skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Maybe the question is, why would I donate to fight for the privacy rights of a small minority of the world's population (which as it happens doesn't include me)? Potentially, the answer is that by making it harder for the NSA to spy on Americans we make it harder for the NSA to spy on the rest of us. The concern is that focusing on US political / legal fixes potentially still leaves the majority of us vulnerable to mass surveillance. I haven't seen as much exploration of this question as it seems like there ought to be.
They would have done a pivot if they were indeed working on a new product. Like they did with Greplin.
Kindle and Focus
Wow, he's the real deal looking out for the entrepreneurs. Kinda reflects badly on the other sharks that they weren't agitating to end the Finnmax abusive equity grab too. I concur that a better class of startups can now show up, versus just desperate ones who would give away 5% of their company to extortionists.
TechCrunch posted this update: We are hearing from additional sources that they did raise that extra funding, so this is looking like a product pivot or a sale rather than a full shutdown of the company.

Source: http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/02/cue-greplin/
Hmm interesting idea, but you are definitely not the first mover, and probably someone else already has a patent on it, when did you file? There has been others doing the same for a while. I have been waiting for someone to properly execute this but everybody that tries ends up showing a video and 3d printed mockups. Just to give you an idea:

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/haamlock-a-smarter-bike-lo...
http://www.smartbikelock.com/
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/social-lock-developers-kit...
Cool, details, thanks!

>Reality can be annoying sometimes.

Don't understand this part.
Yapsody, Watch this #video
Generic containers in C without ugly preprocessor hacks
*Joint* motion to settle (with) attorney fees are
to be borne by the party that incurred them.

Good for Kaspersky, but effectively Lodsys collected payments on this particular patent from 54 out of 55 companies and then Kaspersky let them keep the patent in exchange for leaving them alone. Not sure if this is worthy of celebration at all.
The state of XMir
If you divide patients in 20+ arbitrary groups (say, based on first letter of their name) and give them a 0 efficiency treatment, then almost always you'll see a group with a p-0.05 significant improvement; that' just basic stats.

So, if you afterwards discover some class of patients with this different response, it is grounds only to investigate that group further separately, not anything more - claiming that there is such an effect is fraud. You can't make extra claims until you have verification of that separate group.

For an illustration, see http://xkcd.com/882/
Agreed. Any site that offers me real value -- enough that I would return regularly -- is a site I'd probably give a few dollars a year to, rather than have ads. Of course, if I'm just a hit and run seeing your site once or twice a year or only once ever, then I'm not going to do anything and there is no relationship there.

Unfortunately, the problem with this is:

1) Most sites try to make the best of both options. They put ads everywhere, which essentially makes them beholden to the advertiser and not the reader and then offer an option to give them some money instead of seeing ads. That only addresses "I don't want to see 10,000 ads every day" part. It doesn't address the "I want to be your focus - not your product that you deliver to your advertisers" part.

2) Why is it that when places offer a "support us with money" option, they are so ridiculously expensive? Instead of spamming my face with ads every day, give me an option where I can go ad-free for maybe $5 a year. Nobody does that, though. They say "you can see ads or you can pay us $50/yr". Seriously, you are not getting $50 in value from advertising to me in a year, so why are you jacking up the price ten times over just so I can go without the ads?!

Ultimately, none of this matters. Internet advertising is a joke and a scam and advertisers will slowly catch on. The whole "it's super targeted you guys!" thing really isn't turning out to be that valuable and it is all rampant with fake click-farms and other inherent problems.

Also, the only thing I hate more than a huge site throwing ads in my face for their content is when every little mommy-blogger or part-time ranter on the internet with a Blogger blog has to monetize their stuff. Look, you are not making a living at this. You are not ever going to make a living at this. Why would you do something so gross as to fill a page with advertising for those six people you might get each month who actually bother to read your site?

