skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Quite. I even managed to land three top-of-the page HN posts on the same day on that topic: http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1qsnks/dont_loo...

That issue hit quite a nerve, and it's been commented on at length in some of the news discussions. Ron Amadeo at ArsTechnica most especially:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/04/report-google-to-end-...

The social network hasn't gained the massive userbase it would need to rival Facebook, and the aggressive integration strategy has been universally hated by users. As Google gets bigger and bigger, it faces harsher scrutiny, and few things the company has done have been more disliked than Google+. According to the report, Google+'s YouTube takeover was seen as "a rocky move" even inside the company...

As a brand, Google+ is about at toxic as you can get.

Ouch.

As I'd previously commented answering Eric Schmidt's "My biggest mistake at Google was not anticipating social": No, Schmidt, your biggest mistake was failing to realize that vast hoards of highly detailed and categorized personal data are not only an asset, but a tremendous liability.

http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1u356d/schmidt_...
Interesting how the legalese was longer than the response.
I'm familiar with the governance structure of Mozilla. I'm not a distinguished engineer or anything, but familiar enough. There are employees parroting that Brendan is still has an important position in the structure. Brendan's comment implies he does not consider that the case.
Pascual Jordan, one of the founding fathers of quantum mechanics along with Dirac, Heisenberg, Pauli and Born had his name essentially written out of the history books because of his association with the Nazi party which really amounted to overlooking what the Nazis were doing and saying some positive comments about the Nazis. I don't like what Jordan did. Heisenberg is a less controversial figure which some people claimed had skeletons in his closet regarding the Nazi party. Nothing really came of it and Heisenberg's reputation has been untouched except a few still hold questions regarding his conduct. I'd like to know if this issue was ever cleared up. Heisenberg is still (rightly) remembered as a chief architect but Pascual Jordan whose contributions equal or exceed Pauli is almost entirely written out.
Slightly OT, but my business google apps account was just upgraded to google+ and "hangouts". I found it a bit troubling that when starting a hangout via my brand new business google+ account, it named the hangout title with my throwaway personal gmail account I rarely use. I'm sure Google has the data to easily associate the two accounts, but they should not reveal this to the end users.
According to [1], the surface of Earth receives 89,300 terawatts of power from the Sun on average. According to the stats at [2], world power consumption in 2008 was ~17 TW. So even if we could somehow build the tens of thousands of these power plants necessary to completely supply the Earth's power needs, and assuming that none of the consumed power ended up being radiated back into space, we would only be affecting the Earth's energy budget by 0.02%.

[1] http://www.sandia.gov/~jytsao/Solar%20FAQs.pdf

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption
When the traffic flow was Netflix->Cogent->Comcast, peering didn't really come into it because both Netflix and Comcast were transit customers of Cogent. When Comcast is a customer, they get to decide how much pipe to pay for, and in this case they decided to pay for not nearly enough bandwidth to handle their customers' demand for Netflix.
I was just about to post that exact same comment. I nearly spit out my drink reading that line!
Maybe it didn't topple facebook, but what other data do they have from it? Is searching this information fruitful in interesting ways? It might be.
Have you considered Hipache? ( https://github.com/dotcloud/hipache )
Eric Schmidt said in a December 30, 2013 Engaget interview "my biggest mistake at Google was not anticipating social".

My response at the time: No, Schmidt, your biggest mistake was failing to realize that vast hoards of highly detailed and categorized personal data are not only an asset, but a tremendous liability.

Or as I put it: "Schmidt: My biggest mistake is still not realizing my biggest mistake"

http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1u356d/schmidt_...
The article doesn't get much better, but there may be a kernel of truth to the rug store angle. There's a profile of the rug store owner/prolific angel investor at http://www.forbes.com/sites/victoriabarret/2012/03/21/silico... .
Restore Net Neutrality By Directing FCC to Classify ISPs as "Common Carriers".
Except Facebook's customers use Facebook to access Facebook's data. Comcast's customers use Comcast to access the internet's data, not Comcast's data. At least until the definition of Internet Service Provider is changed.
Cocos2d-x v3.0 and Coordinate Release
Looks like Comcast left their comment section open too, although you have to scroll past the 2 large paragraphs of legal matters to get to the comments.

