skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Interesting points, but a lot of it is contradictory to the advice you hear from successful startups, so I'd take this with a grain of salt.

"I believe that my previous two ventures failed mainly because of the founding team (which I’m included in). How do I know? Because companies with almost identical products and value propositions succeeded afterwards."

I'm not sure if you're drawing the correct lesson there. Sounds more like implementation issues. I'd recommend you spend some effort improving your ability to implement / find people who can implement and then try again.
I would be okay with a maximum sentence of five years.

I believe it's important to consider prison as rehabilitation, not as vengeance. The tone of your consideration makes it clear that you'd want him in jail only for vengeance - it's not up to you to "be okay" with the offender's sentence. All that matters is that it is appropriate.

Depending on the prison, I would be okay with a criminal spending only five years for every degree of murder save for first degree.

I can assure you, you'll get over your bank account being empty. Yes, I know, you could lose a substantial amount of money. But there is insurance for these sorts of things (despite it not being foolproof), and I don't think you fully consider how five years of prison can change you.
Stop bullying people into agreement with your own ethics.
About the same as between you and a sense of humour.
After an arrest was made, agents then pretended that their investigation began with the traffic stop, not with the SOD tip, the former agent said. The training document reviewed by Reuters refers to this process as "parallel construction."

How do you reconcile this allegation with your statement that "the evidence is all public" and the "chain of custody of all evidence" is public? It appears that what is being described is a secret, shadow set of evidence, that in fact is not made public in any way, shape, or form.
What does the code actually deliver in the HTTP request, and what path does the request travel?

Is the exploit that the request is made outside of the TOR proxy (thus revealing the true origin IP) or that it gathers information about the host and sends that via TOR to some machine?
What Lean Startup Looks Like Behind the Curtain
make that 11:23
i think they are saying there is fragmentation, but they can effectively group the different fragments into this much smaller list of buckets by the 5 major versions and the 3 screen size ranges. that leads to 15 possibly combinations, ( although i doubt an android 2.2 phone will have a big screen size and so on... ) So until a new major category comes out they still have there 10-15 "groups" of devices to test...
Here is a Wikipedia article on the upcoming federal trial, but a warning that it is all based on the indictment and doesn't have the defense side of the story:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Jerome_O'Hara_...

This case contradicts the FBI findings from the Madoff case, and relies on the programmers having of had to know that their system could also be used to print out fake trades.
Yeah, I did the same thing. I wanted to be a Ranger, because Aragorn in Lord of the Rings is one, so I manipulated my answers. Plus it's in the center of the graph, so I thought that had to be better.

But, I do recall I would get Mage (Honesty) if I did it, er... honestly. Today I get Bard (Compassion). I guess people really do change over the course of their life.
TIL ...
They include Perl, but do they include a Perl that is compatible with and has been tested with the code that you're trying to run?
I may be wrong, but I don't see how anything is worth doing while the security services can quickly and easily compromise ISPs, and while we believe they can also crack encryption, or force us to reveal keys we may not have.

All that is really left is to alter out behavior in order to up the amount of work the security services have to do and to send a message. So, using services like DDG simply send a message. If enough people do it, the message might get heard. IMHO, that is really all using DDG achieves. And frankly, I suspect that is more about annoyance at creepy google data slurping than NSA type slurping. The NSA would still be able to compromise DDG, but using DDG tells google something. I use, or try to use DDG not because I think it makes me safe from the NSA, but because I don't like google's policies on using my data. Im not kidding my self that using DDG makes me NSA immune.

There is no way to ensure electronic privacy. Frankly, there really never was. Its was an illusion we kidded ourselves was real. In the end, a wire goes from an ISP to my house. That wire is traceable.

The worst part is that if reports are to be believed this has been going on for at least a decade. Cant find a link, but there is that ex-FBI officer who has claimed that they can get phones calls from 10 years ago, or there abouts. They already have our data archived, available for their use when ever they like for what ever purpose they like.