Do people not realize that there was a time when we did things online (or even back in the BBS days) for the joy of it? For the joy of making and maintaining systems and services? Or for the joy of having people read what we have to say or make use of services we have to offer? Not only didn't we expect to make money (much less a living) from it, we actually spent plenty of our own money.

But now, if you can't monetize something, it just isn't worth doing, I guess. Gross. And you'd rather advertise to me rather than just take a buck from me in a value-for-value trade. Double gross.

PS: I pay for or donate to a number of online services and websites from RDIO and GiantBomb to a couple torrent sites, charities, and chipping in a dollar or two when I find something really special on one site or another that I really particularly appreciated. I'm not cheap. I just don't want to stare at tens of thousands of ads for 8-12hrs a day every day of my life. And, ideally, I'd also rather be a customer than a product... which I guess depends on everyone else also wanting to be a customer, but they're too cheap and would rather just look at a page that is 70% ads than give a dollar now and then.
Nice portfolio!
Personally, I prefer SpiderOak. It's secure, and it works on all my devices.
Think about it like this:

In any given sting operation, the John gets arrested, bt there was never any prostitute. The arrest occurs on the basis that, if there were a prostitute, the John would participate in the exchange. Then, at that point, he's dragged before a judge or jury, and they don't really care about the crime, they just want this guy off the street based on the character assasination. The layman/plebian juror doesn't need to involve any sophisticated thought process, because his goal is to clock out of his "civic duty" by 5PM on the dot. The patrician judge is permitted the luxury of aloof detachment, and is a fallible human being. A person with a social life, biases and any other human weaknesses, despite whatever image or persona they may project into their social sphere of influence.

It doesn't really matter whether the sting is a bomb plot, drug deal, or a setup for hookers, Johns and online chat room predators. The maguffin is there to demonstrate intent, and prove that police are doing there job, the streets are safer, when this slob gets thrown in jail, and branded with a scarlet letter.

But the slob is real, and more often than not, simply being placed in the hot seat is enough for judge and jury to usually be swayed in favor of a conviction. It really doesn't take much for a person to get slapped with a jail sentence. Neither imaginary crimes nor genuine crimes weigh heavily on the mind of your typical juror. Or rather, to the juror, all crimes are essentially the same degree of fiction.

They are tales of intrigue presented to strangers who play the role of critic for a day, while attending the performance of fatal charades.
Unfortunately you're wrong on at least two counts:

1 - DPR can easily be implicated in every trade that took place on SR by virtue of the commission I presume was taken. After all if there was none, where did this income of his come from?

3 - Bitcoins are money, in the US and several other countries now:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/08/federal-judge-bit...

Regarding point 2, that's a very specific charge - my guess would be you'll see there's some very specific evidence behind it when it goes to trial.
There were at least three husband-wife teams in our W13 batch, including ours (Lollipuff). There are also at least three couples (pre-marriage during YC, one just recently married). Multiple groups with families (spouses / children) too.
You should really make a "Show HN" post. Just make sure to mention it on Twitter ;)
And here we go over the well-trodden ground yet again. "Should" according to who? You? See the problem there? It's perfectly possible for other people to have equally valid moral positions as you while taking a different stance on this specific question.

Trying to dictate morality never ends well. Especially in cases like this, where the specific tech is not only possible, but also has unarguably legitimate uses, and is therefore pretty much inevitable. You just end up tilting at windmills, and the ensuing hot air back and forth just creates pointless noise, generally adding little to the discussion.
To be fair, this won't exactly ease hardware development in any sense that Verilog or VHDL do.
It would actually be ok to do what you say - the problem is that there WASN'T a 'most beneficial population' for which his treament works; he made up that 'population' from data which, at best, show that this population could be more beneficial if it's verified.
Maturity against the absurd only leads to more suffering. You had better become a clown when youhr enemy is all-powerful. At least you will have your laughs and make them uncertain of the outcome.

