skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's so frustrating to me that this is all based around the stupid legal assumption that we have to stream everything.

God forbid your user should download something to watch later, to prevent having to redownload every time you watch it.

And then during peak Netflix hours, I just can't use the internet reliably.

If anyone knows any source for Libre video works, that I can download and watch with complete freedom, please let me know. I'd pay for it.
How to charge money for things that don't exist yet
> US gov wants to take something like 35% in taxes of "repatriated" earnings.

You are surprised that the US wants to tax earnings? The US taxes everyone's earnings. If they want to keep it overseas they can avoid the tax. If they want to bring it back they need to pay a tax on the amount minus the credit for the foreign tax already paid. They would have been taxed if they earned the money in the US, so I'm not sure why this is surprising.
Just so you know, Idaho is a very nice state in many ways. Largely the only real downsides are the lack of jobs and high culture. I've lived there in most of the corners and would be quite happy to discuss the state with you.
Haha, I have a super-wide monitor in a vertical configuration, which makes this game literally impossible unless I shrink the vertical dimension of my browser window.
And I guess a lot of people forget that the PowerPC is in a lot of embedded designs.
What German ceremony is that?
This is largely due to the US Federal Courts' recent rulings that invalidated the FCC's previous attempts to guarantee Net Neutrality.

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/technology/appeals-court-r...

2. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/20/business/fcc-to-propose-ne...
Not without any resources. Approximately nobody is going to fund a guy whose only demonstrable skill is getting himself arrested for selling pot. They may have what it takes to run a business, but they're going to need to live until that business hits a relatively high level of profitability — which means they need a job.

Additionally, not everyone who sells drugs necessarily "doesn't want a job." Many are simply attracted to the easy money, which is not a trait drug dealing shares with most legal businesses.

Either way, ex-cons by and large do need jobs.
Ask HN: Are you allowed to discriminate against an H1B holder?
I am a US based software developer on an H1B and was wondering whether employers are allowed to discriminate against H1B holders even though it is relatively simple to transfer the H1B to another firm. I wouldn't even be subject to the cap. There is a relatively small transfer fee but nothing compared to the cost of sponsorship. I've been seeing job postings and responses such as "the company is not open to H1B sponsorship", which I understand because of the high fees involved in sponsorship. But is it illegal to discriminate against people who have already been sponsored and only require a transfer?
Decisions like this lend a certain credence to recent studies showing that only the desires of the economic and political elite actually affect policy.
There is mention in the spec: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455#section-10.2

Is this not enough?
This theory (is it a theory?) sounds good, but as someone else here implied, those who copy aren't employing mimicry, but are actually trying to compete with those they copy. I would say that the bubbles are closer to biological arms races than biological mimicry.

The irrational exuberance is met by companies that are competing to be the most successful in exploiting that exuberance. Hence Enron's success at being one of the best performers on the market until its bust.

I'm sure this stuff has been explained before, but it doesn't seem to be part of any popular economic theory?
So store the salt on the client, and reindex if the salt is lost?
Can someone explain Google's involvement?
"It is written by, and for, people who enjoy pure mathematics and numerical functions."

The latter wasn't strictly true of CS focused MIT undergraduates back then ^_^, but by definition they could do math at that level. It was a common background Ableson and Sussman could safely assume everyone taking the course could do without much sweat, i.e. it avoided accidental complexity to focus on teaching the CS concepts they cared about. Just like the very simple syntax of Scheme takes a whole lot less time to grok than the Algol family standards, at least of the day (have not learned Python so I'm not qualified to comment there, but from what little I've seen it's still more complicated).

A broader diversity of examples would indeed be a good thing, and I'd be surprised if no one has done some work in that direction. On the other hand, as is it works for any CS program with a strong, non-optional EE component, e.g. MIT and I gather UC Berkeley, and once upon a time as I recall it was the intro course for CalTech, which is a lot more mathematically intense than MIT (when you show up you're expected to know single variable calculus and are dumped into Apostol, with an option to finish in a more applied track, or so was the case the last time I checked a few years ago).

As for your later point, I've very unsure a grounding in continuous mathematics (no matter how fun it is, at least conceptually) is essential for mastering a lot of CS, I thought the most relevant domains were in the area of discrete mathematics, with of course various areas dipping back into continuous math.
Zynga showed very little ability to reproduce their success in Farmville. Meanwhile Facebook had changed their policies making Zynga's viral growth more difficult to obtain for their next games, and they hadn't proven any success in mobile. So, for those that understood the market Zynga hadn't proven a sustainable business model. However, the Wall Street drumbeat was quite a different story.

In my opinion Zynga didn't need the cash that the IPO offered to re-invest in their business, it was simply a vehicle to cash out investors.

