skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Both sides seem victim of a middleman, the author's not getting sales because the middleman set a ridiculous price, and the reader isn't getting to read her book.

The correct (not necessarily legal) way to solve the problem of an inaccurate or inherently wrong price is to apply a smooth scale. Sure download my book and if you liked it please visit my cafepress site and buy a tee shirt or bumper sticker or post on facebook / social media about how awesome my book is... or provide a nice positive review on amazon even if you don't buy it. If you really want to annoy your middleman, such that your middleman might never sell anything of yours again, ask pirates to paypal you whatever they think its worth if they're overcharged by the middleman.

Most of the drama comes about because some people create to eat and some people eat to create, and making assumptions about who fits in where is a big issue.
Yes, but they got "another XP". They are just discontinuing it now, and they give no signs that they'll make another one.

Anyway, you can't compare the magnitude of the problems of Vista with the ones of Windows 8.x.
1-indexing is no longer intuitive when numbers become large. Years are 1-indexed; how many people observed the start of the millenium in 2001?
Nobody needs to learn to code, but everybody can learn to code
First of all, it's hard to tell how much memory a process uses. If you're on Linux or on OS X and you're using "top", there's difficulty in interpreting the results.

For example right now my Firefox 26 with about 20 tabs is being reported by "top" as using 2190MB VIRT and ~1030MB RES. VIRT reports the total amount of memory allocated, including memory that's shared between processes, including memory-mapped files, including virtual memory, including the loaded shared libraries, or anything that takes up address space, but address space is not real, the measure is next to useless. RES is the relevant measure, which in my case reports about 1 GB, however that's a little misleading too because it also counts memory that's shared between processes, although in my case I think 1 GB is an accurate measure. And if you're using some kind of GUI that doesn't specify exactly how it calculates memory consumption, then you can't trust what it says.

Second, free memory is unused memory. Browsers are caching stuff for example. Unused caches in memory-strained systems end up being flushed to disk. The kernel is quite efficient in flushing memory pages on disk and reloading them later when needed. That's why it's very hard to tell how much memory a process needs to be usable.

If you want to claim that some application leaks memory, then you need to look at growth. And if you want to claim that it's a memory hog, then you need to take a look at how it behaves on top of memory constrained systems.

In my experience, Firefox is very memory efficient, which is why I'm using it and not Chrome. And I'm on the beta channel now, so I've been on Firefox 26 since a week ago and it's OK.
Nature is not morally right. In fact, nature is amoral. Pointing to nature and saying "nature does it so it's ok" is a bit like pointing at a landslide and saying "nature does it so it's ok to build my house like this". It's meaningless.

Unlike most animals (as far as we know) we are in the unique position of being moral creatures. We created this morality idea, which was not present in nature before us.

Killing any kind of sentient creature whose death could have been avoided is immoral (whether legal or not). That some countries still apply the barbarous death penalty doesn't make it less immoral. We don't know exactly the level of sentience of the animals we kill and eat, but they are at the very least self-conscious to some extent. Pigs, squids, dolphins, dogs, cats, etc, are all clearly human-like in some ways. Killing such animals is not that far off from killing sentient beings.

I think it's a fair statement to say that killing animals is wrong.

That being said...

The issue is complex. There is a lot of historical baggage that we have to deal with here. And it could be argued that many of those species only exist because we eat them (or at least that most of their numbers exist only because we eat them). Endless such arguments can be contrived. None of them make it right, but they explain why this is not a simple "X is wrong, let's stop doing X" situation.

I say all this above as a meat eater, btw. I eat (a lot of) meat. That I do so while knowing that it's morally wrong is, I guess, just one of those "contradictions" that we humans get to live with.
How can this tiny minor changes be worthy of a whole version number? Firefox is the software equivalent of the Zimbabwe dollar.
The comparison is ludicrous. Non-obfuscated binaries, often with debug symbols, are much easier to reverse-engineer and analyze than hardware.

Additionally, you can analyze binary diffs, much like source code. You would not start from scratch at each new version.

Let's also not forget how hard it is to verify source code, and how very rarely it is done.
So your counterpoint logic is verbatim the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

Cruelty to animals for survival might have some moral justification. However, as vegans prove every day, survival is no-longer a reasonable justification.

Therefore what we're left with is the willful choice to cause suffering for our own pleasure. Please explain to me how that is morally justifiable.
Unless the backdoor was so incredibly subtle and hard to spot that it could be hand-waved away as a bug should it turn up.
I don't have any strong feelings for or against coffee shop campers, but this article came across as quite self-centered. Perhaps a different approach would be more effective in changing people's opinions.

The argument against campers: "Starbucks and other coffee-shop campers just buy one cheap coffee and then take up a table for hours. We drive up the cost of coffee and inconvenience everybody else. We play loud videos and run our power cords across the floor, creating a safety hazard."

