skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
rm -rf after 14 days is a bit severe. There is a middle ground where you deny access to the service, but don't delete the data. Note that this is a timeline not set by the customer's "delete if you haven't heard from me by X", but by a billing system set up around unpredictable costings.

Besides, even the truly paranoid don't know when they're going to lose access to emails for two weeks. Sudden hospitalisation? Travelling in an internet poor area, and your hotel that promised access was 'down'? Temporary incarceration for something you never did? Death of a loved one that puts you out of your normal life procedures? Or just fat-fingering a command because you're human, and missing out on the email from an accidental bulk delete (or similar). Perhaps change it to an opt-in for the truly paranoid: "If you're uncontactable for two weeks and our billing system decides you're out, delete my data rather than merely revoke access".

After all, if you're really after a 'dead-man switch', then that should be a feature on it's own, not something to do with billing. "If I haven't logged in for -foo- weeks, delete my data". That's clearly a dead-man switch, not a proxy analogue conducted via "we've consumed what's left on your account". Plus the user could set the number of weeks, rather than just "some unpredictable future time".
If so, I have absolutely no clue what the point was. He referred to Wirth's Law, but the way to make software faster as the hardware gets faster is to abandon the idea of individual unboxed numbers, and move to vectors, as that's what the hardware is using.

R, like APL, is much better in its intended domain for being a vector-based language rather than a scalar based language.

If the application domain is a scalar based domain, then R is probably the wrong tool for the job. If somebody doesn't understand the cases where vector-based language is better, they've probably never encountered the right application domain for R.
> Everyone has equal access. Every person is allowed to marry one other person of a different sex.

Which discriminates by sex the same way that "every person is allowed to marry one person of the same race" discriminates by race.

> I'm more in favor with getting rid of marriage privileges all together... why burden single people?

How does the option to marry burden people who choose not to exercise that option?
> Watch how its attempt at lexical scope combines with lazy evaluation for ridiculous fun.

qplot(hp, mpg, data=subset(mtcars, mpg<30),
shape=as.factor(cyl),
color=am,
facets=gear~cyl)

vs

mtbadcars <- subset(mtcars, mtcars$mpg<30)
qplot(mtbadcars$hp, mtbadcars$mpg,
shape=as.factor(mtbadcars$cyl),
color= mtbadcars$am,
facets=(mtbadcars$gear)~(mtbadcars$cyl))

Why thanks, I do find it ridiculously fun to use short, readable names while maintaining encapsulation so that I can 1) keep multiple versions of a dataset around 2) not prefix every reference to a column in the dataset with the dataset name, cluttering the argument list and requiring 20 replacements or a kludgy temporary variable every time I want to plot a different subset.

Oh wait, you were trying to convince me that was a bad thing?
I like Elastic Tarsnap. That appeals to me, I think it probably appeals to everyone who does like the current pricing model, and it's pretty easy for businesses to ignore.
See also the thread for the official announcement from Mozilla:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7525198
It's not ridiculous. Actions have consequences. A consequence of his action is that he was unable to perform the duties necessary for CEO of Mozilla.

Freedom of expression has never meant freedom from the consequences of your expression. Why don't people understand this?
Transpermia seems like a theory rather than a fact. While I think you're probably correct, it's better to be ultra-conservative on questions like this.
Did you know about the CANCER ACT 1939?
Except, you have to get one of the existing ones to clearly win, or else you end up here:
https://xkcd.com/927/
I still can't imagine how you expect this to ever have gone. "Well, those other people are fighting to take away something important to us, so I guess we'll just quietly smile and nod"? I hardly expect anyone whose way of life is at stake to go peacefully, no matter how wrong that way of life may be.

Not so fast. Rabbling at a village gathering is surely the most ancient form of protest. :)

But you're dropping a lot of context here. This wasn't just some dude with some job holding some opinion. He acted to enforce his opinion on others, then became CEO of a company whose entire schtick is to not do that sort of thing.

That nobody has come out in support of Eich's opinion is exactly why he's unfit to be CEO: Mozilla believes in some things, the people who care deeply about Mozilla also believe in those things, and Eich actively opposed those things. He represents the company, and he has a known history of acting against what the company is supposed to stand for.

If it turned out Ballmer had donated to prop 8, would there be nearly this outrage? I seriously doubt it; I would still call him something uncomplimentary on Twitter, but it's not like I have any existing philosophical expectations of either him or Microsoft. People called Eich a dick two years ago, but nobody expected him to quit his job.
Group By in Plain Ruby
It would be nice to see a list of the airports in question (not that I have any doubt about the awfulness of US airports, having been a twice-a-week-traveling-consultant for 2+ years).