So, evidence of deception? All I can provide is that as a solid investment opportunity Zynga was anything but, as a well sold story that wall street spun, perhaps so.
Well they're not usually "way outside" but yes, they are usually more expensive. Also, most brokers add a per-contract fee so that also adds to your cost basis.

If you're looking right now, it's possibly because AH trading is much more volatile.
A little note on how to play would be nice. It took me a while to figure out it's the spacebar you need.
sounds like a bad situation so find a better one. Your probably not going to reason with this person.
The FCC can regulate the internet under title II. They are simply refusing to.
Come transform learning with Rosetta Stone (SF, Austin, Boulder, Seattle)
Or just clicks.
> The Federal Communications Commission will propose new rules that allow Internet service providers to offer a faster lane through which to send video and other content to consumers, as long as a content company is willing to pay for it, according to people briefed on the proposals.

Willing? I'm fairly sure it's going to end up being a "mandatory" fee in order to compete with similar online services.
Microrobots, Working Together, Build with Metal, Glass, and Electronics
Even so, there are two other solutions:

1) immediately remove all regulations that might block new competition from coming into the market, and competing locally with the big local monopolies

2) call them common carriers, and then they'd be able to regulate them however they want, and that's what the judge basically said, too.

I'd prefer 1) over 2), but at this point either one would be better. But right now FCC/US gov is doing neither of them and that should scare the hell out of everyone. This needs to be protested big time.
Much more so, dose-relative, than amphetamines that you find in, say, Adderall? Do you have a reference; I'd like to read more.
now this is the death of internet as we know it.
...oh, well ha, I guess that seems obvious to try in retrospect. :)
If it was as the NY Times piece (which seems to be fairly heavy on editorializing and weak on facts for a straight news piece) describes -- "will allow a company like Comcast or Verizon to negotiate separately with each content company [...] and charge different companies different amounts for priority service." However, the other reports on this have not described it that way -- e.g., the WSJ report [1] (which also hit HN today) says that the new rules to be proposed "would allow broadband providers to give some traffic preferential treatment, so long as such arrangements are available on 'commercially reasonable' terms for all interested content companies."

Then again, this Reuters piece [2] says it won't address these types of agreements at all: "However, the rules are not expected to address the issue of interconnection, or agreements in which content companies pay network providers for faster access to their sites or services."

Maybe we should wait until the rules are actually released for public comment before freaking out over the specific details (about which there are many conflicting stories.)

[1] http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702304...

[2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/23/us-usa-fcc-interne...
Told us exactly what the report found.
I have a question for those more knowledgeable about this than me: compare this to recent EU [1] votes on net neutrality. What do you think, will this give European internet companies an advantage over ones here (specifically startups that don't have the big bucks to shell out to the large internet providers)?

[1] http://gigaom.com/2014/04/03/european-parliament-passes-stro...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Wheeler_(FCC)

"Tom Wheeler is the current Chairman of the FCC.[1] Prior to working at the FCC, Wheeler worked as a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry."

Wow. This looks especially bad for consumers.
Google, Apple and Netflix just have to bribe harder
They never went to the moon....
Here comes the downvotes in...
3...
2...
1...
If you are going to make an allegation like that please at least provide something to back it up.
[Amaze HN]Google Maps launched a TIME LAPSE feature
What's worse, is that if the ISP had implemented multicast for real, then we could save enormous amounts of bandwidth.

Think of the wasted traffic has thousands of people watch a live stream in unison. Or the millions watching viral youtube videos only a few seconds apart.
I don't think there are really any shortcuts. This sort of problem is likely to always require nuanced and direct human intervention.

Sometimes the acrimony and the controversy is an integral part of a news story. Without the gossip from the peanut gallery, it might not be news.

Relevant social topics often smell terrible. I think it just comes with the territory...
If you had a 100 Mbps connection, like many other countries do, streaming Netflix in HD would not be a problem. So this is first and foremost a lazy monopolist problem, less so a congestion problem.
Given the vastly different design philosophies of these two architectures, why is a comparison of a "16-core SPARC to an 8-core Intel" inherently rigged? Aren't those SPARC cores a lot smaller than x86_64 cores? I mean, the first SPARC CPU was implemented on 2 20,000 gate Fujitsu gate-arrays (2nd was the floating point unit)....
What is 'YTowOnt9'?
Feynman and Test Driven Development
As I was reading, I thought this was just a move by the FCC to get the people to understand that the internet without net neutrality is a nightmare. As I'm reading the HN comments, I'm not so sure anymore...
They've actually pulled a bait and switch on small business.

First the pages were free and great, then they started to reduce the number of people who'd see your posts (fair enough, not everyone can see every little thing)

Then they reduced the % of people seeing posts to 3% and less, and really focussed on getting those page owners to buy ads to maintain their previous view numbers.