I thought it was interesting that they have more legal content than actual content on the post.
Schmidt was unapologetically selling G+ as "an identity service".

Gundotra continued that drive until it became clear that the userbase would (and did) revolt.
Las Vegas Trip Reviews
Your question confuses me. If your website is cached on a CDN, Comcast users still have to connect to the network that hosts that CDN, and Comcast accomplishes that by using a peering or transit relationship. The CDN won't magically speed up Comcast's network, which is still responsible for getting the content to people's homes. Netflix is already making its website faster by paying Cogent a lot of money to deliver its data to the ISPs and by (clears throat) using and even building its own [1] CDN. Where Comcast comes in is delivering that content to its customers, who, again, pay it to do exactly that.

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsavitz/2012/06/05/netflix-sh...
Comcast gets paid IN 3 WAYS FOR THE SAME CONTENT, AT LEAST.
1. They get tax money to subsidize their infrastructure costs.

2. They sell the utility their infrastructure provides.

3. They sell the ability for content creators to create content, that they again sell to their users.

They get paid to build a distribution channel, and then charge people the ability to create and distribute content through their stream, then charge for the content. Also, they have no competitors.
And that's why I now perceive Google to be rotten from the head.
Realistic rain drops in JS
If the ISP was a customer buying bandwidth from Comcast like anyone else, then Comcast has zero obligation to increase their bandwidth for free.

If the ISP is Comcast, then when you pay for that 1Gbps uplink, you are paying Comcast and you have a right to expect that your packets will be delivered at that rate.

If the ISP is a peer of Comcast, then it seems like when you pay that ISP, you ought to know the exact details of the agreements and bandwidth arrangements between the ISP and Comcast, and both parties ought to abide by that contract. I don't know enough details in this case to know whether that's what happened.
The Mozilla FAQ on CEO Resignation says "Brendan was not fired and was not asked by the Board to resign. Brendan voluntarily submitted his resignation. The Board acted in response by inviting him to remain at Mozilla in another C-level position. Brendan declined that offer. The Board respects his decision." [1]

"Another C-level position" definitely means not CEO, and probably means CTO.

So Brendan is not disagreeing with the posting, he's just not stating that he was offered a job as CTO or whatever.

I don't know where cpeterso got the idea they asked him to "stay the course as CEO or CTO", but the FAQ makes it pretty clear he was not asked to stay as CEO, and was probably offered his CTO job back. Are there any other "C-level positions [2]" that he is qualified for? Probably not CDO. ;)

Edit: cpeterso may have been quoting yoric from here: [3] So I don't know where yorik got that idea from. But Brendan corrected his incorrect information, without actually openly revealing what the correct information was.

[1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_title

[3]: http://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com/2014/04/07...
This is notable for the response.

Official: The White House Response to

"Restore Net Neutrality By Directing the FCC to Classify Internet Providers as "Common Carriers".

[Title]: Reaffirming the White House's Commitment to Net Neutrality...

{obviously, something has changed at the white house}
What does making a Facebook clone have to do with pursuing a civil lawsuit WHEN GOVERNMENT LAWYERS ALREADY PRODUCED A TON OF EVIDENCE SHOWING GUILT.

Making a Facebook clone is risky, you could spend the money and get no users.

Suing these defendants is almost risk-free, there already was a ton of evidence due to the Justice department investigation.
I wish more had protested more strongly or simply walked.

