skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The FBI was doing a whole lot more than trying to link him to the communists. It was standard operation to infiltrate all civil rights groups. I don;t know specifically what they did to King's org, but the Black Panthers were fucked by the FBI. Malcom X's body guard, for example, was an undercover FBI agent. Most of the civil rights groups had undercover FBI inside them, and in high ranking positions.

Yet another example of our government hating our freedoms.... Oh wait, I thought those were the terrorists....
Scientist controls colleague's finger with mind
Ok, just to be clear, the comment I actually replied to ends with You're hiring yes-men to do your "independent review".
True, but languages/standard libraries don't break quite like frameworks do. This mostly due to the extreme coupling that a framework induces on client code.

Frameworks mean you get to skip the design step, at the risk of having you by the balls later on.
Great. Now can we see more services implement easy to use client-side encryption before uploading data to their servers?
Kinda. While Butcher fictionalizes is, and expands on the truth, there are many tunnels throughout the city, and it's possible to traverse most of the loop underground.

Plus there's good ole Wacker drive...
As I see it if you are developing something small for a client, you want to get something created ASAP get it out and forget about it. So yes, then it makes sense to use the current best framework and write code that is tightly coupled with it.

But when you start to create larger systems, you will have to think about maintaining the code, adding new features and fixing bugs. Then it is not so fun if your code depends too much on a framework and you don’t update it when new versions are released.
It is not fun googling for something and in the one result you get someone is pointing out that you are using an obsolete framework, and noticing that the post is 10 years old. (Did happen with some software I used to be developer on)
So, he's not criticizing Paul Graham for making the statement (and admits he understands Graham isn't anti-immigrant or anti-foreigner), but is instead criticizing him for not taking responsibility for how his words might be taken out of context by everyone else? Is that it?
They will manually remove sites for spam in their own search engine, but they don't ban the associated Adsense account. In other words, they are more than happy to pay you to spam other search engines.
Much less than talented people working on irrelevant "problems". But if it's where the money is, I don't blame them; I'd probably do the same. In the end, being happy should be more important than the advancement of science - and if money can buy some of your happiness, then go for it.
I don't think the panel is ideologically independent at all, and rather doubt such independence was a goal of the panel to begin with. I don't think the panel is being run for "your" benefit.

(I appreciate how gracious your comment was. Thank you.)
King himself sued people over the copyright. We need to be careful not to revise history and turn people who did great things into saints.
Fogbeam Labs revamp website, release new tools to cut through information fog
Great. Now we can pretend we're secure instead of grappling with the problem that we're not. :)

Observe that SJCL's own authors warn about this problem.
> It makes him problematic if you think the charter of the panel is an adversarial interrogation of NSA.

It makes him problematic if you think that the panel has any purpose suitable to a public panel at all.

* If it is a PR effort, its problematic because Sunstein's known biases make it easy to discount his opinion when the underlying facts aren't reviewable.

* If it is a serious effort to get to the bottom of what is going on at the NSA, it is problematic because Sunstein's known biases make it unlikely that he will be interested in probing to deeply.

* If it is a private effort to reassure Obama about legality, that doesn't make sense for a public panel of this type at all, no matter what the composition is.
Off-topic, but do you consider knowing just HTML/CSS being knowing how to code? If so, do you consider knowing something like LaTeX, Markdown, or reStructuredText to include knowing how to code?

Not that I'm any authority, but I generally considering "knowing how to code" to require at least being able to use some sort of branching operation as well as some some sort of looping/recursion (which yes, is really just branching).
Venice is built largely on wood pylons. They are in many cases over a thousand years old.
Not a single country allows unlimited freedom of expression. Every single one, including the US, has substantial limitations based at least on situations where that speech harms others (e.g. slander/libel/defamation/incitement laws).

In that respect laws specifically targetting a very specific set of lies, that also happen to be defamation of a large group of people (and so potentially actionable based on other laws in many cases anyway, including in many cases in countries without laws against Holocaust denial) is one of the most targeted, limited such restrictions around.
I have to disagree with part of the premise. While the speech is copyrighted, that might not be the reason most people haven't read or seen the entirety of the speech. If schools really wanted to teach it, it would be well within fair use laws for them to show the whole thing. There are probably a variety of other reasons why you don't see this speech taught in schools.

First one that comes to mind is its length. Unlike the Gettysburg Address, this isn't some short speech that could be easily recited from memory.

Secondly, there is a lot of religious imagery in the speech. I could certainly imagine people objecting to having the speech presented in a secular school.

Finally and probably most importantly, what do speeches really teach us? They aren't particularly valuable outside of context. How many of the speeches listed here (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/top100speechesall.html) are really taught in school?
So, is this also working with Clojurescript?
Open Source and the iOS App Store
Now you came as rude and tasteless.