His argument for campers (in my own words): I'm an intellectual/creative person; I need to work in a coffee shop because research has shown it to increase creativity and output; I need to resist the brainwashed masses and their preconceived notions of acceptable coffee shop behavior.

Notice a theme? It's all about him, whereas the argument against campers is about everyone else. He even complains about being expected to clean up after himself (bus his own table). Shouldn't people be expected to act responsibly and clean up after themselves in a public place?

He does attempt to give an economic argument (i.e. coffee shops make more money from campers versus if they were to be banned). However, this is pure speculation on his part, and I suspect he is simply stating what he wants to believe is the truth. For example:

"I'm quite certain that if camping were banned at that store, the place would be deserted and it would make far less money. In fact, there would be no reason at all to even stay open until midnight. A huge percentage of its revenue comes from student squatters."

He has no way of knowing this, offers no supporting evidence beyond speculation, and simply states it as fact because it supports his view.
As an interaction designer I really liked watching this. I don't work for a startup but this is often how quick internal reviews go with a project team member at my company, as well; discovering unique scenarios you need to design for while talking through other issues.
Ah so all of a sudden running a verifiable system is considered idealism.
Would be great to see more videos like this from other startups.
See, copyright violation has a well defined term, namely "copyright violation". Piracy means something completely different (an act of robbery or criminal violence at sea).

Despite negative connotations "hacking" still means expanding the usage of an object and "terrorism" still means enforcing ones ideals through violence.

So these comparisons are not valid.

EDIT: To make my point clear. When clicking the link, I thought the article was literally about pirates, that is sea criminals (or perhaps the political party). If only the author would have used the more descriptive, and more correct term "copyright infringement" I would have been less confused. So usage of the word "piracy" in this context is both damaging, wrong and confusing.
So I'm actually setting up a private cloud for my company right now. It's a company of 1, so the requirements are quite extensive. :-P

I'm building a FreeNAS server with 6x3TB hard drives in a RAID-Z2 config. My goal is to allow my Mac to use it for Time Machine backups, but to also use AeroFS as my file sync mechanism when I'm both in the office and on the road.

Hopefully it works out smoothly. I'll have to figure out how to access the machine from behind my router, and I'll have to determine how to get it to automatically back up to S3 + Glacier. I think there's going to be a lot of details that I'll have to research here.
Also, there's https://github.com/clojure/core.typed.

I don't have much experience with static typing outside of basic Java interop, but I gave it a shot on a recent project and it was pretty cool once I got the ball rolling and it caught my first actual bug.
Calling attention to this: disassembly is a thing. It is entirely possible to reconstruct a program's design and logic from the disassembled code. This is what software crackers and antivirus writers do on a regular basis. For an enlightening write-up, see the Symantec paper(s) on Stuxnet.
Unfortunately, the "near" in NFC really makes that difficult. The antenna on the reader and the antenna on the card need to be about a centimeter apart. Only if you're really lucky will it work through a wallet, and with multiple cards in the way? Unlikely to work.
Related to AppleTV: I've been using Beamer.app (http://beamer-app.com/) to stream unsupported content to AppleTV. It's a premium product, but it was worth the $15 (or thereabouts).
I can't help but think that "NodeJS" is a more appropriate HN topic than "meat".
Are you saying that Steve Jobs died of a plant-based diet? Citation, please.
Victoria Secret Models Wear 3D Printed Wings
Oh boy, looks gorgeous.

FOSS needs more of this kind.
That's pretty much my argument for the "Don't use the word 'gay' in a pejorative way" crowd. Doesn't come across as well...
Depends where you work. At a large-ish digital creative agency you're probably stuck in PS creating 100 comps. At the small-ish digital creative agency I'm at the visual designers still use PS because that's where their comfortable but we talk about changing that all the time. I'm an interaction designer and use Axure for very detailed prototypes or some front-end framework (Foundation) for quick things.
So, is the implication that you feel zero-based is the inherently more natural? Or one-based? Truly just curious, and I'm not about to argue over it. :)

Personally, even though I'm not used to it, I could probably be convinced that one-based might be the right "general purpose" answer for looping through an array when not doing any math on the index. Often when doing any math on the index, zero-based is much better. I do a lot of index based math, and yet if I'm being honest, I'd say the vast majority of my loops and the loops in code around me probably don't play index tricks and could use either indexing scheme.

Funny enough, I do a lot of graphics and image processing, and the OP referenced a joke about splitting the difference and using 0.5 -- I used 0.5 indexed arrays all the time! Logically, not syntactically -- I mean I take pixel samples starting from the center of a pixel, which is indexed by (ix+0.5,iy+0.5). If there were such a thing as a 0.5 index, I would use it. :P
the difference is choice. people dont choose to become slaves but you can choose to work in the sex indsutry.
Thanks!

