skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've had this going for a year or two now. It's hard to come up with ideas when you want them, and they seem to come to you quickly when you don't need them or once you've started paying attention to problems. By no means is my list complete or good, but I've found it helpful to write them down otherwise I'll forget them.
> It might all be fine when you are rich, cis-straight and white, but a single non friendly idea and you are a threat to the state.

There's certainly a large amount of people prejudiced and powerful enough to harm those who don't fit their worldviews, but be careful, too, to not let cynicism taint your views or you might become a bit like them.[1]

Derek's post tells a personal anecdote, but the conclusion has a business angle: "I wanted to challenge that fear that someone is going to steal our ideas."

Sometimes you're hiding a business idea. Sometimes you're hiding a state secret, or keeping a state from discovering a secret. However, most of the time, we're hiding personal secrets about our lifestyles because society doesn't like them.

Since you mentioned "cis-straight", I think Derek's argument is in the same vein as the advice given to LGBT children: do not try to be someone else just because some people don't accept what you are. Be yourself and be proud, or at least comfortable.

[1]: You're right about the state or another powerful entity going after people who are somehow unsettling them. My question is: is it better, in the long run, to hide and stay silent, or to stand up and be heard by the rest of society?
1. Pay $2.
2. SSH/DNS/whatever tunnel out through iMessage port.
3. Gloat? Profit?

Seriously, we probably all thought it. Just don't. It'll make life really rough for all of our fellow iPhone addicts who will end up having to pay $8 again. (Also, you'd be breaking contract, but I imagine that doesn't matter nearly as much to you, now does it?)
$30 a month if you opt out of not wanting AT&T to spy on your traffic? Surely that's unconstitutional/illegal and worthy of a class action lawsuit?
Sorry, I suppose I wasn't very clear. I was referring to the fear some people have of Sharia law taking hold in the U.S., not in other countries, which is a baseless fear that can be used by those in power to manipulate those who are afraid. The fear of fundamentalism in other countries is not so baseless, but it can still be used to manipulate people if those people don't examine the relationship between their fears and the policies advocated in their name (ie. fear of fundamentalism justifying not just surveillance of fundamentalists but of everybody).
Really? You think that, for instance, someone trying to leave an abusive partner doesn't have more reason to want their whereabouts unknown than someone with no psychotic acquaintances? Someone who turned state's witness against their drug dealer friends?
This is an interesting point, I think the tendency of most people who are creative/idea types (myself included) are kind of an over thinking of their own ideas, like they are somehow more important and prone to "theft", but the more I work on my own stuff, and the more I do on in open source, the less and less I think that’s the case.

Like when I was working on Capsulr (http://capsulr.com/, shameless plug), I worried about showing people stuff too early, until I just realized that most people probably wouldn’t even see the site, or if they did, most wouldn't even see the product the same way that I see it evolving. It’s kind of helped me to start documenting my work, and I find that sharing notes publicly (just with myself) is a load of pressure off my shoulders and is worth the tiny possibility that someone might take it and run with it.
Unbelievable. Looking around, it looks like postal system are often operating at a loss. Looks like an industry that could use some fresh eyes.
Nice bit of advertorial there - calling NFC a "predecessor" is quite the giveaway. Still, nice white paper Apple; congrats on getting Wired to regurgitate it verbatim.
My question is are the shares of any company available for purchase currently? I didn't find a list on the site.
There are some obvious errors here. Larry Page is an INTJ (and is very typical of his type); Sergey is an INTP. Steve Wozniak is also probably an INTP - his book makes it pretty clear he's an introvert, and if you go by the Jungian functional stack, he's much more typical of Ti-dominants than Ne-dominants. Steve Jobs is debatable, but I would type him as an ENFP, and a psychotherapist friend of mine who's getting a Ph.D in Jungian analysis agrees with me.
QML was the natural extension of where Qt was evolving to.
With listviews in itemviews-ng having delegates that were just a set of graphics-view objects, QML took it one step further by defining it in QML.

