skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Maybe they're going to rework the Apple TV to target the market the wii was going after with iPhone/iPad game campatability on your tv? That is almost not a bad idea actually... Almost.
Yes! 29% of the current batch is from outside the US. https://www.hackerschool.com/blog/25-who-comes-to-hacker-sch...
Care to elaborate? Preferably with proofs that if activity and social graphs of two accounts ovelap at some threshold level user accounts are flagged.
> No doubt that works well in some cases, but the average YouTube video is not such a forum.

Yes, and that's the mistake that Google is making: thinking the problem is procedural ("Just have people log in with their real name") instead of social.

I'm not sure what the best solution is but their current one is obviously wrong. Maybe they could start by doing a better job at sorting/upvoting/downvoting so that only the best comments get shown on the front page and not the most recent ones.
Ding ding ding! We have a winner.
لعبة مطعم البطريق 2 الجزء الثاني
لعبة مطعم البطريق 2 الجزء الثاني

لعبة ,مطعم ,البطريق, 2 ,الجزء ,الثاني

http://www.bnat4games.com/Game-315.html
Brilliant work, definitely appreciated.
I hate this - especially on a sunday afternoon when I don't want to think about work :( My phone keeps ringing because some of our servers appear to offline....

I wonder how many admins around the globe are currently annoyed by monitoring alerts :-(
Yup, just like the backlash against News Feed.

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1532225,0...
No matter your take on bitcoin's long-term viability (or lack thereof), it can hardly be argued that this isn't damn interesting to watch unfold.

A cryptocurrency with zero backing that exists only in digital form is now worth many billions of dollars. Is it a bubble? Will this foment a currency revolution of sorts? If it doesn't crash, how will governments react? If it does crash, what will replace it? Obviously there is a demand for a decentralized currency, and as more people realize that something like this is possible, I can only see demand for it going one way: up. Most people have never even heard of bitcoin; I've only talked to a few people in my own life who are even familiar with the word, and fewer still who know what it actually is. Yet with even such a small awareness, bitcoin's value has grown from zero to billions in a few years. Unless governments step in and find some way to put the kibosh on decentralized currencies in general, it seems unlikely that demand is going to shrink as awareness continues to increase. We're so used to governments essentially owning currencies that it is very difficult to imagine a world where they don't, but obviously, if cryptocurrencies take off in a big way, the implications for the future are profound.
For anyone who is interested in nginx tuning, please follow the H5BP nginx repo: https://github.com/h5bp/server-configs-nginx, which is very well documented already and still being maintained.
You'd think they'd have learned from that woman whose info got sent to a stalker ex by the Google Buzz account she didn't want.
Everyone knows Hipsters are Apple-only :P
Considering that this can be installed to a VM, an image of which is backed up, what is not automated about this solution?

Maintenance: can't the distro package manager take care of that for me?

Sorry for the ignorance in my stance, but I came across this article because I'm looking to move away from Google infrastructure to hosting my own stuff, and this seemed like a great piece :)
riiiiiiight
Fixing HTML Widows
Alternatively, only activate voting on comments when new users reach a certain karma threshold (does this exist already?), and only activate voting on stories when users reach a certain higher karma threshold.
A movie contains literally tens of thousands of ideas [Pixar's Catmull, HBR]
If Bitcoin Is So Secure, Why Have There Been Dozens of Bitcoin Bank Robberies?
> such passion and fanaticism

Huh? Okay, let's say "3 stories on the frontpage" indicates passion, but where is the fanaticism? You need to take a break from HN for a week because of 3 stories about the same subject being on the frontpage? Come on.

> Now, apparently, we all are to remember as a system that worked? One that is so worthy of defense?

I agree that YouTube comments always sucked compared to even the most basic forum. But not because of trolls and stupid people. Depending on the video, you could have perfectly fine discourse or humour. If you're not aware of this, blame the videos you're watching, but don't generalize from them. People talk about personal things on YouTube, too, and sometimes they want to support each other without making their identity known.

Stuff like this, the actual value to be had in communicating, is what necessitates protecting it from spam, trolling etc. It's not to protect the people who "just want to watch videos" and can't help but glance downwards and throw fits over how stupid some people are. So if you're not involved or interested in YouTube comments, why would you care? And if you are, why wouldn't you?

This dismissal a la "it's just, you know, youtube comments" just doesn't work for me. Yeah, and? I know there is a line, and that you can't just allow anything everywhere all the time, but generally: if one doesn't stand up for the freedom of expression for silly, stupid or simply young people on a site that's potentially about everything and nothing, how committed are they? And if people being stupid is a problem, how is censoring that stupidity a solution? It's YouTube, not SomeTube.