Now they have this power, they will never ever let it go. Neither will our data from the past decade be destroyed. Now we are so dependent on electronic communication, we are pretty much penned in.
No one will take the risk to change it. Just imagine if they cancelled PRISM, and destroyed all their archive data, and then 9/11 Mk2 happened... Would we all say, "that's OK, we the people took tyhe risk and we are fine with possible consequences"? You might, I would, but would the general population agree?

We now live under electronic totalitarianism. It is here to stay. Get used to it.
This still doesn't change the fact that phones using 2.2 are ancient and users are probably uninterested in downloading apps, so you can safely ignore them.

It's a high percentage, but mainly because of negative selection. People who don't care about apps bought cheapest Android phones.
Great timing on this post!

I just started to integrate angular.js into a rails app and felt lost on how to best handle it. In particular, angular-rails-resource looks very handy.
I'm pretty sure you could taste the provable difference were you unfortunate enough to buy it.
Definitely don't agree on his point about MVPs.
I waited too long and built an "EVP" and found out I had no customers.

Beautiful product, no business.

There is a lot of time spent in between "quite small" and "decent" on that graph.
I rather enjoy reading and writing it.

I also rather enjoy the excellent career in the bay area that Perl has facilitated.

As I was preparing to leave my last job, I learned Python and Ruby. (I even uploaded a gem for the latter.) I like both of those languages, and I've been toying with them for many years, but my day job has always been Perl.

It didn't seem likely that my next day job would be Perl, at least based on what I keep 'hearing'.

Strangely enough, the perfect position for me turned out to be a bike ride from home. And in Perl.

And I am quite fine with that.
> Owning and asserting a copyright does not make you a monopolist [...] All property rights are monopolies.

Copyright is not a property right, it is exactly a state-granted monopoly privilege, instituted on ostensibly utilitarian grounds. See http://stpeter.im/writings/essays/publicdomain.html

Cory Doctorow has elsewhere explained how IP used to be discussed in terms of a "creative monopoly" until the 1970s when the copyright industry began actively promoting the "intellectual property" moniker. The reason? It's a lot easier to go hat in hand to Congress to ask them to protect your "property rights" than to petition them to further extend your monopoly privileges. In much the same way, they'd like to now redefine copying as "theft". "You wouldn't steal a car." Don't fall for it.
Once again I cannot see how it can be used as DRM - what prevents from installing in a VM and sharing it around, writing a wrapper around the executable that intercepts system calls and just gives what it wants etc?
Animating with AngularJS
If they had robed a bank physically would they still not be extradited?

And given their neighbors experience with cyber war I woudl have expected Latvia to take this a lot more seriously
Your arguments are not self consistent.

>I see a problem with collecting information without probable cause or a warrant.

>I do not see the problem with convicting individuals who are committing crimes regardless of how that information was collected...

The second case is not possible without making an exception to the first, which then leads to the selective application of fundamental rights and that is paradoxical.

Mass surveilance will undoubtedly unearth crimes that would not otherwise come under suspicion in a free society. By definition, the surveilance will also target those who have commmited no crimes. The question is whether that risk is worth it. The Fourth amendment says no. Making exceptions for certain classes of people (even if probable criminals) is just a slippery slope.
I find wildly erratic punitive sentencing for accused offenders who choose to go to trial alarming.

But I'm not alarmed that the majority of offenders plea out.

Trials are enormously expensive, and, in a coldly rational statistical sense, most of the accused are in fact guilty --- the fact patterns in many of these cases and the evidence supporting them are very straightforward. That there would be some incentive for the accused to spare the system the expense of litigation doesn't bother me, especially because the more resources get freed up from pointless controversies, the more resources are available to handle meaningful ones.

So, I think we agree that there's a problem, but not what its causes are.

