skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is what I see when following the link on my iPad:

> Sorry, your operating system is not supported just yet. The Chrome Web Store is available on Windows (except RT), Mac and Linux. Why don't you send yourself a reminder to try it out later?

It would be nice if the Chrome store at least redirected to a relevant static info page even if I can't install the app. Same for the similar Apple App store links.
One of the benefits of having the four freedoms is you, the user, can choose who (if anybody) to trust.

Don't trust Mozilla to build a non-malicious binary from the Firefox source? Get somebody you do trust to build it. Or build it yourself.

Of course when you get down to it you have to trust that there exists a compiler that isn't malicious but I think the point still stands
I think I found something to spend some time on!
Sure: the GPL does not grant you the freedom to alter the license under which the software was given to you, nor to mix the software with other software under a conflicting license. To do either of those things would work against the freedoms that the GPL explicitly promotes.

Other licenses, such as the X11 license, let you embed the software into proprietary projects. So in that sense you are granted more freedom. But doing that denies other freedoms that the GPL explicitly grants.
I hope they don't waste everyone's time with having an NDA signed before the first round of interviews? What would it accomplish?
I don't think Stallman needs to change his approach or message.

We do, however, need somebody to augment his arguments with ones that will reach people like you.
UTF-8 wins for the internet because most of the payload of an HTTP request/response is 7-bit ascii characters, so it is the most efficient even in languages where UTF-16 may be more efficient because of the complexity of their character set.
That's funny. The first thing that came to my mind was turnips. Maybe there should be a parsnip and a turnips in the logo. Maybe a parsnip pointing down between two turnips, in a T formation.
I'm sorry you weren't able to make it work. That kind of workload sounds like a lot for anything. You might consider using something like Omnifocus or Things in order to keep track of all of that. (among other solutions for tracking all of that kind of data) They're a bit more tailor-made for something like that. Evernote is less of a heavy task-management system as it is a place to dump a lot of information. (such as the entire web page with a brownie recipe I have saved. perfect for that, less for managing 10 complicated projects)

Honestly though, it sounds like you have a system already in place that works well for you. Why switch away? The only thing you might do is use a notebook to dump all the stuff from one week into, then have your short review on a separate page(s), then start over. (using indices in the front of the notebook to keep an easy reference to start of each section. start of week 1, start of week 1 review, start of week 2, etc.) But I suppose one size does not fit all. Do what works and helps you keep track of things!
Do you have any case studies of this you can refer us to?
Depends on what freedom you're talking about. To give one example, the freedom to vote is important to me because I think the world would get less fun if we had a monarchy or autarchy. But if there was evidence of some form of government where I didn't get to vote but I would be happier and more fulfilled? Happy to give democracy up if the evidence is convincing enough. Freedom of vote is not an end, it is a means to good governance. Similarly with most freedoms.
Granted. I was inappropriately treating Stallman as "the free software movement." He does not, himself, need to change.
I have had access to rippled for many months, and it is a pretty big part of my job to evaluate different financial systems and asset types and to consider their impact for potential future of financial networking from a technical standpoint. Here's my summary of the most important distinctions between Bitcoin and Ripple:

(1) Ripple includes a single 'asset', the Ripple, or XRP (X-ISO4217-A3[1]: XXRP) with which to tax shared resource use and avoid network abuse. Unlike Bitcoin's mining model, Ripple has a non-profit foundation to distribute the vast majority of these tokens.

(2) Ripple settlements are effectively much faster than Bitcoin, since rollbacks are designed to be impossible.[2]

(3) Ripple encourages anyone to issue any asset. So you can have contingencies' "IOU for 5 euros", or Sidnicious' "IOU for 5 euros" and then you can choose whether or not to consider them to be of equivalent value. This is hugely powerful, since monetary theorists agree that the most desirable and missing feature of an economic system is the capacity to create a record of value (ie. debt, or money) where value is actually being created.

(4) The Ripple reference implementation is far cleaner and better written.

In summary, Ripple is hugely different to Bitcoin, far more aligned with academic thought on economic systems reform, and a toolkit for creating various forms of exchange rather than a currency itself. The XRP thing is just there to prevent resource abuse.

[1] http://www.ifex-project.org/our-proposals/x-iso4217-a3
[2] Can't validate that myself.. though it makes sense you'd know "something's wrong" really damn quickly, since everything would stop working entirely: IIRC a Ripple ledger consensus occurs rapidly and takes majority agreement.
Must be my age showing. When I was in school internet access wasn't common so if we needed to exchange software it was on floppy disks.
>researchers lesioned the basal ganglia of the birds — the region of the brain

a Vulcan reading this would make a mental note "still not ready, check back again in a couple of hundreds years".
I'm interested in that too if there's an attempt to redo this again with some changes. My email is just username at pretty much any email provider.
Grand Theft Auto: meet the grand masters of digital art
Well that's just ridiculous. You can't just hand wave and say Stallman's view is right or is the way things should be. Many would not really want to live in Stallman's Utopia.