I know it's easy to project actions on others, but really, that was a BAD decision.
They did try that, it was called OpenSocial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSocial).
there is also "sc", "spreadsheet calc"

I would love a maintained {n,}curses mode spreadsheet that can handle excel1040.com.
Diseases, even diseases with pretty absurd transmission potential, can die out in small populations due to random chance. For the most part, previous outbreaks have been in the bush - it's entirely possible the answer is "Because we were lucky"
Really? At a certain point (months ago, at least), it finally just consented to creating a Google+ profile based on my current Youtube username. As far as I'm concerned, it was a no-op, since I don't really care what system they're using on the backend for my YT acct.
The same cross section of society that has already given Google their most meaningful data.
Fiat money has value because you need it to pay taxes. Bitcoins are only valuable as long as you can convince someone else that they are valuable.
Link to those other people if they are good articles. The best version of an article should be linked to, even if it's behind a paywall.

Perhaps HN users could agree on tagging any articles that are paywalled?

Of course, they might not have hit the paywall limit and might not know thT the article is paywalled.
It just didn't gain enough momentum

You write as if Google+ is past tense. I think you've drunk the Kool-aid that TechCrunch is serving. Disclosure: I'm very, very active on Google+, and so are a lot of my friends. I've been circled by about 10,000 users and have almost 1,500,000 views. Google+ is quite popular with a certain demographic: very technical people, engineers, developers, and programmers. Also Android fans, photographers and artsy people.

I'm sorry you don't like Google+, and it's fine with me that you express a negative opinion about it. But let's stop the silly "Google+ is a ghost town" false rhetoric. It's manifestly, demonstrably untrue, and it doesn't do you any favours when you try to make a case like that. Let it go. Let the people who appreciate Google+ enjoy it. Google+ is still growing by leaps and bounds, and I expect it will continue to do so whether you like it or not.
If you'll read the comments of most people here they believe that Comcast should peer with Netflix for free. So why should Netflix be the only ones?
That's an entirely solvable problem, and numerous key G+ voices (Robert Scoble and Lauren Weinstein come particularly to mind) have long lambasted Google over the lack of suitable moderation and noise controls.

The effect at G+ was that there was a very narrow sweet spot for intelligent conversation -- you needed a large number (~1000 - 10,000 minimum) of followers to generate real traction, but past 100k, the ability to moderate threads was highly tedious. Lauren was (and is) heavy on the one tool he's got, the ban hammer, blocking people. The reasons often aren't that the individuals in question are doing anything particularly wrong, but that the dynamics given the other people likely to come to the thread will simply go haywire.

Or you end up with accounts such as The Economist whose posts are interesting but comments are invariably almost totally inane.

Google exhibited (and continue to exhibit) a profound lack of understanding of real community.

That carries over as well to G+ "Commnities" which are a complete fucking abortion.
Are you guys accepting recent graduates for this?
Nick and Chris would never explicitly admit it, but in unguarded moments it seemed clear that they missed their old idea, the one they’d come up with on the boat, the one that had served a broad and stately social purpose. Their moments of greatest animation were when they showed off their first demos and decks, when they seemed decades younger.

That strikes a chord.
Stating that the same thing happens to males isn't actually justification for taking an issue with what she is saying. It shouldn't be about gender at all.

However, I agree with you in thinking that the attempts to tie this to gender issues are way off base. When I first read the reports on the issues (which are not the whole truth, I understand), none of them read like gender issues. They read like issues between employees male or female, that didn't work well together. Would we have had the same reaction if Tom's wife had interfered in a male employees relationship? We should. Would we have had the same reaction if a female employee was reverting changes from a male? We should.

From what I've seen, it looks like this became a gender issue because JAH is a female, not because there were specific gender harassment issues.
Yes, and others in this thread believe Netflix shouldn't have to pay to peer with Comcast. What I'm saying is, I too want to peer with Comcast for free. Do you support this as well, or just Netflix?
Google Analytics is acting strange for the last 2 weeks
Anyone know when their current issues finally resolve? I have had the following message atop the screen for 2 weeks now.

Universal properties created prior to December 2013 may temporarily report doubled Visits counts between the hours of 0500-0800 in the View timezone. This issue corrects itself automatically. We are working on a fix to address this issue as soon as possible.
They might be wanting to run automated tests to find some other problem, and find after 70 tests, they get an error.
So it's sensible to want to fix it.
Realtime updates from Postgres to Elasticsearch
There are all manner of infections for which doctors and nurses treat patients with extensive protective gear, or in isolation wards.

