skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Then I oppress people all the time. I oppress students of mine who cheat during tests. I oppress people who talk too loudly when I ask them to be a bit quieter. I oppress the guy who almost ran me over last week when he quickly drove across the sidewalk to park and I yelled at him.

If you mean you form an angry Internet mob to try and force someone's employer to fire them just because they talk too loudly, you're crazy. If not, I don't think you're making a fair comparison here.

> Do you really think this is the exact same as East Germany?

No, I think it has much more in common with the Red Scare in 1950s America. "This guy holds a political opinion that would abridge my liberty if it took over the country. Let's get him fired."

> Your point can be valid, if there is widespread inability to get work when publicly holding a minority viewpoint.

The fact that these people aren't consistent in trying to get Prop. 8 supporters fired doesn't change the fact that, if they were consistent, "there is widespread inability to get work when publicly holding a minority viewpoint" would probably be the case. The lack of consistency in putting their beliefs into practice doesn't really make me like the philosophy of personally targeting your political enemies any better.
The fury of however many people there are that actually care about this issue?
This, if you would like to do it yourself. However, the display advertising space is not currently as turnkey as search advertising, so in most cases you're better off handing off the trafficking of the campaign to an ad network. Quantcast and RocketFuel are two that focus specifically on delivering conversions, and both consistently beat Google on CPA (cost per action). Disclaimer: I currently work at Quantcast.
I think cassandra is pretty good for analytical workloads...for instance "Give me all the customers from pittsburgh" is a faster scan when the city column is laid out contiguously on disk.
Actually, it doesn't. There is no American right to privacy. There's a belief in that right, but as far as I know there is no law that supports or enforces that right.
It didn't sound like he expected anyone at Mozilla to have his viewpoints.

He made a private donation privately, 6 years ago.
Is it just coincidence that Just Eat (GrubHub for the UK) IPO'd today too?
It's interesting people haven't brought this up on Hacker News: http://paulgraham.com/say.html

Cynically, it's about conforming to the views in your given industry, company, culture, or society.

The lofty way to put it is a Mozilla CEO should represent the organization's ideals of tolerance, diversity, etc.

The cynical way to put it is tribalism. Humans want people with similar beliefs around, because they are good, and believe the other side to be evil (this being one of the strongest issues). One way for ordinary people to enforce their political power is through means like this. There's no need to dress it up in terms of fundamental rights, bigotry, intolerance etc. And in the tech world, gay marriage is one of those "not OK's" to oppose. I'm sure in the Southern Baptist world, donating to Planned Parenthood, will immediately get you called for an ouster as a baby-killer. It's just that the climate in the tech world has already shifted to this point, whereas the climate in Brendan Eich's church probably has not.

It's really about what acceptable opinions. For some opinions, there are silent majorities in some areas, that are silenced in others. I'm just trying to come up with a way to understand this, that can be applied to all situations and all ideologies.
Immigration and environmental issues couldn't affect employees?
This is the same logic that was used to justify policies like Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

We are not perfect beings; we make mistakes, we believe things that end up being false, and we do things that we (or the rest of society) will regret later. As such, advocating that opinions other than the current prevailing set should be suppressed is a dangerous game to play. I know that like most of the people advocating it are doing so out of a desire to see the world become a better place. But since we've been wrong before about what "a better place" looks like, we should exercise utmost caution in telling others to be silent about their own views.
Note that it says he's leaving Mozilla. That was the part missing from the Mozilla blog post, I believe.
Looks very cool to me, but it may be a bit daunting for people who know less about cryptocurrencies. The issue at hand for me is that most of us want to get "normal" people involved with cryptocurrencies. I'm very interested in the impedance mismatch between the giver and the taker.
Eich steps down
This is my favourite:

// remove more clutter
#define O printf
#define R return
#define Z static

...

Removes clutter indeed... :)
> we observed a unique combination of circumstances that caused us to
> question whether the Nest Wave could be unintentionally activated.

