skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you work hard for your boss they laugh their way to the bank paying you the same flat salary and pocketing the profits of your labors.

To get there eventually (sadly?) you have to plan to get out from under others siphoning your productivity like that. Because the modern corporate culture has shifted to taking advantage of the best, rather than empowering them. Mostly because there is a surplus of (skilled) labor in most industries. If there wasn't, your boss would be treating you better because you are a scarce resource they don't want to lose because its either expensive or time consuming to replace.

And like the article says, "working hard" isn't invaluable.
It is related in that there has never been a release of OpenSSL that was secure. Not one. Ever.

The known vulnerabilities list for OpenSSL has never had a release that didn't have a flaw that allowed some amount of "backdooring", Dataextraction, or data manipulation. (as opposed to just a path for a DoS attack)

>Don't make things up -

I don't have to make things up. The CIA and FBI keep a list of known vulnerabilities, publicly and not publicly documented. They use this information for doing investigations. I have personally run in to issues where I was contacted by FBI because we had created fixes for our deployments and they contacted us to "unfix" them, because their warrants were "no knock" and they didn't wish to tell us who they were attempting to do surveillance on.

Feel free to Google me (Brandon Wirtz) if you need some background on my credentials in the security space.

But thanks for jumping to I make stuff up. The mis-information that is out there is that OpenSSL has ever been secure.

I'm more sad nobody beyond XKCD did a good job explaining how the bug works, or doing the demonstration I like where you bash on the server and do data alignment to show a couple of gigs worth of data from a single server. People aren't scared enough of this stuff.

All those people saying "change your passwords on every site", but nobody is creating a huge public list of which sites are currently not patched.

so >bad enough without misinformation

No. People are too complacent and the OpenSource community doesn't own up to the things they let slip by. The "smart" guys at CDN's and Banks, were never at risk because they use proxies that have extremely short "memory life" because data is streaming through rather than stored (by the time you could get a second value to do finger printing everything would have changed), and are running NSS, or Matrix or Polar.

Hearbleed is an issue because too many people are too complacent, too trustworthy, and too uninformed.
My idea was to cover 6 topics, which would be equivalent to a broad freshman and 1/2 sophomore math education:

* Set theory
* Linear algebra
* Geometry
* Real analysis
* Combinatorics
* Probability theory
Much to my dismay this is not true. By default debian is configured to `ignoreboth` ie dupes and spaces. Like you I also change the debian default for HISTCONTROL. Lines 11-13 of /etc/skel/.bashrc:[^1]

# don't put duplicate lines or lines starting with space in the history.
# See bash(1) for more options
HISTCONTROL=ignoreboth

[^1]: https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian/vie...

Provenance for /etc/skel/.bashrc:

dfc@ronin:~$ dlocate /etc/skel/
bash: /etc/skel/.bash_logout
bash: /etc/skel/.bashrc
bash: /etc/skel/.profile
dfc@ronin:~$ apt-cache showsrc bash |grep ^Vcs-
Vcs-Browser: https://code.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian
Vcs-Bzr: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian
The Heartbleed moods
That, in combination with the ~50% tax rate on income and capital gains. Turns out, when you redistribute wealth, consumption increases so rapidly that the economy takes off.

That no longer is much of an option, as wealthy individuals have not only managed to reduce capital gains to ridiculously low levels, but also diversified their holdings throughout the globe. This makes taxation a poor tactic, as capital will just flow to tax havens as the rate increases.

Turns out that feudalism is the natural state of man, and reprieves from it are quite temporary anomalies.

For those interested in details, Thomas Piketty's Capital is an excellent reference on the subject. Also, the movie Inequality for All is a far more approachable presentation based on the book.
It seems GS replaced license headers from files with their own license. Painting with broad brush strokes here, is stealing from a thief still stealing?
Why? What is the point of this?

Surely the point of a 'signup' is to create an account able to login into a webapp (or similar)

This appears to just capture the details into a database. There isnt even an API to allow users to login to do something (eg to access a hidden download page)

... so really its just a Form data capture tool, ala wufoo, used for surveys or petitions sort of thing. Not signups.
A moderation team catching a criminal act while it is happening is certainly not the same as storing everybody's IP address for up to 2 years so third parties can access it.
I third the recommendation on Axler's LADR.

I'd actually like to hear about alternatives to Rudin. My undergrad analysis class used it, but it's lack of diagrams was particularly bothersome. I'd spend an hour digesting a rat's nest of a paragraph only to discover that the underlying concept was simple enough that even a rough sketch ought to be able to get the gist of it across in seconds.
I was planning to structure my learning around linear algebra and real analysis, sort of like Harvard's Math 55 does.

Apart from that I wanted to expand on basic set theory, geometry, combinatorics and probability theory to have a well-rounded basic education.