The effect is really an amazingly well working separation of concerns. The biggest and simplest reason is that when you can wrap your head around QML, it takes no time at all to write a good UI.

So, the goal changes from having a complicated UI that has to work well on 5 different form-factors to instead have up to 5 different UI layers to work best on those form-factors. You really can write a good looking UI in a fraction of the time compared to a QWidget approach.

Most of QML is based on core Qt/QObject concepts. A binding is just a combination of a signal, getter and maybe setter. Just to state again that this is just a extension of the direction Qt had been going in for some time already.

See for a simple overview;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6_F6Kpjd-Q

ps. I didn't "get" it until I took part in a kdab course. Its really not that trivial to wrap your head around ;)
Thanks, really appreciate it! We use numpy, scipy, and pandas.

EDIT: clarified libraries we use.
The oldest writings in China are not much more than 2,000 years old. Maybe you're thinking of oracle bones & bronze inscriptions? But those are rarely more than a sentence or two in isolation.
If it takes this long to stop something like this, then god help you if you're victimized in a less elaborate crime!
"We got two ciders and she patiently waited while I spent 20 minutes reading through it. Pages filled with words about processing family drama, formulating goals, plans for life changes, romantic details, lists of regrets, contemplations, etc."

"I was surprised it was all meaningless to me. These pages meant the world to her, but to me they meant no more than any non-secret conversation we’d ever had. It was the same stuff that we all think."

The key here is "meaningless to me". It's obviously meaningful to her. And it would also be meaningful to her family, or romantic partners, or a potential employer, etc.

Privacy is contextual. I often joke that it wouldn't bother me personally if Google or the NSA poked around my e-mail. But it would bother me a lot if my mom did.
As others have pointed out, this is not remotely passive.
SF is really, really expensive.
The name will make business conversations awkward to Kiwis. Maybe.
I think about that book a lot when any discussions of privacy arise. A great depiction of a post-privacy world.
Reg Braithwaite.
Complicity is a loaded term, so I can see why you'd feel that way. Perhaps it'd be better to say that such behavior enables the slaughterers to do what they do. As for the ethical question of whether a particular instance of backing down was right or wrong, hopefully our analysis of power dynamics avoids answering such questions and focuses on, well, the dynamics of power. That's not to say that such questions are irrelevant, they're just a different field, like the quantitative differences between the light emitted by configurations of dyes and the feeling evoked by a certain painting.
They're a corporation. They can charge you to not spy on you because you don't HAVE to use them. It would only be illegal if they spied on you without you signing their contract.

Edit: It's the same way that when you agree to the TOS of a service like, xbox live or something, if they had a line about how you can't talk badly about Xbox or they delete your account, it's not breaking the first amendment, because they aren't the government, and you consented to that agreement.

Services are different from rights.
John Carmack famously reported that you can double the performance of a game engine, if you know exactly what the hardware configuration is.

I think that ENTIRELY explains the performance gain you see in consoles.

And for most apps, no, there is no major difference in the user interface capabilities of a browser, and a Win32 GUI.
And her personal details being available online would be a more reasonable explanation for her job being in jeopardy?

I wasn't questioning or trying to diminish the violation or how she and her family perceived it. I was just sickened by the fact that it was seemingly entirely normal that her job was on the line because of the violation she was a victim of and that this wasn't called out at all. That is a violation not from a single asshole but from an entire society. While we may take the fight and perhaps score wins on the assholes perpetrating this, what is that worth if we silently acknowledge their line of reasoning?
You can't get a cellphone signal 35,000 feet in the air.
Tobacco increases work capacity (2011)
Thanks, I'll check it out! I don't generally like science fiction, but the premise sounds interesting and I did like some of Clarke's other books.
No offense, but this is a terrible argument. Corporations worth $10's of billions do not exempt themselves from doing due dilligence on $50MM deals. Not by a mile. It is negligent to not have a process that structures investment reviews, of which due dilligence is a key part. The (corporate) materiality threshold is not alone enough of an exuse. It is gross negligence to studiously looking the other way...as your modus operandi. (It doesn't scale).
At least in Seattle they do ask to get the bags back, although it's not enforced (we once got a number of dry ice freeze packs as well).

