skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Supreme Court already ruled against software patents in Gottschalk v. Benson. So much for what the Supreme Court says.

If anyone is interested in the establishment's freakout that 2012's ruling caused, look no further than here: http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/20/supreme-court-mayo-v-pr... Here is an excerpt:

How long will it take the Federal Circuit to overrule this inexplicable nonsense? The novice reader may find that question to be ignorant, since the Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States. Those well acquainted with the industry know that the Supreme Court is not the final word on patentability, and while the claims at issue in this particular case are unfortunately lost, the Federal Circuit will work to moderate (and eventually overturn) this embarrassing display by the Supreme Court. This will eventually be accomplished the same as it was after the Supreme Court definitively ruled software is not patentable in Gottschalk v. Benson, and the same as the ruling in KSR v. Teleflex will be overruled. I have taken issue with Chief Judge Rader’s statements that nothing has changed in Federal Circuit jurisprudence as a result of KSR, which is not technically true. What is true, however, is that the Federal Circuit continues to refine the KSR “common sense test,” narrowing the applicability in case after case and tightening the ability for “common sense” to be used against an application. We are almost 5 years post KSR and there is still a lot of work left to be done by the Federal Circuit to finally overrule the Supreme Court’s KSR decision. It took almost 10 years to overrule Gottschalk v. Benson, so we are likely in for a decade of work to moderate the nonsense thrust upon the industry this morning.

Indeed, Breyer’s decision is the most intellectually dishonest decision I have ever read, which is saying a lot given the utter contemptuous understanding of patent law displayed by the Supreme Court over the years. It is truly troubling that all 9 of the Justices concurred in what history will regard as one of the worst decisions in the patent space EVER!

Yes, Congress will be asked to step in and rectify this absurd ruling, and they should. Knowing how the legislative branch operates I cringe at the thought of Congress coming to the rescue. The only thing that gives me solace is that the industries summarily executed this morning have an A+ lobbying game, which in Washington, DC means everything.

(By the way, I remembered this from the comment and discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3732894)
Victimless is hard to define. By victimless I think you mean non-violent really. Even if there is a victim, if there was no violence, putting the perpetrator into a jail/prison will create more violence.

Also repeat offenses of non-violent crimes might be needed but most can be solved economically. For instance take someone who does some financial crime, why lock them up and have the public on the hook for 30k per year or more when they could be making money back they stole and mark them for some period of time similar to jail time. Why cost the public 30k+ per inmate at all if it isn't a violent crime? What a waste.
Mention of this "law" has no place on a site whose very existence is based on the idea of discussing submitted posts.

It's only used as a shallow, lazy shortcut. It doesn't add anything useful to the discussion. We'd all be better off if the people who feel compelled to post it, didn't.

On the other hand, meaningful reasons why the premise of the headline is wrong are useful, and should be encouraged.

For example, the post I'm referring to here would have provided just as much value without the reference to the "law".
How is that a viable model for the users?

I can keep up with my system and applications just fine, but are you saying that I have to re-visit my archive of past documents with each new keynote version, and re-open & re-save them all?
Poor Ruby.
Why on earth is this title in caps?
Sure, and people who are victims of dishonest police can have evidence to support their claims. Everyone wins.
You could separate the screen. Top half/bottom half.
Yeah, I was wondering that too!
Bluff called, I fold .. and sweet!

Looking around, it requires a bit of work (see for example http://www.ru.j-npcs.org/usoft/WWW/www_debian.org/FAQ/debian... ).

Here's a recent (2014) report of success: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/running...

rogue is text only. According to a report from 2009 at https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/linux-binary-compati... :

> A Mosaic binary from 1994 just segfaults, as well as all the other ZMAGIC binaries (1994-1995) I have lying around.

but OTOH that may be because of the setting of noexec and other flags.
Except for the fact that multiple communications systems were deliberately turned off, and the place continued to fly for hours after that fact. I don't think anyone would have been particularly suprised if the place crashed into the ocean off the coast of Malaysia. In fact, that is what most people assumed at first, and that is why all the search and rescue efforts were focused in that area for the first 3 or 4 days. If you have been paying attention to what has come out after then, or read this article, I think you will see that does not appear to be the case.
The word “forgot” was chosen to rhyme with “plot”, so may not have been a normal use of the word/form.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes#Quotes_about_Fawkes

(Now you've made me want to watch V for Vendetta again!)
Not liking the working style, or being unproductive because of it, isn't a reason to sue on being let go.

