skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This assumes 5000ft of stopping distance and a high density runway, which is far more than really needed. Especially considering that the operators of this flight are willing to take more risks than usual commercial flights.

There are probably thousands of additional landing strips, even more if the hijackers don't require keeping the plane in perfect flying condition.
The problem with statements like these is people always move the goal posts. If challenged it goes from nobody to talking about the proportions. There are plenty of people who will use this straight away. Yes, maybe as a proportion but Python has a lot of users developing a lot of different types of applications. Even if initially it's a small proportion, it's not the absolute numbers are large. I guess some of the bellyaching is because there's a feeling that the community and ecosystem of libraries is becoming fragmented -- but the community is large enough to take it and anyone really needing a particular library should be capable of expending the effort to port it or find an alternative. There are plenty of users who don't engage with the community much and/or just use established libraries/the standard library anyway.

In conclusion, not everyone is in the same boat as you. Try and see beyond your own nose pleas.
The pressurisation is not independent, but the emergency O2 is - the cockpit is supplied from tanks and the cabin from chemical generators.

The cabin generators can be disabled by tripping a circuit breaker (and they only last about 12 minutes anyway).
Based entirely on work done by professionals at AT&T. Color me unimpressed.
So if you want to reduce reliance on chemicals (which I do), then GMOs are a bad idea?

Personally I'm a big fan of projects that use more natural ways of fighting weeds and pests. I've read about some very effective programs that reduced pests by planting a specific plant around the crop fields, or (re)introducing a predator of that pest.
1. Not all terrorists are religious

2. Not all terrorists are after Americans

3. Religious terrorists can find a way to justify anything using their book of choice.
The cockpit isn't pressurised separately. It's possible to alter oxygen masks deployment, I know for sure it must be done landing at some altitude airports like Quito which are higher up than normal cabin altitude.

De pressurizing the plane would be extremely dangerous anyway, even with your oxygen mask on. Among other things the cabin temperature would drop to -50°C or so, the low pressure could induce fatal embolism, loss of consciousness, etc.
> There are too many oddities in this whole story that don’t make sense if this theory isn’t the answer in my opinion.

Confirmation bias?

Slow burn fire randomly taking out communications systems and electronics undetected over a long period of time. Pilots freak out and head West for the coast, program way points on autopilot. Fire then cracks the hull, leading to a slow depressurization, incapacitating crew. Plane heads into the Indian ocean with all onboard unconscious or dead, until it runs out of fuel, and crashes into the ocean.
dafuq. Indeed
It would require to adopt a single standard, that is, how to encode that in the character encoding and the files. And it would still not stop someone from in the same browser for example using sometimes one notation, sometimes the other notation, depending on e.g. if they're filling in a form for a European bank, or something related to programming.
Apparently the rolls royce engines have a remote debugging ability that was not enabled on this flight, however it was still pinging home which is how they first noticed the course change. They had disabled all the other trackers, so if they were watching the news the chances are they have disabled these too.

[EDIT] ACARS - http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/16/satcom-acars-explained/
In the case of the radar transponder there is the very prosaic reason that ATC doesn't want their screen filled with all the aircraft sitting at gates.
It makes a person feel threatened because it implies that your co-workers think of /you/ as eye candy too. And if that's all you are, then you can't trust others to take you and your needs seriously. You can't deal with it by ignoring it, because it's not the staring that's the problem, it's what it indicates about how the gawkers view their female coworkers. (How you're viewed matters because that affects whether anyone will listen and help you when you have a problem, and if they'll expect unreasonable things from you - like the coworker who removed a bunch of Julia's code after she turned him down for a date.)

Or at least, that's how I feel about it, when I try to put myself in the place of someone who saw this happening, and took it as a sexual sort of staring rather than a "what the heck are my silly coworkers doing" kind of staring. It's also possible that Julia misunderstood what was going on, or exaggerated - we don't have enough information to know.
Do you have a source for the "at a party" part? The majority of my comments have been predicated that this was in a work environment. The Horvath techcrunch article states "at the office".

More to the point:

Yes because women moving their hips means they automatically want to be considered for their sexual characteristics. /sarcasm

Admittedly, if this was at a party and they were hula hooping then sure no problem at all. But just because a person moves their body around in an office doesn't mean they are looking for sexual partners! It's not that "a man may only glance at it for a few seconds". It's that in some environments (like office ones) they should have the self control to not care what other people are doing with their bodies.
2048 on Android! No Ads. No Tracking.
I need php related topics like php, mysql..
مباريات اليوم الاثنين 17/3/2014 والقنوات الناقلة
Can you expand on what groups might be able to orchestrate such a complicated hijacking?

