skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No, this not even something we have to argue about. Simply look up the definition of the word:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discrimination

This conference is about the first definition, not the third.
Postwar Japan was a different beast for quite a while. Weird Al Yankovic's line "don't you know that other kids are starving in Japan" was what parents used to guilt their kids into eating until Biafra happened. A "Made in Japan" joke was funny in the '50s and '60s because it was true, for the most part. "Toyota" was a word that to most people meant "poor bugger couldn't even afford a Beetle". My '71 Datsun (Nissan) pickup could barely reach highway speed (although it did have a sort of tractor-like utility about it) and I don't think there was a single original body panel left on it by '79. But the cameras weren't bad. And then the "miniature" electronics (a radio you could put in your pocket!) happened. It took a while to get back up to speed. Now people look for "Made in Japan" as a sign of quality instead of a warning.
Sure thing. I actually just made a test file, and realized that the problem is long nodes that have HTML formatting, not long nodes.
Atomic tech is a red herring here--note that many are still not sold on the utility of nuclear power plants (even if those people are being silly). This is a very real, well-documented problem, and one we have at least a chance of defusing.

Let us draw a difference between private and industrial IoT. IIoT (your tomato example, maybe shipping, etc.) is done for practical logistical reasons, and likely as not will end up on a private network or embedded system. There is little likelihood that a government acquiring the tomato files is going to ever truly hurt the consumer, because there is an airgap of commerce between that information and the consumer--I buy the tomato from a supermarket with cash, and the trail goes cold.

PIoT, though, means that I have dozens of little spies all reporting on every aspect of my life, and that eventually that data is collected and correlated in one place--as it must, if it is to be of maximum utility. And that data, once concentrated, is something worthy of scrutiny by third parties. It suddenly makes it a lot more useful to spend a little effort to break into a management system or throw the book at a service provider, because the return is so great.

Moreover, even without extracting the data, the devices required afford computational capabilities, and the only truly trustworthy computer systems that exist are those that are powered off and disassembled--anything else is suspect (for the truly paranoid).

I just don't think that the personal internet of things is a good idea.
First most I was trying to get clarification as to what the person meant with their comment, as what my comment was is how I interpreted their comment.

I am not for or against such a conference, though ideally they're not needed - however if there's enough of a specific interest then business-minded people will try to create a conference to leverage that interest and try to make profits from that common interest - nothing wrong with that - just stating it for the point of that conferences for X,Y,Z group will always end up existing.

I think the solution is to shift the power structures that have been sustained, and are perpetuated, by most of our culture's current societal structures - and so everyone - poorer women and men, any minority, have the same chance of making their way into "power." Unfortunately I have to get back to work before I start writing a mini-essay going into more depth..
I love Github, but they need to build out more serious features into their issue tracker for it to be useful as a software estimation tool. Specifically I need:

* Time estimation.

* GRANTT charts.
> I personally ended up using power-line ethernet to replace a lot of the wireless throughout my apartment. ... With the powerline ethernet adapters, OTOH, I just plugged them in and everything Just Worked, much slower peak speed, but nice and consistent and more than enough bandwidth for HD movie streaming.

Powerline networking is still a shared medium. You're sharing the available bandwidth with all of the neighboring houses on the same utility transformer.

It does have the benefit that signal strength drops off with linear wiring distance. Thus, you're farther from your neighbors than you would be with Wi-Fi.

However, as with 5 GHz, you're getting good results right now because powerline networking isn't too popular. But if every house were to get powerline networking, then you would start encountering interfering networks.
GitHub is not a company floating on some publicly-traded market yet. How they operate internally is of very little business to those on the outside. GitHub can operate anyway they like.
> I'm fairly sure Jessica will just apply common sense though and would put me somewhere below full (trans-)women but above cisgendered men as far as priority goes, which would make sense.

Why? If anything, a heterosexual man would be more likely to benefit from a conference for female founders because his SO is a founder or wants to start a company.

(Not trying to start a flame war — I just can't see the difference between a bisexual man, a homosexual man and a heterosexual man in this context.)
Same tactic as Zynga. Still working apparently.
Built based on this: http://php.net/trait

Depending on the language, I think they're pretty much the same thing; implementation of (read: copy) functionality from a stateless object.
I'm not a theologian, but I'm going to guess that compressed prayers are just as effective as uncompressed prayers.
Yes, the CocosBuilder project has been renamed SpriteBuilder. The creator of CocosBuilder now works at Apportable.
There's a demo of it running on an RPi here: http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/5812
There's also a question of ego, greed and fear-of-failure here. I mean, I can imagine it being pretty damn hard to ignore the fact that you have a "Gain 100.000 Users Instantly" button(that being a tweet, blog post or whatever), right at your finger tips.
>The burden of maintaining privacy is on the person who could violate it.