Either way: plea out or not, these cases don't get brought without "untainted" evidence. The problem is that the DOJ's definition of "untainted" is subtly broken. "Fruit of a poisonous tree" is a good Google search to follow up on this.
Yes, we completely agree. My point isn't that society should look to punish people instead of rehabilitate them. It's that it is human nature to want to punish people, and it takes a special kind of person to see past that and do what is best for society. The average highly-educated, often idealist member of our little community may be able to do it, but I have no faith that a random American would.
>This is interesting, as it's basically an admission that Aaron Swartz-style prosecutorial bullying is not limited to just computer-related cases.

I guess I always took it for granted that prosecutorial bullying is ever-present. It's interesting to come face-to-face with the reality that it's not part of everybody's worldview that the State is 'out to get you'. (no sarcasm)
Understanding Twitter Bootstrap 3
New PR intern in our Romanian branch 
New PR intern in our Romanian branch in Bucharest Zuzana Hlavkova: Read more: http://language-translation-project-management.com/2013/07/20/new-pr-intern-in-our-romanian-branch-in-bucharest/
> I see a problem with collecting information without probable cause or a warrant. Though I may not agree with drug laws, I do not see the problem with convicting individuals who are committing crimes regardless of how that information was collected unless the act of collecting the information affects the information (like confessions under duress).

You effectively contradict yourself: you can't say "no", reward them for doing it, and expect it to stop.

So effectively, your first sentence carries no weight, because you don't believe in enforcing it... you believe in rewarding law enforcement for doing the exact opposite.
You're right, correlation doesn't equal causation. However, in my specific case the implementation issues were came from issues in the team. In the end, implementation comes down to team.

(Hindsight is always 20/20, but everything we did wrong had to do with marketing and building and audience)
That's really the key; it does take some discipline to write maintainable Perl. But there's so many tools to help with that.
At risk of doing the same, please stop mucking up this thread with irrelevant/flame-bait comments.
Damn, I thought it was a Mozilla article for a second and clicked. I quickly realized my mistake - it's a former SEOmoz tricksters in different clothing :)
Tor security advisory: Old Tor Browser Bundles vulnerable
Fun fact: MS has spent more on W8 and Surface marketing than it has made on the Surface. http://www.geekwire.com/2013/microsoft-surface-revenue-853-m...
If you read any green tech blogs, there seems to be a constant stream of battery breakthroughs in the lab. But why do they not materialize in commercial batteries? Li-ion has been stuck at about the same level for more than ten years.

I was trying to find some meta research on what fails with the commercialization of these technologies. There's probably hundreds of breakthroughs per year, or at least that's the impression you get. You'd think at least some of them could be scaled up in a relatively straightforward way. Or maybe it's just press release hype and the research hasn't been going anywhere for fifteen years...
As a scientist who's studied at two unis with massive entrepreneurship and research monetisation schemes (Cambridge and Imperial) I have to disagree - the only people with graphene patents today will be research scientists or universities. They may not do anything with them, of course, but they'll still sue you if you try and use the application they patented.
And it has been already exploited:
http://wordpress.org/support/topic/plugin-ezpz-one-click-bac...
what for all bank robbery? You cant have lesser sentences for a cyber version of a crime it makes a mockery of natural justice.
Chicago Trading Pits Going Quiet, 165 Years After Shouting Began
I think most of the 'tips' and lessons learned make sense and are useful but I don't agree with the overall message. This is like saying 'I went to two restaurants and they were no good (for various reasons that can be avoided in the future), now I'll always eat at home'
You've misread the Reuters story. These cases start with "tips" based on excludable intelligence, but the DEA then diligently works to build evidence that isn't excludable. The excludable intelligence allows the DEA to "always be at the right place at the right time", but isn't (for instance) used as probably cause to effect searches.