You think that counts as "spelling out specific issues"? That is not very transparent to me. Compare Nest's "specifics" with cperciva's response to a security bug in tarsnap:

http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2011-01-18-tarsnap-critical-...
I agree with your sentiment, and I'm not being facetious when I say the answer is "a single human being who can be held up as the enemy." The government seems to be protected in this scandal by its very ubiquity and pervasiveness. There is no one we can force to step down, no building we can shutter, no single computer we can turn off that will restore our privacy.
I think it's simply a branding issue. "gfycat" is a catchier name which also hints at the GIF-related features. I have a pretty good idea of what it does from the name alone. "MediaCrush" on the other hand could be just about anything.
The concept of Socialism presupposes a powerful state.

Both communism and basic income include the notion of income distribution as an antidote to strong government controls.

I agree there's nothing inherently "bad" about these ideas, I just wish we wouldn't invent new terms for old ideas, just because the older terms have gotten a (perhaps undeservedly) bad reputation.
Right now there's an HN front-page story on this from NYTimes. I don't think anyone's burying the story, except from individual users flagging it or because of points-to-comments ratio being too low (flame detector).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7527690

It currently has 3 points and is position 29. Recency of votes also counts for a lot.
To whom?

I'm disagreeing with Brendan on that opinion. That was $1000 - and I was thinking about donating an equivalent amount to the other cause before I learned I'm way too late. But having him step down? Now, we can have our - even good - corporations run by moral people - scratch that: by people whose most important virtue is morality. That could be good. Good for everybody. But I'm not so sure - so I'd hesitate to demand Brendan to step down.

Because he has quite a talent to be useful in other important places.

Or, alternatively - what would you think about my original question? Should we closely scrutinize executives on their beliefs across the whole spectrum? I suspect there are other important issues, besides LGBT opinions.
I dunno. This seems to be an example of libertarian philosophy actually working. That is, public outcry produced a morality-motivated backlash prompting actual consequences.

That's how it's supposed to work, isn't it? If a widget-maker is a bigot, there's supposed to be a boycott while everyone moves over to his competitor so that the bigot goes out of business, right?

I agree that this shouldn't have been a controversy to begin with (though a conciliatory move in reaction to public outrage is hardly unreasonable), but isn't this a victory for libertarianism?
That's as bad as the people calling for the boycott if Eich remained at the helm. Mozilla is more than just the CEO.
No, Eich's $1000 didn't singlehandedly determine a law. It's peanuts. It's nothing. On the other hand, this witch hunt did singlehandedly disenfranchise him of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of employment.

There is no comparison.
Transcoding videos is very, very expensive.
And you're pinning this on Christians, which is also idiotic. First, I could introduce you to more than a handful of non-christians that do not support gay marriage. Second, take a look at other countries, specially theocracies, see how they treat gays.
The Darwin Streaming Server for one. There's also the Apple Lossless Codec. Plus, they're heavily involved in work on LLVM and have been for quite some time. Lastly, There's Grand Central Dispatch (libdispatch). Plus, WebKit is quite far from it's KHTML roots.
Implantes Dentários em Portugal
Seems like a cool site but from anyone in NZ, the name doesn't seem fitting.

The word 'Kiwi' in a brand name is almost exclusively used by the Asian population here. Eg. Cheesy souvenir shops and Chinese takeaway shops.

http://www.skykiwi.com/ is a good example.

Just a heads up for anyone wants to put 'kiwi' in their brand name and wants to target New Zealand.

PS. We call the fruit Kiwifruit here, not just Kiwi by itself.
I don't think multinationals like Microsoft or Google would be too concerned if they were to pick up one of the top programmers in the world for a, presumably, a non-CEO position.
Right - but neither of us have the final authority on what's wrong and what's right. In this situation both sides believe they are right, and then it becomes a matter of who has the power to inflict censure on someone else for their beliefs. In which case, if you were in such a situation, and therefore less powerful than your superiors who believe the opposite of you, wouldn't you want protection from being removed from your job and livelihood simply because you happened to believe something that went against the grain?