Maybe page owners are paying for now, potentially reliant on traffic, but I don't think they're going to be happy paying forever when free alternatives will crop up again. The traffic quality is reported as being low (many mis-clicks on mobile). If the profit isn't there then business won't be able to afford to pay in the long run.

Maybe I don't want to see posts for 'Jim's oil change' every three seconds, but good content is getting cut away also making FB far more boring.
Well it is a little premature to cry doom before these guidelines are even adopted.

But if they are, it will be kind of funny to read in a few years the comments from ISPs re: anti-neutrality policies stifling 'new' streaming services:

"Our research shows there is weak to no consumer demand for alternative services"
15 minutes maybe?
That's just so... wrong. I know some investors are going off things like that but doesn't it bother anyone that such an important part of finance depends on people looking at numbers in a totally irrational way? Like, simply not even doing the math. Even on investment sites, I've seen people say "it's crazy that foo is at $20 but bar is at $50". It's as dumb as someone saying they prefer Zimbabwe Dollars cause it's easier to become a trillionaire.
I also find the new maps extremely slow on desktop, though the interface is reasonably fast on mobile. Tried both Firefox and Safari on my mid-2010 Macbook Pro, and everything is pretty wonky and unreliable. I actually use Bing Maps now by default on desktop due to the speed issue, unless I need something that Bing doesn't have (Google has much better transit coverage, for example).
One downside with ISP outbound relaying is SPF; if you want to use it you need to figure out how mail exits the ISP and keep the SPF records up to date; and even if you do, suddenly all the other customers of that ISP can fake mail from you while passing SPF.

Another downside is you lose logs of and insight in the mailq and the recipient smtp server responses.
Shutting #nwplyng, On To The Next Adventure
> Organizations that want to keep their employees happy and productive may begin to invest in the fight against burnout by helping employees find accessible, affordable therapies for coping with stress.

Sounds like an advert peddling employee training sessions in stress management to employers who want to cover their arses legally while continuing to require their workers to, say, carry their mobile phones around at all times to field calls at, say, 3 in the morning to fix problems that wouldn't have happened if the bosses had invested more resources in making sure after-hours problems didn't happen in the first place.
Well, this is not quite equivalent, but consider mobile platforms. Streaming makes much more sense there given the tighter storage constraints.
I'm still looking for a way to deploy with Elastic Beanstalk without causing a brief interruption in service. It seems like a major oversight in the system it provides.

I know you can do the CNAME swap trick, but that cause monitoring issues due to essentially switching between groups of servers, plus you have to run twice as many servers.

Since you've had some experience with advanced configuration of EB apps, have you run into any convenient trick for doing this?
The problem is not that RPi doesn't have the horsepower. It does - but you've got to use Videocore IV. Hopefully there'll be some good compiler with at least intrinsic support for it.
The Origin header is used to protect the server. This is to prevent the WebSocket Hijacking attack (http://www.christian-schneider.net/CrossSiteWebSocketHijacki...) . i.e. it does not help a lot in the browser end especially in the mashup scenario.

However, the lack of the same-origin policy in WebSockets makes the presence of the same-origin policy in XMLHttpRequests questionable. I am just talking about this part where the browser does not have to restrict a connection to any origin from a given website without even a need for a CORS like whitelist.
The German language, a battery drainer
There you go:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2012/08/01/zynga-ceo-...
Yea but they do all that to secure their services so they can harvest the information.
"Rather than holding it as a "competitive advantage""
Doing so gives them the "competitive advantage" by creating the illusion of some "white knight" protector of the internet and its users. I don't even mind Google as much as I mind the weird delusional back-flips people do in order to forget the fact that Google is an advertising/tracking company. They have no business plan if people stop trusting the internet or use browsers that can make tracking/analytic data harder for them to collect.
Well I wasn't really so much burned out from working as I was from "startupping". So doing just coding was pretty relaxing in comparison.
A cynic would say that if politicians want the tax holiday to appease their campaign donors, it doesn't have to /actually/ create jobs, voters just have to /believe/ it creates jobs.
HOA WANTS TO FINE
my son, w/out my knowledge, put add on AirBnb for short term rental room in my 2 bed condo where it is not allowed. He never rented it. HOA found add and wants to fine me for breaking HOA rules. Can they fine if place was never a transaction due that it was never rented? Do we have to pay fine?
What is "34C" and "24C"?
Rather with a PCIe connector.
> Well it is a little premature to cry doom before these guidelines are even adopted.

It might not be before they are adopted, but it is before they are proposed and, particularly, before the news stories based on inside leaks are even consistent about what the rules are in the area of concern.

EDIT: Not sure why the downvotes, but as I point out in another comment on the thread (with links to sourcs), there are at least three conflicting characterizations of what the new rules that the FCC chair is about to begin circulating and that the FCC might then propose with a public comment period will do on the point in question:

1. (NY Times): Allow ISPs to (apparently, with no signficant restrictions) negotiate per-content-provider rates for enhanced access to the ISPs users.