Nobody asked for something "utterly worshipful", and nobody sounded like a "fanboy" in this thread, and surely not the original commenter (oh, and using such words as "fanboy"? Are you fifteen years old?).

His concern was if this was an accurate portrayal or if Wozniak was resentful and downplayed some of Jobs skills.

Nobody expected Woz to say that Jobs had Bill Joy level programming skills.
They hand pick spam sites and remove them every day... There is an entire department dedicated to detecting spam.
Some people care about doing a good job and getting paid well for it, not the "glory". And if the guy taking the spotlight shows his appreciation, staying in the shadow can be just as rewarding.

Or back on topic: I think someone like Woz would be totally miserable being in the spotlight and under constant pressure the way Jobs was.
this is essentially the same trick that gave birth to Karplus-Strong algorithm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karplus%E2%80%93Strong_string_s...
Black Betty: Cinema Camera That Can Shoot, Edit, & Post Footage (a MacMini)
I've never heard this claim however I was interested so I took the 2011 data for US cities with a population of 250K or more and it looks like the distribution isn't even close to support that claim although Detroit looks awful

https://docs.google.com/a/migrantgeek.com/spreadsheet/oimg?k...
Mobile Web UI Framework: ChocolateChip-UI
Employees don't bear the same risks investors do. They earn their wages risk free, even if they don't generate enough value to justify their pay. They might lose their job, but you never come out of a job with less money than you came in with.

Investors wouldn't take risks if they couldn't reap rewards from them, which means workers wouldn't have the jobs either. The end result would be even less fair.

In any case, the modal investor isn't Paris Hilton or Warren Buffet, it's an ordinary working stiff trying to save for retirement in his 401k, or a pension fund for workers at other companies.
The speech is readily found by those who know how to Google. Perhaps more Americans would have read the speech if not for the crazy copyright laws, but I think most people haven't read it simply because most people aren't interested in reading historical speeches.

It's a little off-topic and a little cynical, but I think the larger issue here is that we've watered our teaching of history (and most things) down to soundbites and simple explanations. What we learned about Columbus, MLK, and all the founding fathers were stripped of everything controversial to create flawless heroes with views no PTA member would find offensive.

How many of the influential speeches in history have you read? I think Time's list is a good starting place. These were all inspiring, influential, and are all readily available for free:

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/...

If you have read even half of these, maybe then I'll buy the copyright argument.
Let's step past the snide insults and look at relevant realities:

Glocks are a remarkably high-density-value product. One cubic meter of quintessential Glocks (model 17 gen 4) would have a street value of at least US$500,000. This is typical of medium-quality handguns, whatever the make & model. A way to acquire & distribute them would be found.

ARs can be made from scratch with stuff bought from Lowes or Home Depot (or pretty much any decent hardware store). Go look up "80% AR receiver" for a good look. AK47s are much easier to make, and have equivalent gross performance.

There is of course the current meme regarding "3D printed guns". Not quite up to desired quality yet, but those involved in the project(s) are making amazing progress in a very short time.

All those types are at the upper end of complexity. Simpler designs (bolt/break/lever/revolver action) are much easier to make; we have a rich history of domestic manufacture thereof involving low-tech processes.

The only "hard part" about making guns is the barrel and primers. Hard, but not impossible for individuals.

Remember the spark that started the revolution resulting in the USA was, in fact, gun control (look up "Lexington and Concord"). Our culture of gun ownership by upstanding citizens is very deeply ingrained, and any suggestion of curtailing it is intensely opposed. Were all guns banned & confiscated within US borders, the rate of garage/basement gun manufacturing would be astounding.

Guns are simple machines. Get a cartridge into a rifled tube, provide sufficient structural support, impact the primer, bang. They're not hard to make. Quality manufacturing has raised our de facto expectations, but workable mundane products can be turned out by a guy with a lathe and a hacksaw. It's not magic.
And, the U.S. government had to _pay_ the king family $800,000 for the rights to use his copyrighted words on the very statue built to memorialize him.

(http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/08/maya-angelou-u...)
Getting Started with PHP on Engine Yard Cloud
Nice analysis. But why is this trending now? This is from 2009.
I'm sorry but I have to ask, is this sarcasm? I can't really tell.
Ask HN: Lisp machine Raspberry Pi?
Are there any Raspberry Pi like devices out there based on a LISP machine architecture?
There is actually quite a bit of historical controversy regarding Einstein's work on relativity and whether he deliberately avoided crediting the work of Poincare, Lorentz, Minkowski, and others. His initial paper on special relativity had no citations, despite the existence of a lot of relevant work by others.
My guess is that it's the third bullet, but that someone in the administration thought it might serve some PR purpose, or that the administration felt like convening such a panel without announcing it would indicate doubts about the program that don't really exist.

