skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well for one they used to always show on the maps... now most of the time they don't. It used to also be easier to load an address close to where pub wanted to navigate and select what is near here... that option is gone, so it is harder to navigate somewhere now when you know where you want to go, but don't have the actual address. Stared places have you the option of having a location already selected, but now it is very inconsistent.
Report: Knicks' Smith suspended over substance
Good riddance. Psychiatry by and large is a sham field. Physicians who practice it love seeing themselves as artists who are experts in identifying the subtleties of human behavior. That's their way of saying there's very little underlying science guiding their practice.

Many of the diagnoses given are pulled out of thin air and made to justify a patient's admission, or to appease a patient's desire to feel as if they have a treatable illness. I would ask psychiatrists I trained with to explain why a drug worked or why a disease developed. They would do nothing more than give me the same surface-level information we all know: SSRIs block serotonin reuptake, leading to more serotonin in the synaptic cleft that would then cause increased stimulation, and voila, you're not depressed. This is information anyone can attain with a google search. The majority of their knowledge dealt with pharmacological dynamics.

I sat in on a psychiatry conference one afternoon where the docs discussed the treatment of several patients. Never was a scientific article or concept uttered. It was all "well, let's try him on seroquel and olanzapine, let's also throw Paxil in there." It was evident that their treatment protocol was largely one of extremely unsupported trial-and-error based on very, very unique experiences, anecdotes, and preferences each psychiatrist had.

Now, I don't want to discredit the entire field. I do know friends and family who have benefited from psychiatric medications, although that could entirely be due to placebo effect. What needs to happen first is that we need to attain a much deeper understanding of how the brain works on the low and high levels, mechanically and abstractly. Mechanically so that we may develop effective meds, abstractly so that we may learn how to manipulate cognitive processes, like with what we see with CBT, which has worked wonders for many with depression -- no medication involved.

tl;dr: Psychiatry is a very, very loose and abstract field. You can't run any diagnostic tests on patients. It's mostly a field of educated guessing and confirmation bias. We need better mechanical and abstract understanding of the mind before we douse it in chemicals.
The article didn't say they can break internet crypto. Anyone can break MOST crypto. It's a matter of effort. I'm still looking for the actual claim that's supposed to be scary.

> Thursday's revelation that US and British intelligence agencies are able to decode most Internet traffic

Ok, most isn't encrypted. So that means nothing. Let's go to that source...

> The National Security Agency (NSA) and its British counterpart have successfully defeated encryption technologies used by a broad swath of online services, including those provided by Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Yahoo,

This doesn't say anything about encryption, per se. It says that it can access big data, which everyone admits to. That's not breaking encryption either (bypassing is not breaking). Let's dig deeper...

> They reveal a highly classified program codenamed Bullrun, which according to the reports relied on a combination of "supercomputers, technical trickery, court orders, and behind-the-scenes persuasion" to undermine basic staples of Internet privacy, including virtual private networks (VPNs) and the widely used secure sockets layer (SSL) and transport layer security (TLS) protocols.

So the only thing this means is that it's likely they bruteforce some subsets (anything under 256bit AES) and bypass it.

This looks a lot like FUD and nothing surprising has been "discovered".

I like the synopsis here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1lsvh2/us_and_uk...
They're losing a lot of political capital, which should limit their ability to further expand their reach in the immediate future.

They're also an item of debate now, which could potentially result in loss of capability further on. At the next round of elections, Democratic candidates will likely have to defend an unpopular intervention in Syria, they'd rather not add to that pile a defence of some invented Federal right to unwarranted spying on everyone's communications; and it's a potentially easy target for small-government Republicans.
I think the former employee just wanted to stress how this is way worse for the NSA than their worst case scenario. It's just to draw attention, nothing else really...
If it is, then why isn't everyone doing it? Are you saying that somehow AstraZeneca has wizardly accountants that Apple does not?
I think it means that while those weaknesses capabilities have not gone away, the data exposed to such, might evaporate (be moved away) from such exposure. Example, the claim that FSB is moving to typewriters.[1] Or criminals moving to other methods of communication, if they perceive the internet as inherently insecure.

[1]http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/130711/kremlin-t...
Why should we have contained the problem? It's not like coca cola and McDonalds are going out of business. The obesity epidemic correlates just fine with the notion that a poor diet leads to obesity. Diets are increasingly poor.
hey Icasela,

I try to avoid emails but since you asked I will send it out to you.
John Gilmore has been involved in this space, and fighting for "us" for a long time. I'd previously submitted this, but it failed to get traction: http://www.toad.com/des-stanford-meeting.html
I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that this switch will actually weaken opponents. Criminal masterminds are often not uber-hackers who can reliably roll their own encryption scheme, so to speak.
Your values have nothing to do with evidence, reasoning and/or facts. You can change your opinion, increase your knowledge, admit you were wrong about facts but this won't change your values.
The way I've understood the recent leak was that we know the NSA has been concentrating on breaking SSL, 4G and others but that the actual techniques haven't been revealed. Besides, I feel that it is very important to know that bank, internet, and wireless security have been comprised by at least one actor.
I'm not going to come out on either side on this yet, still thinking about it.