(I still think this kind of evidence gathering should still be excludable, as it no doubt would if the root of the investigation was torture and not foreign intelligence).
I have had a few interesting problems with Samsung handsets over the past year as well. A couple examples I've observed:

* Samsung S3/Note2 - requestSingleLocationUpdate() would never return a location to the listener, where starting the location listener and then stopping it when you get your first result works fine...

* Samsung S3 (4.0.4) - onResume() then onPause() was being called repeatedly after the device blanked the screen (the time varies before it starts freaking out and calling onResume) - I observed it wait 7 minutes, then start calling onResume/onPause a few times per minute.

edit: formatting
Show HN: Execute a shell command each time a given file or directory changes
Oh, right, old code. CPAN is funny in that they have a central location to test multiple versions of code on multiple platforms and comment/patch them over time. I don't know of anything similar for any other language, probably because there isn't a CPAN equivalent for any other language (edit: there is JSAN and CCAN, but not quite the same).

http://stats.cpantesters.org/

Want to see how old code stacks up in testing? Let's pick a module and see all its dependencies and their test results. XML::Feed as a random example: http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=XML%3A%3AFeed&perl=lates...

Hmm, says no results for some of them. Let's drill down and select HTTP::Negotiate to see its test results. http://www.cpantesters.org/distro/H/HTTP-Negotiate.html

Looks like the latest version has been tested on lots of platforms, and it's good! Let's pick a different piece of code, something older, say from 2005? https://metacpan.org/release/DOMIZIO/CGI-Builder-CgiAppAPI-1... http://www.cpantesters.org/distro/C/CGI-Builder-CgiAppAPI.ht...

Ah! So we see the last version it worked with and on which platforms, but on the latest perl it's failed its tests. We can drill down and see why the tests failed: http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/c91a8b7c-4983-11e1-94...

Hmm, unprefixed autoloaded parameter. That's probably not too difficult to fix. I guess even though there's old crufty code that isn't always maintained across versions, we have pretty good visibility into when something failed, and with good tests we know why and how to fix it.

There's a lot more resources to take advantage of through CPAN, like bug trackers, review sites, development wikis, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPAN
For Minification, Brian Ford's ngmin grunt task works perfectly. The OP says they haven't tried it which to me suggests that they may not be using grunt at all, which is a mistake. Grunt takes care of a lot of workflow and deployment details, including minification, and should be part of every javascript developers toolset regardless of whether or not they use Angular.js.

For the "Directives are never 'done'" issue you should be able to attach any jQuery plugins to the DOM in question inside the directive compile function.
Does women being allowed to vote make anything better if you're a man ?

If this could become a viable alternative to regular meat, it has the capability of reducing a massive amount of suffering.
I think most people recognize that the team is the most important aspect of a startup - from Paul Graham allowing people to apply to YCombinator without an idea, to investors my co-founder and I have talked to being much more interested in who we are, what we know, how we get along, and why we do what we do than product or traction, I think it's safe to say that the team is the most important aspect of a company.

I wouldn't, however, decide to "go solo" next time; that may even be a worse option. You'll never find someone who you work with 100%, but you need a co-founder. Keep "shopping," find someone you click with, and have another go.
I'd love to target non-Apple platforms, but if I don't have the time to work on improving GNUStep. I suspect there are others in this camp. Until GNUStep catches up I'm fine with targeting OS X only if I need to write a native GUI application.
When I'm not out at a coffee shop or working from the waterfront, my setup consists of:

Ikea Linnmon/Alex[1] desk setup

30" high drafting stool

Monoprice monitor arm[2]

11" MacBook Air i5

27" IPS display[3]

USB hub to "dock" the Air with a USB sound card & two hard drives (one for Time Machine)

Magic Trackpad & generic Apple BT keyboard clone I don't mind beating the crap out of when I type.

Crappy Altec Lansing desktop speakers

iPad for podcasts & testing

Two cat beds for my "co-workers"

[1]: http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/S09932691/

[2]: http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=109&cp_id...

