skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The problem with gun registration versus car registration is that there is no real use to having a list of car owners, other than legitimate ones. But, a list of people with weapons would be the first thing any would-be dictator would love to have.

I realize I am inviting the wrath of Godwin's Law here, but, as a real-world historical example of the threat of gun registration, the Nazis:

"In 1931, Weimar authorities discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed. They were written by Werner Best, a future Gestapo official. In reaction to such threats, the government authorized the registration of all firearms and the confiscation thereof, if required for “public safety.” The interior minister warned that the records must not fall into the hands of any extremist group."

"In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued. Police revoked gun licenses of Social Democrats and others who were not “politically reliable.”"

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/365103/how-nazis-used-...
I agree, that's the real world result, but we can't win that argument easily. Instead we can point out each instance of it happening and hopefully the more pragmatic liberals will come around eventually.
Etcd 0.2.0 released – new API, built-in leader election module, many fixes
In large organizations, the appearance of risk is much more important than the reality of risk. Big organizations (like governments) will do things that actually increase risk, so long as the things look on the surface like they will reduce risk.

Saying that TSA security doesn't reduce terrorism risk is a reasonable argument (although I think it's wrong; consider the possibility of gun-toting yahoos wanting to be "safe" with "self-defense" and blowing a hole in the fuselage because they saw a suspicious brown person). But politically, saying to give up TSA security because it doesn't work is basically impossible. Voters will demand that politicians do something about the threat of terrorism.
> "[1] I believe I read another comment on here a while back in which the pilot had a heart attack after the cockpit had been locked from the inside, but before leaving the gate, and it still took the fire department almost an hour to cut through the door."

I can't find a report of this ever happening, though I did find an article from December 2001 which pointed out potential danger to pilots behind locked doors. It also notes that the danger of an incident mid-flight can be reduced by having a flight attendant step into the cockpit whenever one of the pilots steps out.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2001-12-17/news/0112160265_...

(Edit: Lest my nitpicky comment be misunderstood, it also talks a little about how strong the reinforcements are; I think your point about cockpit doors being extremely solid can be reasonably taken as fact.)
There's enough open source OS left for a rag-tag bunch of bikers ( http://cyngn.com/ ) to create an entirely independent open source mobile OS out of it.
"I'm afraid they'll ban all the cool uses of Glass." -- But wan't that the main aim behind Google's Glass invention. What if Apple tomorrow launches an iPhone 6 with a sensor where it can detect the faces and gives the related information like Google Glass. So should we ban that too. Much of the details are already on the internet about you and Google Glass is just fetching it and serving you on your face instead of your browser.
Isn't this tight coupling the issue with node js?
Ironically, I just started my first ever (Django) web app that is built for Python 3 only. I learned Python right after the release of Python 3, and so i learned everything with Python 3 in mind. For instance, I don't think I've ever used print as a statement. I even used string.format for heaven's sake, until I learned that there was little chance of the interpolation syntax going away.

Annnnyway... I am JUST not writing my first Python 3 application, and I have just installed (on OS X) Python 3 for the first time since 2009 (only as an experiment at that point).

Create a virtualenv and tell it to use Python 3 via `-p /path/to/python3`, update your .gitignore to include __pycache__ directories, don't write any code that uses features or syntax that was removed in Python 3 (since they added u'' support to Python 3, most devs I know are already doing this part), and you're literally off to the races. My app's requirements.txt has django==1.6.1, pytz==2013.8, South==0.8.4, django-debug-toolbar==1.0 (just released, btw), and ipython (obviously just for shell support). It works perfectly, and of course mock is included in Python 3, so you don't need that anymore. There was one caveat though :( Fabric doesn't work, because Parimiko is too deep a web to quickly update to run on Python 3.

tl;dr

I think Alex wrote this article too late. I think with Django finally having a release that fully supports (not experimentally like version 1.5) Python 3, a lot of libs supporting Python 3, and a lot of updates to Python 3 in the past year or so, we'll probably see quite a few new apps being built for Python 3 in the next year.
Why Microsoft's "Scroogled" Campaign Is Childish
Curiosity is a hard thing to squash, but the traditional model of education manages pretty well: Listen to lectures, take notes, feed back what you learned, and then forget it all. You’re not allowed to go beyond the curriculum. Khan Academy is all about giving more breathing room. You want to go deep? Go deep. I had this to some degree at the public school I went to in Louisiana, where there were gifted programs. Every day, starting in second grade, they took me out of class for an hour, and I would go to another room, with a mixed age group. The first time I went, I thought it was the biggest racket. I walked up to Miss Rouselle’s desk, and she asked, “What do you like to do?” I was like, I’m seven years old—shouldn’t you be telling me what to do? But I said, “I like to draw. I like puzzles.” She said, “OK, have you used oil paints? Have you done Mind Benders?” Soon I looked forward to that hour more than I did to spending the night at my friend’s house. And I learned more that applies to what I do today than in the five other hours of the day combined.