My ultimate goal is to be able to digest advanced probability and statistics books.
Read the GPL carefully, very carefully...

An organisation counts the same as an individual, and as long as code stays within the organization that doesn't count as 'distribution', and Goldman Sachs is under no obligation to release the code. They even retain the rights to prevent the code being released.

It's easy to hate on Goldman Sachs for many things, but in this case they didn't violate the GPL, and Aleynikov did commit a crime.
upstart.com and pave.com are similar in concept to that.
I don't understand this bit about the DNI:

US master spy Clapper says spies steal open source, then immediately
claims ownership and classifies it, and prosecutes if the material is
disclosed, like Goldman Sachs.

What did Clapper do?
> So to people saying that Welch's advice was psychopathic bullshit, I say sucks to you. Grandpa worked 9-5 for Jack, was not a particularly ambitious man, and came out way ahead in return for his loyalty.

I'd have thought your grandfather was retired by the time Welch took over. In any case, Welch changed GE corporate culture away from what your grandfather would have been nostalgic about.
Not necessarily this app... but the technology to track you comes preinstalled in your device. The government already has access to hordes of information about your whereabouts and activities...

just take care to live your life so that you're never worth the trouble to dig through it.
I don't think he broke the law in any meaningful way; he merely did things that powerful people could portray as such.

I seriously doubt Goldman Sachs had any problem with him using/participating in non-secret open source as long as it was part of his work for them. Claiming this was stealing is sophistry - sure, he doesn't sound like a very clever (in the sense of cover-your-ass) guy, but if he'd have been open about what he did, there's no doubt that if he indeed was in anyway important to the company they would have OK's considerably more leeway if it contributed to their bottom line.

As is, they're simply abusing the lack of legal canny of their victim here. Which just goes to show - don't work for Goldman Sachs if you're smart - why take this kind of risk if you can get lots of other opportunities...
Yes but AGPL is rarely used, the vast majority of FOSS uses GPL or a less restrictive license...
It shouldn't be about it eventually being overwritten, sensitive information like that (which isn't needed for runtime) should be actively scrubbed before the block of memory is freed.

You can't, however, get away with not having the private key modulus in memory (in some form) all the time.
It would certainly make me think twice. I mean why risk jail time over a bit of petty cash?
"this" obviously means going public public about stopping the storage of data and deleting existing logs.

"shit" probably means retribution of some kind for exposing them as being part of the surveillance apparatus and not caring enough for privacy.
Doesn't the world already have enough war toys? Why not make something that actually helps mankind?
I disagree with you in part, but would rather not debate it online.
The Bitcoin Phenomenon
The GPL specifically states that using code within an organization is not distributing it. Further, if employees (or even contractors) are paid to modify the code, the organization retains all rights to it, not the employees nor contractors. It's even within Goldman Sach's rights to prevent the release of the code, as they didn't distribute it to 3rd parties.
> It was the big companies that severed the bond of trust

Because they had to. The original "bond of trust" was never about actual two-way loyalty; it was about the company bottom line. Companies used "bond of trust" rhetoric to lure employees in; they never actually meant it.

In the period following WWII, most industries in the US were growth industries: companies had to get and keep workers by hook or by crook, even if it meant giving them lavish compensation well beyond what their work would actually be worth in an equilibrium, non-growth market, because the alternative for the company was to lose all the growth business to their competitors, as people bought cars, refrigerators, etc. who had never had them before. (Pg talks about this in one of his essays: basically, companies like GE in the two decades or so after WW II were startups overpaying for labor to capture market share.)

By the 1970s and 1980s, much of that growth had stopped because most of the markets for the big US industries were reasonably saturated. Most people now had cars, refrigerators, etc., so those companies all had to shift from a growth market to a mature market where most business was from repeat customers wanting to upgrade their products, not new customers who had never had the product before. So the companies, in order to stay in business, had to drastically change the way they treated employees, since the costs of those employees were now a significant driver to their bottom line.

I'm not saying the companies were good and sweet and true; of course not. They broke a lot of long-standing employee agreements in the process of downsizing. I'm just saying that any employee who didn't see it coming from a mile away wasn't paying attention, and any employee who actually believed the company rhetoric about the "bond of trust" was living in a fool's paradise from the beginning.

> Jack could've given these guys profit-sharing, equity or other incentives to work for him.

He could have given some of them those incentives, yes. He could never have given all of them those incentives; there wasn't enough to go around. The plain fact was that companies like GE had too many employees for a mature market; there was simply not enough business any more to support all of them.