The reality, of course, is that hardly anyone knows who any of these people are.

Have you read much of Sunstein's stuff? What's the thing you found most problematic? Surely it isn't Nudge (a great book! but not particularly indicative of Sunstein's legal philosophy.)
Timeline: how internet telephony has changed since Skype launched 10 years ago
Actually, it was printed in full yesterday in the Dutch newspaper NRC Next.
The key to this one will be figuring out what features of git (and in particular github) will make it successful in other verticals.

I wonder if some key CS concepts are so fundamentally ingrained, but that writers think about their work flow differently.
Announcing Teleport Tool: Backwards-compatible resilience to network outages
1. This is debatable, but probably too long a discussion to have over HN.

2. Once you're "running a script on the target that loads the correct variables", you're doing configuration management. There needs to be a mechanism for retrieving the metadata from somewhere, usually centralized. You'd be better off delivering this through a CM tool to build and maintain the file.

3. This doesn't work. Not only do you have the conflicts to deal with, and a post-configure script a hacky way to deal with it, but now if you need to change a single cron job, you have two unsatisfying options - make a new meta-package for that one cron job and overwrite the versions delivered by the five other packages, which will break any config validation you're doing (as one would hope you're doing), or I can update all of the packages that provide that cron job and update them all (which works, but now you have to come up with a way to notify your package that just in this case you shouldn't restart services adn the like just because the package was deployed. On top of that, there's an even worse issue, which is - how do you know when the last cron job is removed? If I have five packages that all create that file, either removing the first one removes it, which breaks the other four, or I have to come up with post-remove script logic that tries to programmatically determine if this is the last reference to that file and remove it only then. If I did the latter, my meta-cron job package update would break this model as well, and I'd have to remember to remove that specifically as part of uninstalling the their packages.

4. I guess this works, but now you're dealing with chroot'ed environments, which means deploying not just the specific stack you want, but all of the necessary libraries, and as you say, your original package manager idea doesn't really deal with this.

And tomcat gets a lot more complicated too, when you're trying to manage shared XML resource files. In fact, the whole package manager notion really requires the "X.d" style approaches to loading files.

But all of these challenges are why package managers are the worst solution for deploying configuration files. Package managers are great for deploying static software, shared libraries, and the like. I'll even concede that dropping code on a machine is fine with a package manager. But they're not designed to deal with dynamic objects like config files and system configurations.

In fairness, there's a whole other third class of objects that currently both package managers and configuration management tools do terribly, and that's things that represent internal data structures - database schema, kernel structures, object stores, etc.

I've built a couple of configuration management tools and work for a company that has a few more, so this is something I've spent a lot of years working with. Package maangement as configuration distribution is attractive for simplicity, but falls apart beyond the simple use cases. Model-driven consistency is vastly superior.
Copyrighted by EMI/Sony:
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/copyright-king-why-the-i-ha...

There is some effort to make it public (as it should be):
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/internet-activists-are-wagi...
It's a damn shame Ms. Ronstadt has been robbed of her ability to sing. Her early hits are among my most favorites.

It seemed like the combination of Linda and Andrew Gold could do no wrong. Plus Waddy Wachtel in her live band... :)
>The counter argument, though, is "How many
>people have read Lincoln's Gettysburg Address"?

Your counter-argument was about as valid as saying "How many people have needed freedom?"

In any case, your counter-argument seems unrelated to the OP's post... Whether or not people would read or listen to the entire speech, the OP was arguing that copyright laws are impeding the creation of new content, the consumption of existing, important content and society's understanding of itself.

>I think this says more about our "sound-bite" culture than
>how protective the family is of the audio.

Ironically, your comment represents the 'sound-bite' culture quite effectively.
Regarding #2, I don't ever recall Google giving current month's search volume data in the old keyword tool. As far as I know, they showed a rolling 12-month average which was usually 1-2 months behind. If you wanted numbers at the monthly level, then you would have to export your results to get the monthly breakdown. Even then, the export didn't include the current month's data. For example, if I exported some keyword data in July it would only show me up to May.

Also, the reason I found search volume data differing between old KW tool and new KW planner is because Google now lumps all device types into one number. Previously, they defaulted to Desktop and Laptop only, so you'd have to change your filters to get Mobile. Now they lump Desktop, Laptop, and Mobile into one number which accounts for the higher search volumes in the current tool.
>I hoped that in 2020 Racket will be around 5th position in "the most popular language" rankings with Clojure in the first ten too. Now it looks like Clojure is taking the lead - maybe Racket2 will change this again.

I don't think will ever see a Lisp in the top 5 most popular rankings (assuming we can measure actual use, which, somewhat roughly, we can).