But to anticipate those who will say, "do you think the bad guys are really dumb enough to use basic encryption techniques?" -

The 1993 (failed) World Trade Center bombers were caught because they went back to the rental truck company to try to collect the deposit on the "stolen" truck.

So yes, some of them certainly are.
On Progressive Enhancement
The document I linked you to, "Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)", does not base its decisions on the number of childhood rapes by people with Hep-B, nor on the "number of babies delivered in the back room of a whorehouse." Why do you believe those are critical factors in the decision?

You seem to think that Hep-B is only spread through sex and drug use, and from the mother through childbirth. This is incorrect. For example, one of the citations in the above report was to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2626287 . It seems some 30% of Hep-B infections come from unknown sources.

> We investigated two situations involving hepatitis B virus exposure among children in day care. In the first a 4-year-old boy who attended a day care center developed acute hepatitis B; another child at the center, who had a history of aggressive behavior (biting/scratching), was subsequently found to be a hepatitis B carrier. No other source of infection among family and other contacts was identified and no other persons at the center became infected.

Before the vaccine, some 24,000 children got Hep-C each year. That's down about 90%.

As to the "very safe vaccine", nothing in that last line was meant to imply that you needed any sort of religious faith in vaccines nor that you doubted the science. It was meant to explain why failures by the manufacturer are less likely to lead to severe adverse effects than with the older vaccine. This is an engineering consideration and not a science one.

The previous vaccine was only "safe", and not "very safe." The older vaccine started with blood serum from people who had Hep-B, and purified it so only Hep-B proteins remained. This has a risk of infection should something go wrong in the purification process so that the full virus - or other viruses - somehow get through. This sort of failure would be very risky for newborns.

But the current vaccine, which is based on a genetically modified form of Baker's yeast, does not come from human sources. Since human viruses aren't in the source material, they can't enter the vaccine. There can still be other failure modes, but the most fatal - introduction of virulent particles directly into a newborn baby - can't happen through a process failure during vaccine manufacturing.

Think also of the oral polio virus. This uses an attenuated virus, that is, a mutant form of the polio virus which infects the child, but doesn't cause the symptoms. The child's immune system produces the same antibodies at it would the wild-type virus, which provides immunity. The problem is, the attenuated virus mutates in the body, and it can mutate towards a form which is deadly. This happens about once every 750,000 cases.

Again, this is not the type in the modern Hep-B vaccine - there is no infectious material at all - making it safer than oral polio virus. That's why I said Hep-B is "very safe."
Hateful speech, such as calling someone a moron, an idiot, a dummy, a bitch, a fool, etc, is not the same as hate speech.

I have no doubt you are aware of this.

You are probably also aware that on the issue of laws regulating "hate speech" in Canada, which have generally been upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada, these laws are by Province and Territory. Saskatchewan’s Human Rights Code defines it one way, Alberta has another, B.C. has another, and the Northwest Territories have another.
1976: NSA vs crypto
Lightning blows this away.
One concept that I think is hard to grasp, and makes taking this sort of advice hard to apply, is just how much our default happiness is biologically hard coded.

For this reason I view the point about exercise and eating healthy to be the most important one on the list.
Scroogled (a short story by Cory Doctorow) [2007]
دردشة رومانسيات ، شات رومانسيات
Yeah, that blue, injection-molded plastic looks terrible. I bought a new portable (external) Seagate 1TB today that came with a cable that had this connector. Its plastic covering was much nicer and black.
Honey pot user or operating system? A major drawback to prey is that it only works when the thief logs into the account.
> Isn't the whole point of this uproar that we do not trust these unelected (by the US, never mind the global population) spooks with unfettered access to all communications?

Yes, however some people think "the government" can do no wrong because it "works for the people." The government they support also happens to be fighting a "War on Terror" where terror can include personal opinions that are critical of the American government and her corporate pillars[1][2][3][4].

Many still see distrust of government as indicative of mental illness, where such distrust is born from paranoia and anarchist/libertarian propaganda.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_oil

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_lobby

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_conglomerate

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_triangle_(US_politics)
This post by Aaron Greenspan highlights some of the changes that we can expect to see: http://thinkcomp.quora.com/In-Nine-Days-the-California-Money...

This is NOT good. Innovation stifling at it its finest.
I wonder if this will allow MHL and host mode at the same time?
It's 2013.