The packs are also cold-keeping, so I wonder if that makes the paper-bag alternative moot.
This may be off-topic but I always wondered where all the billions raised by charities for cancer research end up. It has to be one of the top money earning charitable causes out there.

Are we really just donating money and time to people who end up over-charging us for pharmaceuticals and procedures? I'm not saying we are but I scratch my head when I hear about the astronomical cost of cancer treatment.
If you have nothing about your personal life you want to hide, I think you're pretty boring
If I may ask you, what kind of visa do you have now? B or E? Or even something else?
> Please don't play with more than you can afford to lose.

When considering investing in something like bitcoin, draw out a table of what you expect the outcome to be 10 years from now. Rows can be bitcoin price ranges (each row having what you believe is a roughly equal chance of happening), and columns can be how much you invested in it. Rate your expected happiness (use some scale -100 to 100?) from each result in each square. Keep in mind that if bitcoins reach a high number like $100,000 and you didn't invest, you will feel like you lost that money. (I feel this way now, from not investing previously - and it kills me. Happiness -25 maybe.)

The only logical thing to do, at this point, is pick the column that results in the highest happiness.

It turns out that for those of us who believe there's a reasonable likelihood (25% or greater) that bitcoins will be very high ($1 million or higher) over its lifetime, the logical thing to do is actually to put the vast majority of our savings into bitcoin. Nearly all of it, in fact.
To many people, email is how they move files about.
Leaked Documents Reveal That Fallout 4 Is Real, Set In Boston
I don't think there will ever be silver bullets. :)

IntelliJ has a community version with the source posted over at GitHub. They also have a flavor for Python which recently had an open source version released. But as you said, to each his own.
Thanks! I was wondering where my piece popped up from :-)
I deeply appreciate the no-nonsense, no-fluff, high-contrast layout of that website. shrug to each his own, I guess.
It was an unfortunate choice of acronym in the legislation.
If you don't have any of that to worry about -- no regrets, no past mistakes -- that's great for you. That might be why the thought of someone having access to your "secrets" seems so contrived.

But what about someone with mental health problems? Depression or anxiety? A past drug addiction, or merely alcoholism? A criminal record? How about something as "innocuous" as a drunken one night stand while in a committed relationship? Is it so difficult to imagine how, if widely known, these facts might impact someone's ability to hold down a job, or their relationship with their neighbors?

For other people who do have things they'd rather keep private, it's not just in their head-- it can have a wide variety of implications in your interactions with people & society if it becomes common knowledge. If nothing else people will look at you differently. And a lot of it has happened in the past and is unchangeable, and therefore unactionable in the present.
Ok, but what about personal responsibility in the real world? There is what we all should have the right to be able to do or , ha, ha, keep private (NSA, etc), and what is prudent or wise.

So, to exaggerate to illustrate.... It is a woman's right to walk down a dark ally in a dangerous neighborhood, dressed provocatively, how ever you define that, but, lets fact it, it isn't wise.

So, in some contexts, yes a woman should think twice about what she is wearing, where she is going or that guy she might be meeting. And frankly, so should men. No so much the clothes, but there are places I would avoid at certain time, and yes, there a some women I'd want to avoid.

As for "victim blaming", well, sorry, some victims are partly to blame, and should shoulder some of the responsibility. That does not excuse the offender, but it does have relevance. Both exist. And if you think that is wrong, then tell insurance companies and courts about limiting damage. "Was you car locked where you left it before it got stolen, sir?"

Oh, fuck, fuck, fuck.