Read "the trial" and for a real-life account, "the diary of happiness", by N. Steinhardt. (http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/83642874)
Quite a few people survive being shot, even in the head.
A somewhat similar site: http://wecanv.as. Less experimental and artsy, but perhaps more useful.

I've been using unlisted (private) canvases as whiteboards during conference calls. Works quite nice.
"Drugs aren't the best example since they are inexpensive (at least the ones I've purchased)."

There are some very expensive drugs, and they're not uncommon. For example, valcyclovir is a very common anti-viral drug, and costs something like $300-400 per course. The similar drug acyclovir is $20 as a generic, but is more annoying to dose. As a result, doctors will nearly always prescribe valcyclovir over acyclovir. For patients with a chronic infection, that's a mundane decision with an impact of tens of thousands of dollars per year. But unless you're a doctor or a pharmacist, you'd probably never know about the choice.

Insurance companies pass these costs on to the risk pool first, then onto employers. By the time the cost increases hit you (through employers cutting or reducing your health benefits), the implications are so far removed from the initial expenses that there's no way to close the cycle.
I guess the question is "at what point is it morally correct to resist government powers, even if those powers are legally granted?".

All would agree it comes at some point (insert references to morally repugnant dictatorships etc).

Even democratically elected governments cross the line (insert historical references to 1930's Europe).

Even "good" governments cross the line (insert reference to numerous examples of legal persecutions of minority groups in most democracies).

Sometimes civil disobedience is a the morally correct thing to do. Was it in this case? Personally, I'm not sure either way.

While I agree 100% that Lavabit's actions were unlawful, just saying "there are rules" isn't enough to convince me that those same actions were "wrong".
Here is an interesting experiment - create a "nice" looking rectangle of one solid color. See how long you can go before someone "maliciously" puts a red dot in the middle of your perfectly OCD constructed rectangle. Human nature + anonymity...
Goodbye yellow Silk Road: the online drugs market killed by human frailty
Why opting for Git was a natural choice
Also anyone talking about it here on HackerNews is already failing at it.
I think this is definitely a pivot, judging by the founder's YC experience (http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2011/03/05/greplin-founde...).

They're very smart, I'm sure whatever they build next will be even better.
Cooking with Clojure
I still don't think many "savvy entrepreneurs" would/should turn to reality television for VC, but glad this ridiculous term got removed.

Any other VC who demanded equity just for a meeting would've been laughed out of town years ago.
That's how nature works. We don't get to decide for nature, she decides for us.
The site: https://silkroadvb5piz3r.onion.lu/

I guess ASAC Shrader's guys were finally able to handle this case once most of their resources became available again thanks to the Gilligan's shut down few days ago...
Don't forget there was a glitch with SR about 8 months ago where it was briefly returning the real IP address of the server on an error page.
> ... so it takes two just to break even, let alone succeed. If that's your definition of success.

In modern times, ideas are more influential than children. If you doubt this, try to tell me the names of Einstein's children. Give up? They're special and general relativity, and the photoelectric effect. They look charming in group photographs.

Would you rather have two children, or influence the thinking of a million people -- and their children? Which has the greatest effect on evolution?
This Amazing Magnetic Pen Will Take Hours From Your Life
The poorest places do not have safety nets.
Wait, you aren't saying Steve Jobs was a genius, are you? I worked with Steve and no, that's not how most people would describe him.

Just for the record.
Am I the only one who feels like cgroups are extraordinarily complex for the problem they're trying to solve? It seems like a simpler structure could have achieved most of the same goals and not required one or two layers (in the case of docker cgroup->lxc->docker) of abstraction to find widespread use.

In particular, was the ability to migrate a process or have a process in two cgroups really essential to containerization? It seems like without those it'd be a simple matter of nice/setuidgid-style privilege de-escalation commands to get the same kinds of behaviour without adding a whole 'nother resource management to the mix (the named groups).

