skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm as troubled by the militarization of the police in America as anybody, but I'm also a bit troubled by how few of the stories deploring it note that it didn't occur in a vacuum. It grew out of encounters in the 1980s and 1990s where police found themselves drastically outgunned by people they were attempting to arrest.

Here's a couple of examples:

* The 1986 FBI Miami shootout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout): eight FBI agents armed with revolvers and shotguns confronted two suspects, one armed with a Ruger Mini-14 semi-automatic carbine. The two suspects were killed, but not before killing two of the FBI agents and wounding five others. The ensuing FBI investigation cited the insufficient stopping power of the agents' service revolvers and the difficulty of reloading a revolver while under fire as key problems, and led to the Bureau moving from revolvers to automatic pistols chambered in a heavier caliber (which eventually became standardized as .40 Smith & Wesson).

* The 1997 North Hollywood shootout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout): officers of the Los Angeles Police Department armed mostly with 9mm and .38 Special pistols confronted two bank robbers wearing body armor and wielding fully automatic rifles fitted with high capacity magazines. The officers quickly found that rounds fired from their pistols could not penetrate the robbers' body armor. A SWAT team armed with AR-15 rifles was called and eventually managed to bring them down, but not before eleven officers and six civilians had been wounded. Many metropolitan police forces began moving to arm more officers with rifles like the AR-15/M-16 as a result.

None of this justifies using SWAT tactics against unarmed civilians in a civil forfeiture case, of course. But it helps to explain how and why the firepower of police today is so much greater than it was, say, twenty-five years ago, and why the SWAT mindset grew from a small corner of the law-enforcement mind to something more front and center. (The other piece of the story is 9/11, which opened a floodgate of money and materiel to local law enforcement in the name of homeland security.)
>So they trudge right over, notebook in hand asking me to recover their data.

I got this in spades at my last job.

We were a web app startup, and the youngest people in a 13 story building. Everyone in the building knew we did something with computers, so they would never hesitate in bringing us their ancient machines and ask us to fix it, ask us to fix their network, in one case, ask us to do their daughter's final project for her intro to C++ class.

People really do just assume that everything to do with computers is directly related, and that they can ask anyone to fix it for free because "it'll only take a second".

I definitely got the feeling that the author had a bit of a chip on their shoulder, but I got through it and loved this article, because I have that same chip on my shoulder.

edit: One cool thing about those old people asking us to fix their shit, was that I got to see an authentic modem from 1999. They wouldn't upgrade because they didn't want to have to change their email addresses.
Ad-hoc error monitoring and reporting
Turning Your Smart Phone Off From Being Tracked – Off Pocket
Review: #FakeFans by C4Dispatches
Y'all are nuts too, what with your freedom to drink in public and buy unpasteurized cheese.

Barbarians!
When I was a kid, none of the other kids could use a computer. I couldn't, either.
I heard a simmilar version "Specialization is for insects".
!!! warning - an extremly biased person above !!!

"- ASP.NET MVC/C#: ..."

1) Microsoft came up with TypeScript recently which is truly open-source and will dominate Dart/CoffeeScript etc. over the time.
2) Microsoft is supporting SignalR which is truly open-source Pub-Sub and is a replacement for WCF.
3) Microsoft is supporting KnockOut.js which is truly open-source and one of the best MV(C/VM) frameworks today.
4) Microsoft invented _modern_ flat GUI style.
5) Visual Studio + ReSharper makes the most feature-rich IDE on the market. You don't have to buy Ultimate or even Premium - Express/Professional is good enough for most people.
6) If you mentioned Scala then mention F# as well.
7) Windows and Visual Studio will now be on much shorter release cycles.

Old Microsoft != New Microsoft.
There are a few similar services. One is Cloud9 (c9.io)
And with the gag orders of NSLs, it's hard for the voters in general to take notice through actions of the companies.

Too much of this is secret, Star Chamber stuff for the voters to be easily involved.
Stephen Few actually self publishes for reasons he explains here: http://www.perceptualedge.com/blog/?p=1521

I'm not sure why he hasn't made an ebook though. This is a new release so it may be coming.
"So, to conclude: The future question will not be "why ruby?", but "why not javascript?"."

Because you will be using TypeScript instead.
Heinlein. Good man.
In my opinion, that's exactly the problem. I don't understand how people don't do the math in their head that spending half an hour learning* to be more efficient at something that you use for hours and hours every day is worth it. I couldn't get my oft-texting mom to switch to T9 (back in the era of dumbphones) because she didn't want to "waste her time" (though she was fine constantly pecking out texts more than twice as slowly as she could have been). I finally convinced my mom once she saw that it only took my _grandma_ a day to pick it up.

