skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
1. It doesn't defend anything. But a $NATIONALITY implying that the US is worse than their country, or most countries, should acknowledge other countries' abuses from hundreds of years ago when they are complaining about US abuses from hundreds of years ago. Otherwise that comparison and that criticism is not very honest and should be replaced by more broadly scoped statements rather than singling out the US in a way which is essentially dishonest, for propaganda.

Important corollary: it certainly doesn't defend current misbehavior of any other country to invoke ancient problems of the US. If you pay attention, you will see many examples of this. The status of the US as 'world police' seems to make it attractive to defend anything you're doing by saying the US is worse anyway.

1a. No, but that's irrelevant. The US is not Ariel Castro. You can't prove that the Hendersons are a terrible family if their problems are on par with the problems of almost all similar families.

2. How do you propose to 'punish' the US? Who will carry out the punishment? Do you think doing this will improve the US somehow?

If natural cause deaths dwarf murders, then efforts to extend lifespan will likely see a better return by focusing on natural causes than on murders. Similarly, if the average person is much more likely to see serious quality of life issues from natural causes. This doesn't mean nothing should be done to prevent murders, but a choice between two interventions of the same cost should be made based on benefit.

Punishment after the fact is not a reform, it is at best a deterrent and more typically revenge. Applied to international interactions, your 'punishment' is liable to be a war in which atrocities are committed against the 'prosecuted' nation.

If you are going to justify war or massive sanctions against the US then please come out and do so openly rather than beating around the bush with stupid metaphors.

3. When you blame 'Americans' you blame all the Americans. Your argument fails spectacularly when applied to anyone who did not receive inheritance or did not descend from slavers.

4. America can do both good and bad things. The fact that it does bad things (and other things which you just don't like) is not an excuse for censoring good things.
I would claim that unconditional love in relationships and family is one of the pillars of civilization; there is also ample evidence that there is a natural neurological predisposition in humans towards such forms of love.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconditional_love

The problem is that it tends to be untenable at scale, it also requires reason as a counter-balance when one member of your family is abusive. Which is why unconditional love for country/nation is usually destructive (see nationalism).
No modern computer can be constructed by an individual without trusting a corporation not to have coopted some part of the system. Therefore no communication system can exist that meets your criteria. (E.g. Because the CPU could be compromised)

Your argument is the equivalent of 'we can't trust any corporation'. It's a coherent position to take but it is extreme and doesn't lead to meaningful discussions about what is possible.
The self-interests of the Soviet Union also pushed the state of science and technology forward a huge amount, probably more than any other country except the USA itself.
Why doesn't he get more involved in the project and stop complaining. Yes Ember is lacking in the prioritizing department but it's a community project and there is always room for more people.

There are a number of forks/patches out there that provide hasOne semantics and saving for multiple records in the same commit (ours are the mhelabs ones)

- https://github.com/mhelabs/ember-data/tree/has_one

- https://github.com/mhelabs/ember-data/tree/parent-child-comm...

- https://github.com/ghempton/data/tree/relational-adapter
> http://hexayurt.com gives some notion of how radical that shift could be when it arises.

That's interesting stuff, but all we really need to get the ball rolling is to remove the financial and regulatory speed bumps that prevent people from buying prefab homes. It's not like it is some kind of mystery how to reduce the cost of building a home...

EDIT: I was thinking more in terms of the way lending and building ordinances very strongly favor building a house on site vs. trucking it in, as opposed to the really... insightful... stuff you guys have mentioned.
It depends on authority and proof. It is not vigiantism if the area is private and the guard is given authority by the neighbourhood association (or whoever owns/is in charge of the land).

While the wealthy being above the law is a problem, the larger problem is the arbitrary nature of the law and the arbitrary nature of its enforcement. People wouldn't have to hire private guards if the law wasn't enforced. The police would enforce the law if there was less of it wasted on things that moral people do (like smoking pot).
I'm starting work at Puppetlabs in exactly a week's time as part of a brand new "module team" and I personally promise you here and in the open that I am going to tackle the puppetlabs-rabbitmq module and fix it so that it actually works and isn't an abandoned wasteland.

Come to that I'm hoping we can start building out a full set of mcollective modules to replace the existing ones that will be fully supported and kept up to date so that getting mcollective running will be as easy as including a class and waiting.

A huge part of this job is ensuring community patches get merged in and contributors get treated as I would like to be treated when contributing to a project. I hope we can reverse your experience with modules within a few months (I took this job because I've been in exactly your position, grabbing official modules and having them not work at all!)
I don't mean to make this personal, but someone who submits a wikipedia entry as a submission should not decry posts that are about current affairs directly relating to software development and the tech industry.
Not for iPhone unfortunately. You can see our early work analyzing client software options from last year:

https://guardianproject.info/wiki/OSTN#Client_Software
> more private beach property

Which would be where exactly?
> Fuck people, make an effort. Do it for the dying ones.

