skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
1. I would venture to guess this is on purpose. Extremely easy to patch before they start whitelisting any public Receiver apps.

2. Why do people want to modify the platform? I'm a hacker and that's cool and I'm glad it's OSS, but why do people want GoogleTV over this super lightweight protocol. It's great as a single purpose device. You push stuff at it, it's completely dumb and cheap.

It's a great model and I think people aren't thinking creatively enough to imagine what they can do with the API we've already been given.

I'm more interested in seeing an alternative implementation or a standalone desktop implementation so that I can just run the "chromecast frontend" on any old PC and throw content at it. As far as I can tell, Chrome should suffice. It's mostly an RPC and then WebRTC with Chrome's tab/screen share extensions for the Chrome sharing stuff.
What if the IP is dynamic? Say an Azure Cloud Service.
You wouldn't, but that's because it's not a science article. It's a pop culture magazine article portraying a climate change researcher as a rock star. There's very little discussion of the falsifiable hypotheses he wants to test - some bits about models, reflectivity, and black microbes is all you get. But biographies are okay, they can help to put a face on things. That said, I didn't find it the most compelling read but the picture of the waterslide was worth it.
The last thing this situation needs is a bit of petition-based slacktivism to calm people's nerves.

Petitions do absolutely nothing. Off the top of my head, I can't recall a single petition in recent history that has done anything other than given its signers a false sense of contribution towards a cause. I'd go as far as to say that pushing petitions probably damages a cause more than aids it.

If you want to change something, you get some people together and start a rally, or get people inundate your representative's inbox with mail from angry voters who don't want to see a measure pass.
What source are you looking for exactly? The piece was about the Dark Snow Project, and the journalist trekked around Greenland with the guy that founded it.
My statement is unprovable but easily disproved, so I'm not sure what you want me to do here. If you don't want to go through the effort of finding one counterexample I don't know what to tell you...

Also the one statistic I provided absolutely agrees with me, are you arguing a small increase in risk doesn't count as an increase in risk? At what percent increase in risk will you deem it a legitimate increase in risk, since apparently we are going by how you personally feel and not what the numbers actually say.

Stop throwing up strawmen arguments and provide a counterexample, and yes it literally is in all the books, have you red your states drivers's manual?
Yeah, politicians always say that until something like that happens to them.
> Why would I even read a science article from 'The Rolling Stone' and presume there is any validity to it?

You can read the article (which you clearly haven't done) and answer this question yourself.
Seems like the US military would be a good candidate for taking care of 911 dispatch.
Al Qaeda may not even exists anymore.
Russ’ 10 Ingredient Recipe for Making 1 Million TPS on $5K Hardware
That's pretty spot on.

As trite as this may sound, I can't help but remember that quote from the Matrix: "Choice is an illusion, created between those with power, and those without."
One thing to consider about C++, though, is that it's powerful enough to already allow you to duplicate or very closely approximate the functionality you listed. This is the essence of what some people call "Modern C++".

C++ functionality like references and smart pointers make pointer nullability and memory safety irrelevant, or at least much, much less of an issue than in C or older C++ code.

RAII significantly helps with lifetime management of all sorts of resources, from memory to database connections to files.

There are various collection libraries for C++ that make out-of-bounds accesses a non-issue, at a very minimal cost.

Likewise, it's quite easy in almost all cases to avoid using unsafe casts and other behavior that may cause problems, when taking a more modern approach to C++.

With a small amount of discipline, C++ of today can be much different than C++ of the 1980s or 1990s. Many of the pitfalls of that era can be avoided with remarkably little effort, especially when using C++11 and modern implementations. Yet it still easily gives you access to very powerful functionality for those rare cases when it is needed. This is much harder to do in many other, more modern languages.
While I agree largely in sentiment, you're incorrect about some things. For example, military spending during WW2 absolutely dwarfs spending on the current two wars.
Sounds quite likely that even if the return code checking does get patched in, that this will still be vulnerable to Travis Goodspeed's techniques here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijyAwxH_iok

(So you don't ned to watch right through – though I highly recommend you do – there's a trick he describes where you use a specially crafted "USB Drive" which can return one version of a file the first time it's read, and a different file the second time – if you know you've got a device that reads in a file to check it's signature first, then reads it again assuming it's getting the same content – that assumption isn't necessarily correct… A "smart" USB Drive can return whatever you choose, including a properly signed Google sourced image the first time 0x1000 is read, and whatever else you want the second time when the device is mounting it rather than verifying it.)
If you want something like iA Writer, check out Byword[1]. It's a markdown and rich text editor which allows you to publish directly to Wordpress, Blogger, Tumblr, Scriptogram, and Evernote directly from the app. And it has an iOS app for editing (and publishing) on the go.