Did those fucks make me any more correct?
The specific case we're talking about here is legally simple. The charge is extortion. In California, the elements of extortion are 0. the victim has property (here money), 1. (the 1C variant) the accused threatened to expose a secret connecting the victim with disgrace, a crime, or deformity, 2. the accused did so with the intent of coercing the victim, 3. the victim consented, and 4. the accused received property as a result.

Different states, different extortion statutes, but the California construction seems to be a common one.

The crime isn't "speech"; it's coercion.

Similar dumbasses who are more sly about extracting money from their sites might be undone by other simple legal issues, such as red-flag knowledge that the content they're hosting is stolen, or (as mentioned upthread) that the content itself is facially illegal, for instance because it depicts minors.

Criminalizing or otherwise prohibiting revenge porn sites on a conceptual level, rather than targeting the sites dumb enough to try to cash in, is a trickier issue that's currently being confronted by state legislatures; it wouldn't be shocking to see one of the resulting statutes eventually end up before SCOTUS, sad as that sounds.
Why indeed, And also why to spend time and money on exploring the archeological places and rebuilding old ancient machines? In short it interests some people and it gives clear picture of how knowledge evolved. It does not need to be advanced than the current technologies.
The history of the VMs is that many years before there was QML there was QtScript. A Javascript based engine. This got used for Qt4.
In Qt5 the V8 open source engine got used instead.

Either way, they ended up picking something that was already there, which would explain why it was easier than creating a brand new langauge.
Freedom isn't and can't be absolute. There's too much predation in human nature for that to be a possibility. Reasonable lines need to be drawn, and nudging a line one way or another is going to happen sometimes and doesn't always need to be feared as the beginning of a slippery slope or invite sarcastic comments about whether we still have a free press. Deciding that our society is going to have a standard of behavior above revenge porn has value. If we were capable (collectively) of handling absolute freedom, we might have it.
Why is this getting downvoted? It's a well-articulated opinion. If people can't handle reading terms like "victim-blaming" without lunging for the down arrow, they should probably stay on Reddit
I think you could also ask the opposite question about pretty much anything - why was this public? And I think the answer is the same - because I wanted it that way. Why should it need to be justified either way? If I want to keep something secret for a reason or by default or just on a whim, I should be able to, and if I want to make something public, I should be able to do that too. I don't think one choice is any better than the other as a default.
It's all in the wording.

You're not paying $30 extra to opt-out. They're giving you a $30 discount for you to hand over your data.

It's the same way gas stations get away with "charging extra" for credit. Most credit card vendor agreements do not allow the merchant to pass along the 3% or whatever fee to the customer. So what the gas stations do instead is give you a "cash discount".
Misread it as in-flight massaging for $2/day.. Oh well.
See also www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik‎.
Well the "ancients" did know everything. As do I. No, really, I know every conceivable thing! It's just knowing which things I know are right that's the hangup.. Everyone has hindsight, but few are blessed with foresight :\
>The reasons for privacy are always so contrived. "Dystopian futures", "enemies trying to ruin lives" etc. etc. It never resonates with me.

That's because you're an average Joe.

And even you, you use a pseudonymous account name here on HN.

Now think of all the lives of change-makers, dissidents, activists etc that were fucked up with the use of such private information (from their sexual preferences to who they meet), under all kinds of regimes, in the US and abroad.

Try reading how some of the pioneers of civil rights for blacks were treated, for example, what kind of files were kept on them, how they were setup and pressured etc. It's not like MLK emerged from nowhere, said "I have a dream" and everybody cheered and that was that.

Heck, you don't even have to go that far. Even opinions expressed on HN can get people fired from their jobs if they go public. Even mild ones, including mere jokes said in private: a guy was fired for telling a "dongle" joke to his friend at a conference -- because someone eavesdropped.

