skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No, this information is just hearsay. This is a PR campaign by the Obama administration to justify cracking down on Bitcoin and Tor.

Until DPR has tried and convicted we should assume that all reporting on this criminal investigation is lies and slander. I'm not trying to defend DPR, torture, or any of that, but we need to hold ourselves to higher standards.

This kind of news caters directly to us -- the affluent tech crowd -- and we should be especially careful. The submitters of these news articles will need to be closely scrutinized as well.
... if you know what I mean.
An odd thing about iOS 7 is that Apple apparently doesn't auto-upgrade the appearance of any app that is unaware of iOS 7: old apps on iOS 7 still look like they are running on iOS 6, right down to the appearance and layout of the keyboard.

This means that there is a ".com" button in Atomic Web (an app on my iOS 7 phone that hasn't been upgraded for iOS 7), and of course its whole UI still has 3D like iOS 6. If I open Safari, I see the new keyboard appearance, everything is flat and there is no ".com" button.
> I got ~40 hours yesterday

Did you have the same yesterday I did? My Tuesday was only 24 hours.
ah, well in that case... Spoiler alert! It was one of my childhood favorites!
the burden of proof is on the person claiming it.

And where might they present their proof? Perhaps in court, in a trial? Like the sort of trial they tried to have, before Assange fled, preventing a trial?
Eric Schmidt Presentation Supercut
Term Sheet, daily, summary of all VC, Private Equity, LBO and other significant deals in North America.

http://ebm.cheetahmail.com/r/regf2?a=0&aid=2087267012&n=1
Subdividing patients after the fact and looking for statistically significant
results is a controversial practice

If by controversial they meant "is considered outright fraud" ... then yes, it is controversial. This is one of the parts that made me see an unacceptable level of bias.

There are a lot of parts that are similar to this, it might do a better than average job of explaining p-values and talking about the realities of experimental design but the tone in every case is dismissive in the "bunch of eggheads worrying about little details" kind of way.

This is so biased I assume there is an agenda here rather than just bad journalism, the other explanation is that the writer is a good writer, researched the unfamiliar terms but didn't understand any of it and is good enough at regurgitating information to make it look like they did understand it. Either way, it's awful science writing even if they did use a lot of science words correctly. I have a higher standard for my hypothetical Best Science Writing awards I guess ... like requiring they get the science right.
Washington D.C. has height caps on buildings. It's no wonder they have so much sprawl.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heights_of_Buildings_Act_of_191...
Claim says he had info on about 2 dozen drug dealers not thousands, and that he had info on about 5 thousands buyers.
I've reread the article a few times since reading your post, and while I might moderate the severity with which I first lashed at the author, I stand by my assessment. Here's my rationale:

1) The tone of the article is skewed in Harkonen's favor right from the outset, particularly in the way the author initially and repeatedly presumes the purity of Harkonen's motives ("saving lives"). In fact, we have no evidence of any motives other than the financial ("billion-dollar market," "$500 million opportunity," etc.).

2) Harkonen's methodology was flawed, full stop. While there might well have been something promising in the cohort he analyzed, a remainder cohort from one study does not take the place of a full set of clinical trials. Medical and statistical ethics would demand another study be conducted of the cohort Dr. Harkonen identified as more promising. Jumping the gun was unwarranted and possibly reckless. (As it turns out, a full study was later conducted, and indeed it proved the recklessness with which Harkonen leapt to his early conclusions).

3) Harkonen grossly misstated the results of the study in his press release, and, while it's hard to prove his intent, he is on record stating his financial upside in so doing. The author devotes all of a couple lines to this crucial point, then trots out a couple of irrelevant character-witness quotes to pave it over. (One quote essentially states 'If this is a crime, then a lot of scientists are in trouble!' Well, it is a crime. And if lots of other scientists are similarly cherrypicking their data and making misleading statements about it, then I'd say we have a serious problem on our hands.)

