skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think it matters how much money a company spends on security, it'll get hacked if there's strong incentive for that event to occur. Basically, if you're popular... just assume you'll be hacked one day. I think there are only really 2 things you can do.

1. Just make sure the hack isn't something embarrassingly easy like SQL injection in the username/password field. If you get hacked, make sure the hacker had to do something really clever that any developer would go "whoa, that's not an exploit I see everyday..."

2. Assume a hacker got a bash shell to your system and apply the next level of security there. Salted hashes, PGP encryption on any sensitive data. Make sure the salt isn't sitting there in plain view and if pub/priv key, make sure the private-key isn't just sitting there on the same system without a passphrase.
An article shouldn’t be split across multiple pages on the web!
We have an infinitely long canvas to write on, along with an elegant
way of moving through it. Why would you need to split it up?"

Well, there are some times you would want to break up a long article. E.G. A tutorial that can touch on multiple steps can be helped with multiple pages. An alternative would be to provide in-page anchors and a contents list a la Wikipedia. This way you can link to or bookmark a particular step easily.
IMO that's in spite of their scollbars, not due to them.
Technically speaking, HTML 5 introduced web-workers which allows javascript to have multiple threads (see 1). However, it's still useful to think about them as being single threaded since workers are sandboxed, meaning they don't have access to the global namespace. This avoids issues commonly found in concurrent programming. E.g., separate threads cannot read and write to the same variable since they don't have access to each other's namespaces.

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/Performan...
Yeah - I am upset about what is going on, and it's funny because you're comments are of the opinion I should just "get over it and realize that humans suck".
Sorry, that's not a position I'll take.

Then, and not coincidentally, you're doomed to eternal disappointment.

As for my own worldview, I adhere largely to three maxims: Hanlon's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor), suggesting that one should never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity; public choice theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor); and a cynical reading of the Federalist Papers.
No, because my car is going to LONG outlast the proprietary and most likely terrible app that my car's manufacturer would write for the current generation of one particular phone.

Cars should never under any circumstances ever have specific apps like Spotify, Pandora, and Bing. In 15 years, people are going to feel pretty stupid about owning those. The 3.5mm TRS connector, however, is a long term open standard that will still be working long after Pandora folds.
I previously skimmed the Wikipedia article on politics, and it does mention companies once and "individual level" once. And yet, everything else I can find in the article assumes that the state is the topic of discussion.

The same goes for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_science. I also did a quick Google search for political science curriculums, and everything seems to deal with governments.
Definitely, though I'm not sure what kind of icon would properly indicate 'personal ownership rights', you could color-code.
not really an answer, but there was lush - http://lush.sourceforge.net/ - in that space, and it never really caught on.

update: actually, it moved, and there was a release in 2011 - http://sourceforge.net/p/lush/news/
Amazon is perfectly happy to print books on demand for low-circulation paperback books [1].

The kind of build-on-demand system that could print an iPhone then a DVD then a pushchair then a fitted shirt then a delicious tomato then a bottle of olive oil is a long way off. I'd happily bet $10 that such technology won't be commonplace by 2040.

[1] http://www.amazon.co.uk/POD
I do assume that almost all online services will be pwned. I have a small amount of faith that my Google account, Amazon account, and (major) bank account won't be compromised except by my government. Maybe a few other services are this trustworthy to me, but not many, and I can't think of them off the top of my head.

We just need to get used to using throw away credit card numbers from our credit card's website. Or buy game currency/points/time in stores, in the form of cards, to prevent giving out the info that will be pwned sooner or later, on one service or another.

And get used to using throwaway passwords. If your password being compromised on one service makes you worry about other services, you've already done it wrong.

I assume my passwords will be stolen. I even have a generic password I use for many sites that I do not and will never trust.

It could be stolen -- and hell probably has, knowing how many services have been pwned, and how many don't even realize it. But it won't give you anything close to access to any email, bank, or merchant website connected to my debit card, as they're all using unique passwords and 2-factor auth where available.

Startup Idea: Debit/Credit card services that provide not "throwaway" numbers, but separate numbers/info for every major subscription or service you use. Generate an Amazon number, an Xbox live number, a number for your cellphone payment. If any one number is compromised, it can be disabled and handled without any interruption or issue to other numbers and services.