Not saying we're hearing the whole story and this "Roy" guy is totally wrong... it could easily be that Dave WAS discriminating against "Roy" because of his age. Or the firing was done in such a way that it seemed that way to "Roy".
Honey Is a New Approach to Fighting Antibiotic Resistance: How Sweet It Is
Seems like it was, not sure why though.
Ummmmm. I think it's copy paste from the blog. + 8k delights?
have you met my friend [1] browserify?

I'm probably not the audience for require.js, because I've never had a situation where I was forced to not have a build step. Once you just accept that there's always a build step, life becomes so much easier.

[1] http://daemon.co.za/2014/03/subtly-meta-introduction-to-brow...
That is not necessarily true. If it is terrorism, it's possible this isn't over, and that the plane will be used in a future high-profile attack. And if the target was passengers, cargo, or something else entirely I don't think that logically leads to it being state-sponsored.
Presumably OP just copied and pasted the title from the blog which actually has the title in caps (rather than using text-transform: capitalize). Nonetheless, this is hardly the HN way.
I ended up thinking it was not a scam but being uncomfortable. It's possible I had originally put a fake address for my whois info, possibly triggering this, I forget. I'm not 100% sure.

Here's the people, i spoke with them on the phone: http://www.neustar.us

here is their first email in april 2011:

Greetings,

As you may be aware, in November 2001, the United States Department of Commerce ("DOC") selected NeuStar, Inc. ("NeuStar") to be the Administrator of the .US top-level domain ("usTLD"), the official top-level domain for the United States of America. As Administrator of the usTLD, NeuStar has agreed to perform random "spot checks" on registrations in the usTLD to endure that they comply with the usTLD Nexus Requirements which can be found at
http://www.neustar.us/content/download/2659/32865/ustld_nexu... ("Nexus Requirements").

Our records indicate that you are the registrant of the domain name CURI.US.

On April 28, 2011, this domain name was selected for Nexus revalidation and confirmation. According to the information you provided with your registration of this Domain Name, you indicated that you qualify under:

Category 1 - You are a US citizen or permanent resident

As part of our verification process, we ask that you provide to us by no later than ten (10) days after the date set forth above, a written response describing how you qualify under the above Nexus category.

In addition, please verify that the name-servers that you have selected to use are also physically located within the United States as required by the Nexus Requirements.

In some instances, we may request additional documentary evidence from you to demonstrate that you meet the Nexus requirements.

You should be aware that if you either (i) do not respond within the ten (10) days, or (ii) are unable to adequately explain or demonstrate through documentary evidence that you meet any of the Nexus Requirements, NeuStar may issue a finding that your entity or organization has failed to meet the Nexus Requirements. Upon such a finding, you will then be given a total of ten (10) days to cure the US Nexus deficiency. If you are able to demonstrate within ten (10) days that your entity or organization has remedied such deficiency, you will be allowed to keep the domain name. If, however, you either (i) do not respond within the ten (10) days of such a finding of noncompliance, or (ii) are unable to proffer evidence demonstration compliance with the Nexus Requirements, the domain name registration will be deleted from the registry database without refund, and the domain name will be placed into the list of available domain names.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Kind Regards,

John
.US Nexus Compliance
___________________________________________
NeuStar
.US America's Internet Address
Email: nexus-compliance@neustar.us
You are thinking of a different class of people than I am.
Scalaz helps with the idioms but without the purity garuantees you miss out on all the optimizations and verifiability.

The java collections & libraries don't help me when I need to manage my own memory. I've spent entirely too much time in the unsafe package because the JVM doesn't allow me to do cheap ffi unlike Haskell or even Microsoft's CLI.
The social parts of programming are a huge part of professional success.
Is it a tough job? You bet. Are they unfairly vilified? Not a chance: police should be held to a higher moral standard than the general public, as they're the ones enforcing it.

The best part of them wearing a GoPro is that everyone wins: civilians get to feel much safer, and police get to show that they're not as bad as they're made out to be.

The issue arises when the cops have that introduced, and accusations of excess force drop dramatically... that sort of shows that yes, they are as bad as they're made out to be...
Has anyone used boto3? https://github.com/boto/boto3
Tracking Health One Step (And Clap, And Wave, And Fist Pump) at a Time
How is this different from http://clarity.fm?
I agree. It's the stigma that I'm talking about. Medicating yourself to adjust your ability to focus in order to perform your job? Like I said, count me in for that.

As a society we're going to have to accept that people are different, and that people may need various medications to adjust their performance capabilities to do various things. That doesn't make these people broken! Simply because you are taking some chemical to do X doesn't mean that you are disabled.