And you're totally right, this isn't limited to startups. I didn't want to title it generally "what design actually looks like" because while I'm pretty arrogant, I'm not that self aggrandizing :)
As someone who is... often vegan, this happens because other people give you shit for not eating something. Usually, people notice that you say no to something that tastes good. And then they ask you why. So you tell them. And then they say something like this.

I know vegans who have resorted to just saying they have allergies, because it's easier than dealing with how poorly people treat them for simply not choosing to eat certain things.
The Firefox release is on a schedule. There's a new version every 6 weeks. Whatever features are ready to go are included. Sometimes they are big features and sometimes not. This one has some pretty major changes, that's why it's news.
3D Depot
Ask HN: How do social networks benefit/harm society?
Serious question. Everyone has strong opionions about why they love or hate Facebook these days, wanted to see what HN has to say. I'm sure there are many unique and thoughtful perspectives that I've never considered before.
In Canada, NFC is pretty much everywhere and I have never, nor have I heard of anyone making a mistake. I use it as often as possible because of how fast and convenient it is, much better than chips and pins or the really old signature methods.
Paypal hangs on for 2 reasons:

1. Foreign countries, where credit cards aren't common (but banks are)
2. People in the US who hate entering CC info for every payment
3. Merchants without alternatives

People have felt for a while that there's nothing that can solve all 3 of those things, but I think there is.
Academia.edu slammed with takedown notices from Elsevier
We do know that insects are far, far less complicated creatures. The difference between a human brain at 100 trillion or so synapses and a fruit fly at a few million is huge. I'm simply arguing that the necessary level of complexity isn't there for a fruit fly. I'm also arguing that this is more of a continuum than a clear line.

> Animals made of meat have the same capacity for experiencing pain.

This is what I don't see as a clear and obvious truth. You shouldn't get on my case for throwing something out there without any kind of validation and then do the same thing yourself.
There are things animals do and you don't and there are things you do and animals don't. Does not make much sense to say you would do something because animals are doing so.
All ebay has to do is accept bitcoins.

What is stopping something like this? If Ebay uses a service to convert directly from BTC to dollars, there's no volatility risk. Is it fear of bad press? Fear of angering existing players like Paypal? Is it logistics? I'm biased, but why wouldn't Ebay accept an additional form of payment for free?
> I think veganism is the logical conclusion to becoming truly aware of what you're eating, personally.

You said you're married to a vegan, suggesting you're not vegan yourself. So by you're statement you're not truly aware of what you're eating? Or are you vegan as well?
Contextual's point is that there is less difference between humans and other animals than most people like to think.

It's a difficult sell, not least because humans are omnivores and by that it is natural to eat meat. But our higher level thinking allows us to reason and determine our own morals, if killing / eating other humans is wrong and animals are not that different from humans then how can killing and eating animals be right?

I sympathise with this view, but still enjoy eating meat, it's a situation that's becoming more uncomfortable all of the time.
On the other hand, there is a certain undercurrent to this and many similar posts that I've seen, something along the lines of "Because I don't need to do it, no one needs to." Or, in this case, "Synchronization primitives are deep, dark, evil voodoo magic and you'll never be beardy enough to do it right." Such as:

"Locks and other synchronization primitives are systems level constructs. People who know a lot more about multithreading use those constructs to build concurrent data structures and higher level synchronization constructs that mere application programmers like you and I use in our programs."

...which is probably true, but there is nothing scary about "systems level" stuff---even the author could probably tool up to do it.

That becomes a problem in the 10% of use-cases (which I suspect is more frequent than that) where the simple abstractions are not satisfactory.
Because "you are physically capable of doing something" is not the same as "I support you doing that thing."

Try applying your attitude to other issues. "How much of your data the NSA collects is a matter between you and the NSA; public discussion is unnecessary."
>There were no expensive ready meal options at my local supermarket - Labeling contains no information about what kind of environment animals are brought up in

I think you know why. :)

>Ultimately I wish I had the will power to turn fully vegetarian

The way I started (I'm a veggie now) is not to fully eliminate meat completely for your diet, but just 1 day a week.

The way to look at it is not that you're missing out on meat for 1 day, but as an opportunity to try out non-meat options.

Here's some suggestions: go to a middle eastern place and order falafel wraps, or tofu next time you go to a Chinese place. Also there's lots of Indian food that's veggie friendly. i.e. Indulge your palette in food that you generally wouldn't try. You might like it!
Places using Python:

Google, Youtube, Reddit, Yahoo, Quora, Dropbox, Spotify, Hunch, RedHat, Pinterest, Disqus, Mozilla, Instagram, Punchfork, The Onion (probably DC, not valley), etc.
A while ago I came across an amusing article about an author who ended up helping a pirate translate his book into Russian.

