bury themselves in their phones to escape social interaction.

They just move flexibly from social arena to social arena. When I'm at the bar, I'll pick up my phone if there's nothing interesting going on and play a game or text or whatever, then just put it down when I get bored of it or someone interesting comes around. We use technology as a way of filling in parts of your life that would otherwise go wasted with something that could be more meaningful.

To worry about software replacing the real is just missing the point.
We need to take a look at these companies' stocks in the next few weeks. It can be seen as malpractice from the shareholders perspective.

What Google et al didn't take into account, being very short sighted, is the competitive advantage they lost unprotecting their customers information.
Como Crear un Blog Superviviente
Another point I was not seeing is reciprocity. Even if I really do not have anything to hide--and I might even not mind the naked picture thing, because will anyone actually care?--then I should be able to see everybody else as well, especially the rich and powerful including those who are running the surveillance system.
Good article, but I'd like to disagree with the notion that what Google and bing are doing with long-term tracking is necessary to have good search results. blekko has its own crawl and index, doesn't do any per-user tracking, and doesn't even save unconnected and anonymized clicks if you have DNT set. We don't use super-long personal session data to pick whether we show you Fox News or the NYT article on Prism. Our results could certainly be improved, but having a bigger crawl and more unconnected and anonymous clicks is how we'd improve them, not by making a huge database which could easily be used to reconstruct our users' lives going back years.
Cory Doctorow's Little Brother
Analyzing Yahoo's PRISM non-denial
All three branches of government agreed that the surveillance we found out about this week was lawful. "Rule of law" is a feature of a just society, but does not define it. "Rule of law" is also the vehicle we use to course-correct society back towards justice.
Why do you say Islamist and not radical Islamist, while you say Christian extremism and not just Christian?
From http://fieldnotesbrand.com

"I'm not writing it down to remember later, I'm writing it down to remember now."
– Unknown.
I can't seem to attach an image, known issue?
Linux Mint, Firefox Aurora, NoScript (allowed all but the analytics), and Ghostery, if it helps
There is no Salafi army capable of achieving military victory against the United States. The existential threat is zero.

Therefore, I see no reason why our sacred liberties should be secretly sacrificed as "tactics" in an eternal, global war.

Better to declare global perpetual war against pools, bathtubs, or uncooked food. It would be cheaper and save more lives. Oh, and, preserve the sacrifice of those who died fighting for our freedom.

Or, is a life lost to a one who has claimed jihad worth more than one from uncooked food?

It may be that Bush was right, that terrorists wish us to abandon our liberties. So, too do the disciples of Leo Strauss who want to elevate to warriors the ideology of people who are merely sad, pathetic men no different from the killers of random school shootings, and deserve no more.
Where do you see a connection between influencing the world for personal gains and having morals?
I said no one's challenged the validity of the PowerPoint. What you're quoting is challenging the articles written by the Guardian and the Post.
and beaten by the cops in France, especially if you are not white.
That "rhetoric" serves as a justification for why the "supreme law of the land" should be respected and upheld in the first place.

Instead people have replaced that justification with circular justifications, blind patriotism, and apathy.
Already posted a few hours ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5845541
Not all that contrarian. Some editors use a simpler structure, a gap buffer, that doesn't have the same speed in all situations but still handles inserts and deletes well when they tend to fall in a small area:

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2009/02/18/gap-buffers-or-w...;
Or just use the implementation in OpenJDK https://blogs.oracle.com/coffeys/entry/want_the_latest_tzdat...
Now would be a good time to give variuous good organisations cash.

I just sent the EFF $100.00 earlier this evening. Needless to say, I concur wholeheartedly with this sentiment. Slacktivism and clicktivisim or whatever are nice, but if you aren't in a position to do anything else, sending cash to advocacy / activism groups like the EFF is probably the most straightforward way to advance causes you support.

For my money, so far this year, that means supporting the EFF, NRA, Gun Owners of America, Libertarian Party, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, Second Amendment Foundation, Grassroots NC, and the International Mountain Bicycling Association. I think the FSF will be getting a donation from me soon as well. Probably the ACLU as well.
But that's kind of the point; if you don't speak out, it WILL happen to you anyway. As they say, if you don't deal with politics, politics will deal with you.
I'm sorry: Which of Mohamed Atta or Osama Bin Laden's villages did "we" bomb prior to 9/11?
I don't think that Assange has much credibility on this issue. He's shown repeatedly that he believes himself to be above scrutiny in both his personal behavior and in the way that he operates WikiLeaks. I don't see how he can demand that other people in power behave transparently when he refuses to be transparent about how he uses his own power.
You pay to receive protection from the people that you pay? How is that not a protection racket?
Society gets to decide the rules though, and we can't all do that when only a tiny fraction know what the rules are, and anyone that tries to talks gets prosecuted under the espionage act.

Obama really needed to keep his transparency promise, mission failed on that one.
Say you use some service based in Europe or Asia, and you visited a bunch of countries in Europe or Asia. would you be okay if those governments accessed your data, without any reason, without any warrant? It is not about Americans vs foreigners, or paying taxes or jury duty - it is about having a valid reason for anyone to access anybody's data, and doing it the proper way (warrant etc). Not just in the US, but anywhere in the world.

May be other governments in other countries are doing the same, we don't know. If that's the case, this is very depressing - pretty soon, everyone will be spying on everyone else (if that is not already happening), and this wouldn't be a nice way to live
I still haven't been able to find a neat example of what sort of problem really benefits from this.