[3]: http://www.microcenter.com/product/384780/EQ276W_27-Inch_IPS...
Honestly, I think the potential advent of efficient fully-homomorphic encryption is potentially one of the largest effects we could ever see on privacy-related computing. The possibilities are absolutely staggering. Imagine, for example, a search engine that returns useful results but does not know what the user is searching for. And so on; the possibilities are well-covered in the literature.

As of right now, the current-day state-of-the-art fully-homomorphic schemes impose roughly a billion-factor overhead on operations, but this is quickly decreasing (in the past 4 years, we've already knocked off three orders of magnitude). But I am personally convinced that an efficient scheme would likely revolutionize privacy in computing. Exciting stuff, especially with recent events.

Unfortunately, I don't expect an efficient scheme to be widely-used for at least 15-25 years. For one, even if a super-efficient FHE scheme was published tomorrow, it'd probably take at least 6-10 years of powerful, sustained cryptanalysis for the community to trust it. Add the time to discover such a scheme (if even possible...) and you have quite a while. But still, the potential is amazing.
I don't think entirely ruling out partnership, or thinking it's the only way is right.

I've done both, and both offer interesting pros and cons. Namely if you have the ability to fund a project yourself while building it, you can be in the drivers seat more and some partners are okay with that.

Would you mind sharing your experiences?
Just a couple of days ago somebody on HN speculated this was happening, and I dismissed it as paranoia. Surely nobody is going to risk revealing the existence of a universal surveillance program over a few drug convictions, right? Twenty-eight of you agreed with me. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6134821

I give up. Apparently no speculation is out of bounds any more. If someone says it's all due to Nazi reptoids, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
What about the massive amount of non-violent drug offenders in jail?
"there is no way to de-obfuscate the code, not even in a million years."

Perhaps you're just being hyperbolic, but can you qualify this statement? Is it not possible in a million years given today's technology (this seems unlikely, even the marketing material suggested 100 years)?

Or are you claiming there is mathematical proof that advances in computational power, a growing body of knowledge about de-obfuscation, etc., will not break this approach?
Don't all these kinds of machines have a scrub disk option? Or just take the disk out and scrub it.
Correct, the particular system I encountered this minification issue has an Ant-based build (which calls r.js for concatenation and minification).

I'll have to check on your compile suggestion. I tried lots of things, including using the postLink etc. Do you have an example?
The recidivism rate in Sweden is 35%. Which means, that even with a rehabilitative-oriented system, you still have 1/3 of prisoners returning to jail. It does provide some substance to the claim that some criminals can't be rehabilitated, because even in one of the "best" systems, you still have a large number going back to prison.

Of course, the US recidivism rate is 67%, which is horrible, however it's very difficult to compare Sweden and the United States simply because you have some significant differences. It's difficult to assume that the only variable in play between the US and Nordic countries are simply the justice system.

First, you have a demographic differences. You also have significant differences in culture as well. In Sweden for example, single parent families are just 20% of all families with children. Yet in the US, 67% of all black families with children are single-parent, with 42% in the Latino community and overall a rate of over 30% for all families with children in the United States. In 1960, the overall rate was just 9%. I'm not arguing for or against single parent families, but there is a strong correlation between the likelihood of being arrested and the strength of the family unit. Here's an article that discusses it more, including research citations: http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/the-real-co...

Suggesting that the prison system is the primary cause of recidivism is to miss the point. We shouldn't be focusing on recidivism, we should be focusing on what gets people into prison in the first place.
>there is nothing you can do about these things.
It's gonna take generations of work to resolve it, but there's absolutely a way out of this. We may never find it, though.
The problem is that this produces an echo chamber, the things that majority 'agrees' with hits the top, and the things that folks 'disagree' with sink out of site. Upvoting/Downvoting comments shouldnt really be based on 'aggreement' but instead based on 'interesting', upvoting interesting or thought provoking comments regardless of wether you agree or not leads to more interesting conversation...