And I say this as someone who has been using his real name on YouTube since 2006, and rarely comments. If only the people having real stakes in it would speak out against such crap, the people having real stakes in it would be fucked; so the rest of us have to use our imagination, and show a little solidarity. People high on the "importance scale" generally can look out for themselves, after all.
Wow indeed! Thanks for the links.
Non sequitur if I ever seen one.

1. I never stated that Google software is magnificent. I stated that it is ridiculous to judge a corporate giant with thousands of engineers by pointing to a bad bug created by one team.

2. I do not work at Google anymore. And my view of the company is worse after my employment there. But I reserve my criticism for issues that I consider to be really important like NSA spying or limiting keyword search data to website owners.

3. I feel personally offended with all the emotional FUD that is going on what is assumed to be one of the best discussion forums on the internet.
Looks like the author of the linked blog post is reading HN. They have modified the article in an attempt to address your criticisms.
Two million Raspberry Pi sold
My opinion is that your points are all incorrect.

\* It will not be publicly available other than behind a paywall a la PACER.

\* No laws will change. The government and corporations are already protected from the consequences of acquiring illegal data so they (congress, lobbyists) will continue to not care if a non-corporate entity can access data safely or not.

\* The government has already decided that you are well within your rights to photograph whatever you want from public land, they will angle the cameras however they like. Although I am sure wealthy people will be able to get cameras facing away from their neighborhoods somehow.

Being in public does mean potentially being recorded. But that law was legalized before everyone had a camera and could easily aggregate it all. We should be fighting for laws against persistent, widespread recording or aggregation of photos and video done by private or government entities.

\* You cannot tail everyone, everywhere with such low expenses without ubiquitous recording. Why not criminalize that? Otherwise any CEO can see where you or I go, who we talk to, etc. It will not be available for ordinary people to view CEOs or congresspeople.

\* Recording people's conversations is illegal for private entities, but "voice stress analysis" is legal. Recording conversations in service to the NSA and DHS is probably illegal but they most likely have a secret court warrant that allows it but is unchallengeable.

\* If you think every violent crime will be solved by recording everything, and that it is worth the collateral damage, I have got some news for you. If you're serious about recording conversations they're going to be able to solve many new conspiracy to commit "crimes," like if someone jokes about eating a child's heart in public.

\* "Follow a protest" is exactly what they would like to do; by having computers everywhere they can skip having police get an identity and just add the protestors to a no-fly list directly, or look up their crimes from the email database and arrest the leaders at their leisure. No more embarrassing pepper spray incidents. Yes Google will be able to tell you the traffic or weather, startups will not be able to unless they are well-funded and well-connected.

Making the recording public just allows abusive spouses to easily find their victim again as well as enabling all the shit the government would like to do. I want neither the government nor private entities to be allowed video data from hundreds of points around any given city.
How Anonymous Submissions Affected Gender Balance at our Conference
yep. and i'm pretty annoyed that they do not update their status page more regularly while things seem to get worse by the minute.
I have had bad experiences with Hetzner in past, there are many better providers out there I do not understand why people use them and their cheap desktop based servers and minimal support (even if hardware breaks and you can prove it they drag their legs)
Regarding the headline, "A sensible exit: PrimeSense bought by Apple for $345M", does anyone have any opinion on the price here? It seems reasonable, but really just serves to highlight just how absurd the Snapchat offer was earlier this week (in my opinion).
yes, 144.76.0.0/24 looks down for me too, unfortunately even the robot administration is unavailable
1. Any money is a bubble in a sense. It's a feedback loop of speculation that the commodity at hand will be widely accepted by other speculators in the future. The only basis for this speculation is that people need some money to trade. The money bubble pops only if there's some other, better commodity on the horizon that speculators may bet on. http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.fr/2013/04/bitcoin-...

2. Some governments are very supportive (at least, not intrusive): Germany, China, Hong Kong, Canada. In United States Bitcoin is effectively 90% forbidden already. Banks close accounts for Bitcoin businesses with no reason, regulatory approval is very slow and very-very expensive (need to get it from all states), past history of very aggressive raids on financial experiments.
Link to nginx.conf: https://github.com/h5bp/server-configs-nginx/blob/master/ngi...
5 People you meet during a computer science degree
Presumably Microsoft has a perpetual license to PrimeSense's IP? Or does someone else entirely own that?
> One of the worst pieces of journalism about Google+...

That's a nice opinion, and you're entitled to it. But please don't try to present it as a fact.

> written by "a outspoken and controversial author and journalist"...

I don't see anything wrong with that. Since when did HN veer towards safe and conservative journalists or authors?

As for the straw man argument about the N-word, I don't think that was the gist of her article. For me, this is where she nailed it:

Before anyone tells me I can't complain about "free" things, and starts to remind me that Google hasn't done anything directly to feed the U.S. Government's flagrant - and growing - surveillance law abuses enacted on civilians, consider this.