This is going to be a big leap for society. Up until now it's all been "If you need drugs, it must be because there's something wrong with you!" Well, not really. We're all "broken" in various degrees....
I think simplicity is undervalued in the programmer world in general. It takes so much more mind-energy for someone to implement/refactor/add-to/test complex code written by someone else as opposed to simple/verbose code.
This exactly. Really tough and often thankless job. As shown in Rialto everybody wins when the police wear cameras. Complaints down 88%, use of force down 60% http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/04/california-poli...
Its worth noting that use of "forgot" instead of "forgotten" is also found in the first line of Auld Lang Syne, where it isn't rhymed with anything.
No, I meant what I said. Victimeless, and no it's not at all hard to define. Drugs, sex, gambling, bigamy, etc; basically laws based on Christian morality that try and tell you it's wrong to do things that only involve consenting adults.

Non-violent is another category, but I agree with you on that category, prison should be for the violent.
if you store it with log2(n) you could easily store everything with a single byte. That brings the storage requirements down considerably. Though you still have huge issues with storage, not to mention input. For input you'd need 4096 combinations!
HR is worthless until the day they become invaluable.
It's arguable. While it's completely unreasonable for a business to overwork its employees or not pay them, it seems reasonable to me to expect them to not bring their personal issues to the workplace. Also, I imagine their coworkers feel the same; if you're trying to get work done, and your coworkers are fighting because of their relationship, wouldn't you want them to stop/go away?
You can even do 2 numbers per byte (11 takes 4 bits).
This is very cool and much better insight than the forbes article... I think it can still be summed up as "they angry" being the reason they take these cases.

>One of the key reasons the Supreme Court will take a case is when lower courts disagree on a legal issue. But, with patent law’s single appellate court, no such splits arise.

This was the question that I think that I was trying to understand better, if there is no ambiguity of opinion from lower courts is the only reason they take patent cases because they just happen to disagree?
My approach: Export every presentation as PDF. I'm guessing LibreOffice will be around for a bit (files from 2003 and later working ok) and the PDFs provide a second line of access, but, I accept, they are not convenient for editing.
> Apple's communications are borderline dismissive to people who are less fortunate and less lucky.

I couldn't disagree more. I think it's condescending to treat less fortunate people differently this way. Almost everyone aspires to someday have all the nice fancy things they want. The worst thing a maker of premium products can do is apologize for making premium products. People want to believe someday they will be able to have all the nice fancy things. They don't want to be told essentially 'sorry you are too poor to buy my product. you'll probably never be able to afford them"
I've been a fan of Laurent's work in this area for a long time.

What I find most interesting is that Laurent's work is clearly about the pervasiveness of myth and the need to apply rigorous thinking to what we believe. It's not about the specific claims; those are (fascinating) examples.

And yet, every time, people get really worked up about the 10x issue. They ignore the broader point entirely and focus on that one claim. (I find it particularly interesting that they focus on 10x and not any of the other claims Laurent debunks. Perhaps because it's easily understood? Perhaps because it's easy to think of anecdotes? Perhaps—and I suspect this is the real truth—because they secretly believe in their hearts that they're among the Chosen, and Laurent's threatening their clubhouse?)

Laurent doesn't say, "there are no 10x programmers." He says, "the studies that claim 10x programmers are so weak as to be laughable, the notion of measuring productivity itself is controversial and poorly defined, and do you even know which ratio you're using when you say 10x, anyway?" (He's not quite so informal about it, but that's the gist.)

In other words, the 10x claim has yet to be defined, let alone subject to rigorous analysis.

But out of the woodwork come these people who say, "I've seen 10x, therefore it must be true!" (I can't help but believe that these are the same people who jump up and down saying "the plural of anecdote is not data.") To be blunt: irrelevant. Laurent didn't say "there are no 10x programmers." Sit down already. Read it again.

You know what? The 10x claim doesn't matter. Laurent's not even saying it matters. His argument is bigger, more interesting, and more valuable than that.

He's saying that people—us programmers, specifically, who so wish ourselves to be rational thinkers—believe things because we want them to be true. Not because of the "evidence" and "proof" we're so keen to demand when we hear something we don't like... but because they're the myths that surround us, and they make us feel good.

(And now I hope morendil will chime in and tell me how I've misinterpreted him. ;-) )
One of the first things that "broke my brain" when starting with Angular.js (during its wild 0.x days) was inferred injection — I know Javascript. I know how arguments are passed. What the fuck is happening here??