2. (WS Journal): Allow ISPs to offer enhanced access if the terms are commercially reasonable and open to all content providers.

3. (Reuters): Not address ISP-to-content-provider agreements at all.

My point is that its premature to react to the details of the rules when there isn't any consistent picture of what those details are likely to be.
Is this what you're talking about?

http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.4270
I liked the article. I think it captures something real. However it dismisses out of hand without discussions any number of other theories which do in fact have at least some explanatory or predictive value--exogenous shocks (i.e. gas crisis of the 1970s), credit/debt cycle, inventory cycle, interest rate cycle, fixed-investment cycle, and the 60 year Kondratiev waves which may be driven by a new technology introduction cycle. It also ignores recessions and depressions that don't fit it's thesis. See here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle.
Honestly the assumption that we want to stream everything is a really good assumption. People are lazy and setting up a proper storage is tricky and costs money. This means 99.9% of people don't want to do it. Yes being in the .1% it would be nice if we were catered to but that's life.
They actually used to have a more full-featured date search in Google News, but it was temporarily discontinued in December: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/news/Gl23RwnTIl...
In 2002, Colin Powell's son, Michael, was the Chairman of the FCC. He determined that broadband services weren't covered by Title II, and that they could be regulated 'better' under different statutes. That is the genesis for all of these problems.

Today, Michael Powell is the President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association.[1]

Of course, today's FCC could walk that Title II ruling back, and reclassify ISPs from Title I to Title II, but that would be met with lawsuits for years.

1 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Powell_(politician)
> They're selling the fruits of design and engineering work that happens in the US, and so this is arguably where most of the value creation happens, and that that should be taxed despite the fact that the nominal sale and creation is happening overseas.

There is an easy solution: Tax the corporation's US payroll. The obvious problem with doing that (or any other thing that causes effective tax rates to increase in response to employing US workers) is that it creates a large monetary incentive to move the "value creation" somewhere else.

The whole problem is that we're trying to tax stupid things. Taxing corporate profits is stupid because profits don't have a nexus with any particular jurisdiction, so they get moved to whichever jurisdiction has the lowest taxes. The only way to avoid that is to tax something other than profits -- something that actually exists in your jurisdiction. Payroll tax, consumption tax, etc. And between them, the consumption tax is better because a disincentive to buy things made in other jurisdictions causes less harm to the local economy than a disincentive to hire the people in your jurisdiction would.

Edit: People who downvote comments without providing any reasoning are cowards.
NewRelic Instrumentation for Carrierwave
Don't take my comment as a slight on engineers. I have an engineering degree, practiced as one, and half my friends are still engineers. But they skew logical/mathematical, and that makes them, generally, less empathetic than average.
Does anyone know what the rationale for not allowing users to undo votes is? I'd be happy even if it were only accessible for the first few minutes after the initial action...

There have been several times where I've accidentally upvoted low-quality (sometimes malicious) posts, and I never feel good about it.
Legislating "net neutrality" is a crude hack. The real problem is telco hegemony in the ISP space, as pointed out in John Gilmore's 2010 essay at http://www.nnsquad.org/archives/nnsquad/msg04177.html
I'm also looking for a Clojure job. Email in profile.
Yes. The malicous scripts can already do that. It has taken years to train people and educate them on adding suitable Content-Security Policy headers to prevent such violations without breaking the internet. Every modern technology (especially the XMLHttpRequest) has been more strict on the SOP. However, to introduce a new technology which is more effective than a simple XMLHttpRequest in such a manner that it does not follow SOP when there is no threat of breaking any existing websites is questionable at best.
Entrenched services that can pay the premium. It's their "don't worry about upstart competitors" tax.
Agree - but, this is a good initial offering I believe should only get better with time.

This is a great thing for AWS and for Docker users.
Whatever the FCC does (well, except maybe not regulating at all) is going to be met with lawsuits for years.
Responsive Deployment
http://blog.cozycloud.cc/technic/2014/04/22/responsive-deployment/
Why? If the ISP's push the issue too hard, the public will be up in arms for net neutrality. If they just push hard enough to keep small companies from competing it will be a win/win for everybody since the ISP's make even more money, and the internet companies get to avoid new players.
Agreed. I worked on PPC on the Xbox 360, and rarely had to worry about the underlying ISA, although when you did have to worry about it, things got pretty hairy and ugly, fast (think: DMA, cache coherence and other low-level stuff all ganging up to ruin your day).

You also had to worry about the ISA when you were doing something performance intensive (that's when you start taking advantage of multimedia instructions and so forth; ideally you have abstractions for this, but they'll only take you so far).