skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I already moved everything away from Google. There's no way I'm ever going back. Trust is gone.
You're also unlikely to hit a UAV with a rifle, unless you're given perfect conditions (e.g. a very stable hover or very low and slow flying).
Yes, but (at least in New Zealand) they're more than the $20 threshold mentioned above. So you're effectively buying a microcontroller plus a programmer.
www.cppreference.com is a good place to start
Like a Porsche 928?
Meanwhile, Google Argues for Right to Continue Scanning Gmail

"This company reads, on a daily basis, every email that's submitted, and when I say read, I mean looking at every word to determine meaning," said Texas attorney Sean Rommel, who is co-counsel suing Google.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/google-argues-con...

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24021944/google-argue...
yeah, I never got the appeal of those services. After all, it's the country that all but threw out the rulebook to nail the PirateBay people and then Assange. Not the friendliest haven for digital rights, imho.
Fantastic, bring it on!
If I don't like the local cops, I can move. Another libertarian principle that's worth defending.
I would assume Google is big enough and smart enough to competently vet and deploy trusted encryption techniques.
The g2231 etc certainly are not specced to work from high frequency crystals or oscillators, but in actual use it works:

http://forum.43oh.com/topic/594-use-a-12mhz-external-square-...
Another language with un-googleable name.
Open-Sourcing My Investment Thesis Re: Mobile Computing
This link shows me the new logo.
Yes, the libertarian principle that it's OK to do whatever in a certain city as people who don't like it can always move away. Great principle. :P

Either way though, your logic applies just as much to Federal cops as it does to local ones. Think the FBI dudes around your city are a bunch of dicks? Move to the other coast, maybe they'll be better.

Hell, you can even pick an entirely different nations' cops, if you want.
Let's consider boxcars also: http://github.com/azer/boxcars
A good rule of thumb is to dress the same level or one level up from the person you are interviewing with.

If you want to seem serious, but not overdo it, perhaps you could wear a jacket with no tie or a tie with no jacket.
this was discussed quite recently - see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6258093
If you don't want to be tracked and you don't want to use Google+, stop using Google products.

Google does not sell data to anybody. They sell advertising slots.
Fixing this problem may not stop suspicionless spying. But it will certainly make it more expensive. The public revelation that the data wasn't encrypted is surprising, though I had previously speculated on it. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6264415
While this article is just a rewrite of a similar one from today's NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/national-parks-try-to-a...), I appreciate that it contains some additional data, even though it doesn't relate specifically to National Park visits.

The NYT article only states that "about one in five visitors to a national park site is nonwhite... and only about 1 in 10 is Hispanic", which definitely points to Hispanics being underrepresented, since they make up 16.3% of the general population. But they don't include any more specifics, which makes me think the discrepancy couldn't be that big.
This sounds pretty cool! What sorts of considerations does one make when you are deciding between more RAM or SSDs?

Random IO is processed first through the SSDs (the thing that they are really good at) while sequential IO short-cuts to the hard drives - which is pretty slick.

I'm curious, what do you use to develop something like that? Is it build on top of something? Built into the kernel? I wouldn't even know where to begin...
There are limits to what Google can do to protect your email. If you email someone outside of the gmail service, your message will leave their data centers and travel over the public internet, possibly unencrypted at various points (unless you GPG it yourself) depending on what the various SMTP relays along the way do.
My main reaction to this was, ummm, wait - google isn't already encrypting its data internally?!

-- off topic rant --

Such a weird discontinuity in all this ... Google was prosecuted and paid a fine, despite self-disclosing, falling on its own sword and issuing an abject apology, for accidentally sniffing some unencrypted data as they drove past. This was condemned at every level by government.

Now the government is openly sniffing and capturing everything, including our encrypted traffic and deliberately trying to crack the encryption, ... and they don't think it is the slightest bit unreasonable?

How can there be moral outrage about Google's offense and not about what the government is doing that is ten times worse?
It's not really Google's call. If they're issued an NSL the opinions of any employees are irrelevant. Either they comply or someone goes to jail.

I, and many others, would appreciate it if they fought such things. And if they would fight the good fight on the policy fronts. But ultimately Google does not make or interpret the law.
I agree -- I dislike when important technical concepts are redefined for marketing purposes. It's a bit like lightweight marital fidelity, where your spouse is faithful to you in specific circumstances.
How is ssl broken when many different ciphers can be used?
Are they suggesting the NSA is tapping intra-data center communications? I hadn't seen that suggested before.