If we mete out harsh punishment to people who don't toe the line people become afraid to speak and debate. If we are truly right then our idea will be proven right only through rational argument and rigorous debate. We should be doing everything possible to foster such an atmosphere, and that means sometimes tolerating beliefs that we don't agree with.
I doubt any company is chomping at the bit to hire Eich after this fiasco, regardless of his technical competencies.
Yes, most states encourage you to take work, even temporary work. A contract job won't require you to stop it and start it, you just "skip" a week.

Last time I was on UI, it didn't actually last for X weeks, it lasted for Y dollars, and if you earned more than a certain threshold in a given week, they would reduce your payout that week by 50% of the amount you went over that threshold. So one week of high earnings would, in effect, mean you get $0 that week but give you an "extra" week at the end.
I like almost all of her icons, but I can't stand the command icon. It doesn't obviously relate to its meaning and its difficult to describe in words to someone else. It causes so much confusion. I can see why Jobs didn't want to use the Apple icon any more, but I can't think of an icon I dislike more than what they replaced it with.
'Silicon Valley' review
Ok. Sorry. We'll all use the exact right level of rhetoric from now on.
And ... the users. They thought they had the company swung; but there were boycotts and actually-disgusted end users happening.
Nope. Just checked, and it silently takes you to the regular login page.

Poor form, OKC.
Should we update the Bill? Heck, should we join Lessig's efforts - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Constitution_of_the_Uni... ?
Which we only know of because someone leaked the information to a pro-gay marriage group illegally.
I thought I was crazy when I popped in to check something earlier. Bolds look a bit lopsided, especially at small sizes. But it's probably a positive change overall.
Font is messed up on Chrome/Windows
Better, why compete? Just wrap him! Put up a better marketing site, sell packages, and pass the actual traffic back to Colin's servers. Volia!
> At the IPO price, it will debut at a valuation of about $2 billion, or almost 15 times last year’s revenue.

Can someone with a classic financial finance background answer this: why do analysts take revenue * multipliers for valuations? Aren't most valuations based on EBITDA * multipliers? Is this just an odd side effect of the numerous tech companies without EBITDA?
The Google support person may not be fully informed, but they are provably incorrect in that claim.

Simply put, Google used to offer the ability to include/exclude devices based on desktop/tablet/mobile device types. Additionally, they offer the ability in their device segment reports in the AdWords UI to see what device did what. They have the data.

When Enhanced Campaigns were launched in the not so distant past, there was a large uproar from the paid search community (of which I consider myself apart of given my search agency background). It was very much a sense of them forcing mobile traffic despite our wishes and the negative bid modifier for mobile was something we had to push them on.

At the time, Google took the stance that tablet traffic/usage was largely indistinguishable from desktop traffic, so it shouldn't be a problem to blend those. Anyone with half a clue in this field could point out several reasons why that was false, but we were unsuccessful in getting that changed.

There have been a few changes to AdWords targeting and settings in the past couple of years that were pretty large steps back for savvy advertisers, and this was one of them.
Mozilla, on the other hand, is an organization that is meant to protect people from oppression.

What are you talking about? The Mozilla Manifesto says nothing about 'protect' or 'oppression', 'rights', 'civil', 'diversity', 'discrimination', 'orientation' (sexual or otherwise), or 'marriage'.

All but one of their stated principles are about 'the Internet'. Number 8 is about 'transparency promoting participation', which seems to have not worked out so well for the inventor of Javascript.

http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/
Which basics are you referring to?
>>As soon as you bring a third party dependency, game over.