[1] http://bywordapp.com/
Specific scope? Like hell! This could apply to any Internet content.
Ask HN: security vs. utility: admin priviledges
I work at a university, and the computer services for my academic department are managed in-house by a couple of computer officers. To maintain a secure network, they do not allow users admin privileges on any machine for which they provide support. While I understand this point of view, (and I am aware that there are probably many potential problems that I have no knowledge of) it seems to render the network much less useful than it could otherwise be.

For example, my postdocs can't install any software without clearing it with the admins in advance (and for experimenting with new software and programming languages, this is really impossible, just think of dependencies).

Another example: I would like to send a student to a python boot camp, but he would need admin privileges on the department laptop. It's a no-go.

My question is: What is the modern "right way" to securely administer a network without laming it to this extent? What is your opinion on what strategy the department should employ?
Which watchdog group (e.g. EFF, change.org) would be the best one to propose a congressional metadata law?

If our elected officials can see value in knowing the metadata of his or her citizens, then the citizens that elected those officials should be able to see the metadata of everyone his or her congressman calls, meets with or emails. The same should apply to all the senior staff of any elected official. One of the easiest way to handle making sure official meetings outside the office are logged is to only allow expense reports to be honored, when the other party in the meeting is logged.
Maybe modern languages don't have tuples because modern programming language designers don't have any|much|enough experience with tuples? If I wanted to play with tuples, what language(s) would I have to use?
I see what you mean, that would be really interesting to see and its probably not going to make sense for all languages.

PHP to C++ is an easy win since PHP is so slow compared to many modern languages and frameworks.
Excellent story. Thanks!

http://www.sblib.com/book/silverberg-robert-absolutely-infle...
Startups as a Career and Transparency on Equity Grants
You do realize that the "symptothermal method" is simply "don't have sex during the part of the menstrual cycle that results in babies"?

Apps exist to track the menstrual cycle already.

Plus using hormones to modify the menstrual cycle has other known positive side effects (such as, avoiding a week or more of severe cramping in some women). Plus, traditional birth control (i.e. condoms) allow a woman to have sex when her hormones would naturally cause her to want it (hint: when it would result in a baby).

Frankly, I'd rather deal with the people in India who are injecting polymer into the vas deferens. (In the USA, this procedure is known as "Vaselgel", although AFAIK it's not FDA approved yet.)
The 2014 Hennessey Viper 1000 TT (Testicle Tingly) Edition
> until something like that happens to them.

Right, that's when they lose their balls. Even if they didn't have any to begin with (genetic reasons included).

EDIT: On the other hand, it's only a plus when those who only have a "moral" authority, not the real one, make that statement. There's nothing to lose, only to gain. Even if it's a very small pressure, it's better than zero pressure.
Site is really slow, failed to load a few times for me.

Mirror: http://blog.gtvhacker.com.nyud.net/2013/chromecast-exploitin...
I call CHP 911 frequently (2-3 times/week, for reporting objects in roadways, etc.); it seems to work better than any non-military 911-type service I've ever used.

CHP was traditionally where all cellular 911 calls went, too, but that got improved over time.
Yes, I read it. How exactly do you expect me to determine the validity of the words in the article? Please tell me you don't simply believe them to be factual based on their articulate organization. If you do, there is no hope for this conversation.
It's futile to try to learn computing without root access. Buy separate computers to hack on, and just use the departmental computers for non-technical stuff.
Where is your scientific evidence that there is only merit in scientific evidence?
Didn't know about defer, cool. You can use Java's finally in a similar manner (although the syntax is worse, and you can't scatter the logic like with defer).

> I see it more as explicit. You HAVE to decide what you're going to do in case of an error. Usually it's as simple returning that error, but sometimes you want to do more, and having the question constantly being asked means you think about it for all cases.

Checked exceptions also do that (you have to add "throws" statements) and it looks much cleaner. I must however say that I'm not a fan of checked exceptions either.
Is validation bullshit? No. Can you "validate" the wrong things (measure the wrong metrics) and make yourself believe that you have real validated learning when you don't? Absolutely.

If you read The Four Steps To The Epiphany you'll note that @sgblank really emphasizes the importance of getting someone to actually give you money. For many (most?) classes of products, you don't have any validated learning whatsoever unless someone has given you money for the product/service you're building (if you're going for an ad supported model, then all bets are off. That space doesn't interest me, and I don't think about it).

Beta signups? If they're free (and you intend to charge for the "real" version), they don't really count as validated learning. They're suggestive maybe, but they don't validate "somebody will pay money for this X". Email list signups? Useful, suggestive, but not validated learning. Twitter followers, G+ followers, Facebook likes, and six tons of email from people who aren't in your target market, or who haven't paid you any money yet? Might be useful, but not validated learning from where I'm sitting.
I can't wait for Elon Musk to silence all the low self-esteem full-of-envy idiots talking shit about him and mentioning "vaporware" without even understanding how vaporware works! I bet $100 he'll have a prototype to showcase given the engineering power at his disposal.
Ostensibly, sure. In reality, More than 2/3rds of ISAF are US troops.
Things You Can Do With EPF (That You Can't Easily Do With Ember Data)
They easily could have to stop license proliferation and incompatibilities.
I'll take that $100 bet.
> What more do you want?