In NYC, they start prepping kids for admissions testing before they are 3. By pre-K they are teaching kids to sit still for written exams. "Experts" discourage kids from learning multiple languages since some K admissions exams test vocabulary. "Experts" discourage kids from prematurely learning to read because most K admissions exams only test aural reasoning.

Salman's points about the system destroying curiosity is 100% absolutely true. I don't have a good solution other than to find a way to improve all the schools in the system. Nobody has shown how to do this yet.
oops, i meant "just now" rather than "just not", which would basically ruin the entire context of my comment... what an unfortunate typo :)
No "pure toss-up" elections We need $75k in 32hrs.
What if after the shower you just feel like going back to sleep?
I've seen leaders who don't delegate but abdicate. They hand over a project completely, refusing to make decisions that only they are authorized to make. It's as if they're saying "Guess! And if it turns out poorly, I can say I never told you to do whichever course you take."
Because, in most cases, its a stupid argument and a requirement that only restricts law abiding citizens. Criminals don't care about laws in the first place. It's a way for certain politicians to appeal to a certain base that, in the end, helps no one in any way that was proposed.

Get into a boxing match and stipulate that both boxers must have their right hand secured behind their back. You step into the ring to find your opponent has chosen to ignore that rule. The ref tells you that while you must keep your hand tied or be disqualified, he cannot deal with your opponent's lack of respect of the rules until after the match is finished. How exactly did that rule help you?

Some people disagree with the law, some people think it's the beginning of slippery slope that leads to confiscation, some people don't like their rights being used as a cheap election gimmick. Take your pick.
This is a false equivalency. There are numerous, perfectly good reasons why you should store hashed passwords in a database.

Frisking Grandma is another story. Air marshals, metal detectors, and reinforced cockpit doors should be sufficient to halt the vast majority of terrorist attacks. As with any system, a determined adversary will absolutely get in. That is what makes the TSA theater.
What video games will still be widely played in 100 years?
"...if you purchase a gun without a license..."

Isn't that by state? Can't private parties sell guns to each other and not even have to report it to anyone in some states?

Other than someone reporting a crime (theft of the gun or violence etc) the tracking would only serve to tell you where someone keeps their gun. You'll have to forgive my skepticism that needing a warrant would be a huge barrier.

That said I haven't read the article yet so maybe there is something that changes how I see this comment.
> My last trip to London from SFO, according to the ticket fare breakdown, fees were more than 1/2 the ticket. Probably closer to 60%. I would love to see every line item.

If you were flying a UK airline they were probably counting the "fuel surcharge" as a fee, which in many cases can be the majority of the ticket. I just priced up the cheapest SFO-LHR return on Virgin next month, it came in at $1000, with $458 being "carrier imposed surcharges", counted as fees.

Except they're not fees at all, it's the 'fuel surcharge'. Actual taxes and fees were $233, or 23%. Your airline should have given you a link to the line by line breakdown of every item ($5 custom fee, $2.50 TSA fee, etc) when you bought the ticket.

On a related note, if you're flying from SFO you're not actually interacting with the TSA itself at all, San Francisco is one of the few airports that contracts out security screening to a TSA-approved company (some people think SFO has more 'friendly' security screening because of it, I haven't really noticed).
Recaptcha is free and takes minutes to implement. Those aren't valid excuses.
I don't think that's very fair. This kind of thing is a problem every language confronts, and it plays out differently every time.

EDIT: deleted parent said "Better than Python."
>This.

Samefag detected. Go back to 4chan, faggot.
Free, un-copyrighted NDA and employment contracts
Interesting.

It just all sounds so silly to me. I imagine everybody all sacrificing themselves for each other. Sounds pointless.
I always torrent. I usually always find what I'm looking for the day it goes on air (new TV shows like Shark Tank).
It is absolutely true, that

IF an attacker has the ability to attack unprotected plains and the ability to attack unprotected trains,

AND the attacker is determined to attack,

AND the attacker and defender basically care the same about successful plane attacks vs train attacks,

THEN protecting the planes alone is useless, as it just shifts attacks to trains.

For example: I think we can agree that it is pointless to put a lock on your back door, if your front door is wide open.