In the age of constant pwning, a debit card that isolated the damage to that one service without any hassle or disruption to any other service would be brilliant. I know I'd pay for that. In fact, how easy would fraud monitoring be when the only charges to a specific number would be allowed from that 1 service. It makes the numbers useless outside of that 1 service you're using it for, even when stolen.
Baby Boomers (those born after 1945) are entering retirement.
But going off road is not even what we're talking about. We're talking about putting a lot more stuff in or on top of the vehicle. More than you would with a sedan. I have no problems with people who buy a Sport Utility Vehicle and never go off road. Having the Falcon Wings reduce the options for a roof rack is a valid concern that has nothing to do with going off road.
The Next Level Of Search: Google Authorship
The guy was obviously acting in good faith. Sure, he may not have known the right way to go about doing what he was demonstrating, but that was ignorance, not malice.
though the difference from scroll bar to the article indicator on my site is i set mine to only the length of the article not the page, so long comments sections/footers dont contribute to your progress.
so modest http://www.enjoy-your-style.com/images/amish-women-swimwear....
I worked, for a brief instance in time, at a roadside produce stand. At first I got really hung up on whether or not I could give a customer an accurate, precise answer to their question. With time, I realized that 19/20 customers didn't want the correct answer; they simply wanted a confident answer to allay their concerns.

To wit: a customer asked for a tomato with qualities A, B, and C (anyone who thinks that such a conceptually complex interest in tomatoes is unnecessary needs google 'heirloom tomatoes'). I recommended a Black Krim tomato which, to the best of my knowledge, I believed would meet all of her needs.

She happily purchased six Black Krim tomatoes and went along her merry way. I then asked my manager if there was a better recommendation.

He promptly told me that 1) I was diametrically incorrect in my choice for meeting her needs, and 2) it didn't matter, even in the least.

Sure enough, later that week the same customer came back and specifically thanked me for my excellent recommendation.

I've been reading the comments on various progress bar threads here and elsewhere in the past few days, and I think many of those who dismiss this UI pattern are missing the forest for the trees.

It's not about accurately representing the loading of elements in the page.
It's not about accurately predicting and displaying when the page will finish loading.
It's not about supplanting browser features for the sake of establishing a site-wide or web-wide standard.

---

It's about making the user feel like things that are out of their view and control are working properly.

---

When I look back on my childhood experiences with computers in the 80s and 90s I distinctly remember my litmus test for "is it frozen" was "can I hear those clicky noises from the hard drive".

Those noises told me nothing directly actionable nor did they accurately describe what had been done or what was left to be done. If, hypothetically, I ran an app caught in some bizarre infinite I/O hard drive loop those noises would have been misleading, and I eventually would have given up and hard-rebooted the computer

Spinning wheels generally act consistently; a loading bar such as this juts and pauses without any noticeable pattern. It gives us the impression that something is happening behind the scenes that we can't directly observe. If it acted uniformly we might just as easily believe that a dumb loop was living out its repetition.

Actual representation of reality is not the point. Perception is the point.

I'm sure that popularity could result in a harmful cliche-ification of this UI pattern, but I believe it has its place and its purpose. A browser cannot divine the amount of content that will be loaded on a dynamic site pre-execution.

At this point in time, at least, I don't mind encountering these loading bars. I can't really think of an example that irk me in any way. If I notice an in-site loading bar sticking around for a while there's probably something happening (or not happening) that would have pissed me off whether or not that loading bar were there.
Replying to myself as this could have been misunderstood: programmers are not going hungry in the US, and yet, comply with things they may consider unscrupulous. We shouldn't, even if we were starving, but that's a tall order for most human beings.

I'm not intransigent, but I try not to redraw the line of how low I'll go according to context.
> Your misconception is that it's government who creates property titles.

Because it is.

> Even in the animal world, territorial rights are enforced by animals themselves or groups of animals.

The power of the each individual, or collaborating group, to claim as much territory as they can effectively defend, independent of who held it before, is pretty much the opposite of what "property" and "property titles" are.

> Now what government does is it provides a service of protecting that property. Indeed, it's much better than having to protect your own property yourself all the time, but it's much worse than hiring private protection agencies. Two reasons: 1) you can't stop paying for the government service if you dislike it

Yes, you can.

Now, there may be negative consequences to this, but, in the absence of a government to constrain the action of "private protection agencies" (which are, de facto, governments) exercising force to defend property, the same can be expected. In fact, where such private protection agencies have played a major role in protecting property (with or without the consent of whatever de jure government nominally operated in the area), retaliation against those who attempt to opt-out of their "protection" has been a frequent feature of their operation.

> 2) customers who may need various levels of protection cannot subscribe to various service plans, thus some customers get inadequate levels or protection, while some subsidize protection of others.