That's interesting. I hadn't considered that could be how Prism works, but it would make sense if these companies weren't encrypting those connections previously. Somehow I assumed they were.
Their business - like that of most tech companies - is built on data (so is every business to some degree) they can't forgo data, that is stupid. If the NSA is your main concern then it's government policy you want to be changed, not the engineering decisions of private companies. Also worth mentioning that unless you're speaking of telecom companies there is no profit motive to cooperating with government but mainly legal obligations.
You can always remind yourself by going here: http://valleywag.gawker.com/
Since Google is able (and willing, when asked by the government) to decrypt everybody's email at will, and continues to build software that maintains their absolute power to do this, I really don't give a f@#k whether they promise to use 256 bit encryption, 512 bit encryption or 23439287239 bit encryption.
They have the infrastructure for a fully paid version set up now with being able to buy more space for your google account. Maybe add a client-side encryption option along with no ads. It will make things like server-side search incredibly more difficult although.
Who are you trusting now?
No, seriously. If you're even remotely serious about protecting yourself, why would you use a closed source OS?
Why are you posting this shit on HN? Everyone here knows how contextual advertising in gmail works, and excepting those too young to have been aware back then, have known about it since 2004. If you have a point, make it, but scare quotes specifically made to induce an emotional reaction from those without technical knowledge really have no place here.
What is the practical option for mobile devices? Everything I've found on iOS & Android is absolute awkward shit.
Sounds like SSD's are used as a cache, like ZFS does with its l2arc.
WebKit and C++11
C# / MS-Test: Implementing data-driven tests using TestClass inherence
Trust to do what, and why would you trust anyone else more?
has never weakened its encryption systems to
make snooping easier

Up until today, Google didn't even encrypt the data. So it's kind of hard to weaken something you weren't even using.

And then to go on to equate it as a "personal honor".. you've got to be kidding me.
Fair points. Wikipedia'a Public Good article shows at the top a fireworks display as an example. This is interesting because most large fireworks displays I've seen do offer a small number of viewers the ability to watch from nearby (i.e. to obtain more-privileged access) in exchange for money. So non-excludability may not be complete and absolute: a "public good" may be available to all comers, but also available in an enhanced form for pay. Similarly with outdoor concerts having VIP seating, parades, and so on.

In the end this is a semantic issue and we can probably agree that the language is not precise enough to succinctly describe what's going on with the Survey now. But perhaps the examples above are illustrative enough, as I have rarely heard complaint about the visible existence of ticketed/VIP seating at public events. Some others here claim the Survey's dissemination would not be objectionable if it were done in a more transparent fashion (but still in tiers for pay).

Finally, it's interesting that this particular news item has such a "long" advantage period for paying customers. Two seconds is a long time for computers, and even if the Survey were released "simultaneously" to everyone, those who paid to build better networks and systems to use it would still benefit. The end result might be similar, only without the extra rents paid to Reuters. If Reuters and UMich argued that without these rents the Survey could not be produced at all, I wonder if it would calm the critics.
Don't write cross-platform code(2010)
Either Nginx and Apache is pain in the ass to configure. No need to mention both have some unix challenges that you gotta solve for just starting to serve bunch of stupid shit. Have a look at boxcars
I have a very similar background/opinion. Almost all of my professional work has been on the *nix stack and I generally like Ruby. During a brief stint in Microsoft-land I found myself super impressed with C#. First class functions, type inference, anonymous types/functions and LINQ make for a really nice general purpose language. Its really a shame its mired in the Microsoft toolchain.
Seneca had similar thoughts: http://www.ryanholiday.net/seneca-on-travel/
Don't use CoffeeScript
Well, it reflects well on Google that they say this, but in the end, the only "truly secure" host is one that cannot decrypt your data even when compelled to do so.

Bottom line is, if a capability exists, it can be exercised, willingly or not, coerced or through oversight. Anyone willing to put data in the cloud should be conscious of this no matter what the provider says.
I've used both. Each of these languages has its quirks. But JS's design makes PHP's design look like it was done with crayons.
Well, to be fair, it's not really the same people at the NSA looking at captured data who were doing the condemning. OTOH, you have senior administration members saying that they don't spy on Americans, when of course they do, or senior German administration officials outraged at the NSA's behavior, when of course they were participating all along.

I really don't know how much of it is self delusion, how much of it is just perfectly logical mental gymnastics from their perspective, and how much is just the "this is what we have to do, even if it doesn't match what's in the law" perspective on display in the nytimes piece.
Every time I think I'm done with Linode, they draw me right back in. I guess I'll wait to see about the pricing, but I imagine this will be a serious challenge for Digital Ocean to overcome, since their main selling point over Linode is cheap SSDs VPSs.
The revelations that NSA is running a HUMINT program should make it very clear that you can't trust everyone at Google or any other major provider. Those risks are mitigable, but it's expensive and I doubt most places take sufficient steps to prevent it.

Even without that, trusting companies because their employees are honest is hard.

There are some people at the NSA who really really care about privacy and not spying on US Citizens and believed we didn't do so. In fact, most of the ones I've met. However, with sufficient compartmentalization, they don't know what they or others are truly doing. Same can be true for any company.