He wants things handed to him. Rather than follow up via the multiple sources they provided, along with a link to the project itself, he'd prefer we do that work for him.

Which is sad, really. That people don't want to take the time to research things on their own, and simply expect things handed to them.
I see a broadly titled patent like this one as a mechanism scaring small companies into settling. I wonder if it is worth building systems anymore.
The first few days talking about company culture. Bleh. Kill me now.
I'd probably just go with a Bring-Your-Own-Device strategy.
This is what virtual machines excel at
Allow me to suggest Coursera. They have nice courses about FP. Somehow in simple -> difficult order.

Systematic Program Design by Gregor Kicsalez (I believe influenced by HtDP).
Programming Languages by Dan Grossman. (50 50 HtDP SICP and Brown University material)*
Functional Programming using Scala by Martin Odersky (influenced by SICP).

In case you can already do the SICP exercises without issues then you won't need these, but otherwise, the deadlines and automatic grader were great ways to keep a regular pace in learning.

*) this course focuses on semantics, and language design, the problems are not hard applied problem solving, that's why I put it in 2nd, but they can twist your mind quite a bit when dealing with different meta-levels.
With regards to multiple selections, have you seen:
http://emacsrocks.com/e08.html
http://emacsrocks.com/e13.html
> But biographies are okay, they can help to put a face on things.

Damn right. They do far more for science than people realize. You make science fun and exciting, and it draws people in. Not everyone wants to start with all the technical data.

Hell, the best scientists understand this.
> Yet this doesn't seem to be happening.

Rust is starting to settle down, and once it has settled, it will be very stable. In particular, the 0.6 release was a huge breaking one, and 0.7 was less so. As it approaches 1.0, things should calm down quite a bit.
Interactive Map of Bike Share Use in New York
JetBlue pioneered this strategy years ago with their reservations line.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-593026.html
4. No actual consequences for anyone demonstrated to be lying.

Until officials are held accountable, why wouldn't they continue lying and denying? It's starting to get to the point where I'm more angry at congress members who should provide oversight, than the lying officials themselves.

As a simple example, if I'm an NSA official and contrast how James Clapper experienced absolutely no real consequences for perjuring himself [1], with how Snowden has been treated for rocking the boat, I honestly don't know what decision I would make.

[1] http://www.salon.com/2013/06/12/how_james_clapper_will_get_a...
I agree. This is going to affect Rust's adoption if they aren't careful. People are hesitant to write tutorials, documentation, or code that may need to be rewritten later.

But I still give Rust a pass on this for the time being. Rust is a younger language than Go (Rust is not yet at version 1, while Go is at 1.1.1), and Rust supports far more compile-time features.
No, it's US based. We want an European calendar.
The State of Rendering – Part 2
There's no question that you _can_ write safe code in C++, but it's very, very hard.

> With a small amount of discipline,

I would just like to point out that when dynamic language advocates suggest that 'with a small amount of discipline, you can write reasonably safe dynamic code' and you laugh them off with comments about how static typing saves you from errors at compile time.

The same is true with languages like Rust or Haskell; you don't need the discipline, the compiler catches such things for you.
I'm an undergrad at the University of Waterloo.

The way most undergrads have dealt with this problem is to buy and bring their own device. It's gotten to the point where we exhausted our IPv4 allocation on our eduroam (Wi-Fi) network, so a year or two back they switched eduroam to mass NAT. (It appears that they're only just starting to add IPv6 support in, but I digress.)

Frankly, any sysadmin worth their salt knows that admin/root access can easily be granted in a secure network, either by using Group Policy (Windows/AD) or by using virtualization (for client-server computing; think KVM/libvirt) or access control (SELinux).

Edit: Need proof? Try http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/play.html

That said-- if you're installing new software and programming languages, you probably shouldn't need or want root, especially if you're using Linux. The binary packages are almost always too stale for what you're doing -- and if you're building from source, you can set PREFIX to $HOME (so you get $HOME/bin, $HOME/man, etc.).

For Ruby and Python in particular, rbenv and virtualenv make it a breeze to use the language (and all the packages/gems you could want) without ever needing to touch root.

The disadvantage of this is that now you have ten post-docs each with a copy of Go and the GHC and Python and Ruby (and sources!) sitting in their homedir, which means that you're now storing thirty gigabytes of source when you could have a few megabytes of binaries. (Think about how this scales when you have 1,000 undergrads on NFS homedirs.)