A rogue state like North Korea would have the capability, but they don't really have the motive since they can acquire passenger airplanes by other means. (North Korea's national airline has 27 planes -- if they wanted to make a nuclear kamikaze plane, they'd just use one of those.)
100 requests per second does not sound like a botnet attack. If it were you probably wouldn't be able to access your servers on their public interfaces for all the traffic.
Or perhaps it's the rest of the thing that colored her view of this perhaps harmless event. It could go both ways. Prolonged sexual harassment by two (three?) people at a company where HR does nothing effective and your perceptions of the rest of the company are bound to become warped.
Oh yes, this must be why leadership positions in business, government, and all areas of life are dominated by women. Oh wait...
I realize now that my comment may have sounded like someone trying to prove all of Horvath's claims to be false. That was sincerely not intended. I apologize for that.

Frankly, my purpose in providing a plausible defense for GitHub is that the TechCrunch story itself only presents a single side of the story, though I understand that sometimes that's necessary for someone to come forward and draw the necessary attention to an injustice like this.

It is, however, easy to read the TechCrunch article and immediately point 100% of the blame on GitHub when we don't know the facts. I think it's helpful to step back and look at the accusations for what they are: accusations.

As others have pointed out, GitHub's response says very little in terms of confirming or denying the accusations, but it does say that they are professional enough to take this seriously.

Horvath may be doing GitHub (or various people at GitHub) a favor by going light on some details - the facts may be far worse than they appear on the surface. She (or the TechCrunch writers) may also be skimping on details in order to paint GitHub with broad strokes. There are numerous plausible motives in either case, but I won't speculate as to the motives here as I've learned it doesn't help to spread false accusations.

It isn't fair to accuse Horvath of being anything less than 100% truthful, and by the same token, it isn't fair to assume everything she said is 100% truthful without GitHub coming forward with their side of the story.

Again, I apologize for my comment earlier leading to speculation where we (as the public) really have no say in the matter since we have so few facts. It's an unfortunate situation for everyone involved and I hope it can be resolved in a positive way for both parties. For me, at least some of the followup comments here have been helpful in better understanding some of the ideas involved in this story - e.g., sexism, appropriate handling of conflicts in the workplace, roles of founders and spouses, etc (in general terms, not necessarily in connection with this story).
Googled "Neal Stephenson README" expecting a thriller involving a government agency plot to inject malicious code into a open-source crypto-library, and the final commmit to the github project made by a hacker found murdered in front of the computer in his basement.

Was disappointed.
This is a great apology, and goes a long way to restore my shattered faith in github.

No denying or spinning what happened, no victim blaming; just "we fucked up, we're going to do everything we can to fix it, and Julie is great". That's all I expect. Own up, fix the problem, and protect the victim.
The folks over at airliners.net have pointed out that the 777's collision avoidance system only works if both planes' transponders are turned on. That doesn't mean this scenario is impossible, but it does raise the level of sophistication required.

Sadly, I feel like whatever happened, the amount of sophistication involved increasingly points toward the involvement of one or more state actors. If that's the case, I'm starting to doubt that we'll ever find out what happened to this plane...
The Greatest chance Approach For Waking up In the Kundalini.
I'm already using 3.3 on live stuff. Likely to make the jump to 3.4 when I have the time to do the upgrade.
Major Linux distros already do.
> Sadly, I feel like whatever happened, the amount of sophistication involved increasingly points toward the involvement of one or more state actors. If that's the case, I'm starting to doubt that we'll ever find out what happened to this plane...

Indeed. And not just the "what", but the "why" as well.
Twisted and gevent don't!
On a somewhat related tangent, but a tangent just the same, Ada came to my mind because people in another thread about avionics in relation to the Malaysia Air Flight were debating the efficacy and/or safety of Ada versus a language like, for example, Haskell.

When I looked into Ada and memory management, out of curiosity, I did not find a lot of information about pointers. Or a garbage collection system, and casual reading confirms that Ada has a less manual version of pointers (from what I gather) and manual memory management, and no garbage collection. Given its syntax and semantics, which remind me very, very vaguely of Haskell (which I am sure is bound to insult someone on HN, specifically Haskellers), I could not imagine this as a systems language. Then again, even though I am ignorant of such things and do not know C/C++ (the latter I only took briefly in undergrad, and I have mixed reactions), I am product of the C/C++ generations and the stand of the shoulders of Unix and Linux giants, as I have looked into computer science and Linux application source code in attempt to understand. Not even write the code mind you, just understand. Perhaps others were exposed to Pascal and BLISS, so the alternative perspectives made it seem possible. I do not have that perspective, so I feel dazed and confused by alternative offerings when reading them. I get the idea generally, but still whisper to myself with a concerned "How!?", even though it should be more obvious.