*Even just by asking a friend. In my experience, tech-savvy friends (including myself) are extremely willing to explain how things work, since it's a welcome respite from "just fix it"
I found this Michael Wolff comment very interesting: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/wolff/2013/07/....

Basically, an influential shareholder has resorted to spending company money (from deferred dividends and sale of the Alibaba stake, etc.) to drive up the company's stock, after which the shareholder cashed out, as the stock soared.
This can be applied to any system, not just the US government.
A buddy of mine said that he thinks it might because of things like FB, there are now so many people that just have no expectation of privacy. He might be onto something.
But can this CMS cure halitosis?
Russian State Duma’s committee: Banning Swear Words On The Internet
I'm a bit confused on what the actual "backdoor" here is:

"While the FAA 702 minimization procedures approved on 3 October 2011 now allow for use of certain United States person names and identifiers as query terms when reviewing collected FAA 702 data," the glossary states, "analysts may NOT/NOT [not repeat not] implement any USP [US persons] queries until an effective oversight process has been developed by NSA and agreed to by DOJ/ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence]."

The term "identifiers" is NSA jargon for information relating to an individual, such as telephone number, email address, IP address and username as well as their name.

The document – which is undated, though metadata suggests this version was last updated in June 2012 – does not say whether the oversight process it mentions has been established or whether any searches against US person names have taken place.

This seems to suggest that procedures allow for the name of a United States person when querying data collected under FAA 702 (for example, they could search for intercepted communications where the parties referred to the President by name); however, no analyst is allowed to do so until an oversight procedure is developed and approved.

Is that the entire backdoor? That the name of a US person can be used as a search term?
The irony is that the article was summarized in the conclusion.

"I want the people who will help shape our society in the future to understand the technology that will help shape out society in the future. If this is going to happen, then we need to reverse the trend that is seeing digital illiteracy exponentially increase. We need to act together, as parents, as teachers, as policy makers. Lets build a generation of hackers. Who’s with me?"
After a little while I was able to move past the snark and start reading your post and I really like it, but the open automatically alienated every person that you are trying to reach. Everybody saying that they're glad you have it in there or that it's refreshing to see already gets your message.

By removing from the spectrum everybody that would actually benefit from reading this article it got changed into pointless a circle jerk for the tech community about how much "they" just don't get it.

It's a good article, but it's too bad that the people who need to read it will pass by it because of an opening.
IBM SyNAPSE project, ways to get in touch?
The site unfortunately doesn't offer many information at the moment but maybe I've missed something. I've been interested in hardware implementations of neural networks for a long time (although I'm more excited about possible implementations with Memristors in the future) and I'd like to explore the possibilities.
This is how I keep myself from being angry at regular people just trying to use computers. I have a car, I just want to use my car. I don't really care all that much how it works (thought to be honest, combustion engines are pretty cool!). I'm vehicularaly inept. I can drive, but I can't diagnose and I can't troubleshoot (though I can change a wheel). In my position, It's my hope that the vehicular technicians opposite from me assist me in continuing to use my car. In response for that kindness, I'll assist them in using their computer.
I don't think that this is related at all, actually.

Criminals have been outgunning police for ages. It's literally impossible for police to have proper weapons deployed at every location at every time - just as it is literally impossible for the Marines in Afghanistan to have proper weapons at every place at every time. The criminals have the advantage of choosing when and where their crimes are committed, and the police the disadvantage of having to respond. This has been going on for thousands of years in all nations, yet this militarization is largely an American phenomenon.
You started it as "On hiring developers" and quickly went on to a discussion about Stallman's views. Also from what I've understood you are not just criticizing Stallman's "request" to give back to the community but whole idea of sharing code.

You are free to criticize anyone or anything but the Stallman part really did look like going off on a tangent.

It's really easy to be an ass on the internet but I'm not attacking you or anything (Like one commenter probably thought I am). Just pointing out what I noticed.
Hmmm, it's an interesting point. I think the reason people don't even try is because they recognize that they can't tell the difference between something that might take them 15 minutes of monkeying around to fix, and something that is beyond their competency. Worse, they are not sure that they won't make things when trying to fix the problem.

I'm sure it must be similar to the feeling I get when I'm working on a new code base that I'm not familiar with, and I need to make a modification in a function so that it calls another module correctly for some new functionality. But I can't tell if that change isn't going to break something somewhere else, so making that change becomes quite scary.

In the software development world, we handle this by creating suites of automatic tests that we can run after the change to make sure that what we just did doesn't break things. We also use config managent software so that we can back out any erroneous changes. These things aren't available to nontechnical users - they can't verify that they haven't broken anything, and if they have broken something, they may not be able to put things back the way they were. This pretty much guarantees that people won't experiment with their computer.
Some people are vehemently proud of their limited technical experience. You can't even convince them that they should learn more so that they can solve their own problems. It's a hopeless argument to have with one of these people.