4) Your point about the closing statement in the article doesn't indicate absence of bias in favor of Harkonen. It adds some balance, yes. But it's buried at the bottom of the piece, where the typical reader either won't find it, or will glaze over it.

5) The opening paragraphs of the article, by contrast, paint a tragic portrait of an eminent and well-meaning doctor humiliated and punished for the crime of simply being overeager to help people (with the strong implication that his humiliation and punishment were unjust).

6) The author makes the repeated assertion that there is 'nothing factually inaccurate' about the content of Harkonen's press release. This is true by the letter, but not by the spirit. Harkonen cherrypicked the "facts" that he portrayed, accurately or otherwise, in that press release. And the later study bears out the potentially disastrous consequences of his having done so, negligently and recklessly.

I'll grant you that "fraud" seems a little extreme in this case, and that's where the controversy lies. But we can demonstrate mens rea, and at the very least, Harkonen committed an act of criminal negligence. That he stood to gain significantly from his misleading statements is strong circumstantial evidence in favor of fraud, though the article doesn't give us enough facts to make a definitive claim there. At the very least, we see no evidence that Harkonen was doing this to save lives -- a point the author strongly and repeatedly implies throughout the article.
I'm not certain that lavabit should be unilaterally deciding who the good guys and bad guys are. That's something that happens later.
patrickg_zill is making a claim - that the rape accusations are to discredit Assange.
Space-based money barrel detectors.

Anyone rich knows that laundering money is a purchase and sale away: art, jewelry, plane, barge, etc.

As long as there are one or more parties disincentivized or unconcerned with participating in taxation, people will find ways to avoid handing over large sums of cash and "let the little people pay taxes." (Yup, that's how some view it.)

How about a large finders % fee for reporting cheats? Or would NARCing render it moot by social and business pressures?
Flutter (YC W12), Makers of Gesture Control App For Mac, Acquired By Google
I think it was to avoid being too obviously non-compliant.

Delivering the information this way could be construed as merely avoiding paper-costs while using formats the hide-bound government officers would be most familiar with (paper). It's somewhat facetious, but you can almost say it with a straight face, and a tech-illiterate judge might even accept it (especially if you did something just slightly more legible at 5 or 6 points).

It would be impossible for anyone to claim with a straight face they complied if they did as you described. Lavabit can claim they provided the keys in a fairly digestible format, and it bought them a few days worth of time.

Also, a single character at 4 pt surrounded by whitespace is much, much easier to decode.

Finally, most courts would charge you for delivering that much paper. For similar reasons, paying court fees in pennies is not accepted by all jurisdictions.
I see a deleted comment. I'm going to assume SEO is Somewhat Eager Obituary instead of Search Engine Optimization.
The good news here is that Lavabit only started to suffer when the feds came calling for Snowden. Another email provider "Mavabit" could provide a quality encrypted email service for a while as well, as long as we have a supply of trustworthy operators.
Do any of you actually believe any of this shit? Do you realize what level of distraction we're likely reading at this point? Keep a healthy dose of skepticism for the next few weeks until everything settles down. The authorities are probably not going to be releasing the truth if they still have the means to catch other criminals in the same way they caught DPR.
Leaked specs also mention a 4.97 inch display.
In decimal, when you reach numbers after 9, there's no longer a single symbol you can use to represent the next number. Hence, you represent it as 10, which is one 10 and zero 1s. 11 is one 10 and one 1. This decimal, or base 10 system hence uses only 10 symbols, (0-9). In base 36, you can use additional other symbols, up to 36 different symbols. In this case they are 0-Z, changing to the letters of the alphabet A-Z as the remaining 26 unique symbols needed. Hence A is 11, B is 12 ... Z is 35. 36 (base 10) is then represented as 10 (base 36), one 36 and zero ones. 36^2 = 1296 (base 10) would be represented as 100 (base 36).
Lavabit founder raises $20,000 to fund court battle
The indictment alleges that the party contracted to perform the hit was an undercover cop. Generally, when you hire a cop to kill someone, you're prima facie guilty of hiring someone to commit murder, though I suppose there's always some possible mitigating factor like entrapment or falsified evidence. You can be damned sure the police have scrupulously documented their methods and recorded/logged all their interactions with Ulbricht, to address just such charges being raised.