LaGuardia would be my personal nominee for US Airport Hell, but I'm sure there are others...
But sometimes treating symptoms is the only usable treatment. There is a big difference between someone "self medicating" with a drug with high abuse potential, and falling into addiction and a controlled dose in a therapeutic setting where (as the article stated) the benefits far outlasted the high.
Why Money Isn't Always Your Biggest Problem
Same problem on FF ESR 24.4.0
This is why I don't think the flamewar penalizer on Hacker News makes much sense (or it should at least be turned off for stuff that is "big news").

This news item is going to keep getting submitted as every time zone comes around to it.. voted up, huge argument, kicked off the front page despite hundreds of votes and then the loop begins again. It's better to just have the one initial thread with all the noise, no?
Gay marriage opinion is the grounds for changing CEO. How about immigration opinion? Animal rights opinion? Climate change opinion? Political views?
The new cloud face of Satya Nadella's Microsoft
The effect is probably bigger when you see it in the reduced size.
> Freedom of expression has never meant freedom from the consequences of your expression

That's awesome and I've never heard that said before. If you don't mind, I'm going to steal that one.
How I Manage Multi Million Dollar Companies With Ruthless Optimization
You don't need any fuel to start a safe descent, except for a tiny amount for course corrections. The atmosphere does all the work.
From what I can find out from online sources, Socrates was able to "retire" from working as a stonemason at a fairly young age, and to spend basically all his time talking about philosophy. So yes, he certainly was not destitute. I didn't mean to imply that he was, only that, as a member of the Athenian class of "free persons", his existence was supported largely by the labor of many slaves, and I am not aware that he ever questioned whether the slaves were OK with that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but blacklisting was done by the government. It wasn't just some business owners that decides they weren't going to hire non-communists. Big difference.
> He never expressed "bigotry publicly". He privately backed a cause he believed in (right or wrong) with a donation.

Political donations (at least, of the size Eich made) are public, otherwise, this would never have been an issue.
> Even without compression and data duplication, very few people have a good understanding of how much data they have at any given time, because machines measure data in bytes but people measure data in abstractions.

I have to beg to differ, as I know this value for where I work. Sure, don't know it to a byte, but I know enough digits * price per GiB/month = reasonable estimate of cost. (And I know the before and after compression.)

Of course, his real point is:

> different bytes have sharply different values associated with them

This is true. However, I don't think that I should be charged by the value of my byte, ever. This is something I despise ISPs for, in that they forbid you to run servers, because what? those bytes have a different flavor?

Same thing here: some bytes are more valuable that others, but I want to be charged by the level of service you're giving me per byte. If you're giving my really-valuable bytes and my not-so-valuable bytes the same service, I expect the same price. If there's a service difference, show me that, and show me the difference in cost for you to provide a different level of service.

Of course, I think he gets this, because if you read he suggested tiers of service, they not only scale up the available storage, but also other things, like "Custom legal / compliance documentation". Different service -> different price.
Luckily my timeline was not affected.

However, I wonder, shouldn't Twitter be able to pick these messages up automatically fairly fast, after (I assume) hundreds if not thousands of users have flagged them?

Also, the spammers can't have unlimited IP's. Twitters anti spam kinda seems to lag back behind E-Mail (subjectively).

Is there a reason the same techniques used in E-Mail aren't applicable to Twitter?
Done https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook/commit/55d9bfbf1833376d...
And Erich Gamma moved to MS three years ago...
Domain for servers, which one you would choose?
Hello there, I have a site which uses a .com domain, and I want to contract a server for its external services.

I don't know what domain I have to use.

Supposing my domain is: google.com, is it better to use google.net or googleservers.com?

Thanks in advance.
Half a CEO's job is being a spokesman, representing the organization, and in Mozilla's place, representing the surrounding community.
Would you say the same of people who hold opinions you've always thought were immoral? Do you respect the current remaining members of the KKK for sticking to their guns?
> California courts had already ruled that same-sex marriages were valid under the California constitution [...]

Actually, it was the other way around. They had ruled that prohibiting same-sex marriage was invalid under the California constitution.
That's true. Still doesn't mean you should optimize for CTR when you're really interested in conversions. But I do see your point that in some cases - especially when starting a new campaign on a tight budget, it would be useful to manually target the campaign with more precision (including tablets vs desktop control and more obvious control for apps). Ideally, Google would allow people to start optimizing for conversions from the beginning, but I guess their algorithms have to start with something (clicks being the most abundant form of response data).

As for the desktop-only or tablet-only app, I'd still rather let that work itself out with conversion optimization (given that download conversions can be tracked effectively) rather than assuming my conversions are going to come through a certain channel. It comes down to the idea of making marketing decisions based on real data rather than what we're "sure" is best.