The author found the rogue translator through a message board where the translator was asking for help with obscure English phrases. It's surprising both how much effort the translator went to, and how confused he was. For example, he thought "white-liberal guilt" might be guilt about using cocaine (since it's a white powder).

Eventually the author decided to help the pirate achieve an accurate translation, since he seemed to be actually interested in the book.

Check out the article here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/11/steal-my...
I had a hard time trying to find numbers, but this blog post seems to have reasonable sources. http://www.lauraleighparker.com/2012/06/human-trafficking-pr...

4.5 million victims of trafficking for purposes of sex, 40 million prostitutes total.

I certainly won't argue with the idea that some of them are forced into it by circumstance, but no matter how you slice it you end up with a lot of voluntary sex workers.
Oh man ... flame war alert.

The reality of course, is more nuanced. Rarely do absolutist statements like "Killing animals is wrong," bare fruit in the pragmatic reality of everyday experience.

For one thing, freeing all livestock and allowing them to live as nature intended, would be releasing them into a much more savage existence. An analog to freeing slaves does not exist because people have the capacity to improve their station, while animals in the wild fall back to basic survival.

My wife and I run a backyard hog farm, raising animals on pasture with ready access to clean water and plenty of highly nutritious food. In return for the kindness we show them, at a pre-determined point in their life, we kill them and eat their meat.

I will not do that for my children, because the (mostly) tacit contract I have with them and their own capacity allows them pay back my kindness and generosity with their nuanced human emotion and industrial capacity.

Most animals do not have such an industrial capacity. Though where they do (horses, mules, etc...) there actually does exist a very different contract (i.e. we don't eat them).

The problem with your black and white view of morality is that it fails to account for the reality that if I keep 15 hogs, eventually they will die, because all life dies. If they live into old age and become emaciated and weak, their bodies are useless to me. Aside from perhaps companionship, they have not had a net positive impact on my life. Why then should I care for them?

As members of the Animal Liberation Front have discovered, releasing animals back into the wild is rarely a kindness to them. If you ever look closely at a wild rabbit, you find them swarming with parasites and usually living with chronic low-grade infection of some sort or another. Compare that with rabbits raised humanely and holistically in a small-scale rabbit farm and the differences are stark, indeed.

None of this applies, of course, to an industrial farm where animals are treated, as a phase of the end product instead of animal. But that's a whole different argument from "killing animals is wrong." I have no problem arguing that industrial farming is, at it's best, amoral, and more importantly completely unsustainable. But nature has a way of handling unsustainable behavior.

EDIT: Dairy animals would be another classification of animals that we do not kill for their meat. Of course, they do die, as one of our dairy goats did a few days ago. But then we dig a hole, say some kind words and let the decomposition feed the apple trees in our orchard.
If this is what I imagine, it should/could be making so much money :) Are the founders HNers?
JavaScript Prototyping for Zen Masters
Of course the president of PayPal would prefer a digital method of payments that he can capitalize on to one that works in physical shops. I use NFC as often as possible because it is so much faster and more convenient, especially for small purchases.
Because of Chrome. Until it came along version numbers meant something. Now a major version just means 6 weeks has passed since the last major version.
The US Federal government didn't exist.

No, that's not correct. You'll recall that the girl's mom worked for the FBI; in once scene we see the mom going in for a security check.

The existence of an FBI clearly implies the existence of a federal government. It's just that their scope was significantly curtailed.
I think your anecdote is a flawed positive correlation. Your wife's family may be largely vegan, but that doesn't strictly account for their health and wellbeing vs your average obese person.

I think that their veganism is part of a broader health consciousness, where they most likely pay more attention to their nutrition and exercise than do the average "morbidly obese guy" in Northern NJ. I've no doubt that if they were to practice a similar lifestyle but include meats they would look and be equally healthy.

And for an equally anecdotal counterpoint: look up Crossfitters and the paleo diet, of which meat makes up a key proportion.
Horses had canines for fighting, not for eating.
One advantage Parellella has is that I can put it inside a small robot (backyardrobots.com) for say, image processing. I just can't do that with a NVIDIA card, particularly once you include the desktop that it connects to. There are probably other applications where a little card with that kind of processing is helpful.

But you make a good point, if I were mining bitcoins, I would take the NVIDIA hands down.
> This is what I don't see as a clear and obvious truth.

So their nervous system and brain pain centers (which look just like ours), the physical reaction to pain, the chemical reaction to pain (stress, releasing adrenaline...) and all the death avoidance... that's just a ploy?

I'm not sure about mosquitoes, but I'm pretty sure meaty animals do feel pain.
Promotion in the App Store