I want to quote this for emphasis. ;)
Opskeleton, a puppet/vagrant fast workflow
Want to move fast with puppet and vagrant? check github.com/opskeleton github setup redis, docker and many more using a single workflow
A few of my thoughts. Bruce did make an important point during his presentation, which I didn't write about in the piece. Whenever possible the NSA goes around crypto and other security. The agency has immense power--through, for example, QUANTUM Insert and redirecting to Foxacid servers--to target individuals. The real-issue is BULK collection, and that's where strong crypto will help when placed on endpoint devices and of course at the backend. In this sense: if we make it more expensive and more difficult to get at the data, the NSA will go after easier targets--this is kind of implied in some of the Snowden documents according to Bruce. So crypto is "less important" because if they really, really want to governments and next-gen cyber thieves will get at some of the data. But there are a lot of conventional techniques--better authorization controls, and constant monitoring of activity-- along with encryption that can limit the amount of data that's exposed.
Or maybe they're bringing it up because it would be gender discrimination and would be hypocritical?
Ask HN: Competitor is giving my app 1 star reviews... what do I do?
Hello,

I launched my app (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.senstore.alice.harvard) about a year ago and it's performed very nicely, with an average review of 4.6. However in mid-december I started getting one 1 star review a day and over hte last month the average review score has dropped to 4.48 which has reduced my place in the charts. At almost the same time a new competitor arrived, and so I'm suspecting them of giving me the reviews. What should I do?
> So do you think that there's more of an emphasis on getting the product make or the job done than the start up/hacker culture side of things?

Sort of.

I think there are fewer professional / institutional investors in the UK. It feels like there are more early stage startups in fewer spaces, too. So there's a really big "scene": Drinkabout, meetups, the various L*UGs (e.g. London Ruby User Group), the incubators (WAYRA, TechStars, Seedcamp), the offices (Tech Hub, Google Campus, Innovation Warehouse). Fuck, I went to an event at Bloomberg last year (probably the last wank networking thing I went to) where whoever the most recent government stooge told to gas about startups (without any credibility) was speaking authoritatively.

In my experience, venture-backed startups mix in with other venture-backed startups. E.g. Smarkets/GoCardless/Rentify used to share a single floor at Royal London House (somehow!). Now Rentify is moving into WAYN's office as we're approaching 40 desks. So whereas when we were younger we were in environments where networking was forced on us because, fuck, it's a communal space and everyone is doing it, now we're not beholden to someone else's schedule.

Whereas I phrased the point about good startups not doing networking events very poorly, I believe very strongly that the successful startups in London (and probably across the rest of the world) focus maniacally on one of growth, revenue, or raising capital. If you have two of those three you will get the third. I think people in the early stages of their startup can mistake hustle and networking as routes to all three, and it's usually bullshit.
'Fiat money' in derivation and use means something more and somewhat different than simply 'unbacked by other collateral'. For example, the word 'fiat' alludes to a decree – as in a legislative or military 'fiat' – that the money is valuable and should (or must) be used.

It so happens that the biggest implementation change between plain 'money' (which for a while implied collateral backing) to modern 'fiat money' was the removal of official asset backing, leaving only the government decrees that such money was 'legal tender'. And the theory of why this works relies on the traditional role of government, to enforce behaviors or collect taxes. (Academics discussing 'fiat money' use the term simply as a contrastive category, without the political-implications-of-suspicion you've seen elsewhere.)

But Bitcoin doesn't map easily into the 'fiat money' categorization, either way. No legal authority bootstrapped Bitcoin into money by decree, nor requires its use. Bitcoin is not redeemable by some issuer for some other backing asset... but by Bitcoin's design there is no issuer who could even contemplate such a policy.

And also by design, Bitcoin's limited-supply and counterfeit-resistance make it potentially self-backing, in a manner similar to gold. Gold was the traditional backing for non-fiat monies... and even though gold could circulate as currency, gold was not itself backed by other collateral. The reductionist definition of 'fiat money' as "simply currency that isn't backed by collateral" would make not just Bitcoin but also circulating gold a 'fiat money' – a fairly useless categorization at odds with historical meaning.

So is Bitcoin a 'fiat money'? I could buy the answer 'no' – Bitcoin doesn't affirmatively fit the old category or usage. I could even buy the answer 'mu' – it's so different that it neither fits nor not-fits the old category, so the question is meaningless or irresolvable. But the answer 'yes' requires both an oversimplification of the 'fiat money' term, and premature conclusions about whether Bitcoin will achieve its design goals.
What will the payout time be for it to hit the debit card? Is it instant? This is awesome by the way.
Convert the magical subtleties of drawing into a shallow engineering exercise. Throw away your magic lump of charcoal and replace it with this species of narrow cerebral wasteland that everybody and his dog is getting skinny on these days. Just plastic the fuck out of the whole deal. What's not to like?