I think this is exactly what Stephen was referring to, most people don't understand clinical depression, including yourself, it seems.

At least with something like cancer you can tell for sure whether you will live or not or for how long you will suffer. With clinical depression, even if diagnosed and medicated most people suffer as long as they are alive, and some people will even try to hide for fear of people constantly trying to be in their face with advice and overtly concerns. Similar to what Stephen is facing, which makes me wonder if he trying to hide it...
They don't need analysts to watch them. They just need to add their contact information to their 'watch more closely' list, and then run that through their data mining software. There's more than enough processing power to add a few hundred thousand more people to their 'intense scrutiny' list.

Not that I expect that it's actually going to happen, but it's not beyond the realm of their capability.
For question #2, this doesn't seem like a heavy duty product, just a tool for experiments and spikes. If you're doing real development, you wouldn't be using it (not unless it grows a lot in power and scope).

Question #1 isn't really relevant for serious projects.
Surely you agree that there needs to be some sort of organized process for whistleblowers, right? You can't just have government employees exposing secrets without punishment because they don't like something.
You are pretending that this is equivalent to asserting that they have access to arbitrary message histories, which they in fact do not.
It will be easier to convince mathematicians that homotopy theory is maths than it will be to convince them that type theory is (in general).
Dear Everyone: Please Don't Turn Edward Snowden Into Julian Assange
Maybe lowering the cost of construction by setting the quality bar lower is one of the factors behind the higher rate of home ownership in the US?

(I have relatives who, last I heard, live in trailers, err, manufactured homes, which I believe are pretty much unheard of as dwellings in northern Europe.)
What does it feel like to stand on top of the tallest building in the world?
You probably could, but you'd need pretty deep pockets to get decent coverage — it costs in excess of $1000 per patent. Filing dumb patents is a lot like a lottery.
As far as I understand, this NDA is used to make big newspapers publish reviews of the new OS at the same time to make a concentrate PR effort. If every big newspaper was free to review Mavericks, by the time it got out, no one would care about it. Also, early builds always have bugs and shortcomings and those will be discussed in the reviews. Using NDA Apple makes sure that major media sources release info on the latest, most tested version and at the same time to create necessary effect on the readers.
What about this? Why not only grant a patent if you can prove that you invested a considerable amount of time and/or money to come up with the invention? This protects the often cited expensive research done by pharma companies and puts a stop to all the patents on problems with trivial solutions once you have to deal with the problem. And you still have the first-on-market advantage if you are the first to come up with a trivial idea although you have no patent for it.

Can you think of good examples where this will not work, where we really should grant the patent but coming up with the invention was neither time consuming nor expensive? Of course, proving how much the invention cost you and that it could not have been done with considerably less effort is a non-trivial problem on its own.
In one news report today (time.com blog), some US official tried to attack Snowden's legitimacy as a proponent of "transparency, freedom of the press, protection of individual rights and democracy" because of Snowden's choice of the countries through or to which he is said to be travelling.

That reasoning seems rather weak. One might guess the Obama Administration is getting desperate. Behind the scenes, this president could be as bad as Nixon. He's better looking, a good speaker and generally likeable, but, like Nixon, he's hell bent on secrecy. What's he hiding? If it's nothing, then maybe that's eveidence that even innocent Americans can keep secrets and there's no need to spy on them.

Anyway, following that US official's reasoning, every time some American visits, say, Cuba on their vacation, does that mean they do not support various principles of democratic society?

I see more than a few comments suggesting Venezuela is defective in various ways compared to the US's democracy. But are they really that bad (what about all the countries who are worse?)... or does a certain government that needs oil more than any other on Earth (guess which one) have particular labels for Venezuela that aim to further the US's interests in (destabilizing or stabilizing a given regime) in order to get access to Venezuela's oil?

Here's what Carter thinks about Venezuelan elections. He doesn't seem to think it's that bad. The voting part of their elections: "free and fair". The press: may be manipulated by best funded campaigns. But we see the same type of thing in the US, of else campaign funding would not be such a pertinent issue.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/19/3460412/andres-oppenhe...