Are you working on Google's data liberation system to not trap users in your system or are you working on NSA's data exfiltration system for Google's data. I's not always clear.
Is not as easy to scape, they keep tracking you with cookies, with Google analitics and with whatever they can use it, they have all figured out.
You're still tracked if you don't use Google products.
SNES games used it a lot for storage of things that need to be displayed on screen, such as score and lives and whatnot. If the counter is checked relatively infrequently, the reduced integer range and hassle of switching to and from BCD mode are a lot better than having to divide by ten repeatedly each frame, which is relatively slow.
They said it was a range estimate. Right there in the episode. Where was the lie?

Oh no! They showed a dramatization of running out of power while driving it on their track! How dare they!
I had the same response. It's not about agreeing or not -- there's no point to reading an opinion piece that covers my opinion plus my rationale -- rather, it's about assessing the quality of the arguments as you go.

I started reading, was put off by the snark and sarcasm (snark is occasionally entertaining; this wasn't), then I got to where the author was baffled that Meyer described Yahoo's identity in positive terms. Really?

I skimmed a bit after that then wrote it off as a waste of time.
If nothing else, it reminds people that it's going on. Which is a good thing. Myself, with adblockXYZ installed, often forget or don't notice. And when these do come up, I'm grateful because it reminds me to stop being a lazy bastard and set up an email server (as I've done many times for others) for myself. I appreciate that.
This quote makes it sound like Google employees (i.e., humans) are reading your email. It's an algorithm that is processing your email, as most (all?) of us are aware. It's not like there's some employee sitting there reading your stuff and then determining you're in the market for a new camera.
Yet Another Coffeescript Rant
Here's your footnote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_of_privacy
There's still a gigantic difference between the government being able to "vacuum up" everything (weak/no encryption) from everyone, versus the government having to ask for communications from specific users.
Just to clarify the discussion here, since the NSA is involved in snooping on internet users along many different dimensions, I think what is being discussed here is encrypting internal Google data being transmitted from datacenter to datacenter via private fiber optic cables. Recent revelations seem to indicate the NSA has set up fiber taps on various company's networks. This encryption would frustrate those tapping efforts.

Legal requests to Google for user data are not affected by this change. Neither is private data at rest, which is still presumably encrypted. Neither are other extralegal avenues the NSA has to infiltrate Google (employee co-operation or intimidation, exploiting zero days to get into corporate networks, hijacking security protocol construction, etc).
Their business is data, buy they have gone beyond that, they just don't want to know what I'd like to buy, they want to know were I live, my phone number, the places I visit, they want to know where I'm every single second of the day, screw that.
‘Back door’ spying claims set to hit tech groups
Conspiracy theories and the NSA
You can split up the USA into a few queries and then just filter for a specific email. Semantics.
But do all of them? In my personal experience, such tasks will be given to employees who are likely to perform them.

For example, at a past sysadmin job, I was asked about the technical feasibility of monitoring a certain employees computer use, whom management suspected of some minor infringement. I refused to assist in the matter on moral grounds and was reprimanded. The task was given to a colleague of mine who had no qualms about it. Next time, they went straight to him.

And the more complex, distributed and large a system is, the more people are in positions where they can compromise it. It takes only one person to break the whole system (which is basically what just happened to the NSA). Do you trust everyone who has or can gain access to your SSL private key? Everyone who manages your network?
> It is ultimately in every honest person's self-interest to disallow the _initiation_ of physical force.

You used the word "honest" but failed to define it. That word must have a definition, and within that definition you are implying additional values beyond pure competition. I suspect that if we tried to clearly define that word we would find many more actions that many people would argue should be disallowed, like the "initiation of physical force". But many of those things would be far more controversial. My point is that real, existing (non-theoretical) markets are more complex than you seem to believe. Market actors will always try to find the "edges" of acceptable behaviour in order to gain advantage, and in a dynamic, changing world, those edges continuously multiply, making self-regulation in real life a pretty unreasonable prospect in my opinion.
> Up until today, Google didn't even encrypt the data.

That's not what the article says. The new encryption is specifically for backend datacenter-to-datacenter traffic over leased lines. But even before that project, there was lots of strong encryption being used all over Google: to encrypt user data on servers' hard drives, to encrypt data going between browsers and servers, encrypting tape backups before sending them to offsite storage facilities...
Well I mean, both bears and moose are very capable of destroying vehicles too... ;)
Yes, I think it is quite appropriate to discuss what these drone strikes prevented as much as it is important to discuss what they caused. Elsewhere in the this thread, it is argued that drone strikes also create enough anguish that they end up creating more extremists than they have killed.