At that time documentation was sparse and often incorrect, but I'm very glad they're moving to a more predictable and sane DI model.
A black market by definition is a free system. Doing anything to the contrary (i.e. applying any policies regarding exchange) will naturally foster it.
The police are a case of when it goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong. Instagram down? Not a big deal. Space shuttle software bug? Possible death, explosions and millions of dollars of destruction. The two software systems are developed very differently as a result.
Your next visit to the doctor might kill you
Yes; I've won, and I know (at least) one other person to have done so.

http://i.imgur.com/tBqcjSK.png
I've taken my time to ponder this because there really is a problem with getting this point across. I do not know of any other language where two letter combinations are connotated this heavily. Sure, there are some that are mildly weird/inappropriate, such as for instance FU in English, but nothing compared to these three in German (I stupidly forgot one in the previous post).

I think I've come up with a way of explaining how heavy the connotation is. So again, these are the abbreviations:

NS is bad, quite worse than any comparable thing in English (but not bad enough for Apple to drown in boycott mails, as you noted).

SS is significantly worse than that. Have those two uppercase letters together (better yet, standing freely together) and there is nobody raised in Germany who will not immediately think of the SS and/or death camps.

KZ is the worst. This one is an immediate, unconditional full stop. Now here comes the comparison: Putting that in your product name is _exactly_ the same level of horrible as using the word pedophile in your product name.

That is the level of connotation we are talking about here.

I hope this helps somebody.
Fraud is non-violent but people are hurt by it.
Recap of an MIT Media Lab workshop
I have to admit JavaScript isn't the only driver for my interest in OCaml. It is however the angle I'm pushing for using it in my day job :)
I think you don't understand the Australian voting process very well. Australians are not as accepting of robocalls as Americans are (and with mobile phones becoming the norm, robocalls get expensive); the voting date is hard to fake since everyone has to vote at the same time and there are media blitzes about the date itself; and polling addresses are meaningless, because if you don't go to one of the ones for your electorate, you can go into a polling station anywhere in the country and record a vote, it just takes marginally longer. If you try and make it so that voters have to queue for 8 hours to lodge a vote in order to marginalise them, people will give up and go to another polling station. People here complain bitterly if they have to wait an hour to vote.

If someone did try the voting date switcheroo and succeeded in stopping a sizeable portion of people from voting, the most likely outcome - apart from the scandal - would be that the Australian Electoral Commission would call for a repeat of the voting for that electorate. By-elections happen all the time; it's not something that would be procedurally unusual.

Blackmail is still an option though, and still a good reason to oppose the law.
Yes, but what is it?
In Internet argument fashion, a bunch of people will just jump all over you, and take your words through every useless permutation of meaning they can think of, for which they can contrive a shallowly plausible counterargument. I grow more and more convinced that very few people read to comprehend.
StartSSL has a good deal for commercial websites too - for $120/year you get unlimited certs, including wildcard.

Only downside is they do proper identity checking which is a bit painful to go through (they will need to see official company documents, verify ID by phone etc) - but worth it in the long run IMO.
This is madness! The decay of western civilization is nigh! All we need is the string theory 11-dimensional version of the game to show up and doom us all!
@danford was asserting that he didn't think there would be switches in the cockpit that allowed all tracking devices to be turned off. Are you countering his statement? Can you provide a citation?
I don't know how people put up with this kinda stuff, I hear a C-suite say something heteronormative and I'm already pretty much on my way out the door.
>Once you just accept that there's always a build step, life becomes so much easier.

Sigh... but I don't want there to be a build step... :(
> The USA bombed Yugoslavia to distract the world from Bill Clinton fooling around with an intern.

That's a rather controversial claim. You could probably make the case that, instead, the Clinton Administration exploited the Right's obsession with the Lewinsky affair to drown out any serious domestic criticsm of its policy in Yugoslavia.
what have you designed?
I think TheBiv's point is that, even though you know it can happen, historical data suggests that 1-4% is too high a probability. It's never happened in, say, 20 years of a 64-team tournament? That's 80 #1 seeds? Then 1% might be a reasonable probability, but 4% does not seem reasonable.
People on this site have an absurd tendency to view everyone who disagrees with them "corrupt." CAFC isn't corrupt. It does have a less than diverse representation of engineering perspectives, however.

My degree is in aerospace engineering, and I went to a school known for its traditional engineering programs (mechanical, chemical, aerospace, electrical). In this world, patents aren't viewed negatively the way they are in the software world. First because the capital requirements to enter the field are high, so you don't have little companies for whom a patent suit is an existential crisis. Second, because development is capital intensive. Pratt & Whitney develops new turbine blade designs, and patents them because developing them is tremendously expensive. In software, there is a huge field of things that are patentable that don't fulfill the economic rationale of patent (protecting expensive capital investment from free riding). So the attitude in software is very different.

CAFC is full of people with backgrounds in traditional engineering fields. Think DuPont rather than Dropbox. They have a very different perspective, and it is neither corrupt nor invalid.
Finally, a Formula For Decoding Health News