There are tons of 3 party libraries written in pure platform portable Go that will cause you no issues. In fact the vast majority of 3rd party Go libraries are just as portable as the stdlib.
Facebook Explores Anonymity Features
Square tool lets local merchants drill down into sales data
No, we know it because it was a political donation that had to be recorded publicly by law, with the name of his employer.

Where did you get this claim that "someone leaked the information to a pro-gay marriage group illegally"?
Guardian Awarded IRE Medal for NSA files Investigative Reporting
Did they make the source data available? It's only about 40 companies, right? Should be pretty easy to show us the details.
The same right to marriage that people are rallying under is a subset of the right to privacy (that's not specifically mentioned, but extended by the supreme court).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_rights
, z
No, he made a public donation publicly, the public bit being required by law.
MS Office for Mac is pretty well done IMHO
... and what does it mean for our organizations that we select for leadership only from those who have never held a now-controversial opinion?
I additionally went through a twitter warning before I got to the bit.ly warning
Eich resignation as Mozilla CEO as messy as his appointment
How about immigration opinion? Animal rights opinion? Climate change opinion? Political views?

- "Political views" is too vague to comment on.

- Immigration opinion is absolutely grounds for changing a CEO - it affects groups of people, potentially both employees and customers of any company. If the CEOs views affects them sufficiently negatively, this should surely be addressed?

- Animal rights - possibly , particularly if the company's role is animal-related.

- Climate change - as above.

All the above might not apply to a company / CEO that is not as directly "public-facing" as Mozilla, but generally for any company with a widespread reputation to uphold and an outspoken employee base, then absolutely any of the items you listed could be grounds for change.
Well, I certainly can't speak for the startup community, as I'm more strongly affiliated with the screwup community myself. ;) But no, I'm certainly not dismissing MS's new direction: it seems to be fairly genuine, and (some lingering patent/EEE concerns aside) good news, just as IBM's support (in various ways) for Linux or Sun's eventual open-sourcing of Java were good news. I'm all in favour of a kinder and gentler MS (as far as it goes and as long as it lasts). And I'm certainly not singling them out either, as the list of comparisons shows.
It's funny how the newspaper that reported on the stories gets a medal, and the guy who leaked the information is sent to Siberia.
If Mozilla appointed, say, a KKK Grand Wizard to the post of CEO, that would definitely be relevant. First, because every non-white person would immediately have rational cause to fear discrimination. Second, because every anti-racist employee, partner, and donor would have incentive to reevaluate their willingness to help Mozilla along. And third, it would be an enormous PR nightmare, an unending distraction from Mozilla's actual work.

All companies are human institutions. And nonprofits basically all make a deal with their employees: You may not get paid as much, but you'll be doing something you believe in. It's immensely powerful, but it does mean you have to keep it a place that people can believe in.
Darwin was based on NeXT, which as far as I can recall, wasn't open source before Apple opened it. While a number of the userland tools were (and are) open source, I don't recall the kernel being open.

There's also things like the streaming server which as far as I can tell was strictly an Apple project. I think libdispatch was also strictly an Apple project.
You make it sound like he held a press conference. All donations are public by law, sure, but he made the donation as a private citizen.
The solution to his network problem is probably something bizarre, like URbit (http://www.urbit.org/).
Anecdotally, I've only heard a lot of people complain. Comparing this to a witch hunt appears pretty absurd. Nobody is physically attacking him for what he believes.

Free speech is a 2 way street. I can disagree with him and express that, just as he can express his own views. Free speech is not expressing an opinion with everyone else shutting up about it. Why is this so hard to understand?

Edit: The more I read your comments, the more ridiculous you sound. People protest and boycott things all the time. Why is this any different? If he can't handle public outcry to his own actions, well, that's his problem, not mine.
It's sad that for "change" to happen, it often requires someone to hate.
When AES(☢) = ☠ – a crypto-binary magic trick
I think they are. Most of the search results I'm seeing are only up until a minute ago.
Can't you get the .com domain? Every time I see your site being mentioned I avoid using it because of the domain name for some reason. It just sounds weird and not too legit.