For instance, killing of children is not even the only cause of growing anger towards these drone strikes. It also hurts the sovereignty of these states and fuels to Anti-American patriotism in them. If I live in a failed state, it is still my state. Unless it is abundantly supported from people outside my country (and yours) and almost universally acceptable from people within mine, your government shouldn't be interfering.
For a lot of reasons.

OSX have a profitable section of the market. Is not the size what determine if something is or not a failure, is your POSITION in that market.

Having 90% of all the non-paying customer VS 10% of all the paying customers is a different position for a for-profit company. In this case, you truly want the 10%.

If WinPhone have a desirable portion of the market, untouched/unchallenged by others, then could be called a success.

Le't use a contrived example: vim/emacs have a strong position in a desirable sub-set of the developer mindshare. His position is so strong, that no-IDE to date have be able to destroy it.

Then if also is growing, is something powerful.

Let's play the (almost incorrect) stereotype of the Apple users: Them are hipster, richer, more creative, select for themselves the gadgets, etc. And pay. This segment, even at %1, is valuable. And if nobody else touch it, then is more than valuable, is unchallenged. Could be say: Is bullet-prof, failure-prof.

And then android. Android is for geeks (and the masses that wanna cheap). Have the subset of geeks is desirable. Probably, a lot of android users hate so bad Apple that will never use it. The position of Android in that case is solid.

Both have solid position.

Windows phone? No have it.
Yes, but (as others have already pointed out) the takeaway point from this press release shouldn't be "Google is doing great things to prevent spying" and should instead be "Google admits they have been sending sensitive customer data between data centers in plaintext."
This language is pretty problematic especially in context of these third party hosted services. If Google have the keys and the encrypted data, what do we know about the security properties.
I'm using Riseup.net and an offshore email account. I won't recommend the offshore service by name until they upgrade their servers (it's been slow lately).
Yes.

If you are actually trying to hide something from a targeted government attack, you certainly don't want to use any hosted services like Google's.

If, however, you are merely trying to avoid the government passively sweeping up all of your data, searching through it, and maybe subjecting it to further scrutiny due to it containing the wrong keyword, it helps to know that it's encrypted in transit, and that in order to decrypt it, someone has to actually present a warrant to Google.

Of course, there's the additional problem of National Security Letters, as they aren't really real warrants and they have the secrecy around them.

These problems can be attacked on multiple fronts. We can improve cryptographic security, and work on more decentralized approaches to online services, and reign in the NSA's power at a legal level, and so on.
New folding car in South Korea. [video]
I think it started life as a 4 bit processor to compete with the 4004 and went out the door as 8 after the 8080 so they just muxed what was already there.

I don't know that, I just think that. :-)
Uber offering DeLorean rides in San Francisco this weekend
How you can speedup LaTeX compilation speeds by a factor of 2x or 3x.

%&Thesis -jobname="Thesis"

% ^^This needs to be the 1st line of your Thesis.tex^^

%% Enable Binary Preamble Cache

%% Doc: http://www.ctan.org/pkg/mylatexformat

%% Usage: pdflatex -ini -synctex=1 -shell-escape -jobname="Thesis" "&pdflatex" mylatexformat.ltx Thesis.tex

\csname endofdump\endcsname

What follows here is the part that changes, ie. your chapters. All preceding "endofdump" will be compiled into a cache file.
There is pretty much new independent PHP engines nowadays, one of my favorite is an embedded PHP5 implementation named PH7 written in ANSI C and following the SQLite3 coding style (very impressive)
http://ph7.symisc.net
kind-of related, is anyone using bcache with linux yet? how easy is it to get working? does it speed things up as expected?

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/linux-...
Is that what we're talking about? I thought we were talking about drone strikes which are targeted assassinations that, so far, have had considerable "collateral damage" (i.e. death of innocents).

The sad truth is that the American assassination campaign is little better than one that would be carried out using car bombs. Though had those methods been used it would be much easier to place in a more accurate moral context.
they won't be likely to guess their beloved news source is in the wrong

It doesn't really matter if their beloved news source is right or wrong, it still paints Tesla as litigious. The only time such suits over reviews expressly supported by the manufacturer go over well is when the reviewer committed gross fabrications or other inaccuracies.

The omissions in their suit speak quite loudly to me. For example, I just went back and rewatched the Top Gear review. They mention the engine overheated in one Tesla, and in the other the brakes failed while it was charging. I notice Tesla only made a big deal about the race track range estimate, which if I recall they didn't even claim was wrong- just misleading. That leaves an especially bad taste in my mouth- it's almost like Tesla is trying to discredit the apparently real failures by nitpicking unrelated minor details.

It all looks even more shady when you consider how few of these sorts of scuffles come up with Top Gear & other car companies.
The z-axis stuff is possible. It's surprisingly how performant CSS3 3D stuff can be, but it's also difficult to do without going overboard.