Also, Assange wasn't accused of rape, but a lesser form of sexual assault, defined under Swedish law. Moreover, his counsel has stipulated both that the sex occurred, and that it was unprotected, which is the central issue in the charges, as I understood them. The question isn't whether or not he raped the women (plural!), or even whether or not he had sex with them, but whether or not they asked him to use a condom, and whether or not he refused.
Thirteen-Year-Olds Hack Their Way Into Space
Actually, my feature request is "don't show that incredibly aggravating page at all" or "increase by 60 minutes the time it takes for things to expire".

I see no particularly good reason for the site to give up on me just because I took awhile to read articles before clicking "More" at the bottom of a page. From my perspective the page was still open in a browser window so it should have remained functional.
What do you look for in a representative?
I realize that this may seem a bit off for Hacker News, but I am curious as to what the members here look for in deciding who to vote and if you do not vote why not?
>>This particular policy was almost certainly not useful. But the overall regime of "better safe than sorry" has proven to be highly effective in this particular context.

The context here is this particular policy, not FAA's approach to airline travel as a whole.
Sad to hear that hasn't been fixed since I left a couple of years ago...
I donated earlier tonight. I am thinking I will send a matching donation to the EFF as well.
Detecting the Quantization of Gravity
They captured him using good ole fashioned detective work so... strengthens privacy argument as surveillance isn't needed to catch the bad guy.
""Technical ability" means that yes, it's doable if someone does work. It's doesn't mean that they 'already had the ability' other than in a theoretical sense."

That is a meaningless distinction. It is the difference between having to type a large number of characters (not even that large -- how hard is it to capture a password?), or a small number of characters. Lavabit, as designed, could access any user's email the moment that user logged in. That is obvious to anyone who understands what encryption is. It is an inherent vulnerability in every system that does what Lavabit/Hushmail/etc. do.

"And even so, it still doesn't change the fact that it would have turned all their business claims into giant lies, possibly even exposing them to suits for false advertising, etc."

If Lavabit advertised itself as an email service that cannot read your email, then that suit could have happened regardless, because the claim is untrue. If, on the other hand, it was advertised as a service that will not read your email and that protects your email while it is stored, that is different and would not have been affected by their cooperation with the FBI's demands.
This website is very broken on my iPhone 4s.
Who's got the Dune quote for this?
I'm sure, but that's not really better. That just means the mobster in my analogy is befuddled that the restaurant owner chose close up shop and leave town after being threatened with arson.
You are not the first person to come up with the idea of "let's have a lawyer sit in the room while we plan our conspiracy". I doubt it works as well in real life as on TV.
Historical performance is not... you know the rest.

Anyway, there is no evidence in that blog post to verify there has been 100% annual growth rate.

Also, growth of WHAT? Is it growth of revenues? Number of employees? Number of customers?
Yeah. The second hand things I've heard about drug busts tell me that the steps are generally:

1) Cops have a pretty good suspicion who it is

2) Cops falsify evidence to get search warrant

3) Search warrant executed, they have the drugs, go to trial with the drugs

This case seems to be a little more outlandish than most, though.
> His claim was that receptive vocabulary in grade school children was the single best predictor that was known for their IQ and tests scores in high school and presumably beyond.

This isn't true. For example, IQ as a 20 year old is a better predictor of IQ in high school than receptive vocabulary in grade school is. It happens that it's hard to observe the IQ at age 20 of a child who isn't 20 yet, but that doesn't change the strength of the predictor.

> But having been exposed to a lot of vocabulary when you're young seems to be a good thing.