The only question worth asking is:

Can a person easily connect and disconnect this cable in the dark (or if blind?)

If the answer is no, then the cable design is terrible.
I have almost no programming experience, and this game expects you to know quite a bit about programming conventions. My experience so far includes:

* "I don't really know what call means in this context, but based on previous knowledge, I'm guessing I should replace the example words with that."

* "Oh, right, I remember based on previous knowledge that "#" means comment, so I should remove that part too."

* "Oh, maybe I need the exclamation point that previously looked to me just like punctuation, because I know that code is precise about punctuation like that."

* "I don't know how to use if/else in Ruby, but I can guess that I just type 'if' and 'else', because Ruby has a reputation for simplicity."

* "I can also guess based on previous knowledge that indentation probably means something in Ruby, so I'll try indenting things."

And that's about as much guessing as I feel like doing for a game, and I'm still on level two. (I know I could easily learn how to play the game by looking at any basic guide to Ruby; I'm just demonstrating how it feels for a person without any experience.)
looks interesting. the concept is unique. it seems to be only for android.
I think talking about capitalism, or rather, "free market", in the context of drug production is laughable. Free markets, as conventionally defined, have two characteristics:

1. Producers and consumers are both equally informed
2. There are so many producers and so many consumers that no single producer or no single consumer is able to appreciably change the market price

Neither of those assumptions hold with the the drug market. Drug makers are massively more informed about the benefits and side effects of their drugs than I am. And there aren't that many drug manufacturers - and ongoing mergers keep shrinking the pool. In reality, the drug market is a barely regulated oligopoly, where a few large players manipulate the price signal to coordinate behavior so that they can move in relative unison to screw over the consumer. It's just like oil companies or airlines.
The offer made by Glasgow to the student is guaranteed, as long as the student meets the conditions of the offer: typically a grade-based offer.

According to the original article, the student didn't meet the conditions of the offer. The university may now award a discretionary place... this decision could have been influenced by the principal, but is moderately unlikely anyway. The article notes that Zaloom will study at Portsmouth U instead. Good luck to him :)

http://www.camdennewjournal.com/news/2013/sep/headteacher-re...
How to make butter chicken in 1 mintue Funniest
If you want to surprise your friends with this shit butter chicken prank... you must check this video.... its Hilarious lolzzzzzzz
As an Android proponent, and someone turned off by the iPhone's proprietary nature, I must admit: Lightning is elegant compared to this.

I understand there is the form camp and the function camp, and that I think (in my opinion) that most people on HN would subscribe to the "form following function" ideology. The USB 3 plug does look hideous compared to the clean microUSB plug, but I guess that shouldn't matter.

Could we really not pass more power and data over a standard USB 2.0 connection/port? sigh
Mayor Nutter kicks off PennApps
I wonder what criteria Snowden used in his disclosures in terms of what to release and what not to release.
To be fair, your phone likely consumes far more power than your electric toothbrush. I would be interested in learning about the viability of this type of technology in the phone space.
Per the article the gains that were made in breaking existing systems have been made public, so all of that effort goes for naught as people move on to new systems (which requires all new efforts). Basically if you want to consider the "cost" (as in $$) of Snowden's leaks, this shows a bunch of budget $$s that were spent on the assumption that these broken systems would remain in use for a period of time. Since that assumption is removed, the $$s spent on breaking those systems won't be as useful as forecast, hence the cost estimate.

That said, at the big crypt-a-geddon moment, when Leon Panetta said [1] "It does not mean that the Department of Defense will monitor citizens’ personal computers. We're not interested in personal communication or in e-mails or in providing the day to day security of private and commercial networks. That is not our goal. That is not our job. That is not our mission." he was lying. Both by omission and by commission.

And perhaps the most painful aspect of Snowden's act is that by exposing this failure of integrity in the NSA, they will never again be able to take the "high road" of we need this to defend the nation.

[1] http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1728
Exactly. The complaints are wildly off-base; it doesn't matter whether it costs more or less than a college chemistry textbook; it matters whether or not it will save you more than $60 worth of time.

I mostly write native apps, but happen to have started to make a website for the first time in several years the other day. Having decided to start with Bootstrap, I spent at least an hour chasing down blog posts about using Bootstrap, and then googling to see how things had changed since v2, how people do X and Y, finding conflicting opinions of unknown provenance, etc etc... and was expecting to have to do more of that to finish getting up to speed with Bootstrap (especially since I'm starting with v3 and most of the info on the inter web tubes pertains to v2).