Stallman freely admits that his view probably entails a certain destruction of programming as a profession that is worth more than ditch digging or deincentivizes a lot of innovation ... I like RMS as a person, and he was a brilliant programmer at one point, but let's be honest, he might as well be using a type writer with a telegraph system.

What is it that you think shows RMS as being clearly right?
Is there a free version? (e.g. for printed circuit boards, DIPTrace offers free, non-commercial size-limited licenses; I think Eagle does too)
I think that's exactly right. I came to the same conclusions after reading 1/2 a dozen books about the events leading up to the 2008 market crash. There were no evil masterminds, just a lot of shortsighted greedy individuals whose actions had consequences larger than they'd imagined.

We're not a very rational species yet.
"in 2007 web-apps were server side"

!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmail#April_Fools.27_jokes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_maps#2005

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_(programming)#History

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oddpost
> Imagine how much litigation there would be if your property right in your yard couldn't be simply and unambiguously determined just by looking or simple surveying. That's basically the problem with patents.

True, that's basically the problem with patents.

I'm surprised that there isn't a concerted effort to more clearly define what constitutes a valid patent from a semantic point of view. What meaning in that definition on paper is monopolized for a limited period. If we use a semantic hierarchy to define patents then looking up patent prior art becomes a mechanical process where we compare a hierarchy of prior art to the patent application.

How is a patent definition considered acceptable when it doesn't try to show that it is novel. Patents are after all a monopoly for a limited time before claims become public domain. So what constitutes public domain should be recorded to facilitate prior art look-up.

Some basic things like these two points can go a long way in resolving conflict.
This assumes you know the byte alignments. What if all you have is a stream of zeros and ones?
Meet the US Navy's new high altitude drone, Triton
Are your data archives append-only?
Securing Docker and Containers
All you have to do, the email says, is help them catch your friends in the group. You have to report back every week, or you dad might lose his job. So you do.

FWIW, that is exactly what the FBI has been doing with the No Fly List. They put known innocents on the list mid-trip so that they can't go home. Then they offer to take them off the list if they will inform on their friends and relatives.

Want to bet that the FBI chose to target these innocent people because of social-graph data exactly like this article talks about?

The ACLU has been fighting and they just released an update on the situation yesterday.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/no-fly-list-wher...
Oh hogwash. RMS is principled but his "all or nothing" approach is less effective than PETA.

The reality is most people don't understand Stallman, neither his detractors or supporters. For most of you that "support" Stallman, he would deride your love of open source as little more being evil or masochistic.

To paint detractors or non-followers of Stallman as mindless entertainment watchers or whatever is very simplistic.
I'm a employee of a large tech company that's being parodied here, and I found this really disconcerting. The scenes with the boss and HR are completely different to my experience. No one cares what I do at the weekend. No one cares about my social media presence. No one cares if I use the company's products or not.

A few clear examples: one of my grandparents passed away, and the company was as supportive as possible. I asked if I could work from my parents house to be with my grandmother, and I got back "You can work from another country for an open ended period. If you aren't getting anything done, let me know, and we'll call it compassionate leave". There are people who go out socializing, but I've never felt pressured to go along. There are people who work long hours or the weekend, but again, I've never felt pressured to do that either.

Edit: When the company was newer, the employees worked very long hours and weekends. They worked, mind you. Everyone I know from that era is remarkably well off. The vast majority of the early employees have retired to spend more time with their wealth. I'm much more concerned, as a person, about either the big companies that do massive crunches (see ea spouse) or the startups that fails despite everyone working really hard, the employees don't get the 100 million dollar payday.
That was my reaction, too. I was expecting something more than a random pixel map.
Rather than worrying about rhetoric, though, why don't we question whether Stallman is actually right or whether his Utopia is somewhere we really want to live?
I'll back up that endorsement. I've seen it 3 times now, the last time being last night. As an aspiring game dev, it is really motivating and enlightening.
Voilà. :)
Did you investigate using the identity API?

http://developer.chrome.com/extensions/identity.html
On another occasion, Lewin called Linux, which made servers in North Carolina, to say Akamai needed around 1,000 servers in four weeks. The company said such a large order wasn’t possible; they needed more time. Instead of pleading with them,  Lewin sent them an e-mail to confirm a deadline of four weeks. That night, he went to the hardware store and bought tool kits,  flew to North Carolina with some of his best engineers, and showed up to work at Linux the next morning. A baffled employee said, “Sir, who are you here to see?” Lewin replied: “I’m not here to see anyone; I’m here to build servers.” Within four weeks, he’d helped Linux construct more than 1,000 new servers.