In other words, given a budget of X, it is better spend it to raise MINIMUM(plane security, train security) then to raise MAXIMUM(plane security, train security), since the attacker will attack your minimum. This is just minimax AI theory.
Is it really more extensible? Jekyll has the means to execute arbitrary code as well, which means it can do basically anything Ruby can do. I assume that's the same with pagd, but with python code... But that doesn't make it more extensible.
That, and there's one more benefit. Before 9/11 we were taught to deal with hijackers by letting them get what they want, because up until that point they usually freed their passengers at that point. Now, passengers have nothing to lose by fighting back, so the response is "do anything you have to to end the threat".
Why the Xbox One and PS4 Aren't the Future
At least you adequately explained your position.
It's a yoke I'd be pretty happy to accept as an application developer. No, it's not necessary to couple the two concepts. But nine tenths of good language design is coming up with good abstractions, and good abstractions always involve some conflation. And from a software engineering perspective I can see some good reasons for this choice.

One is that it creates some predictability around how errors will be handled. As a producer of components, I know that within this component I have to accept that certain classes of error will always cause a fast failure, and other classes of error should be handled as immediately and gracefully as possible. Compared to the mishmash of different error handling philosophies that I currently encounter when working on different components, this seems like it might be a welcome improvement even if it isn't a complete solution.

As a consumer of components, I think it's even better because it enforces still stronger predictability. I get a couple nice guarantees out of this. One is that critical failures bringing the whole component down means I encounter fewer situations where I'm unsure whether the overall application is in a consistent state, because 3rd-party component developers have fewer opportunities to do weird things with exceptions. The other is that I can always defend against critical failures in 3rd-party components bringing down the whole application. That isn't always easy to do in vanilla C#, where FailFast exceptions always bring down the house and the best defense against that is to resort to the hassle of process-level isolation. For systems programming I imagine such measures are even more irritating, since process-level isolation creates performance overhead.
In a rare interview, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt gives Bloomberg his outlook for 2014 trends. Check out the full segment here: (Video)
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/ask-a-billionaire-eric-schmid...
If leaders wanted to improve security, and they knew how, they could do that, while simultaneously adding theatrics and populist talk to create the appearance of security.
I guess you are right, most 15 year olds at my school couldn't tell me how a bold tag looks like if their life depended on it! I didn't develop my skills over a fortnight. I have been programming since I was eight (I come from a family of engineers).

I still remember building my first VB Application (A browser), the moving on to HTML, PHP, then teaching a Python Class at my old school and now I'm proficient in Node.JS and know how to use most of the HTML5 API, so I guess it does take time to evolve your skills.
No one would intentionally make the choice of having their data shared with other users, and if that is a business model they rely upon they need to find another.

This is a profound, never-ever-should-happen gap in data security, and it is yet another instance where DigitalOcean comes out looking remarkably amateurish.

Conversationally, I would have expected their hypervisor to have been doing thin provisioning: That until you write data to a block the block is 0s (having no provisioning on actual storage). And if you write 0s, that too isn't actually provisioned on real storage. And when you write actual data, well that is what the block now contains.
Your justifications are misguided or just plan wrong for every reason of TSA existence and performance. You assume they are necessary. You assume they do a good job protecting us. You assume they are professional. You assume body imaging and body searches are not a bad deal. There is no evidence to prove this, and there is plenty of evidence to prove the opposite.

> but honestly, grow a pair and walk through the damn thing.

It takes pair to not walk through. You seem to be confused about that.

Furthermore, I will never walk through your full body scanner for these reasons:

1) They have not been studied and properly tested medically over a mid to long time period. We have the word of the company who created them, telling us they are “safe”. You know what else was “safe” said the manufacture? Asbestos, DDT, mercury, X-rays, etc. Millimeter scanners are shooting high energy particles a the body’s dermis. High energy causes DNA replication issues.

2) These machines are medical imaging devices being implemented by high school educated people.

3) These machines can be fooled. Pancake devices slip through undetected.

4) These machines DO NOT detect PETN. I will say that again, they do not detect plastic explosives! This makes them useless and trivial.

5) We have the right to travel, unsearched, unless there is just cause. Times have changed from when the Bill Of Rights was written, thus the advent of metal detectors and bomb sniffing K9s. When we talk about “the slippery slope” these machines are about as far as you get before for things get out of control, ei: suspension of meranda-rights, torture, warrent-less wire-taps, militarization of local police, etc.

No, I will not pass through your body scanner, EVER! I will protest their existence forever in the form a polite “Opt Out” and a silent but complete disrespect for the TSA. They institute insulting useless security theater and I am not amused or fooled.