But that's a trade-off that is up to your department's sysadmins to make.
I don't think rallies really change anything either, unless they are large enough to really disrupt other media coverage and shift public opinion. Which is rare.

Polls change things. Politicians pretend to care about phone calls to their office and letters, but they're really paying attention to public opinion, as represented by public opinion polls. They will never do anything unless the math adds up, unless doing so keeps them safe (or safer) in their job. They will never do anything unless you force them to do so by shifting public opinion.

People get the government they deserve. Cameron is only doing this because he thinks this is what the majority of British people want, or at least wouldn't mind. Make the argument to the people, not the politicians.
Every nation is sovereign as to every other nation. The implication of that is that every nation reserves the right to do whatever it wants to other nations. As in the state of nature, the only governing law between nations is power. America is unexceptional in this regard, they just have most of the power. But if you see how other major nations treat countries in their back yard, it becomes clear that power really is the only governing law. America's back yard is just bigger.

As an aside, I've always found Chomsky's continued association with one of the major pillars of the defense industrial complex, MIT, rather hypocritical. Maybe he could move to a university that doesn't take a billion dollars in DOD money every year, if he's so critical of it...
A+ is an earlier effort by Arthur Whitney, who created K and QDB (discussed in Scott's article).
1. I wrote that I was from Europe, so your conspiracy theories about US mainstream media trying to make him look bad isn't applicable.

2. I discussed an interview with Chomsky, where he himself discussed why he didn't criticize X. I noted his motivation was just not rational/true/etc. So your Venezuelan claims about an example are doubly irrelevant.
> Checked exceptions also do that (you have to add "throws" statements) and it looks much cleaner. I must however say that I'm not a fan of checked exceptions either.

Indeed. I was going to mention checked exceptions too. I think they are a great alternative, and personally I do not wish to use a programming language with no exceptions.

I must ask, why are you not a fan of checked exceptions?
This defiantly jives with some of my experiences. I've been saying that "Go makes me feel like an old man," because other than a _fantastic_ development experience, I don't actually see anything about Go that's particularly interesting and/or worthwhile.

I also remind fellow Rubyists who say "Go is boring, it's supposed to be that way!" that when they talk shit on Java, that was one of its rallying cries as well.

It's all just a bunch of cycles, what's trendy comes and goes, is boring and then interesting again...
I would rename their "Hobby" plan. It's condescending. People don't pay ~$240 / yr to have a status page for a hobby site.
The response to this is a great example of how far Hacker News has fallen. The readership here appears to be in a state of believing what The Rolling Stone says in place of actual scientific research.

If you want an example of how intellectual forums die, this thread is it.
or have a relationship with someone who has a relationship with someone who has ever contacted a terrorist suspect.
Or if your information happens to be valuable (bitcoins, passwords, stock tips, blackmail material) and can be sold without it being traced back to an analyst in any of the facilities around the world where your information is cached.
It’s hard to tell how big of an advantage this is, if any, without some actual data.
I've never heard anyone say "inbox me." It's always "text me", "facebook message me", or "send me an email."
The lack of features actually is a feature. It is a different approach to language design. The Go devs wanted to keep the number of language constructs small.
don't be so smug. It almost happened, with kim dot com.
Perhaps not just the engineers either.

I'm working with these people: http://dev.moorescloud.com/

Check out the text on the pcb mask just between the bottom row of pads and the microSD card here:

http://dev.moorescloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Holida...

We're going to a lot of effort to ensure these are "secure" for regular users – but it's an iMX233 ARM Linux device with a ATmega328 "Arduino" hanging off it – it's eminently hackable, and at least at the current introductory price it's very cost effective compared to, say, a RaspberryPi with a power-supply/case/wifi-adapter/Arduino (which is almost exactly what the prototype was).

While we're working hard to ensure your Christmas tree lights aren't remotely exploitable – if you've got it in your hands and have a screwdriver handy – it's yours to do what you want with. You can pop that SD card out and load your own OS to play with the software, and you've got a bunch of GPIO pins from both the iMX233 and the ATmega328 if you want to play with the hardware. I'll be a little disappointed if no-one's got one controlling a quadcopter or a laser cutter or a 3d printer within a few weeks of them shipping…
Aww man! I had this idea too.

Are they doing anything with this patent?
Double Robotics Reports: A2 Wind Tunnel + Williams Cycling
Tell HN: Google: "Keyword Tool will no longer be available"
"[...] in the next few months. To get keyword ideas, try the new Keyword Planner, which makes keyword research even easier." https://adwords.google.com/o/Targeting/Explorer
Haha oh god so many. Google startup metrics for pirates, check these out http://www.conversion-rate-experts.com/clients-and-results/#..., sign up for this https://segment.io/academy/, read these http://blog.kissmetrics.com/topics/conversion/.

Now that you mention it, putting together a huge directory of this content might be valuable.