Linux. Right.
i remember i read an article under the same title, that said more or less

that postmodern programming, is googling for code snippet to paste in your ide or framework

and all the effort you will do is configure and glue stuff together

sounded cool at the time
AngelList Syndicates Will Also Pit Angel Against Angel
From http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/nio/charset/Ch...: "The native character encoding of the Java programming language is UTF-16."

That said, at least they adopted a Unicode encoding, and helped it establish mindshare.
Oh, wow. I hadn't realized until this review that the thing has four distinct shoulder buttons and four underpad triggers. That's eight full buttons that are accessible while keeping both thumbs on the pads--better than any console gamepad I've seen! I feel better about the thing in general, now.
DokuWiki's own manual page (and others) keeps getting spammed
The plan for BitWeav: Unifying the web for open distributed micropublishing
I will tiptoe carefully around the issue you're bringing up and point out that the styles of type checking provided by Dialyzer and Typed Clojure are pretty different.
Agreed, it's completely unintuitive to a lot of software developers. I run a revenue API company for app developers to help them monetize free apps, and in three years, of all the paid app developers I've spoken with, exactly zero have initially believed me that free App Store apps can generate revenue to even approach the revenue they think they'll capture with a for-pay app. They don't realize that the avalanche of free apps is going to crush them like a Mack truck.

Common sense, creator's optimism, and B-school economics all suggest that paid beats free, I get it. But, sh-t's changed. Chris Anderson wrote Free: The Future of a Radical Price five YEARS ago, but I wish more creators and developers on HN took the ideas described there to heart.
Handing my information to Stripe defeats the entire purpose of your application.
Yes, it's good for end users, but it's not complete freedom so GNU shouldn't make that claim then in the fine print add "...but some kinds of use are restricted." They should be more open and say "freedom for end users but not free to modify and distribute".
That's the physical and link layer's fault for not possessing alignment information. You shouldn't have a bit stream, you should already have a byte stream, otherwise you are dealing with data forensics.

The physical part of disks and networks usually have things like preambles, correlators, phase-locked loops, Gray codes, and self-clocking signals which can be used to deduce bit and byte boundaries, which is why in software, we almost always deal with information which we already know is correctly aligned.
True. I didn't really mean for my comment to be a normative standard for what is considered "free software", more to highlight how one might differentiate "open" and "free".

As for the licences you list, I'd say that MIT, BSD and APL belong together as "different" from GPL, while the MPL is much closer to the GPL.
There's no way to align a bit stream containing exclusively 8 bits per byte. (Whatever code you choose for the alignment mark could also be a valid code since there are no extras.)

You need to add extra bits so you can find the alignment, and once you do that you have the answer to your question.
Libre. Liberty.

Done.
I just want to take the opportunity to comment further on the hygiene thing, because it's relevant to public health in a very unexpected way.

The author has such a fixation on hygiene that they arbitrarily elevate it to a special category, above proper refrigeration and storage, beyond all reason and logic. What reason and logic, you may ask? Hygiene's mainly an issue if a food handler is sick or come into contact with a sick person. Whereas improperly stored food will get you ill a very high percentage of the time regardless of the health of the staff. Just do a quick calculation of the odds in your head of which is a more critical issue.

But it's super gross, right, and most people can't help but put it at the top of their mental list of "grossness", even above unrefrigerated meat and eggs (that have been previously refrigerated), which are far more likely to make you sick.

So how does an irrational fixation with hygiene affect public health? There was a study done that compared poor Russian kids with rich Finnish kids living across the border from one another. It found higher rates of auto-immune diseases, allergies and diabetes in the Finnish kids. Similar genetic profiles and all that.

Long story short, the theory is the rich Finnish parents were more obsessed with hygiene and keeping their kids clean, and it actually hurt the development of a normal immune system.

Interesting, right? Moral of the story: mere quantity of data is insufficient to draw correct conclusions. One must also adhere to a rigorous scientific methodology that controls for biases.

Source: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/The-Unintended-...
nouns are commonly used as adjectives

http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/nouns-adjective.htm
That's more of a problem with the English language.
The questions are very simple. Anyone who depends on a blog post to know the answers will fail a slightly different set of questions, not to mention the next interview.
I recently spent four days in hospital on IV fluids after a bad restaurant meal. Here's what I learned.

1) Most restaurants are primarily in business to make money, not to provide high-quality healthy food.

2) Much of the food served in restaurants is not made there. There may be a chain of 3-4 intermediary suppliers between the raw ingredients and what you are served.

3) Most restaurateurs don't know what is in the food; not because they don't care but because it is impossible to monitor the supply chain.