It just sounds like many people don't bother setting up conversion optimization out of ignorance - they think Google is somehow doing this app/game placement just to try and steal people's money, when really it's just a natural consequence of the CTR optimization. In the case of Aha!, it appears that most of the "wasted" money was spent before even realizing what was going on - and once they did figure it out, they apparently found the way exclude mobile apps without too much trouble (though I'd agree Google should make it easier).
I'm sure your startup will work hard to make sure this never happens to you. If this is how the world is, then what are your plans?
He could have made his donation anonymously, but instead, he chose to do it publicly. His stance against gay people is now a part of his public identity. That was a conscious decision on his part.

One of a CEO's duties is PR, and if you're a PR disaster, then you cannot discharge your duty effectively. That is certainly a valid criteria for employment.
Let's take the opposite case. Let's say you were working for a bunch of people who believed wholeheartedly what Eich believes- that same-sex individuals don't have a right to marry - but you expressed that you think they do have a right to marry. Do you think it would be acceptable for them to fire you based on this private belief simply because they disagreed with it? Take this question completely apart from the question of whether or not our belief is correct and theirs is wrong.

What is the limit to the consequences that can be meted out because of your free expression?
One man can't be CEO because other people complained on the Internet. A great many people temporarily couldn't get married because that one man paid good money to make it so.

And your sympathies lie with the poor persecuted CEO. Won't someone think of the rich white guy for once?
If free speech "cuts", then it's not free speech.

Free speech cutting both ways should only mean both parties are allowed to say whatever they like -- and the majority/plurality of the people decide democratically which way to go about it and who they agree with.

If an unpopular speech means you get fired, then it's not free at all. It's "be careful what you say or bad things can happen to you" -speech.

All dictatorships and all opressive regimes have such mockery of "free speech". Heck, even burning Giordano Bruno can be considered an example of "free speech" that "cuts both ways" in this logic.

(Not to mention that he didn't publicly voice an opinion in the first place. He privately backed against a bill -which was his democratic right to do- and the name of the backers was leaked).
Civil liberties. That's what all this is about. And he used his money to take civil liberties away from a group of people. That was a mistake. A costly one.
Of course we can, we do it all the time. What are you defining as "morality that we can't legislate?"
We have just had an article on here about Susan Kare - icon designer extraordinaire.

I guess that when Facebook picked up the phone they didn't bother getting her to do a new 'like' icon or whatever it was they needed using their tools in their special dev environment with their special workflow.

They probably noticed that her other work had done quite well and thought they might as well chance it with her. They probably hired her without her drawing one pixel for them. Her competency was not in doubt.

This cumbersome audition process people want to put you through might work well for someone fresh out of college that has no portfolio of work, however, for those of us with work that is live and on the internets, isn't that, with a few code samples, good enough?
I agree that this is not a matter of freedom of expression, but your generic blanket argument for "consequences" also defends lynching as a valid means to impose one's views.
Yelp Reviews Brew a Fight Over Free Speech vs. Fairness
The bit.ly link is marked as spam and shows a warning, and then the shortened link doesn't load at all. The spammer failed :P
>Sorry, you're just wrong. There is no language in prop 8 that has to do with the concept of civil unions.

Let me start by saying that I find both scenarios (pro-civil union/anti gay marriage and plain old anti gay marriage) equally reprehensible, but your logic is flawed. I'm an atheist married to a young-earth Christian, so I get to hang out with quite a few other young-earth Christians. The logic behind prop 8 is that if you clearly define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, with no exceptions, then you are leaving homosexuals with no other alternative than to form some kind of alternate terminology, such as the civil union. You have to look at the entire situation outside the context of the actual proposition, such as the views that Christians are openly expressing outside of the legislative process. There are Christians that are 100% against allowing homosexuals to form any sort of a bond with one another, but there is still a significant percentage that would be somewhat OK with a 'civil union.' There's no way to tell which view Mozilla's former CEO held without talking to him.

Like I said, I disagree with him either way, but its disingenuous for you to pretend that you know exactly what he's thinking.
Russian and Brazilian Hackers Discover Facebook's Biggest Holes
> He could have made his donation anonymously

Well, ignoring campaign finance laws...
It's amazing how there are many life lessons that aviation and flight school can teach an individual. The transferable skill-set in entrepreneurship and aviation in terms of staying alive are quite impressive, from launch, flight, and landings.
Again, this is not a "political belief". Actively, and I say actively because he donated money for his cause, denying a group of people rights because you disagree with their lifestyle is bigoted.

We wouldn't call it a political view if he was donating to groups trying to remove rights from other minorities, yet it seems ok when talking about LGBT rights and specifically the right to marry.
A deeper look at Turkey Twitter and YouTube, and Google DNS IPs sprayed as graffiti
Patrick actually answers this point. The shorter is that while people are free to spend as they please to charities, businesses usually don't. He goes on to note that businesses have very different value structures. This means that while I may consider a hundred buck real money, an enterprise business very likely will not. The final bit is that businesses value some things disproportionately highly compared to the trivial cost of it. There are plenty of reasons for this that he makes clear.