They will only change their minds if they can convince themselves that it's important. Most people remain ignorant of the value of such skills. When there's cheap access to skilled labour to fix it for them then there's almost never going to be an opportunity for them to discover this value.

Then again the same is mostly true for a lot of other technologies we largely take for granted these days. Despite not knowing much about cars we use them all the time. Same with air conditioners, televisions, radios, etc.
It was found in the wild.
This reminds me of Masha the Bear, in Misha i Masha (my own transliteration, can you tell?). That image of the old guy who lives out in the woods and can fix anything seems really Russian (also very American, actually). I want to be that guy when I grow up.
Hey hoverbear, sorry for the long wait time.

We're in public beta now and anyone can sign up: https://koding.com

P.S. I work for Koding.
Because it is fashionable (in a bit hype-y way) and happens to be not bad :).
Counsyl: Medicine is now a software problem. Join us to write code that matters.

Software Engineer - South San Francisco, CA - Full-time

Counsyl's goal is to make the human genome practically useful for life-altering decisions. Over the last few years, we’ve grown from a Stanford dorm room to become one of the largest clinical genome centers in the world. Our pre-pregnancy genetic test is now prescribed by physicians for more than 2.5% of all births in the United States.

TechCrunch covered Counsyl at our recent tech talk: http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/23/counsyl/

Watch our tech talk "Genomics at Web Scale" https://vimeo.com/63141778

The cost of sequencing human genomes is plunging - over 5x faster than the cost of computing; the potential impact on preventive healthcare and the medical landscape is boundless. The science is there but the scale isn't. That's where Counsyl comes in. We are building the technology platform to make genomics useful and accessible to everyone.

Software is at the heart of Counsyl

The vast majority of our operations are powered by our own custom-built infrastructure on a Python/Django/Postgres stack, from ordering to lab processing to billing. We’re building new tools, new workflows, and new infrastructure to solve the challenging problems of a technology startup involved with not just bits, but also interconnected physical components like lab robotics and patient samples.

Don’t be intimidated if you don’t have a genomics background; solving these problems fundamentally requires software solutions. We’re looking for the best and brightest software engineers — strong generalists with solid CS fundamentals and practical software engineering intuition — to help us scale up genomics to billions of users.

Prerequisites:

- Working towards a BS, MS or PhD in Computer Science (or equivalent experience)
- Strong software engineering fundamentals: design, testing, version control
- Significant independent programming experience as demonstrated by a GitHub account, personal web page or prior internships.

We like to see experience with:

- Python, Django, CoffeeScript, Backbone.js, Bootstrap, HTML5, CSS
- NumPy, SciPy, scikit-learn
- Relational database systems, such as PostgreSQL
- Unix, Git, and other command line tools

What you'll do:

- Move fast without breaking things :)
- Start in the areas you're familiar with, and grow to work on the full stack
- Work closely with a small, tight-knit team
- Develop algorithms and code for all aspects of clinical genomics, from machine learning to supply chain optimization to insurance billing
- Quite literally save lives with your keyboard

Perks:

- Competitive compensation and benefits
- Generous equity package in a fast-growing startup
- Catered meals every day plus a fully stocked kitchen
- On-site gym access to work it off
- Dry cleaning and laundry service

Apply Today!

Full-Time Software Engineer: https://www.counsyl.com/jobs/software-engineer/

Product Design: https://www.counsyl.com/jobs/product-design-web-htmlcss/

We have other positions in Sales, in our Genome Center and in Operations. Check them out at jobs.counsyl.com
At your own link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equ...
... and Jacob Bijani has left the company.

Don't know whether he was offered anything to stay, but he was (is) a huge design talent.
Litter - Travel like ROYALTY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equ...
I didn't downvote you, but a novice's most successful way to solve a problem using a console is "use Google to find magical incantations to type into computer", which is actually a less useful level of abstraction than navigating your way through a list of options offered by a half-decent GUI.
Nope.

The US disparity is equal with France and lower than that of Germany.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equ...
I suppose we have different perspectives on what the general public is capable of.

To me, changing your oil yourself is somewhere on par with being able to connect to wifi yourself. Sure, you'll often just get other people to do it for you when you are having other more extensive work done on the car, but having to get somebody to do it for you seems sort of like having to call "Geek Squad" to connect to your home wifi. Far more prevalent than you would hope or expect.
But that's advertising in a nutshell right? They're not using disinformation, they're simply setting a tone for how they wan't their company to be viewed. Coca-Cola makes sugar water, Kleenex makes tissue. But you don't push many units by downplaying your product.

I think the video does a great job of making them seem to take their product seriously. If enough people walk away with a similar impression, it will allow the company to expand within the market and be taken seriously in their new endeavors as well.
Canonical has put its users over the barrel and let Amazon have their way with them, that's enough to stop me from giving one red cent.