Having nearly died as a result, I will never again trust my food to someone whose primary motivation is financial gain. Now, if I eat it, I made it.
This is what happens when you are drunk and can type 150 words per minute. :)
My apologies; that's what I meant. I tend to (incorrectly) use "open source" synonymously with "free software" when writing informally.

In this case, the project that I contributed to was distributed under the MIT (Expat) License, which, to my knowledge, is GPL compatible.
RMS and the FSF have always talked about Free software as a moral and ethical issue, rather than achieving some measurable benefit, so saying "reducing proprietary-software usage by 95% is almost as good" is a different discussion than the one RMS is trying to have. Which is not to say that it's a Bad Thing To Discuss, just different.

Personally, I try to stick to Free software wherever I can, but there are definitely times where I say "screw it" and use something proprietary. For example, my government has an income-tax-filing application that's free-to-download but proprietary. Technically I could get a paper copy of the form, fill it out by hand and send it in, but in the long run I'd rather have the temporary safety of automatic form-validation over the essential liberty of tax-software autonomy. Maybe that's completely unjustified and I'm a terrible person, maybe it's the right decision for me but the wrong decision for society at large, I dunno. If I had an infinite lifespan and could take the time to re-implement all the proprietary software I encounter, I'd like to think I would, or at least contribute, but given I've got Stuff To Do...

Honestly, I think Step 1 of the Free software movement is just to encourage people to think about the consequences of their (software licensing) actions. Some people will agree, some people will disagree, some people will agree in principle but put "ensure software Freedom" at the bottom of their list, just underneath "learn Esperanto", and I think that's OK. As usual, the real problem is exploitation of the uninformed and uneducated, and the more people there are with informed, educated opinions the better off society will be.
If I know the hash function, it would be relatively straight forward to deduce what state the hash function is in before processing the final "a" without knowing t.

With that state, it would then be a matter of computing the last character of the hash function with the "b" constant. Once I've got that, I can get m knowing only hash(combine(t,"a")), hash(combine(t,"b")), xor(hb,m) but not knowing t.

One way to strengthen your approach is the use an approach borrowed from HMAC, which is to compute hash(combine("a",t,"a")) and hash(combine("b",t,"b")) instead. Now it's a harder problem to figure out the state of the hash function, if you'll permit me to extend your combine function.

I hope this is clear.
drchrono is looking for iOS, iPad, iPhone developers
Great summary - especially spinning up another container to use as the client - I was wondering how to do that : )

Docker is seriously another planet of cool!
Isn't that a vagueness in copyright law itself? You could avoid the vagueness by making the GPL stricter and more explicit, but that seems like the direct opposite of 'simplification'.
I agree that it is better than many EULAs, but that doesn't make it simple. At roughly 5000 words with a reading ease grade level of about 15(Flesch-Kincaid) it is not a document for the average person.

Doesn't even mean I disagree with most of the license, but it is unreasonable to expect people to understand it.
One also has to trust the source code of the project. Given the sheer number of unintentional back doors in the form of exploitable bugs occuring in so many projects, this is a complete non-starter to me, even had I the time to completely review the source code of any given project. I will miss mistakes, and I will most definitely miss intentional "mistakes", even if I'm well versed in the programming language at hand and using it daily within a professional capacity.

Open source has some significant values to me, but security is not among them. It may raise the barrier to some very simple, basic, hobbyist style maliciousness going uncaught, but this is by and large not what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned by more sophisticated maliciousness. If I cannot trust your binaries to not contain it, I generally cannot trust your source code to not contain it either, even if I personally review it.
Yep, the limit so far is 17 trillion, which is very limited..
Developer A writes some code.
Developer B makes device-specific alterations and puts it on a device.
Consumer C buys the device.

If A GPL'd the software then C has a right to the exact code running on their device. This is not the case under other licenses that people like to call "more free".
I (like many of us) have been reading and following RMS for many years now. It is fascinating how things that I used to feel were impractical about his ideas ("if proprietary software gets the job done, then why shun it? We live in a world where we must be practical, etc.") now seem imperative.

This point struck home with his mention of education: how frustrating it is that so much of it lives in, say, Matlab, as compared to any other numerical package!

How frustrating that we all depend on Microsoft Excel (or Google Docs) to do pivot tables!

How frustrating that we depend on github to store our code.

How frustrating that we depend on AWS for our servers.

I spend a lot of my professional life migrating from one closed system (eg, deployments on Rackspace to AWS; cc processing from PayPal to Braintree; accounting from Quickbooks to Netsuite) to another.

I wonder if, in practice, so many of these frustrations would have been alleviated if we, as an industry, had adopted the "impractical" view of insisting on using only free software.
I wonder how well-received the coming .tech/software/app/etc. gTLDs will be. Will people still want to grab the .com for their company?
How is the different from convergence.io? What does using Tor offer over Moxie's approach? An existing network of machines?