But that value is for that service, not a charity. It will never get redirected otherwise. So getting a business to happily pay a large sum for a cheap service is a fantastic way to ensure you now have the money to donate, and likely an order of magnitude more.

This is also the reason he says to charge $500 a month, but to give away the service to them that need it. Because the business is effectively subsidizing the needy here, while itself provably working in it's own interest. This is pretty win-win if anything.
Sentry: https://getsentry.com/welcome/

It is good.

Easy to deploy internally. Python server, client libs for basically everything, plugins to chat apps, issue trackers, you name it: https://github.com/getsentry/sentry

The JS reporting supports source maps too.
NSA has better things to do than read your email
The NSA has better things to do than read your email
Sorry but I have to agree with this. If the purpose of the role is to be the CEO of a company dedicated to open source software then his religion, personal beliefs, and his lifestyle choices should have no bearing on being a CEO. That includes both people who are for AND against gay marriage. We aren't supposed to discriminate on any front when hiring someone so what makes this different?
The Guilt of the Video-Game Millionaires
No, but the difficulty with which your personal viewpoint can be adopted is not (nor should not) be the benchmark of his responsibilities as Mozilla's CEO, which is what he is there for.
If Mozilla hires someone as figurehead/CEO who is incredibly divisive for any reason, and public outcry is sufficient to impair its actual mission, then they might have that CEO step down to avoid the firestorm.

Rather than becoming "the anti-gay rights company which courageously stood on its anti-gay rights principles".

Publishing Nazi tracts might be protected by the First Amendment, but you can't compel it to be protected from social disapproval.
Findings of the Social Progress Index 2014
The problem is that support for Prop 8 has been misrepresented as "hate" of gays, and that gullible young people have been tricked to support the gay agenda in the first place, and also to believe anyone who disagrees with that agenda is a "reprehensible bigot".

If "gay rights" are really so self-evident, let's confront the haters and explain in a clear, concise manner why their beliefs are invalid. The thing is that reasonable people disagree, and shouldn't be shamed for that disagreement.

Pro-gay activists have gotten all progress by bullying opponents and teaching people that anyone who dares to question them is automatically a "reprehensible bigot", and foolish children have been flattered into accepting this patently ridiculous line of thought.
.com beats .net
I think Eich is a bigot and I'm glad he stepped down. I don't see how someone can be against gay marriage and not have a problem with homosexuality in general.

How does one go about changing their views? They just wake up one day they're like "hmmm.. I just don't hate gays anymore"? Most of the reformed racists and other bigots I've heard about have become that way because something happened, maybe a family member came out or a black dude helped them jump start their car or something stupid like that.

Your comments read just like the people that claim homosexuality is a choice and gays should just choose to not be gay.
Most modern Catholics are ignorant to all the suffering their religion has caused. As are most people of all religions, otherwise they would abandon it.
What are some of the other "hundreds" of examples that come to mind?
That's fairly incorrect. Wallets are not a single address, nor to they need to be known by the network to be sent to. Address creation happens completely offline.
That is very true. I have one of those older CO detectors and the instructions say it should be about a half a foot from the floor. I have no idea why the Nest CO detector wants it mounted 10 feet from the floor. Seems useless.
i have been getting tired of all interface complications on youtube, I think this would be a welcome place for interesting and funny videos - old you tube style. number of things I have too look at and click to get to my channels is slowly growing which is pita.

Although I tried using imgur a few times, I could not upload images a number of times, subjectively I don't know how they get that much money for such service... bubble is it?
Box CEO: NSA bad for business.
Hardly. There's an enormous difference between publicly ostracizing someone for holding beliefs or a political position that you disagree with and oppression. But there's leagues of distance between using speech and private choices (like whom to do business with) on the one hand and using the machinery of the government to deny people rights and to harass them at every turn.

For example, the KKK is horrendously ostracized in this country. And I think that's OK. But while they might be ostracized, KKK members still enjoy their rights, they still have the opportunity for free speech. And I think that's important too. I wouldn't equate the ostracization of open racism with McCarthyism and I don't think most folks would either.

The lesson from the McCarthyism scare isn't that ostracizing people for their beliefs is wrong. That's a valuable, even essential, function of society and an important aspect of free expression. Although we should definitely be careful in its use. The lesson is that hounding people for mostly private activities or activities in their past is wrong, and conducting public witch-hunts using the power of the government where the flimsiest of evidence is allowed to decide someone's fate is also wrong.
Introducing the Tuvi programming language for kids