Fuckin diet coke and fleshlights. Ice Nine.
Could you kindly s tfu please?

Women do simply have it much harder than men in tech and if you even criticize them for trying to build a community, you do a lot of harm to the whole industry and will scare away even more women from becoming interested in tech.

With statements like yours, you are making sure that the gender divide becomes bigger and bigger and that people become very sensitive and insecure when discussing female founders, female programmers and similar.
I would say that many people would disagree. Launching without a profitability model is what a lot of startups do, and some of them are successful. I'd like to see numbers on how many of those types are successful versus the startups looking for profit to begin with.

I would argue that it is A business model. The debate would be around whether or not it's a good business model. I guess as long as you're honest with yourself and your employees, aiming to be acquired as a profitability plan is perfectly valid.
The event is targeted to women, but they are not exclusionary. Look at the invitation form.

As to your main point, when there is a power asymmetry, I think it is unlikely for that asymmetry to remedy itself without explicit efforts targeted at it.
Yes, it would be a shame if people attending a tech-related conference were treated harshly due to their gender.
There's a lot of complexity here. Aside from the list of defendants, you may find some of the lawsuit filings of interest. And you may be surprised as to which companies are really for and against over-regulation of the payments space.
Obama Plan To Depopulate Montana Raises Crisis Fears In Moscow
Can you really automate that problem? You could provide a "split at glyphs" function, but I doubt that would actually be useful without tons of caveats. Even English doesn't do split at glyphs well given the existence of ligatures. `flat -> fl a t`.

Not to mention you would need to make any such function language aware since different languages could theoretically have different mapping rules for the same sequence of characters.
The reason I feel bitcoin is a scam is due to such misunderstandings. Bitcoin is not what makes any of this possible, the research happening for 20+ years in the background is.

Bitcoin is just a marketing term, a specific implementation of those principles that derives its power just from the number of clients installed across the world with it. All the arguments that Andreessen gave are not Bitcoin's, but are rather characteristic for all altcoins out there.

When you leave the research out, all you end up with is a term which denotes the first runner in a long-tailed race - http://coinmarketcap.com/ . And when you compute the long-term value, being today's winner of the race in terms of marketing and clients user-base is totally different than the open-sourced research that happened and what Andreessen invoked.

Fiat currency is sustained by our obligation to pay taxes in it and the legal tender notion that the law offers to it. Bitcoin is not offering such uniqueness, nor in the law nor by being the only system which provides the features involved in the article. It's only power comes from the specificity of its installed client-base, and anyone who sustains otherwise is either too less technical to notice the difference or comes close to border-line fraud to manipulate its interest in this bubble, at least in my book.
In regards to "people believe the world is getting worse", is mostly Americans and the US media. I believe things are getting worse, or at least harder for the majority of Americans; not the rest of the world.

Unemployment, large disparity in wealth, massive problems with debt (student debt), and highly dysfunctional political system. Americans see things as getting worse, here at home. We don't really focus on the rest of the world.
Can you prove this or are you just going on assumptions?
Three things about the internet
Oh, i think the investors need therapy more than these enterpreneurs. But did any of these anonymous 'investors' write how bad it was to see his pile of money being burnt?
Thanks for that. I can't edit my post anymore, so I can't fix it above.

Quora's really aggressive about getting people to sign up. I had to log in with a dummy account just to get the permalinks in the first place.
If we take 'intrinsic value' to mean 'having some use other than to simply trade away again to someone else, or being backed by something with intrinsic value', then the dollar has intrinsic value in that it is backed by freedom from being prosecuted by the US government for non-payment of taxes.
Bill Gates said that he himself had this misconception when he first started in philanthropy. It's good that he's working to unwind it.
Outbox is shutting down its mail service
Bitcoin is the first practical solution to a longstanding problem in computer science called the Byzantine Generals Problem.

Wait, isn't Paxos arguably the first practical solution to BGP? [0] [1] It's been in production use at Google since at least 2006. [2]

Furthermore, Paxos actually has a proof that timely consensus will be reached. Do we have the same level of rock-solid mathematical certainty about Bitcoin yet? The Eyal-Sirer paper [3] from late 2013 raised some concerns about a new mining strategy that might lower the attack threshold from 50% to 33%. Ed Felton's group at Princeton responded with some interesting analysis from game theory [4], but AFAIK there is no rigorous proof yet that the selfish mining equilibrium isn't a real threat.

If Bitcoin is The Way of the Future (I hope it is), we need to be sure about these things. Hand-waving statements about how Bitcoin isn't vulnerable because no one has found an exploit yet [5] are ridiculous and dangerous.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paxos_(computer_science)#Byzant...