Privacy is a serious question for businesses, and "you can opt out" isn't a serious answer.
I don't. That was the joke.
Yes, there is. [1]

[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/05...
Actually I have owned only pre-90s car (the period when cars were cars and not Playstations on wheels). They were simpler and lighter affairs. You could fire up and drive an atmospheric diesel car with all fuses blown and without any electricity and broken alternator.

But that is offtopic. I don't want people to resolder chips on their mobile devices. But we must educate to not freeze like a deer in headlights when something move from it just works to it just doesn't work.
Regarding #1, if you've looked at Americans' confidence in Congress lately [1] it seems exceedingly unlikely that Americans perceive their elected officials as incorruptible. In fact, that has mostly been the case post-Watergate.

> "Americans are not used to systemic corruption and tyranny, so they don't have the framework to consider their state becoming authoritarian or totalitarian."

I agree, and I'll add that since the US is still a relatively young country whose present form of government has been in existence since shortly after its inception, Americans have trouble mentally disassociating their opinion of America--its culture, its people, its common beliefs--with their opinion of American government. In countries where citizens have lived to see multiple governments come and go, this is much easier to do. Americans, however, seem to have a hard time loving their country but hating their government, even when their government actively works to undermine and destroy some of the best qualities of their country.

[1] http://www.gallup.com/poll/163052/americans-confidence-congr...
Just like their fucking unwillingness to learn how to fix a car that won't start is what gets in the way of them getting to work? Oh yeah, it was easy, the clutch pedal switch failed, duh, that's a $5 part and 10 minutes to replace. What do you mean, you missed a day of work for that, you fucking idiot?
It rewards success and thus incentivizes more competition.
People like to put down scripting, especially shell scripting, as "not a real language." I prefer shell scripting, since it lets me tie together programs written in many languages, each doing something that language does very well. The opposite of this would be to try to do everything in one language, which seems inefficient to me. Difficult applications of one language are often handled efficiently in some other--why not take advantage of that? Of course, I've made my peace with living in a polyglot computing world, and having to at least superficially know many programming languages and little-language tools.

The best difference I've seen between "programming" and "scripting" is Knuth v McIlroy, summarized here.
http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2011/12/more-shell-less-egg...
The only difference is it's almost impossible to defend yourself against these robbers.
Become a Trillionaire for $0.45 (+$3.56 S&H)
Making things foolproof results in better fools.

But, I really would like to admit that things like "WPA2 Enterprise" or "Proxy" are really at least more than special in terms of common language.
Looking at the TV analogy OP made, I would like to throw in this piece of information:

Even getting a new TV up and running is some kind of rocket science nowadays. This is what it is like in Germany right now:

Step 1: buy TV at local dealer.

Step 2: At home, the TV is asking you to tell him what kind of signal you have:

* Cable, analog
* Cable, digital
* DVB/T (terristical, antenna on roof or indoor)
* Sat, satellite analog
* DVB-S, satellite digital
* DVB-S2, satellite digital h264 HD

Step 3: Call son or husband of daughter to setup this strange device:
"All I wanted is to watch TV!!!!eleven!"

And that is not even close to the confusion happening when the wifi and apps settings are popping up.
I think a lot of people think the fears are overblown, that government is basically perpetually inept but well-intentioned, and even if they do capture everyone's data, they can't possibly make sense out of all of it or connect all the dots on each of us meaningfully & use that to impinge on our liberties.

I, of course, think that's dangerous and short-sighted thinking and there are higher principles at stake here (and for the future), but I get a strong inkling a lot of folks shrug and feel this way. My wife, for instance.
No, I called IT support and they fixed it for me.
The team members are listed, hit linkedin and find them, failing that hit Google and find the structure IBM uses for email addresses so you can figure out the teams.
Which do you wear, glasses or contacts?
The graphs are nice. But I think raw histograms of the most used commands, and a table with the highest correlations per given command would also useful and more digestible.

If you still have the per user data around, I'd also love to see the most often used commands by the community that I never or very rarely use. Maybe I'll find a gem of a unix command I didn't know about yet.
the real tldr:
"i don't know how to properly configure a network and now everybody and me has to suffer"
Reality Makers Episode 1 w/ Ryan Hoover: Please Share & Give Feedback
>"There was broad concern among privacy advocates and the private sector about the impact of the NSA's surveillance efforts. Several of the private sector representatives worried that the international backlash against NSA collection of foreign data would harm American global competitiveness," American Civil Liberties Union President Susan Herman said.

This is very encouraging. Though I doubt that civil liberties groups have much pull on the White House or Congress, hopefully having all these large tech companies on board will add some pull to the message.

Throw in "global economic competitiveness" and/or "jobs" and it can almost counteract the "terrorism" propaganda war.