The cgroups document you link to as [4] has such a weirdly contrived use case example it makes me think they were trying really hard to come up with a way to justify the complexity they baked into the idea.
The gist:
The technicalities of moving away from SVN was never a problem for us, It was more of a workflow issue.

I think this should be the real reason anyone should consider moving their codebase from SVN to GIT.
Yes, but usual relations could be implemented by default and generic relation still be available.

I just want to test this and see if the database can do more and my code less.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlan_County,_USA
Hush, go back to your cave.
Damn. This means it's much less useful to me (and 99% of applications outside of google). I guess I could combine lmctfy with a namespacing library of my own. But that's more extra work than I was anticipating.
> Just NO NO AND NO, I can't be the only one who hates the new Windows interface, I want to be able to place my windows where I want them not be forced to use full screen for everything, or rely on some automated way to place them

Personally I find manual window-management extremely tedious. I want a window-manager to actually manage my windows for me. So on that part, I agree with the statement. That however doesn't mean that any automatic window-management is an improvement simply by being automatic.

There are bad automatic window-managers. The one in Windows 8 can clearly be be categorized as such. That however doesn't mean that all automatic window-management is bad.

On Linux, I like tiling VMs, because that means I no longer have to manage Windows manually, yet I get to remain in control of what I do and how I position my "windows". This is good automatic Window-management.

One day I hope Windows will be able to get there and get something of equal power and usefulness. That is, without throwing all the users not power-users out the Window, because current Linux tiling-VMs are obviously aimed at and created for power-users. User-friendlyness and intuitiveness has been sacrificed in the process.
In the Garage Where Google Was Born
> They have no incentive to drop a case this far into it.

If you think of their model as an exercise in gambling, they do have an incentive. Jury trials for patent cases are notoriously hard to predict, and they risked a very real, non-zero chance of reaching a decision that, even if it didn't kill their patents, could cripple their campaign, say, something like "Patents are valid, but iOS apps don't infringe."

(Note that jury verdicts in patent cases seldom seem to have much to do with the technical merits of the case.)

So their potential outcomes were:

A. Drop case: continue settling with small entities for Y revenue going forward with estimated revenue R.

B. Favorable decision with X in damages: nice bonus to go along with contiuing revenue R.

C. Unfavorable decision: 0 damages as well as very likely loss of continuing revenue R.

Say the outcome has probabilities P(A), P(B) and P(C). They likely just assumed some values for these probabilities (actually, lots of empirical data out there these days, and P(B) is quite low)and X and R, and ran the numbers, and they got an expected result that wasn't too favorable. So they chose to minimize their risks, along with the associated rewards.

> Future targets now know that they just have to keep the case going and eventually Lodsys could just drop it.

Right, but the catch is that for most defendants it's too expensive to even just keep going on. And that's why they'll keep suing left and right and dismissing if anybody gets too close to trial. I don't know if there's any way to stop this campaign unless they slip up.

(PS, I was mistaken about the Apple situation. Apple could not intervene because Lodsys settled the cases it was trying to intervene on -- essentially a tactical retreat like this one -- so it doesn't really speak to the exhaustion defense as such.)
Check out the outrageous perks top companies offer
Woody Harrelson's father is (was) a convicted hitman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Harrelson
Is HealthCare.gov Working Yet?
Here's the thing. Whistleblowers do get protection... but mostly protection from retaliation for their whistleblowing.

Yeah, that didn't play out so cleanly for Thomas Drake.
Have always seen Dragon's Den but didn't pay it much attention for the same reason. I may just revisit it now, based on your recommendation. Thanks :)

The patent move always had me scratching my head - how they could just take their word for it and move on so quickly. Never understood it, but now it makes sense.
> And you dare to pontificate on this topic on HN while not even knowing the basics.

The basics of IQ testing and its many misuses? Gould didn't invent this topic, and he doesn't define it. You remarks about Gould and IQ testing remind me of the creationists who think evolution was Darwin's private fantasy. If you take away Gould entirely, you still have any number of terrible examples of misuse of IQ testing for racist and other deplorable objectives.