In 2020 we'll probably see imperative and functional imperative hybrids topping the charts.
This completely ignores that companies will sell, and edit, popular public domain works for a profit, if they can.

It was initially a defensive copyright by the King, Jr. estate. Fox Records started selling records of the speech in 1968 [1]. And, CBS was rebroadcasting the speech for commercial purposes [2]. Only later did his family more strictly control the work and likeness of King, Jr. Otherwise, we might have seen the Dr. King, Jr. version of the Obama-hitler posters of 2008, or his face on a box of children's cereal.

[1] http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/mlk_spee...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estate_of_Martin_Luther_King,_J....
I'm pretty sure we read the whole thing in school. It was not long.

Of course, probably only about 10% of us really understood what he meant by that phrase you quoted, but hey, at least the school system tried.
IIRC, this has always been on stripes job page. Always thought it was a clever idea.
Unless copyright law has changed since then, the circle c doesn't matter. The way copyright works in the US, the rights to any creative work are automatically reserved for the author.
The extent of the jurisdiction may be a squishy factor. The "greater metropolitan area" may extend well beyond the strictly-speaking city limits.
What about draftin.com? I use that already and I like it a lot.
Loved it.

Just a tip: when the command got a long man page you can't really see the line matching the option in the top of the page and the man section down on screen.

If you guys could keep the command on the top of the screen even when scrolled down that would be superb.
Very cool idea! One comment in defense of the host. Hosting a game that depends on users hitting the page every 10 seconds at the least on a shared server was not a great idea. Shared servers are notoriously (and understandably) unstable -- mainly because of sites that overuse their resources. If a single site is taking down an entire server worth of clients, the best course of action is to always disable that client first, and then work with them on a solution after. It's not fair for all the others on that same server to have their sites down or slow because of one site.

Which is why I pretty much always recommend against shared hosting, unless it's some static site that doesn't need constant uptime.
I remember reading that about a year ago though Letters of Note (which is often excellent), and being absolutely blown away by how eloquent King was. It was an amazing letter.
The function was already established: it made a beep. The entire discussion was around form. It's not form over function, it's arguably exactly the right balance between the two.

I wouldn't say that only those who care solely about function are the only worthwhile people, either. Unless you wear only woven sackcloth and eat only nutrient pills.
Youtube teases us with new logo
How To Make A Bootstrap 3 Theme The Proper Way
Thomas Edison, Power-Napper: The Great Inventor on Sleep & Success
From someone (not me) who's dealt with publishing excerpts in a book, at least one major publisher's lawyers have decided that the text of the speech was indeed a "public performance" - given in a public place, and broadcast on public radio - and therefore not under copyright. The King family are apparently notoriously insistent on high royalties for any use of the estate's copyrighted works, but they seem to only have a firm lock on the video recordings.

(Of course, this may be something that has yet to be tested in court, so Don't Try This At Home unless you have the money for a large lawsuit.)
Hey,

Martin from Codified here. For what it's worth, I didn't submit this article to HN so surprised it got here - it was meant to be a quick overview of IO issues on shared hosts and the impact it can make.

I ran the tests a few times over a few days, pulling from the latest git source. We use a build script from a highly tuned bootstrapped mono install to build, which I will update the blog article.

I'll also publish a new article about how we build Mono, if it's of interest to people.
Yet Fox News published it not two days ago:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/27/transcript-martin-luthe...
You absolutely are. Otherwise, what's the point in hiring you?
I didn't read it as belligerent. He stuck to facts only and avoided emotional vocabulary.
I've never seen a business person use a WP phone. Never. And I do get to talk to quite a lot of them. It's iOS most of the time with very few Androids. WP is simply not a factor. There are markets/territories where WP is doing quite well, especially in low income countries because you get them quite cheap. But when I say 'doing quite well', I mean: You actually get to see them in 1 out of 10 phones.
> > It's a fact that it is easier and faster to comprehend images than words.

> That's not at all a fact. It might be faster to recognize images than words

There is one point that almost all of these icons vs. text discussions omit. And that is an additional phrase at the end of the sentence:

"It is faster to recognize images than words, __after you have learned what the image means__".
A perhaps naive question: could this sort of thing tap into Clojure's type hints rather than using external annotations? So rather than writing the example in the post:

(ann my-inc [Number -> Number])

(defn my-inc [n]
(let [internal-number (Integer/parseInt "1")]
(+ n internal-number)))

one could write this:

(defn ^Number my-inc [^Number n]
(let [internal-number (Integer/parseInt "1")]
(+ n internal-number)))

...and then run a type checker that reads and analyzes the hints?

Of course, the core.typed annotations could preserve whatever information they need in the compiled output, whereas the type hints aren't preserved past the compile phase (as far as I can tell.) Is that the limitation that requires defining type information in separate annotations?