You provide no support for this other than the fact that a large vocabulary at a young age is indicative of a high IQ later. However, a large vocabulary later is also indicative of a high IQ later. Applying the same logic, you should conclude that being exposed to a lot of vocabulary when you're old is just as good (if not better!).

If you don't think studying vocabulary as an adult will get you very far, why do you think studying it as a child is different?
Oh, get fucked.
I've seen this advice floating around the internet before, and while I agree with the lower limit, who the hell charges their phone to just 80%? I just plug the phone in at night and let it charge to 100% while I sleep. Is there even an option on smartphones to do anything different?
in ruby '1bp49b'.to_i(36)
I love HN because it's the only site where one guy can be an authority on cryptography, politics, computer science and hitman etiquette all at the same time, and nobody bats an eyelid
The number is 1bp49b. The base-10 values of b and p are 11 and 25, respectively. The decimal value of the number is then:

1*36^5 + b*36^4 + p*36^3 + 4*36^2 + 9*36^1 + b*36^0
= 36^5 + 11*36^4 + 25*36^3 + 4*36^2 + 9*36 + 11
= 80113871

I'll start on Monday.
That ad needs to be on a round manhole cover
Blizzident, the 'six-second toothbrush'
In contrast to mbetter, I agree with your assesment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmvSsBE4MBQ
I set up the same system in Tasker: it is actually very surprising how well it works.
With your computer's webcam!
I live in Mexico and I have seen facebook profiles of guys wearing their insert any kind of organized crime organization related to drugs "uniform". Like its just there, its listed as their job sometimes, too. Like, granted not all people that list it actually do it. But still, can you imagine just doing a regular search on Facebook and having hundreds of people to arrest?

War on drugs my ass. Use of NSA privacy-breaking technology to fight "the bad guys" my ass.
This information is all months old though. Some of it more than a year old. I mean, I don't know if we're getting the unadulterated truth or not, but it isn't like they just discovered all this yesterday. They've had time to take it and run with it.
And as Churchill said, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
The name itself indicates that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dread_Pirate_Roberts
It is more like the making of Breaking Bad. The FBI staged torture photos of DPR's ex-employee. I imagine Jesse's makeup artist went from his day job to the FBI.

What is funny, is DPR got away with the murder for hire plot. They tried to set him up by making him do a bank transfer. After having seen the photo's, the undercover agent thought he would send the money non-anonymously, but DPR used some now defunct Australian anonymous wire service. It took the FBI several months to locate him.
There's some of us here in Brisbane. There's just not as much as in Sydney to get that kind of press coverage I think.
You'd think once in a while a "real" Internet hit man would get caught, and you'd read about that. But I've never read that story. I just read story after story about the morons who think they can more or less request a murder on Craigslist, and who let money change hands with the first person they talk to who seems amenable.
9 ways to get more users for your product
With iOS 7 Apple has tossed 30 years of progress out the window
Believe what you like, others will too, and the majority will choose.
You think the DOJ invented an entire murder-for-hire scheme with an undercover cop in a federal indictment because they're intent on convincing message board nerds to distrust Bitcoin?
I still have a G1 with an extended battery, and it gets charged once-twice a week. I use it fairly regularly, so it's not jst standby.

Underclock, people, underclock :)
Show HN: A Collaborative Art Canvas (experimental)
The Feds were waiting to find out what happened to Walter White before they decided what to do with DPR.. timing is impeccable.
The classic Windows 95 game, Hover, is reborn on the web. Play now
That looks awesome. It works everywhere that OAuth does? Can it be used with a password as a 2FA?
If only I knew your phone number ...
The part where he paid $40k to kill that person for knowing him seems less fun.
The Obama administration is so concerned about Bitcoin that they created a fake murder for hire scheme instrumented by a fake undercover cop documented in a federal indictment that supersedes another federal indictment that explicitly says Bitcoin has lawful uses, and is so concerned about Tor that... what, they stopped funding it?
Awesome info, thanks.