Obviously psychologists are defensive about IQ testing (they should be), and Gould made himself an easy target. But this substitutes substance with ad hominem, a mode of argument you appear to prefer.
From README:

> lmctfy was originally designed and implemented around a custom kernel with a set of patches on top of a vanilla Linux kernel.

No sign of said patches though. Anyone know if they're available?
I still don't think many "savvy entrepreneurs" would/should turn to reality television for VC

Looked at another way, it's instant exposure of your company to 6+ million viewers. Seems like a great deal in some circumstances.
Same here. And thus in lack people using TIFKAM apps (The Interface Formerly Known As Metro), we have a self fulfilling prophecy.

Users never arriving to the TIFKAM-scene ensures no developers will bother developing for it.
Click 1: http://www.vanmarcke-software.be/Home/News

Click 2: http://www.cerelliphotography.com/google/

Seems to be broken on every non-https site on Chrome...

Went to http://maps.google.com/help/maps/businessphotos/ and pressed "Report a problem". Perhaps some should do the same.

Just when Google Virtual Tour got published in the Belgium Press some days ago, this happens. :-)
Bitcointalk.org hacked
I'm really glad I read this. I thought from the headline that it meant he wanted the sharks to have more wiggle room to get out of deals made on the show, or something similar that would make me think less of Cuban.

I couldn't have been more wrong. This is great for entrepreneurs. Giving up five percent just for the chance to make a deal is BS. Giving it up to a TV production company is even more BS. I greatly admire and respect Cuban for having the guts to stand up for these startups. (And it really does turn out to be in his interest too -- smart founders should balk at having to give up five percent just to appear on the show!)
(disclaimer, I'm from the RAML workgroup -- nice to see you here, Jakub!)

As you know, we carefully considered swagger and blueprint, before embarking on the RAML path. There's a bunch of us who are strong believers in very human-readable API specs, though we also strongly believe in clean API specs that reveal the structure of the API and encourage consistency and reuse -- and we just didn't find that in existing DSLs.

We're actually not finding any issues embedding markdown documentation in RAML at just those points in the spec that need documentation, while letting the spec itself do the talking when more documentation would just be repetitive. That way the structure of the API is manifest.

We also find the spec to be much DRYer in RAML than other ways; less repetitive reading means quicker and better grokking of the API.

I think the point about syntax highlighting in generic editors is debatable, but that's fine -- as you say, we have two different approaches and we'll keep each other on our toes, to the benefit of the community. Apiary's dedication to user experience is an inspiration to us. And just in case, my invitation to you to consider collaborating with us and the other workgroup members on RAML remains very much open.
Interesting that this is C++ (vs Docker in Go).
Snapchat Stories
I always wanted to pitch to shark tank and this equity clause was the only good reason I could think of not to. Most of the entrepreneurs were probably happy to give it up because of the exposure, but now it feels like trying to pitch on tv is an even better idea.
Namespaces will be coming, but we're not there yet. This captures some of what we are already doing internally, but not all of it, yet.
Learn C first! You'll understand why C++ is what it is and you'll also get the skills needed to contribute in a lot of open-source projects.
The good news is that namespaces (the most interesting part of containers) are simpler than cgroups, and the api is stable.

cgroups are indeed a mess. The api is highly unstable and there is an effort underway to sanitize it, with the help of a "facade" userland api. In other words kernel devs are basically saying: "use this userland api while we fix our shit". (I don't claim to understand the intricacies of this problem. All I know is that, as a developer of docker, it is better for my sanity to maintain an indirection between my tool and the kernel - until things settle down, at least).
Even if the chances of being selected are remote, I can't wait for apply ASAP. I live far away from US and this would certainly be a dream for my team and I.

Thank you for posting again.
Drug trafficking is the least of his worries

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/10/feds-silkroad-bos...