If you look on his foundation's website, you'll see them acknowledge there is no universal, worldwide definition of "a democracy". Look at the database they compiled on the countries they've studied. The concept of "a democracy" is a compilation of many factors, from many sources. Maybe democracy is more like a continuum of "less democratic" to "more democratic".
I think throwing the term "emotion" around closes discussion because it is such an ambiguous term. A better model would be reason versus obedience - do we believe our own senses or what we are told? Non-science is rooted in charlatans and manipulative "leaders". We should be examining how people choose who they believe to be authoritative. Then again, appeal to authority is a known logical fallacy so any conclusion based on an "expert" is suspect.
https://fund.meshwith.me is pretty similar.
There's evidence, but not proof, for reincarnation. (It's probably impossible to prove or refute.) Researchers like Ian Stevenson have worked on it.

Personally, I prefer not to try to remember past-life memories. If there were a reason for it, I would.

Also, I tend to think (and I know this is an unpopular view in CS circles) that there probably are some paranormal interactions between consciousness and the world. Where I call bullshit is when people claim control of it-- that they can talk to dead people or predict the future or communicate telepathically. That stuff is all bunk.
Bria seems to be the industry standard and the most feature complete. The interface is horrible, but the codec support and feature set is solid.
FISC precedent is not binding on any federal court but FISC itself. I have never seen a FISC opinion cited to support some point of law (and only one FISA Review Court opinion so cited: 310 F.3d 717), so I think it's ridiculous to say that "the FISC has established binding precedent that has very much become the prevailing understanding of 'legal' where its cases are concerned."

FISC precedent is important in the sense that it guides FISC itself, and it guides grants of foreign intelligence warrants, but at the end of the day, if the government wants to use information collected pursuant to a FISC warrant to prosecute you, it has to do so in a regular U.S. District Court, and that court is not bound in any way by the FISC's interpretations of the law. In contrast, in a patent litigation, all the U.S. District Courts are absolutely bound by the Federal Circuit's precedent.
Yes, in the same way that an excellent front-door lock doesn't stop someone from smashing your front window.

For the purposes of encrypting traffic to prevent eavesdropping, one of the recipients sending the unencrypted data to a third-party is not an attack vector of consideration. In your scenario the only viable measure is to send no data at all (aka "don't play").
Hocnet is pretty dead curretly, but the main developer of cjdns plans to implement the Hocnet idea using OpenTransactions.
We built this yesterday as a start. The goal is to make it easy for open data wonks to unlock that data for the common civilian! Also, the direct URL without any explanation: http://civomega.com
"Does racial diversity matter a great deal to you Americans?"

Given our peculiar history, yes, it means a lot.
The debate isn't whether a fair trial would convict him, the debate is whether it would be a fair trial. Regardless of whether he's guilty of a crime, an unfair trial is a sign of an unjust society.

Though, the same could be said for mass warrantless wiretapping.
Show HN: Passup.js, Update all of your passwords at once
That makes no sense at all.

By that logic, it's also offensive to call the contemporary PRC and Russia undemocratic, despotic, and dictatorial because millions of people aren't dying under those regimes.
> It's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood.

Since when? And I mean that in a "can you elaborate on how that happened", not a sarcastic way.

My only knowledge of the history of Malibu comes from Rob Lowe's autobiography - he moved there as a young teenager / pre-teen (11-13 I think) with a slightly hippy mother who was looking for cleaner air than Ohio had to offer. Anyway, he describes 70s/80s Malibu as very different from what it is today, much more laid back, much less rich-people-focused (although even back then he had, as an example, Martin Sheen + family as neighbors), worth noting that when Lowe moved his family were probably somewhere between working and middle class, and they fitted in fine.

It seems easy to understand why Malibu could become so expensive and lived in by only super-rich and celebrities - that's basic economics of supply and demand - but at what point, and why, did it get to a point where you say "it's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood"?
Actually, it really depends on how the house there is built. Many are on stilts, and with the tide, you are up against their property. Beach is also uneven, so in places there is dry sand left, but it's surrounded on three sides by water and forth side is the house.

There are also legitimate concerns for many homeowners. I've frequently seen homeless camping underneath those houses on stilts. This is definitely a safety issue.

Another issue is trash. If you walk through Santa Monica beaches Sunday evening, it is appalling. Piles of trash in the parking lots and by waterline. After seeing it, I really can't blame Malibu residents from trying to protect their beaches.

That said, because I'm not privileged enough to have private beach access, this app is kinda cool.
It's about the same.
At least one of the newly appointed (in the past 3 years) judges is rabidly pro-patent

In this case, the decision is by chief judge radar, who believes the court's goal should be to strengthen intellectual property protections.

How do i know this?

He told me (and the rest of the class) this, when I took his class on the federal circuit in law school many years ago.

Silly me, of course, always thought courts were there to decide law, not have policy goals.

In any case, this is one of a long line of the federal circuit giving the middle finger to the supreme court.
Judge radar and others basically believe the supreme court is not helpful to them when they are trying to create rules practitioners can follow, so he tries to ignore them when possible.