Wow, some of these phones are getting pretty large. Especially considering this is Google's flagship phone. I wonder what size it will max out at?
Suppressing evidence sounds like something that would have happened considerably later, after they had reviewed Snowden's email records. Reviewing Snowden's email records seems like a reasonable means for the FBI to determine if they are dealing with a whistleblower or a saboteur. We are all convinced Snowden is a whistleblower, but the FBI isn't likely to believe that just because he says so.
You don't just never hear about "internet" hitmen getting caught- you never hear about any hitman getting caught, that I've heard of. I find that suspicious, and am not willing to conclude "ah, so hitmen must not exist". There are just too many people, too many grudges, too much power & money. They probably slip through the cracks, either in the shadow of a kingpin going down, or perhaps most hitmen pretend to be ordinary criminals and take the rap as part of the job.
My point is that by saying that "more patients on the drug died", they're implying that the drug was itself killing people. With 35 patients, the 2% difference is about one person. They stopped the trial because the drug wasn't doing anything, but it's misleading to suggest that it was contributing further to mortality.
That's what I'm wondering. I would have thought someone running an operation like that would control their physical hardware.
"How does this knowledge effect the ongoing debate about digital privacy ?"

Not at all. You cannot encrypt a dead body, or a blood smear, or the fact that someone connected to you has disappeared. This is kind of like asking how the news that the mafia avoids using telephones to conduct their business will affect the debate about privacy in one's home.

The right to privacy will always be use by criminals. That is the price we pay for our civil rights.
To be clear you can use Openstack today, you just can't automatically provision Openstack instances. You have to construct your formation manually. However, you still get most of the platform benefits. :)
Like half a dozen people have tried to argue that, because the order was lawful and Levison had complied with previous lawful orders, he has no moral justification for refusing this one.

Let's not beat around the bush. You're willfully missing the point. The lawfulness of the order is not at issue; the target of the order is. I would happily obey a lawful order to turn in a fugitive rapist hiding in my basement; I would not willingly obey a lawful order from the same authority to turn over an escaped slave, even if I lived in a slave-holding nation.

If you don't think that Snowden should have broken the law to inform the public of massive, unsupervised, hidden government surveillance and lies about same, that's fine. But say so, don't go making disingenuous sidewise arguments and thinking you're sly. Yes, Levison disobeyed a lawful order. Laws should be obeyed because they are just, not because they are laws.
The user is vulnerable, not only to "malware" but also to the phone vendor (and anyone the vendor enables, notably government). The degree of control one can attain over a phone or tablet is much less than on a general-purpose PC, and the latter is hard enough to relatively secure. Smartphones are captive, remote-controllable devices and as such are not trustworthy for secure communications or any important secrets.

This fact, together with grc's implications that the scheme is novel, important or secure, supports the derisive view of the author in the sub-thread above. Also check out the stylistic buffoonery on his site.
Until proven, they are just accusations, aren't they? His "claim" is regarding motives for the accusations, which really isn't the same thing, is it?
Here's a statistician's take on this story:

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=9308
Outlook.com allows you to use your own domain (free) and supports IMAP https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6375844
Somehow I thought it was a known thing, that outside of the movies, if you found a hitman, that is willing to do the deed, he's either a con artist or an officer of the law.
Just block first-world nations from accessing *.mturk.com, and problem solved.
I picture an old bus full of pennies.
From the readme:

>> lmctfy runs best when it owns all containers in a machine so it is not recommended to run lmctfy alongside LXC or another container system (although given some configuration, it can be made to work).

At first I thought this might be Docker-esque, but it's a completely different stack solving the same problems.
Ask HN: Freelance web developers, how did you get your first real client?
That was my first thought as well. Please don't tell me no one in Sydney managed to think of this.
I'd be remiss without mentioning it in python: int('1bp49b', 36)
SEC Weighs Overhaul of Exchanges' Self-Regulatory System
You read too much goddamn internet if you think that's how things "generally" go down.