Again, that doesn't mean the way he did it was good. But if it took what he did then for employees to realize they couldn't depend on him, then again, those employees weren't paying attention; they should have known from the start that they couldn't depend on him, that if push came to shove he was going to do what was best for the company, not best for them. Any employee should always know that; that's what it means to be an employee.
Doesn't Apple's ToS prohibit writing apps in any language other than Objective-C? Or using other than Apple's tools?
Why not throw in a lot of other "evil" entities too. Soon, we'll have jslint's license!
This doesn't strike me as HN relevant, much less front page worthy. Am I nuts?
0) Don't work for Goldman Sachs.
Rule #5 of an Open Source license: "The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons."

http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
I am pretty sure this is a violation of one of the four freedoms, namely freedom 0:

The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
My recommendation is "One-Variable-Calculus with and introduction to Linear Algebra" by Tom M. Apostol, followed by "Mathematical Analysis". Both books form a great combination!
Lesson learned, don't ever work for Wall Street.
That's contrary to what I'd heard, but if it's in fact the case then that does change things a little.

Note that there is again a flagrant lie in the GC's writing there - "Mr. Clapper [...] focused his mind on the collection of the content of Americans’ communications. In that context, his answer was and is accurate." We know now that this is only close to true in any sense with the disingenuous and misleading definition of "collect" the NSA uses - which has no place in ordinary English and deserves no place in legal opinions. Of course, lying in a letter to the editor to the NY Times isn't a crime, but if the GC has no compunctions about wilfully misleading the reader I'm highly skeptical of their other claims.

It's more than a little odd that he wouldn't have looked at the questions in advance - he knew this was a public forum, in which providing the most correct information while not leaking anything seems an important part of his job, and is likely to take some care and forethought.

"Keep in mind that this was a program that everyone on the intelligence committee had already been briefed on. You could make the argument that he misled the American public, but not Congress."

Most of Congress is not on either intelligence committee. Whether misleading them is correct is a deeper discussion, but if the answer is "no" then I think it's fair to say he mislead Congress as well as the American public.

In any case, I agree that Wyden's approach here has been a little odd, though I at least appreciate the direction he's been pushing.
> It was not a lie at the time.

I'm not so sure. I think company executives in the boom years following WWII knew perfectly well that a time would come when the boom would be over, and those companies would have to start focusing more on labor costs and downsizing, reducing pay and benefits, etc. They just didn't see any need to tell the employees ahead of time that all that was coming at some point.

In other words, the company executives were never under any illusions that their "work all your career at our company and we'll take care of you" rhetoric was actually sustainable in the long term. Only employees had those illusions.

> It worked out just fine.

It sure worked out fine for Welch, yes. It didn't work out fine for a lot of his employees.
Oops, fixed! Thank you!
Ah but you cannot change the copyright of source to something else that you want, also I'm pretty sure you cannot distribute it to subsidiaries as I'm sure was done.
Oh look more value:

http://www.quora.com/Family/I-caught-my-younger-brother-watc...

http://www.quora.com/How-does-a-sixteen-year-old-get-a-girlf...

Look - I don't care if Quora wants to spam my inbox with link bait in order to generate AU and page views, but they could at least not try to take the high road and pretend to be anything more than the lowest common denominator, no-business-model, spam factory that they are.
I could walk into the heathrow terminal for edinburgh plonk down my card buy a ticket walk into the lounge have a quick pint and be on a plane to ediburgh within 15/20 min
You now know the two primes (p,q) which multiply together to make n (the public key modulus). We also know e (the public key exponent).

d (the private key) is:-

d = e^-1 mod ((p-1)(q-1))

To work this modular inverse out you use the extended Euclidean algorithm.

This is why you need to know the factorisation of n=(p*q). You can't compute d (the private key) with just the composite n.
I'd love to see John Perry Barlow... :)
GnuTLS does not use an acceptable license. Apache/BSD/MIT please. It's the only way you'll find it replacing OpenSSL everywhere.
You mean a truck that can cross a river, say, despite a damaged bridge, is not something that might help?
Depending on who you are, half a million dollars a year is not necessarily 'petty' cash. Also, people risk jail time over petty cash constantly in all walks of life.
I get the Little Spies Orwell parallel, and it does give me pause. What I don't have an answer to yet is: how is this fundamentally different than the police having a tip hotline?

I also really dislike OPs headline. It implies that they're doing something much more than they are.
I have essentially taught myself everything I know about analysis to suit my needs (and I'm probably worse off for it). I really wish there were a book like "Analysis from a computational perspective," which I suppose is just numerical analysis but I have yet to find any books that suit me in that topic either. That being said, something like Christianini's "Introduction to Support Vector Machines" has doubled as a synthesizing text on basic functional analysis for me. My recommendation, if you're comfortable with proofs that you would see in abstract algebra, is to jump right into baby Rudin or any other undergrad-level analysis text. I view them all pretty much the same.

Likewise I essentially learned all the probability theory and combinatorics I know from people and scraps, so I can't recommend a synthesizing text.