No one likes being tricked by a company that leverages a monopoly to force unrelated services and nonconsensual exposure onto people's lives.

Hundreds of thousands (actually, more) are being coerced, through threat of withholding essential utilities (email, work docs, etc.), to consolidate their online identities, tie it to real life and real names, reveal friends and family connections, have communications scanned, be put in advertisements, provide phone numbers and credit cards numbers, and more, while discovering that service settings and privacy defaults are being changed behind the curtain.

And when they complain and demand privacy, the ability to give informed consent, and control over their personal information, they're told they're doing settings wrong, the policies are really for their own good, to send in their IDs for verification, that they agreed to all this in the beginning anyway, it's too late, that this is how everyone does it, and that wanting privacy really means something else because only good people don't have anything to hide.
> So we'll agree to disagree

Agreed. And for that part, we can leave it at that.

But… This comment thread starts to get a bit too deep, but I have one more thing to discuss I think is interesting: How would you measure the issue? Well, because you said you would like to get a data foundation and then measure the quality - compared to my position, that it is a subjective impression anyway and therefore perfectly fine to base reports on the subjective impression of visible people using the system. I even agree that it would be nice to have that data foundation. But how to do it that way?

In my opinion, one can't simply measure length. Even swearwords are only a possible, but not a sufficient factor for spam. My first idea was to measure the use of the spam-button, but given that the G+-Inclusion might change the basis for that heavily (Comments lived on G+ before, where the circles change the dynamic), that might not be a fair comparison. So where do you see the possiblity to get that objective foundation for your line of reasoning?
I,too, see fanatics in this thread and many others. They produce no cost-benefit analysis of G+ YT integration, use loaded language, provide anecdotal evidence and appeal to emotions.
a year ago, a disk in a raid-1 broke at 2am. they responded to the support ticket 1hr later and replaced the disk by 5am - this was on a standard dedicated server without any special support package, which i found pretty amazing.
Good introduction to nginx. However, the guide states: "Keep in mind that the maximum number of clients is also limited by the number of socket connections available on your sytem (~64k)".

This is incorrect. The system can open ~64k connections per [src ip, dst ip] pair. In the case of a webserver listening on just 1 port, it means you can open 64k connections per remote IP, which is why some people can write about how they handle a million connections on a single server.
FOC.US - a tDCS headset for gamers to overclock the brain
Thanks for the explanation. Food for thought in the second paragraph there...
there are three articles about that at the top of the frontpage that say exactly the same thing with exactly the same comments.

Worse, two were based on the same guy at G+ raving about the whole thing.[1]

I'm a little curious about how the stories hit the front page and have stayed up so long. I don't know if it's fully organic, if Google's reputation has really suffered that much, if it's specific to the HN community, or if someone at WaggEd[2] woke up Saturday morning, glanced at HN's submission queue, and decided they needed some nudging. Or Apple, or Oracle, or Facebook, or even some of the privacy rights groups (though Google's slightly late-to-the-game but strident opposition to NSA/PRISM surveillance seems commendable).

But by HN's metric of what's worthy of consideration[3], the story seems to resonate. And I have to say for myself, having worked in the tech field for a few decades and watched data, surveillance, and analytic capabilities mushroom, I think it's a damned good thing for people to be questioning.

That said: I'm partial to Reddit myself, if you find the right subs. And if you're into the whole drama thing, their personal information policy ain't bad either.

_______________________________

Notes:

1. I happen to be that guy. And I'm pretty much just as amazed as anyone.

2. Microsoft's PR firm. Or whomever they use for online reputation management.

3. That being: stuff which makes the front page.
That's where the reddit enhancement suite comes in. I use it to hide any post that links to most image hosting sites like imgur.com and it makes all the stupid meme posts go away.
> It's a much better product than Facebook.

It's slow and buggy (i.e. it jerks painfully while scrolling on modern touch devices, it's sluggish on the desktop even in Chrome and they broke spacebar scrolling!), the photo upload experience doesn't work as reliably, search is embarrassing for Google and the timeline still doesn't do basic things like clustering shares of the same item or sorting based on what you've found interesting.

When Google can't compete with Facebook on technical quality, you know it's because of a management decision rather than lack of technical resources.

> But a better social product means nothing without an active network of users.

Lots of people tried it but they just found a marginally QA-ed bug-fest for the first couple of years which was clearly designed with the top priority of providing Google's ad sales team with tons of data to compete with Facebook ads and building a quality product seen as a cost of getting that data rather than the actual goal.
Plenty of employees left the company due to the + obsession. Users too, I wouldn't be surprised
> Studies on pair programming show significant advantages in many circumstances

But do these studies take into account employee happiness (and thus potentially losing good developers)? In other words, is it better to have five mediocre engineers pair programming or having five stellar engineers working normally?
That sounds entirely reasonable for the 99% use case - you have one convenient login, pseudonymous accounts on different services, and the only problem is that Google knows your accounts are the same person. Which they could almost certainly work out anyway from IP addresses etc. Your accounts are not safe from government snooping or unethical behaviour by Google - policy, or individual malicious sysadmins - but you are safer from harassment by other net users.