How do you even say it out loud? "It's Media C R U dot S H. Mediacrush, get it?" :-). Then again, Imgur isn't much better...
To be fair, trade between European countries has increased by orders of magnitude since WW1, and that remains true even after you account for general economic growth.
I think Startups doing impressive things at scale will help with this. For example, Whatsapp serving 500M people with code written/maintained by <50 engineers is an impressive story. What did they do differently? The post-hoc stories about success rarely discuss the leverage achieved due to the technology choices.
If You're Against Gay Marriage, You're a Bad CEO
I personally think it's sad that he's leaving

But I do have to say I think Brandon handled that really well and its definitely the right thing to do.

He had to step down eventually from mozilla to avoid further damage to the brand.

I think it's good he realized that and takes on new challenges.
I think you're wrong there. He'll be unemployed not one second longer than he wants to be.
I'd check the gay marriage positions of say... Yandex or TenCent.
Nah, sounds a little controversial to me.

1) "opinion on gay marriage is a political view"
2) "Companies shouldn't stray into the realm of political opinion because their employees do not have homogenous political views."

Employees may have - even strong - opinions against gay marriage. But they can't be homogenous?.. So they shouldn't be considered? Or being "particularly contentions (because)" makes them exempt?

Looks like a really complicated subject, don't you think?
I am not a Twitter user. Can anyone explain what I'm looking at here? The outcome of malicious Javascript?
Whoever's downvoting you should be ashamed. The exact effect of Prop 8 was to strip marriage rights from people. And part of why it worked (until struck down in federal court as the civil rights violation its opponents always knew it to be) is the well-funded campaign in favor of it.
The irony of this happening in SV where everything is a supposed "meritocracy" :)
Isn't WebKit a fork of GPLv2 code?
Wrong.

Gerald Combs is the creator of Ethereal/Wireshark: https://www.wireshark.org/about.html
Why do you mentor?
a. To Pay it forward

b. An early opportunity to invest

c. You like to learn what's new and what people are working on

d. All of the above

e. Other? Please list
The title is flamebait, but this part rings true for me:

"Think for a second: If you knew your boss rated you undeserving of the same rights as everyone else based solely on your sexual orientation, would you feel good about going to work for him every day? Would you be reassured when he insisted he wouldn’t treat you any differently in the workplace just because he felt the Constitution ought to be amended to discriminate against people like you?"
Here's a graphical look:
http://blog.datarank.com/recent-twitter-spam-behavior-quanti...

Appears to have started on March 31st and has affected > 100K Tweets. It also appears to run between the hours of 2PM and 10PM PST, peaking at 7PM each day.
> their personal, not work related, opinions.

How do you know it's purely personal?

He clearly doesn't agree that homosexual people should be afforded the same legal rights and societal status as heterosexual people in their personal lives.

It's safer to assume that he would have negativity towards homosexuals in the workplace, e.g. look down upon them due to 'lifestyle choice' or some other bigoted nonsense, than to assume that once he's at work all of his prejudices are put to one side.

Chauvinists and racists rarely, if ever, leave their prejudices at home, so why would homophobes?

> If you don't like someone's opinions on civil rights, fight them in the court of public opinion and/or voting.

That's almost exactly what has happened, yet you call it 'lynching'.

'Public opinion' has forced him to step down before people 'voted' by not using/contributing to Mozilla products.

Nobody has denied him the right to hold his opinion, he's free to carry on doing so, however people have questioned his ability to not discriminate against people in his role at Mozilla, due in large part to fact that he has actively supported discrimination against people in the past based upon their sexuality.
Take a look at MrGrim's posting history for yourself.

http://www.reddit.com/user/MrGrim

It's not 100% imgur anymore, but he's well over 10%.

It turns out having Reddit be a secret investor in your company gives you all kinds of leeway.