Undergraduate geometry can be a mess, so you should know what you're looking for. There are three kinds of undergraduate geometry classes: 1. Euclid's Elements (ugh), 2. The hyperbolic version of Euclid's Elements (meh), and 3. The "Erlangen Programme" style, which involves studying geometry via group theory and linear algebra. As you can probably tell, my recommendation is to study the last, because you already know group theory and with the other two you'll spend a lot of time wondering whether you can apply some basic obvious fact to prove some other basic obvious fact. The Erlangen style also allows you to describe projective and hyperbolic geometry via linear algebra (as well as the Euclid way), which is far more useful. See, for example, my post on projective geometry for elliptic curves [1]. I went through all three styles, but the last unfortunately had no textbook.

I'm not a huge fan of logic/set theory, but again the best treatment I can see for basic logic is to view it as algebra. In that vein, Halmos's "Logic as Algebra" was all I needed, and the prose is superb. This book does not contain any real set theory (say, about higher cardinals), but it's nice and short.

[1]: http://jeremykun.com/2014/02/16/elliptic-curves-as-algebraic...
tl:dr People who have never been addicted to anything and don't take the time to talk to addict to find out what is really going on are ignorant.

It's sad when people are witch hunted like this. Not taking the time to see what is really going on. Being ignorant and only focusing on one thing. My fiance is a recovering addict who happens to be on Suboxone. As controversial as it is, it still helps tremendously. Anyone who actually takes the time to talk to people like this will find themselves wrapped up in a very complex and interesting story. There are some who do heavy drugs and end up ruining their lives or worse, dying. However, there are a few who use, and have it completely under control. Based solely on this article, one can see that this man, Mr. Aaron, had/has his addiction under control and only wants to be left alone to handle it himself. But when it comes to addicts, most look down on them and see them as scum. Many believe addiction is a disease, and if that is the case, one wouldn't look down on someone with Aspergers. They would help.
You're supposed not to drink water from a plastic bottle which has been exposed for some time to the sun.
I don't get why it needs massive heavy tyres. Wouldn't it be better to have a mobile platform from where it lifted off from saving quite a bit of weight. I mean the wheels and suspension must way rather a lot. This is a supply unit.
I thought the same, but still had to give my two cents. Oh well.
To be fair, your idea of "terrible" luck basically means "having to switch jobs several times and making less than $250,000 as a 30 year old".

I mean, I get it: There are plenty of people who are less deserving than you that have been wildly, disproportionately successful. I can understand why you're envious. But don't kid yourself, most people would kill to have the supposedly miserable failure of a career that you've had.
Okay, so.

* misleading title. Goldman Sachs stole nothing.

* This guy steals code from Goldman Sachs.

* Covers his tracks. There is almost no reason why your password ever ends up in your bash history. If it does, you edit out only the password. Or you put a space before the command you run. At any rate, this guy should have known how to prevent his password from getting in the shell history and had no reason to delete his history.

* The guy talks to the cops

* Waves his rights to a lawyer

* Signs a confession

* Lets cops into his house without a search warrant.

* Doesn't testify at this trial.

This guy fully deserved what was coming to him. Goldman Sachs did nothing wrong here.
All the passwords you should change because of Heartbleed, in one handy graphic
I like to think our rejection of the metric system is because we are standing on principle and reject the semantic inconsistency that is the kilogram. Base measures should not be prefixed;)
HN takes an inordinate interest in health matters, physical and mental. This is pushing the envelope of relevance, though, yes. Your own mental state cannot be determined by your current correctness.
How is that you have become sure of these things?
Watch NASA simulate a Mars landing on Earth to test supersonic parachutes
After considering that some more, it seems like the court could (and maybe should) have ruled that it was simply a misunderstanding of the open-source code's license.

It seems like a waste of everyone's time to even pursue a case such as this after it's determined that the person didn't have malicious intentions.

Could the owner of the modified code successfully sue Goldman Sachs?
I think the idea is that it can drive quickly overland where it is smooth enough for wheels, but still have the multiple rotors to be able to go over things that it can't easily drive over
I think that the government should be liable for all reasonables damages caused by police investigations. Not just here, but in general - it's obvious the police use investigation as a form of blackmail at occasion, and that's just wrong. As part of a conviction, some of those damages might be voided to the degree the damage was necessary and proportional to the crime.

Also, from the point of view of efficiency in society, this is a particularly nasty cost since its borne not by those that cause it (the officers), nor by those hiring them (the government), nor is it ever accounted for as a loss. I think this encourages malpractice. Certainly if you observe how the police go about enforcing the law once they've decided somebody is guilty in their own eyes there doesn't seem to be any kind of restraint whatsoever. To the extent they can, they're single-party judge, jury and enforcement in one, exactly the kind of thing the idea of a justice system is supposed to prevent.