Plus, your notion pressuposes that things will always be totally fine (save a "dystopian future"), and nothing will ever make citizens question the government, big corporations, etc. Which does not hold, really. From McCarthyism to the Civil Rights movement, down to the Vietnam War protests and recent stuff like Occupy Wall Street, there's always such discord, and there will be even more in a future with rising inequality and diminishing middle class.

Hundrends of millions (perhaps including you) might continue to be oblivious to all this (as they were oblivious about Vietnam War protests and/or rock n' roll in rural Idaho), but tens of millions were and will be affected.
Interest = 0

Maybe I really am turning into a Luddite after all.
On the other hand if they and everybody else knew the whereabouts of their abusive partner, wouldn't that actually contribute to their safety?
When did The Guardian, WikiLeaks, NYT etc hack or steal anything? This is new to me
Ah, indeed. I should have double-checked the name.
Ask HN: Should we buy bitcoins?
Now suppose the wall st. starts buying bitcoins in say 6 months from now , does that mean the value of bitcoin will skyrocket? And does that mean we too should invest ?
It is meaningless to you because you have no use for that information which is probably why she shared the "super super secret" diary with you. In terms of your relationship with your friend, you present a harmless consumer of that information.

As a though process, lets replace "you" with:

a) her employers, colleagues, etc

b) any of her family members that she talked about

c) her significant other, partner, etc.

Now, do you think she will let these people read her diary? Do you see how dangerous these "secrets" are if these parties get their hands on it?

IMO there are always valid or invalid reasons for keeping secrets (privacy is actually the real topic here) but the real question is whom are you keeping this secret from.
- For iBeacon you must have installed an app that monitors some iBeacon in order to get notified.

- More generally, for Bluetooth LE there are security measures implemented see [1] page 1301 and [2] for all the details.

[1] https://www.bluetooth.org/docman/handlers/downloaddoc.ashx?d...

[2] http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=911133
Easy: buy a new computer every day.
Why would you be interested in such a thing, even hypothetically
http://cs.lbl.gov/careers/summer-student-program

Since it sounds like you're in the south bay, you might check out NASA Ames; they may have something similar.
Ok, got in touch with you via email.
Taking The Jeff Bezos Approach To Building Your Own Startup
Back in 2007, you'd be a fool if you didn't pour your life savings into real estate, since prices could only go up, right?
Anyone interested can start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance_in_the_United...
I generally sell at 15% above MtGox price. We could either trade in cash face-to-face if you're near Brighton in the UK or otherwise Paypal or Bank transfer also works. If you're interested email me at Shanee753@gmail.com. :)
What's the difference between non-sexual harassment and sexual harassment?
When you live in a society where anything you do or say (or accidentally appear to have said or did) will be held against you, privacy matters. It matters so much you don't log-in to online messaging services because you're wary of SSL MitM attacks or send non-encrypted emails from that network or do a litany of other "normal" things. It definitely means you aren't 100% open like Sivers is suggesting.

How do I know this? I live in a very small, strict university setting that presents a picture of the potential of a future of "complete transparency". Even the hint of "lawbreaking" (i.e., rule-breaking) can land you in serious trouble. Trust me, I take privacy very seriously. Not because I have something to hide, but because I have everything (in the short-term) to lose.

I know what I've said is mostly anecdotal due to the implicit nature of choosing to be in this environment; however, were this environment the world at large, I believe my anecdote would be normative.
Seeking technical cofounder for FashionTech startup, Europe
Hi!
I'm looking for a technical cofounder for a FashionTech startup with an Ecommerce component currently based in Europe. The startup is operating in a specific niche between FashionTech, Fashion and Data.

The startup has gotten some good early traction and market response and certain technical prototypes have already been developed. There is already a database available that with further development becomes sellable data.

I'm looking for someone to take this further with me, preferably someone that has experience in building startups, design skills are a plus as well as some machine learning knowledge. You're comfortable in building producs for a mostly female market.

Looking forward to hear from you!

You can reach me at stiala12@gmail.com