Beyond that, as others have mentioned, the really tricky bit is that once we don't have a good treatment for it, so post-exposure prophylaxis isn't really in the cards.

I have, for example, never seen an estimate for the infectiousness of Ebola that puts it anywhere near measles.
Which means deciding what an acceptable QoS is for those peak times - many of us think they decided too low - I personally think you should be able to get between 1/3 and 2/3rds (ideally around half) of 'peak' speeds on a sustained level at any time for any amount of time.

It's just like the telephone network of yore, no single trunk was ever capacitied to mothers day call traffic - there were reroutes, and more than one path to any large point, so you'd get a lower quality of service, but the traffic would still get thru.
If I weren't trying to stay up to speed with about two dozen other technologies, I'd have switched to rbenv. RVM works for me and stays out of my way so I'm just leaving it be for now :)
Fuel cell fillers are slower than gas and not much faster than quick-charge stations.

EV charging stations are ubiquitous. Fuel cell fillers are outrageously expensive.

All US cars can charge with J1772. CHadEMO and SuperChargers have the same power output, so adapters will be possible and reasonable.

Oh, and hydrogen-fueled cars are far less efficient wells-to-wheels than electrically-fueled. We can't afford to be paying more for fuel.
You've failed to explain how Comcast was in the wrong in their dispute with Cogent. Until you do that, it's just 2 businesses that could come to an agreement, a thing that happens thousands of times every day.
Tokaido won't bork your setup. It's completely self-contained.
Fostering community is a fragile process. Google simply stepped in the brown stinky stuff far too often. The initial beta, the public release (too soon), the lack of features (no search ... from the Internet's leading search company?). Some huge reorientations of direction. A miserable client experience (it's a hugely bloated web page, and I still can't do more than a trivial amount on it).

Real Names, the SEO takeover, and the YouTube Anschluss were really only the icing on the cake.

The first drove me to kill my personally ascribed account and create one under this nym which I use in a few places online. The second largely dismayed me. Things looked up briefly a year or so back as search got more powerful and enough interesting content had accumulated to provide some actual utility to the site. Last May's redesign, the War on Words, and the YouTube Anschluss were all pretty awful.
.NINJA domains are coming as an alternative to .COM
> With this logic, why should anyone have to pay for hosting bandwidth?

Because you still have to get the traffic from the datacenter to the peering point. That's what you're buying when you pay for hosting bandwidth -- transit. You're paying somebody to get the traffic to all the networks in the whole world.

The last mile provider isn't providing transit. You peer with them at their facility. The connection from their customers to their facility was paid for by their customers. The connection from their facility to yours is provided by you (or by the actual transit provider you paid). So what would you be paying them for?

It's nothing but a monopoly rent you have to pay because there is no other way to reach their customers.
I grew up with this (actually have the box next to me!), PageStream for DTP, and Scala for video titling. I was utterly flabbergasted when I discovered DOS and mouseless PCs (back when we still called them IBM compatibles).

Ah, nostalgia.
That's funny, I was under the impression something had to be alive before it could be "walking dead."
Are you aware that you can use Google+ with non-real names? I see loads of them. Many people use a handle. Nobody who uses Google+ every day complains about Nymwars anymore, that's so 2011.
> G+ was certainly a platform internally but it was never a platform externally.

It is true that there was a substantial delay before G+ was made a public external platform (there were initially some external, selected partner, integrations), but G+ has been a public external platform for some time.

> Google has offered no useful APIs for it

"Useful" is subjective, of course, but they offer a fairly extensive set of G+ platform APIs. [1] It's true there isn't a write API for the Facebook-style news feed, but that feed isn't central to G+-the-platform, only to G+-the-product.