In short, I cannot really conceive of manual memory management without pointers and pointer arithmetic as it presented in C and/or C++. I was terrible at it, granted, but everything else I see from Rust to other system languages which promise a systems language without GC and offer some equivalent of memory management done manually do not click. They seem foreign and impossible because I have always assumed, for better or worse, C is the way you interface with a modern PC or embedded system by managing each and every pointer, or you are on your way to assembly and then memory is one of many complicated underpinnings you must understand intimately, not just the must troublesome one.

But I am an amateur programmer. I recently the saw the threads on FORTH. I want to look because, as much as I "know computers" the idea of this kind of very low level stack language is very foreign to me, just from looking at it I feel odd and not sure how it could possibly work. The same would be true of writing low level code in Haskell. I like it a lot, for all its beauty and warts, but I have just assumed you must learn to manage such things manually and in an ugly fashion a la C/C++ to learn system management in a programming language in our generation, and no amount of screaming or holding your breath until in the red face will change that.

However, a lot of this is conditioning. Maybe others can share other observations to counter my admittedly very naive experience.
This theory keeps coming up, but it doesn't make much sense.

If your goal is to acquire a working Boeing 777, on a secret airfield somewhere in Western China or Eastern Kazakhstan (see this map for orientation: http://www.airliners.net/uf/109874/phpnIOEWi.jpeg), then you don't have to be particularly smart or rational to realize that hijacking a commercial flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, with 240 people on board, and then attempting to stealthily cross both India and Pakistan, as proposed in the OP, is not your best option.
Show HN: I wrote a book about adventure. Here it is for free.
New news aggregator for Windows
This article lost me midway second sentence.

"to evade commercial (secondary) radar coverage after it turned back from its flight path en route to Beijing."

Secondary (used by ATC) radar is based on transponders responding (the very thing that was switched off).

Primary radar is usually military and does not need any device being on or off.
You can always replace dialoguegue with dialogue again afterwards.
Untested, untested.. Directly observed is a better definition, the quasar observations are quite convincing.
I've been working on Storage systems with multi-gigabytes of RAM where you still reason about your memory in much the same way. These systems have lots of RAM but properly intend to make use of all of it.

I tend to prefer to allocate on the stack when possible and when the context is right and that works when working in threads or user-space-threads (aka coroutines) that are all hierarchical. It makes some things simpler though you need to care about the stack size and its usage. The places that do need dynamic memory allocations would normally use a memory pool for same sized objects to be allocated from.
Not to imply I think it's possible, but deniability is an obvious reason not to use your own aircraft.
What surprised me is that after a long time with string based path libs, Java and Python are now moving onto oo based ones. I wonder how many other languages already had abstractions for this (smalltalk ? ruby?).
I Knew a Programmer that Went Completely Insane (2013)
>>but if the pilot wants, he can make the plane disappear at will?

The pilot is the captain of the airship and can take any decision deemed necessary for the safety of the aircraft and its passengers and that decision is final(this is actually defined in the airspace law, would need to look for a quote). That means that the pilot has to have the ability to turn off any and all electrical parts of the aircraft if that would ensure its safety(in case of a fire). That power cannot and should not be taken away from the pilot - you don't want a plane crash due to a fire which couldn't have been put out because the burning thing was always-on due to some regulations.
Me too. I heard a lot because of Zed Shaw using it, then having a fall out after a long angry rant against git and others. Subsequently, he corrupted hours of work when using fossil, got angry on the mailing list, and then he quietly moved to git (he is here, so maybe he can qualify; I say quietly but it might have been around the time Posterous went offline and the old article is only accessible at Posterous and not his subsequent self-hosted blog).

In any event, it is nice to meet others using it.
> People: when did our brains melt and spill out of our ears?

Classic case of confirmation bias.
I don't know if Horvath is right or not, but this is nice case study how PR works.

I would say this statement is a very clever move from GitHub side. I guess they have skilled PR people working on the issue.

At first look, the cited article seems to admit to everything. As a result, it will be sort of last news on the topic - if they admitted Horvath is right and they even put on leave a founder and the programmer and founder's wife will not be allowed to enter office, then what's more can be said or written? Github did everything it could to resolve the issue.

The point is that they did not admitted anything. The only paragraph that contains actual content is paragraph no 2., the rest is just speaking how Github grows and how they liked Horvath, how sad it is that Horvath is sad, etc.

So we have:

"We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. The founder’s wife discussed in the media reports has never had hiring or firing power at GitHub and will no longer be permitted in the office."

So they have started "full investigation", just that. After two months when everybody will forget about the issue, the founder with his wife and the programmer might be back at Github (who knows what the investigation is going to prove - Horvath will not take part in it - she's no longer an employee). Whatever happens nobody will pay attention. No media will investigate the issue further because "Github admitted Horvath is right", so the topis is closed and no longer "hot".