I find it interesting that you posit "the rich can't buy better protection of their property rights than the poor" as a problem with government, but I think you'll find considerable disagreement on two grounds with that claim:

* First, disagreement that the absence of equal protection is a problem, and
* Second, disagreement that the absence of an ability for the rich to buy better protection is, in fact, a feature of government in the real world (however much it might be in some theoretical models.)
Yes, I was thinking specifically about "pockets" which have long history of this.. Germans in places like PA or OH, Irish and Italians in basically any northeastern city, Polish and other Slavs in Chicago, Nordic in the upper midwest, Ashkenazi in New York, Dutch in New York, French in Louisiana, Spanish in the west but increasingly everywhere... Even taking 20th and 21st century immigration as "rounding error", I don't think there's very many places you can go without being surrounded with non-English names.
My guess is it would be something like the well-worn 3-2 pull down; you could get there, but the loss in quality is annoying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-two_pull_down
I appreciate the complexity of the subject a lot. I understand we can't just break iframes. The frustrating thing is that sandboxed iframes left out one essential option: allow-plugins. Yes, allow-plugins would be a security concern and it goes against sandboxing but so does allow-top-navigation. We can go back and forth forever on that subject but the fact is that ads use flash and limiting the use of iframe sandboxing sucks (which makes me say it is horrible).

Fundamentally, something better should exist and websites get the flak of bad iframe security. Annoyingly, any site with an iframe on it can't determine what locations are being accessed within the iframe to be able to accurately let there be a "report ad" feature that grabs the sites involved. Sometimes ad network iframes are nested 3-4 deep (disgusting but true) and it is impossible to read the location (yet these iframes can call window.top.location with ease).

I don't know what needs to exist but trying to work against these bad actors is nearly impossible for web devs (yet the burden is placed on the site).

Thanks for taking the time to comment - I understand it's very complex but I feel like this important subject hasn't seen a lot of real world use (we've decided against using sandboxing because it doesn't work for ads).
Misleading title. He did not hack his account. He bypassed privacy/security restrictions and was able to post on his wall.
Neat. Not vastly different from gitk. Crashes for me after I try the fetch button.
> "The language is restricted in various ways to prevent error that can result in an unrestricted environment."

Sadly, this is not true for us programmers. By and at large, we have preferred to devise mechanisms (such as exceptions and contracts) that protect us from the consequences of our mistakes, rather than attacking the root cause of these mistakes - our failure to enforce pre- and postconditions using static techniques. And this situation is not going to improve as long as we stick to a limited vision that embraces integers, strings, lists and trees, but not equality of terms as types.
I think a good case could be made for such an automatic system... although it's probably a somewhat too complex / labor intensive task at this particular stage for this particular project!

As for the write-up however, the process I currently use is very simple (and it's pretty much all "manual labor").

To partition a score into time intervals, I have a couple of lines of javascript that record the time the audio is at, together with where in the score I click (and where I aim to click on the note currently being played).

It doesn't take too much time and effort to partition a score this way actually, unless the piece is slightly complex. Beethoven's 5th took a little more effort than Air for example ;)

Hope this helps for now! And I am planning to publish a more detailed write up of everything, so please stay expect that in the next month or so (easiest to hear about via Twitter or by submitting your email to the site).

Thanks for your interest and suggestions!
I watched the video, and it looks really cool, but the way I was taught to use git was to create a branch, make your changes, commit the changes, then merge back to master, rinse and repeat.

Is that not the standard way of using github? How does that look in this scenario? Everything almost always being in a straight line, and the author always working on 'master' makes it a bit confusing to imagine in a real-world scenario (based on my Git usage).
> It appears that there is a reduction in violence when one entity (usually the state) achieves a monopoly on law and force.

Does the data you're hinting at include wars? Does it attempt to control for other variables which may be somewhat orthogonal to the existence of a state, like technology, medicine, wealth, types of weaponry in existence, etc.?
US and UK at odds over security tactics
There is a huge demographic (baby boomers) in the U.S. that are becoming seniors [1]. That probably has something to do with this phenomenon.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boom
But Ben! What happens when spiders crawl your site and can't find comment content?
It really isn't a conspiracy anymore. It's more like a statement of fact. Media in the traditional sense, just pure and simple, isn't what it used to be in more than one way. Maybe it's the people tweeting the news instead of articles that change governements now (not that i'd want that, but meant as in the expression).

I'm pretty certain the watergate scandal would never have ended the way it did, if it happened in 2013. It would just be dusted under the rug, and a retroactive law passed through to legalize the offense.
Perhaps it would be even better to say, "power transmission kills."
Go Lumoid - so happy to see them finally out in the open! Disclosure - I'm married to one of the founders :).
Also, Glio looks like a copycat, so it is exactly Yelp for Brazil. That is what they are building, not just a form of explain their model.