So of course I bought this book. In order to be a worthwhile investment, all it has to do is save me from the hassle having to do that again, one single time. Perusing the site it really looks like it will. Sold!
"To be fair, both the DAA and the IAB would like
advertising to be as wrought as possible, and for
consumers to appreciate the good intentions and effects
of their business. I know that because I've talked to
them about it. Those organizations see themselves,
correctly, as advocates for good behavior in a business
rife with the opposite. "

this paragraph stuck with me. I rigorously ad block, on everything. I make sure my relatives have PVR's and I train them to pause and skip effectively so that they never see advertisements. I install ad block on not just my computer, but my families as well. I actively avoid content that has advertisements in it (I don't play free to play games, for example).

I do all this for two reasons.

1. I don't trust them. I honestly believe that if an advertisement ever states anything, the opposite is likely to be true. eg. "Our product helps you lose weight!" I am now convinced this product makes you gain weight.

2. I fear that advertisements really alter the way I perceive the world. part of that fear discussed here: http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/14y695/el...

I worry that advertisements gradually change the people that watch them.

but the paragraph mentioned above gave me pause. I can't help but feel, if there were advertisements that didn't lie or actively mislead, that didn't have a terrible and dishonest history, that didn't exist purely as a form of mass manipulation, that I would be more amenable to them.

Of course, that will NEVER happen EVER.

so I will continue to block them at every vector. Maybe when the advertising industry is completely squeltched, desperate, and trying to claw itself from its own dug grave, will they play by the users rules. I wouldn't hold your breath.
I.e. Lightning.
They give you $50 worth of credit when you sign up.
For comparison, PHP has mutable strings. Some totally unscientific averaged benchmarks (Atom D2700, PHP 5.4.4-14 amd64):

$buff = '';
for ($i = 0; $i != 100000; ++$i) {
$buff .= $i;
}

Runs in about 0.06s

$buff = array();
for ($i = 0; $i != 100000; ++$i) {
$buff[] = $i;
}
$ret = implode('', $buff);

Runs slower, in about 0.10s

$ret = implode('', range(0, 100000));

Takes roughly the same time, 0.10s
A writer's job (among other things) is to get and keep your attention. This article did that very well using hyperbole (i.e. 12 on the scale of 10).

I think the rest of the article is hyperbole too, but not much more than that.
They have children, though, and some of those children are probably smart, and might train their old men to use Tarsnap via Tor in order to transmit encrypted messages/photos/other data anonymously and securely.

I'd imagine the NSA is concerned about future intelligent adversaries who have finesse, which is why they stay as far as possible ahead of the curve.

(I'm trying to come up with an alternative to our standard explanation of "the NSA does this because it's a soulless governmental machine that wants access to the world's information for corrupt purposes.")
In what way?
Connector aesthetics?
Or technical specs?

One of the reasons the connector looks like this is because it's backwards compatible.
So on that front, lightning definitely doesn't "blow it away".

If they threw backwards compatibility out the door, like Apple did, it would "look better", but if you are always willing to throw everything out and people are always willing to go along with you, you can basically do whatever you want.
Fun Fact: Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, the class of drugs used to treat depression and anxiety disorders by increasing the availability of serotonin, have a mirror opposite: Tianeptine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianeptine), which acts as a Selective Serotonin Reuptake Enhancer.

Incredibly, this drug has also been effective at treating depression. That's right: two classes of drugs with polar opposite first-order effects are used to treat the same disorder, and both of them apparently work.
You aren't, the port is backwards compatible, not the cable.
The US Government and the NSA have made it painfully clear that there are two options for the US to participate in the global internet: capability to decrypt everything or an American version of China's Great Firewall.

The capability to decrypt everything is largely outside of their control, however they can exert pressure of ISPs, SSL certificate authorities, commercial software vendors, social networking services, and a variety of other organizations.

The rationale being that the US Government pressures those organizations to intentionally implement weaker security measures to facilitate the ongoing capabilities of the government's suspicionless surveillance systems.

Since this system of clandestine supportive relationships is potentially unreliable (since it is directly outside of their control and it relies on reciprocal partnerships) then it stands to reason that the simply revelation of these relationships could jeopardize the US Government's surveillance capabilities.
People are also increasingly sedimentary. Watching more TV, web surfing, playing video games.
Doing stuff efficiently is great when there's some benefit from efficiency. But I've seen a lot of fragile code (and implementation specific hacks) created based on benchmarks, when the time savings were meaningless in practice.
How to open banana correctly and saftly
I found this hilarious prank videos about opening the banana in safe way and correctly lolzzz Must watch!!
Now this is quite a national-biased view (again).
On the other hand standards, protocols, and the trust in networks are an international affair as well. So what is probably a future damage viewed from a national side is a damage already caused from an international point of view.
That would be a wholly more convincing argument had checks and balances actually prevented the data retention directive and the NSA excesses. They didn't. Now what?