[1] https://developers.google.com/+/web/
Is it? Most (old) ovens used to be rated at 1KW, but they certainly weren't 1 square meter, more like half a square foot. You can fit quite a few half-square "feet" in a square meter (roughly 3*6 -- so 1kw/sqm would be about 1/18 of a microwave oven?).
How was Netflix "blackmailed"? Cogent failed to provide the service they needed so they are doing it themselves. Doing it themselves is saving them a lot of money.

Now they're attempting to shift costs onto everyone else. And they're using the public's distrust of ISPs to get the public to pay for Netflix's business expenses.
Employees tweeting they want Brendan Eich to resign because his donation to Prop 8 is not in line with Mozilla's mission.

The mission to build a free and open web has nothing to do with social issues such as gay marriage.
They pay transit providers to do it. Except with Comcast, who they pay directly. And save a lot of money by doing so.
That's assuming that "the people" have a measurable influence on politics. Plenty of data show that no such influence exists in certain aspects of policy.
The FCC’s “fast lane” rule is awful for the Internet–just ask the FCC
As much as I detest virtually everything Facebook, it's growth strategy from Harvard to Ivies to selective edus to all was great. From the get-go, it was the place to go to find a crowd more exclusive than the one you were in already.

That ended with mass-market availability, but it's provided steam to roll on for a while.

Google had an initial base which was, I think, the seed around which it could have grown a community but blew it by releasing publicly too early.

Among other failings.
Pfft forget about using this for mere electrical power. Boil the sea to make it rain!
— not necessarily due to Gundotra’s departure.

Seems clear enough.
Netflix is attempted to send one-way data right now. That's what their whole campaign is about, shifting their costs onto everyone else. They don't want to go back to paying Cogent, that was much more expensive.
This is bonkers... in a good way!
The lack of external access to G+ remains a massive pain point. I'm fucking thrilled by the ubiquitous RSS integration at reddit -- it's pretty amazing.

For G+ I've got to go to the damned site (which is a browser bloat pig) to follow stuff. Which I avoid if at all possible.

http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1sxfar/reddit_r...
Running Calculators Are Inaccurate and Misleading
This happens between cable/sat providers and the networks all the time. Company pissing matches in public are terrible for consumers.
That "easy nym fix" still requires storing your real ID with Google.

That's a non-starter for many of us, as it's still available: to hackers, national security, subpoena processes, etc. See Bruce Schneier's recent Stanford talk.
Libressl.org is running apache1
It is worse than that. "15 Mbps peak speeds" is actually "15 Mbps bursts."

I am fine with getting less than my maximum speed; I understand that the connection is shared and that my neighbors' service can interfere with mine. TCP can deal with congestion. What grinds my gears is that ISPs are not content to sell me a maximum speed; they want to oversubscribe, then claim that they are selling burst service, then call it "unlimited super-awesome Internet!! 15Mbps!!" then penalize customers who fail to limit their use of the supposedly unlimited service.
Schmidt was selling G+ as "an identity platform".
Comcast's stock is up over 250% over the last few years and has made me a lot of money... so whatever they've been doing has been working and IMO they should keep at it.

It's a dirty game and no one is completely clean, so we should all come down from our high horse. Fluid and evolving business strategies are not the devil's spawn that people make them out to be.
Show HN: Hacker News + Webcrawler for Woodworking
Is that "tata" from India ? How do they play role here ?
Here's a suggestion on how to implement a fair interconnect market. The world's regulators designate a few physical locations as public interchange points governed by the following rules:

1) If you are an ISP you need to be present in all the interchange points of the geographical areas where you are licensed to operate in.

2) Any ISP can connect to any other ISP at those points with no charge.

3) Whenever an ISPs link is above 90% peak usage for X days he has to upgrade.

That way everyone pays their own way. If suddenly Comcast customers sign up for Netflix in droves both Netflix and Comcast need to invest to upgrade the links on their side of the interchange, Netflix because they're being paid for the streaming service, Comcast because they're being paid for internet service. If you can come to some other arrangement with interchange at some other point, more power to you, but to be an ISP you are obligated to interchange freely with anyone at these points.

What am I missing?