Remember those times when people discussed how YC model was "cooler" than Rocket Internet model? Those times are gone.
MyKolab.com: Building the Open Source Cloud service that was missing
I think this discussion is going to be a regurgitation of everything said in the original one. So here goes my part:

Facebook's rules were only available in english - despite having a way to switch most of facebook to arabic, the guy is obviously not a strong english speaker.

Rules are only guidelines for people who can't (or aren't allowed to) exercise good judgment. Rules are meant to be black and white, but real life is rarely so. In this case absolutely no harm was done, or even suggested, by the guy's actions. Facebook's decision to apply judgment rather than zero-tolerance is commendable.

EDIT: Facebook is still doing the brainless zero-tolerance thing. Shame on them. I should have read the article rather than assume the best.

PS the best company I ever worked for had as the first line of their employee handbook: "Don't do anything stupid just because it is written down in this book."
OK, thank you for letting me know!

Just checked out your video + followed you on youtube! Looks very cool as well!
Encouraging ignorance is even worse than encouraging malice :P
Le tote is like Neckflix from the series The league.

http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-leagues-netflix-for-neckt...
I understand, but those are hardly two conflicting things, are they ?

Julia does seem to use some sort of Scheme in their implementation, wouldn't it make sense to allow S-expressions in the language (or is it allowed ?) ? Or maybe, the designers/implementors felt that it wasn't necessary ?
Development environments for beginners: ruby, javascript, & python
However, they need to change the A in the logo from:

|=|
|=|
| |

to:

===
|=|
| |

because I read it as METH.
Don't agree. If you attempt to communicate a security bug and get ignored or told "it's not a bug", then you can do pretty much anything you want "within reason". Posting a harmless block of text on Mark's wall isn't the end of the world. He could have posted something extremely offensive, then I would not be on his side.
If someone told me there was a way to exploit my LinkedIn account, I said "no way", then she edited my LinkedIn profile to add "I really love fluffy bunnies" to my current job title - I'd correct my job title, then say "Okay. Good job. Tell me how you did it".
In the same way I think it would be ridiculous to get a speeding ticket for going 66 MPH when the limit is 65mph, this guy should get the reward despite this minor technicality. He tried doing it the "right" way, it didn't work. Yes, I know he wasn't super clear & he posted on someone's wall but FB could have at least tried to clear it up with him.
Imagine if hospitals worked that way, someone shows up clearly in distress but doesn't speak english. Do you just say, "Well. I don't know what you're saying, so get out". You at least try to figure out what's going on...
From what I've read, FB didn't even do that... so messaging on Mark's wall is just a small slap on the wrist so FB will make more of an effort next time.
At the very minimum, FB could update their TOS to highlight the important sections for this situation, give the guy the reward, tell security-staff to be more supportive in the future, then announce that they will refuse to pay out on anyone copying this guy's actions going forward.
Thanks for a great suggestion; that's a feature very likely to come in the near future actually! I'll probably post it together with a few other updates to Twitter, so please stay tuned!
Very nice! Have you considered going by "Ricosta Cruz"? It sounds kind of cool that way. NProgress is perfect for something I'm just about to finish, thanks!
Well, also the resistance of the load.
I'm sure this has been talked about before, but I think the ideal of what a scroll bar should try to impress on the user is that it is a shading, representing the area they currently see, over the entire bar, representing the entire length of the page. Basically similar to what Sublime does, showing you a zoomed out view of the text with a shading over the section you currently see. http://i.stack.imgur.com/UeGnE.png

Obviously, this is pretty much how the size of the bar is calculated already, but few designs actually translate it very well. That's what really struck me about the iOS and OS X Lion scroll bars over the others he showed. They really do a much better job at actually conveying this to the user, or at least, they did for me. Ubuntu's terminal scrollbar is also similar in this regard. It would be awesome to see default designs start to focus on this in the future.
Another thing that's misleading, Facebook isn't the one paying out:

> Now, Marc Maiffret, chief technology officer of cybersecurity firm BeyondTrust, is trying to mobilize fellow hackers to raise a $10,000 reward for Shreateh after Facebook refused to compensate him.
And listening too? ;)
Not to denigrate the work done here, but I find it hard to see the excitment over this new UI pattern as anything more than a fad, and anticipate that will go through a highly predictable cycle of 'why you need a progress bar' through 'progress bars considered harmful' etc. etc.

I suggest rereading this insightful article from last year when the Pinterest layout was flavor of the month.
http://jfornear.co/the-pinterest-layout-will-not-save-you/