You should educate yourself about all the ways the government is invading your privacy, and where governments go from there. Then grow a pair and start to fight back.
Dick asks if you ever approached fitness resolutions with a “just do it” attitude only to be disappointed that you summoned up all of the willpower that you could muster and still failed. A further discussion is happening on Lifehacker on the topic http://lifehacker.com/ask-an-expert-all-about-health-and-fit...
This is essentially the problem with all government agencies. They're never motivated by efficiency, but rather by justifying as large a budget as possible.

If your hypothetical heroku scenario were a government project, they'd be proposing a "conservative" increase to 23 dynos for next year.
I'm going to go against the grain here and say that moving slowly is one of my absolute favorite features about python and its libraries.

Rails and django were released about the same time, rails is on version 4, django is on 1.6.

Moving slowly means I can spend more of my time writing code and less of my time upgrading old code. More importantly, every release requires a perusal: did the API change, what's new, are there breaking changes I need to be aware of?

I didn't appreciate how nice a slow but consistent and deliberate release cycle was until I started using Ember which seems to release a new version monthly.

Its generally acceptable to be one or two x.x versions back, but much more than that and the cost of maintaining libraries skyrockets, so you start losing bug fixes and library compatibility.

With python there's not really a question of if I can run my code for a year between non-security upgrades, even with a few dozen third party libraries. That stability is immensely valuable.
You forget about the subset of crazed American freedom-lovers that may be on any given plane. Hijackers would have to somehow get past people willing to die to stop them. It's just not a viable method anymore.
Yeah, some kind of outcomes-based incentives for the prisons seems like a good idea -- it would have to be fairly small, though, to avoid gaming. See that case this past year where a judge (in PA, I think?) had a corrupt relationship with a private prison and sent thousands of people there for minor offenses.

I'd love to see "Private Prison" phased out in favor of "Rehabilitation Contractor." But it would require legislation be crafted in favor of extremely careful balancing of incentives, in the teeth of pressure from the powerful private prison lobby to turn the whole thing into either a NOOP or a private prison subsidy.
The point is that planes are only a high value target when they can be used as a missile. If the cockpit is locked from the inside then this possibility goes away. Even with a bomb on board no one will give control to someone who may use the plane as a missile.

There is no more incentive for someone looking to cause mayhem to blow up a plane than there is to blow up a shopping mall or any other building with more than ~180 people inside (the approximate number of seats in a 747).
If we are being pedantic, then the issue becomes fairly fuzzed when you consider guns that have you insert the clip, not just the ammunition, into a fixed magazine. The M1 Garand for example.

I don't know of any examples of guns with this sort of setup that would get anywhere near 15 rounds, but I suspect that the M1 specifically has something to do with the common misuse of terminology. It may also be related to some of the loonier misconceptions about guns, such as the idea that "clips" (actually magazines) are disposable (and therefore somehow also not reusable) (example of this misconception: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_DeGette#Gun_control).
As a member of Google's algorithmic search quality team, I wish I could take that bet against you. :-)
Oh, people down voting because of Godwin's law? Fine...

Armenians in Ottoman Turkey,
Anti-Communists/Stalinists in Soviet Union,
Anti-Communists in China,
Mayan Indians in Guatemala,
Christians in Uganda,
General Population in Cambodia

There are lots of examples of gun confiscations preceding mass murders. Not that every gun confiscations lead to mass murder since there are examples of that not happening. But to ignore the possibilities in some areas of the world is just being naive.
The best part about this CAPTCHA is that not only is the data contained within the CAPTCHA in plain-text in the source (more than once) but they actually add a background image to the text ( mirrored here: http://i.imgur.com/xlYbYZ7.jpg ) so it's harder for humans to decipher it but easy for bots..

<span id="txtCaptchaDiv" style="background-image:url(1.jpg);
font-weight:bold; font-family:Modern font-size=12">67839</span>
It still feels too early to say that. Every time I look at Rust, it still feels incredibly different from the last time I looked into it. I'm excited about this language, and I hope they get it out of the gate and popularized before Microsoft's counterpart is ready... but it's so far from solidified right now that I'm worried they might be rushing into 1.0

Of course, nobody wants their language to be forever a toy instead of something actually used, so I get the the pressure to settle things.
"Second, it's pulling a subtle slight of hand--the goal of airport security is NOT to reduce terrorist casualties overall. It is to reduce violent attacks of any kind on airplanes, specifically."

Since cockpits are now near-impossible to break into, why is a violent attack on an airplane worse than a violent attack in a movie theater? Probabilistically, the expected carnage in the latter case is higher.
You may want to look instead at six which let's you write code that works with both py2 and py3: http://pythonhosted.org/six/