I guess GitHub cannot publicly admit that Horvath is right or not, their lawyers would be mad, it is much better for them to keep all statements fuzzy and sounding good.
Live streaming to the browser using Media Source Extensions and MPEG-DASH
Civilian flight control and radar is designed and optimized for a fully cooperative system, extremely so. It's not designed for filtering through data to track down inconsistencies and identify potential bad actors, it's not a military air defense system.
Haskell for Coq programmers
So Many People Just Settle – Not Josh Kaufman from The Voice
a very nice apology, but it cannot be enough. i hope some specific action will be taken. but somehow, i am doubtful.

it is relatively easy to apologize, and say "we will investigate". but, how does something like this happen, if it did happen, without people knowing? Ms Horvath stated she raised the issue, yet it took a public scandal to actually issue a "we will investigate" statement?

at the very least, IMO, GitHub must get rid of the problematic co-founder.
Ignoring the current polls an looking at historical "free" election results, the southern part of Ukraine seems to have more support for Russian than one might otherwise think.

But this is getting qute off topic.
Founder put on leave, his wife no longer allowed in the office, that's not nothing. It's not a full admission, but it is an apology. While they don't admit anything specific, to me it sounds like an admission that they dropped the ball. Their company didn't work the way it should have and they intend to fix it. They offer a reason why this was the case (their rapid growth) but don't present it as a justification.

I'm seeing plenty of mea culpa in this, and that's good. They could have responded far worse, and only slightly better.
I'm an Amazon Prime customer who has experienced no lockin, so I'm not sure what Marco is going on about.

As someone not using Amazon prime, this is one of the great thing about services and leasing stuff vs owning it. I know some of you swear to owning everything, but in this new brave world of platform lock-in, owning things becomes a prison in a much more literal way than the Buddhists ever imagined.

Had I bought stuff from the Apple iStore, I would be stuck with DRMed media I wouldn't be able to consume on any other devices than those made by Apple. If I've first invested in this system, leaving it means my media will lose may stop being playable, turning worthless, and existing devices may not work correctly with other music download-services, etc.

This vertical integration becomes a set of vertical pilars surrounding you on all sides. Leaving one thing means leaving it all behind. It has a very high cost. Very few people will do that unless they are presented with something truly incredible as a reward. And things like that comes along very rarely.

If I on the contrary used Spotify to consume music I would have nothing to lose if I stopped subscribing to their service. Leaving for a better service is completely free of cost and would only present me benefits.
>What do you think a sensible alternative is?

"sensible" is all in the eye of the beholder, once you have your computer hacked your priorities may change..

> but few people (including me) would accept a "security upgrade" which made my browser significantly slower and memory hungry.

And THAT is the issue, security CANNOT be an afterthought..
Note that significantly slower doesn't mean slow, PC's CPUs are very, very fast.
what about showing up at someone's house and propositioning them is not an 'uninvited advance'?
An interesting theory and article, but I can't help but feel like this reads too much like one of the classic conspiracy theory articles about 9-11/lizards/aliens/Area 51, etc.
See also http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio3/posts/Radio-3-in-40
We already have a solution for that - cryptocurrencies. This is the exact situation in mind when bitcoin was created. Seeder gets some bitcoins for streaming the torrent, and leechers pay for the movie in bitcoins. You can seed and download at the same rate to come even. Nobody loses, there's the incentive to seed, everyone's happy. Now we only need system to incorporate crypto into such system. Maybe even into popcorn time fork.
I think you're putting words in my mouth. I wasn't arguing in favor of managers but against an unclear power structure – which is what the article is saying.

Also, I don't like the use of the word "freedom" in this context, as in "people can't handle the freedom". Lack of organization does not imply freedom, and strict organization does not imply lack thereof. While anarchism appeals to me as well sometimes, I do not for one second believe that it brings more individual freedom. Are people in The Walking Dead more free than us? Diffuse power structures breed just as much oppression as tyrannical ones. An individual can as easily be abused by a group with no clear leaders as by a tyrant. And this isn't theoretical: historical and sociological examples support this (e.g. bullying in schools). Clear organizations nurture freedom just as often as they suppress it. The adoption of strict(er) government regulation in the US to suppress the unchecked power of the free-market robber barons in the early 1900s clearly increased individual freedom in the US for the majority of people (while curtailing the industrialists' "freedom" to exploit the populace).
Indeed. Thank goodness I am not in a situation where I have to worry about nonsense like this.
The Pros and Cons In Hydroponic and Soil Plant Growing
Many different sources will advise you to grow your medical cannabis at home and in a hydroponic ambiance. This means you should buy at least a ready-made starters kit and begin studying the art of hydroponics