I think one of the clear benefits is having a tool to aid you in your research. Speaking about chess, is like what Kasparov envisioned for advanced chess http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Chess
Is Assange claiming this is a bad thing? He doesn't seem very fond of the the 'rule of law' himself, just ask Sweden.
Nate Silver doesn't forecast House races because there isn't enough good polling data. He does predict Senate races; he was 31 for 33 in 2012. He predicted that Republicans would win in North Dakota (a 92% probability) and Montana (66% probability). Democrats won both races.

Here is the link to his 2012 predictions:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/fivethirtyeights-20...;

Just click on the Senate forecast.
The Constitution follows the flag.

I think in the sense that the rights are human rights, then all humans should get them. But the civil rights in the US Constitution and amendments are, for the most part, meant to protect citizens from the government becoming too powerful and abusing its power. The framers of the constitution, being in the novel position of actually getting to decide what the powers of their own government were to be, were very fearful that it would be too powerful. A fear soon validated by the French Revolution's problems. (The idea that civil rights are somehow "earned" as mentioned in this comment thread is odd... the rights are not a "reward" to be earned, they were put in place as a precursor to any government: no American starts off without them and you do not need to be a taxpayer or even a citizen to enjoy them, you just need to be in US-ruled territory.)

It does not make sense for anyone not residing in the US to be given freedom of speech or the right to bear arms by the US government. These rights are allowed (or not) by whoever governs the place where you are. If the US government is spying on you on your territory, it is up to your government to protect you. Note how the US government reacts when another country is spying on our citizens (well, corporates anyway.)

The fourth amendment was not put in place because "gentlemen do not read each others' mail" but because the Brits used to bust in with general warrants to try and collect taxes and it pissed off the colonists. It was not the principal of the thing, really, but the consequences that got the colonists' goat. Since the US government can't really do anything to people not within the US except as an act of war, their search of your property--while reprehensible--is not meant to have been protected under the 4th.

It does, unfortunately, make perfect sense for any non-American to want their Internet traffic kept from traversing US soil if by so doing it places that communication under US scrutiny. I suspect it would not be hard to set up routing tables that keeps traffic from entering the US unless that's the destination (but I'm talking out of my armpit, I'm not a network engineer.)
'Logic Variables' and unification provide a lot of value, even without predicate databases and backtracking/search. Peter Van Roy's book goes into some detail.
"Rule of law" is also not closed to debate; it's somewhat difficult to define a precedent for checks and balances when those checks and balances have been iterated so frequently.

While Assange could have been more precise with his diction, what would occur were it not for people questioning the integrity of the branches of government themselves -- barring the true definition of a rule of law? If the rule itself is unable to effect positive change, why would it be relevant in a just society at all?

It's questions like these that make government, and law in general, incredibly complex to break down, bit by bit. Everything is tightly integrated and there's no true definition of what is right or wrong. Theological morality doesn't, at least in a modern society, have any bearing whatsoever on law, and the morals perpetuated by anyone can be debated by anyone.

There is no clear line that divides the justness of any such law. The only way that we can decide if law is just is through majority versus the minority -- but what if the majority drowns out the minority's cries? What if the minority is trying to convey a sensible solution to x problem?

It's happened throughout history, and it will happen again. It's a fundamental flaw of a partially broken system -- but it's all we have.
"oops" is not an excuse
We had launched a similar product couple of years back. Unfortunately, it failed miserably as we were unable to crack the chicken and egg problem. We were even featured on national TV.
Search IRS 990 forms from non-profits
> Yes, even logged in. I think the idea that you're any safer because you clicked the log out button is incompatible with understanding how the web works.

If you don't share an internet connection with anyone else, or have a unique browser fingerprint, then logging out won't do much. If you do share an internet connection with other people, or use a coffee shop wi-fi access point and have a non unique browser fingerprint, then logging out makes it harder to determine who you are.
who the fuck knows, I'm an American and I don't feel like this is necessary, acceptable, or justified
> It's considered polite to pretend not to notice things like someone crying on a park bench, if they aren't someone you know

As a Scandinavian, I strongly disagree. It's not that it's considered polite, as such. It's just that Scandinavians are deeply inhibited by nature.

Someone crying on a park bench, or someone tripping and hurting themselves in the street, or a similar situation where a person needs help or shows signs of needing help, would simply be embarrassing. Most people would dearly want to help, but would hesitate to get involved because that means having to sort of open up socially and no longer be a neutral stranger.

The Scandinavian countries were, up to just a few decades ago, generally unmodern countries, sparsely populated and divided by physical distance and dominated by a sort of severe, patriarchical farming culture. Norway a little more so than the more centrally located Denmark and southern Sweden, I think. And this is something that is still imprinted on the mindset of later generations. This, by the way, is also why Scandinavians binge drink: To overcome their — our — social awkwardness.

Scandinavians, by the way, are terrified to death of initiating spontaneous connections with strangers, but they will open up right away if you approach them in an outgoing, friendly way.
There are initiatives going in this direction:

http://thefnf.org

http://projectmeshnet.org
wait, people are actually paying attention to Mary Meeker?

seems that we have the memory of a goldfish

what's next? listening to Henry Blodget?

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/10/henry_blodgets_horrible_bitc...;

oh