[1] http://read.seas.harvard.edu/~kohler/class/08w-dsi/mazieres0...

[2] http://research.google.com/archive/chubby.html

[3] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.0243v2.pdf

[4] https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/bitcoin-isnt-so-br...

[5] https://twitter.com/cdixon/status/412447615331360768
The market would crash, you mean like how it happens in the real world all the time?
>> This alone isn't enough to convince me that we should give in to short-sightedness by allowing people to prevent or destroy future human lives.

Is it not destroying the life of the parent(s) by giving them a child they do not want and cannot reasonably care for?
Judging by some of the talks I've watched, pg would disagree with this.
The original article that broke the story:
http://the-gadgeteer.com/2014/01/20/amc-movie-theater-calls-...
If someone gave me that sentence, I wouldn't know whether the person that wrote it was a native speaker or not.
The baseband can lie about the phone being off. So the phone has a blank screen but is still phoning home.
> I guess YMMV depending upon exact OS and software used to access the device, but most media playback software will run a big enough local cache that it is requesting chunks of data long before it absolutely requires them for playback to work without a hitch, giving the drive more than enough time to wake up if it has parked itself.

On a Windows 7 machine with lots of RAM and a 3TB WD Green secondary drive, Foobar 2000 music playback and VLC video playback both exhibit the problem behavior. I don't think whatever read-ahead caching those programs do is designed to accommodate the latency involved in getting the drive going again.

Also, consider how a random playlist of thousands of songs works - reading all the songs into RAM isn't really an option. Foobar 2000 definitely does some read-ahead caching, I've noticed that a few seconds of music will sometimes play at the beginning of a song and then pause, as the software blocks waiting for the disk to get going.
As Bitcoin Infrastructure Booms, Mining Heads to the Data Center
Imagine you're a woman. The legislature that governs your country is more than 80% male, and that's after a lot of very recent gains by women. You feel this status quo is the direct result of historical as well as current bias against women, and bias for men. Much worse, since this legislature makes the laws and performs checks on the other branches of government, the inclusion or lack thereof of women in the legislature has concrete and far reaching impacts, such as whether congress takes seriously and pursues reports of sexual harassment and discrimination in the military, or whether abortion rights are upheld. This status quo is not simply the result of age-old and deep bias, it is a player. It perpetuates the bias and slows our evolution out of it.

It is in your interests to have a government that is representative and understands your difficulties as a woman in this society, that understands these biases and is highly motivated to undo them. You would also like your daughter and the daughters of others to one day look at that poster on the classroom wall with a solid block of 44 male presidents in a row and finally see a woman among them, because you know it has an impact on their psychology and dreams and perceptions of gender, even if only one woman among 44, even if it takes decades for that poster to change enough to erase its impact. You directly experience on a day to day basis how much women are limited by society simply due to their gender. It is also obvious that despite the ever increasing number of men who are sensitive to women's issues, it is fare easier for other women to share your understanding simply because they've lived it and have been pained by it. It is not just a abstract principle of equality for them.

Is it not rational, in fact extremely smart, to have a preference toward electing women into office, when all other factors are more or less equal or less important? As a preference, a factor in your choice, not the sole decider, you would of course vote for a man sensitive to women's issues over a traditionalist women, or a man with unknown sensitivity to women's issues over a woman who was significantly less competent or more disagreeable with you on other important issues.

Is this gender discrimination? Is it gender discrimination if said preference only lasted as long as the stilted status quo existed? Would you not be a naive idealist to stick to the notion that despite the deeply ingrained sexism in society, one should not take any active action against it other than not be sexist yourself?
The healthcare industry was taking their self selection to the extreme. The evidence of it is too much to consider it as anything else.

If they were good about their self selection process we wouldn't have mandatory health coverage right now.

Hell the entire problem could potentially be put on their decision to go away from properly underwriting and just checking when something came up.
On an individual level, people can choose to have or not have children. That's not really what I'm getting at.

My point is more about the collective mental separation between sex and having children. When children grow up in a society where you can have sex without having children, the default is to just have sex with no regard to this consequence. The thought of having children occurs less and less often. In fact, it often encourages a fear of having children, which suddenly taunts in the form of a life-ruining "accident".

This is the kind of mental "artificial" limiting that I'm concerned about. It's not about the choice itself, it's about making one choice the default.
If the tracks are more than 5-10 cents a piece, what's advantage over what I've been spoiled to (gomusicnow, and now iomoio)?
Pinterest CEO Lays Out Growth Plan
I didn't list the payout time because it varies by bank. It is instant (24/7) when we're able to go through an ATM network like STAR or PULSE. We'll learn a lot more during the development.

... and thanks for the support!
> I feel like I've seen that conference before, many times.

Really? Where? Could you please give an example?
PiPad: The Raspberry Pi tablet