What we have in practice is people complaining that their real names and photos are appearing next to comments on their previously-psudonymous Youtube accounts. Google seem to have flubbed either their user-education, or the mechanical steps put on offer to find what people wanted for their accounts when the policy was rolled out.

I don't know what was offered to Youtube users - were they given warning of policy rollout? Clear pages of settings to adjust when they logged on? Was a 'page' containing their current Youtube identity in place by default? These would sound like reasonable steps to take to avoid an outcry.
You missed the point of the article ... that it's better to damage all of society a little bit to save some people from a lot of damage. And I was pointing out that most of our modern conveniences have some level of risk associated with them. Privacy has similar risks.
Try to use european proxy, they banned all US part, as can I see (inbound and outbound connections), but I connect to admin/ssh from Russia.
Maybe it's just a coincidence, but it made me laugh when I see this in the petition

Petition by
John Doe

Well played.
Many hated it and left the company because of it.
Maybe just create fake G+ account to use it whenever you need to go somehow public with your comments.
My point was simply that there's no statistical meaning in two reviews ... but I'm thinking about buying one!
Yeah, Godwination isn't stylish. The analogy is inaccurate too. But that's what the pissed-off people are calling it, and that was the title of the post.
I've had good experiences with CampBX. However' I've never met the people who run it, so I can't comment on their clownishness.
Your logical fallacy here is that you have no evidence whatsoever that the people complaining are not voting for a third party every time. Perhaps they are, and in fact, it is as ineffectual as they claim.
> I am pretty tired of people saying "I'm an introvert," when what they mean is "I'm an asshole."

And I'm pretty tired of extroverts expecting everyone else to be like them and consider anyone "assholes" when they aren't.
I've had always had good experiences with Hetzner, a few times even speaking by phone to an English-speaking technician running around the data center.

Which providers would you consider better whilst providing similar value?
Most Bitcoin exchanges have transaction fees around 0.5-1.0%
Why Connecting your YouTube and Google Accounts Matters [2011]
currently no ipv4-routing from central europe either. using ipv6 works tho.
Ed Catmull interview (Pres. Pixar and Disney Animation Studios)
"restore backups"

Never restore anything but user data. Best implementation is a herd of puppet modules and classes.

So your class mailserver { include shorewall ; include mysql-server ) and a whole bunch of other modules. That way you can leverage your efforts to have a class like database-server { include mysql-server } or whatever.

then you have
node 'somevps.something.com' inherits mailserver {} or whatever other future/load balanced machines.

You can go from bare iron to in production in a couple minutes if done right. This makes troubleshooting easy, just bring up a test box during a coffee break and see what happens under identical conditions as production. And the other way around, never change anything in production until it worked on the test box, which only takes ten minutes...

My experience with postgrey has been utter failure in that 3rd parties too dumb to have a mail server that responds correctly to temp fails by retrying and instead give an insta-perma-bounce in response to a temp fail invariably are also too stupid to understand the problem is on their side. All they know is the mail server they installed in 1996, and never touched since, always gets bounces when they email you, therefore the problem must be on your side. And the global population of idiots will exceed any normal human level of patience. So, yeah, greylisting... bad, bad idea...
Yeah, they were great on net neutrality until it was inconvenient to their profit goals with Verizon and Android:

http://stadium.weblogsinc.com/engadget/files/vzw-google-net....

(See "Because of the unique technical and operational characteristics of
wireless networks, and the competitive and still-developing nature of wireless broadband
services, only the transparency principle would apply to wireless broadband at this time.")
Try thinking this through. If necessary try to imagine what it's like in others' shoes. Please try to grant this the critical evaluation it deserves.
Well, while discussing this issue on HN I was thinking about the task obtaining data to reason objectively about the pros and cons so I'll be happy to share my thoughts. What could be done?

1. Query lots(100 000s) of Youtube videos and store the comments associated with the video.

2. Repeat the operation after 6 months when the Google+ integration goes in full effect and there is enough G+ comments.

3. Label an initial set of comments (100 000s) as spam, non-spam, hateful, sexist, neutral, etc using Mechanical Turk.

3. Use a supervised learning ML algorithm on a training and testing dataset to understand perfomance and error rate.

4. Iterate as needed.

5. Run an algorithm on the whole corpus.

6. Compare the results.

7. Publish the results on HN and discuss the issue based on data.

Obviously, this requires lots of resources so one could try to reduce the input dataset and see if it is possible to draw any conclusions. What do you think?