He also cites his completely ridiculous reasoning from CLS Bank:

At bottom, with a claim tied to a computer in a specific
way, such that the computer plays a meaningful role in the
performance of the claimed invention, it is as a matter of
fact not likely to pre-empt virtually all uses of an
underlying abstract idea, leaving the invention patent
eligible

I'm not even sure how he can say this with a straight face.
I don't think it makes sense to say one can do mathematics without logic. Even if early math users didn't have a concept of formal logic, their mathematical reasoning was still dependent on it.
But what book it was?
The Anatomy Of Sliders And Scrollers
My understanding of mean high tide in California is the law does not specify a time frame for the mean. So how do you actually know where the MHTL is?
No Parkinson's with the flip of a switch
Hacker Scrapes Thousands Of Public Phone Numbers Using Facebook Graph Search
http://pineapple.io/tags/django
I think it might actually have more impact this way: it's not only information that's lacking, but public awareness of the law on beach access, deliberately muddied by some false information and low-level intimidation from homeowners. By both collecting the information and making an app with some fundraising publicity, they can try to target both angles.

That said, I would like to see this information make its way into OpenStreetMap, if it isn't already. In addition to just mapping out the paths, OSM has tags for access rights.
I believe in Hawaii if such access doesn't exist, you may create it by jumping a fence or whatever. Property owners like to put KAPU (forbidden) signs alongside access paths, giving the impression that the path is forbidden when it's actually just the land on either side of the path.

Resorts in Hawaii may be required to provide public access to the beaches they front. Some have public parking lots or other public amenities to direct the flow.
> I want to stop a service

You WANT to stop the service? Really? Stopping the service is an actual headline-level goal, and not a behind-the-scenes detail?

Personally I tell puppet "make sure that the latest version of X is running", because that's what I actually want, and I don't care how it does it...
Do they seek low-margin businesses? My take was that they looked for industries where they could comfortably price lower than anybody else. Case in point: tablets. Traditionally a fairly high margin business (on a unit basis), and Amazon comes in at a price that is only feasible because of the Prime play.
Here are all of the PDFs compiled into a single one with correct page numbers, including the preface etc. http://static.dyli.sh/Foundations%20of%20Computer%20Science%...
They could do so, yes, but it would pop up a message on your actual devices which you would have to agree to before that device can receive and decrypt new messages.
For Linux, have a look at RecordMyDesktop:

http://recordmydesktop.sourceforge.net/about.php
Move it to the USA!
Would you be OK with China intentionally displacing natives of one of its provinces with Han Chinese? Today, in the modern era, as opposed to hundreds of years ago?

No one can seriously dispute how bad the Native Americans got it (ANYWHERE in the Americas), and no one can undo that now. But we all just look the other way about ongoing activities in (say) China because what can you do and besides, they brought development to the benighted natives ruled by tyrants, and anyway, Edward Snowden?
Maybe I should re-read the article, but I have a need to further explain my line of thought. I myself have no need to hold strong beliefs. I tend to accept overwhelming evidence from sources that seem credible and I will often juggle opposing views, perhaps even never forming a firm opinion on a subject. But I see a lot of people struggling with that, like never choosing a side or forming a conclusion will kill them or something. It's the same when people think never changing opinions (e.g. political) is a sign of good character.

Also, I am more interested in technology, science, nature etc. than other people and their lives. It seems that my parents', but maybe even the majority of "ordinary" folk's lives, revolves around what other people say, think or do. So much so, they interpret everybody's actions as intentional and try to explain a person's motives and will paint somebody's character based on some trivial event. For example, if I forget to call them, they'll perhaps discuss for hours how ungrateful and selfish I am and fabricate detailed explanations for my actions, e.g. how maybe my girlfriend's mother is pulling me away from them or something like that (I heard such stories from my brother).

In short, people try to find a (hidden) motive behind every action and think there always has to be one. I think it is this way of thinking and functioning that creates a fertile ground for conspiracy theorists.
Do Americans not have maps or have forgotten how to read them?

What's this thing with having an app for every silly little thing? One would hope that the definitive map of public rights of way is kept somewhere, and the thing to do would be to get a copy.

Perhaps one could even draw a new map with just the public beach accesses and publish that. That would cost way less than 30 kUSD. But, no, in Silly Valley, everything has to be an app.
It's between 8m03s or 8m04s, and it's very hard to tell - it's very well done. If Simon Singh hadn't told me I would never have known. Here's the section:

http://youtu.be/7FnXgprKgSE#t=7m55s

I didn't put the time marker on it because I wasn't able to check for sure, but I've confirmed it now.
I'd be more surprised with titles phrased "The United States didn't wiretap _____".