skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
another idea, but thinking the following:

1. anyone who wants to use a site has to create an account with a fb "anonymous" login. there would be no more "free" access" because then you can start to tie free user behavior to actual conversion.

2. Once the user wants to pay, this is tied to giving more information--at least name and email address.

Will be interesting to see the details, because tying free behavior to conversion is a holy grail for marketers.
|This is ignoring the other side of the equation. For someone to spend bitcoins,
|they had to have bought them for cash.

This is not true. 3600 coins are mined every day. The people with the most incentive to spend coins are early miners who have a significant chunk of their net worth in Bitcoin.
CircleCI launches new pricing
Your approach is a minimal-effort Pareto principle based hiring. By eschewing any and all candidate information sources other than the market leader professional social network, you get access to a pool of 80% of the candidates with minimal effort. For you, it's great. For your company, it's passable. For the candidates, it's disgusting.

No, at different levels it is the approach everybody takes. The concept of search cost[1] always existed in economy. You can think that an answer to your question is in some obscure web site but if that web site is in the #1000 position in Google, very few people will find it.

Regarding LinkedIn, I think if you want to increase the probability of being hired in US (and other countries where LinkedIn is popular) you must be there. You can argue against it like I argue about needing to have a Skype, or a PayPal account to receive payments: everybody is there, network effects, etc.

- [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_cost
"If we didn't do it, someone else would."

This sounds like the justification of every grey-area business idea I've ever heard.
Linux creator Linus Torvalds shares Millennium Technology Prize (2012)
You Don't Want XTS
Preface: This is a rant...

============================

Thank fucking god.

The greatest distraction the United States has ever dealt with-- being the 'number one' economy. It makes me sick people have seen this as a sense of pride, or even as something to be "sad" about.

... It is too bad we've pissed away the opportunity, it didn't have to be like this...

It, for the United States, has done nothing but acted as a catalyst for systematic and perverse exploitation of our people and resources for gain of a few with "wealth." It has given the evil of the world a corruptible, unstoppable force to push their agendas.

Our democracy has proven to be much weaker than it's ruling sibling, 'crony-capitalism' or 'socialism for the wealthy' (whatever you want to call it).

Look at the amount of money we blow up in the desert fighting redneck farmers (that's what they are, they just speak a different language). Looking at the money we spend on death of outsiders, compared to helping the people of our own nation, should make anyone feel nauseated.

This is one step toward a less powerful United States, and dare I say a much better one. We'll still be the world's reserve currency for a while, but this is still a step to fixing the inherent systemic problems within the United States.

Economic power doesn't mean high quality of life, and shouldn't be a sense of pride, hopefully the nation begins to understand this. There's more to life than being exploited money.

C.R.E.A.M. -- Cash Rules Everything Around Me
That may in fact be the harbinger of the Apocalypse.
Or not? Proof-of-stake is arguably better than Proof-of-work. Peercoin, NXTCoin and so forth have fundamentally moved forward from the "waste more energy than the next guy" approach that is innate to Proof-of-work.
Can you point to any modern day currency that is anything but a tulip bulb? So long as merchants are willing to accept it for payment it is decidedly not just a tulip bulb.
In this industry, I'm sure that's both of us.
> but why wall yourself in to a Github only universe?

I really don't. I just avoid LinkedIn. My Github profile is the predominant one when you google my name (after the g+ profile because Google is like that), but I maintain profiles on a couple of freelance websites which host relevant work experience. Through those sites and my personal one, I get regularly contacted about prospective employers.

My LinkedIn profile had not brought me a single good offer when I turned it off. I've not felt its loss. I strongly believe a lot of people who "rely" on linkedin only rely on it because they don't realize the alternatives are better.
Not really. Facebook isn't giving up any information at all. So it's nothing particularly unexpected. Actually, it's kind of up FB's alley, because it allows them to gather info on web/app usage patterns of their users while leaking a lot less info to third parties. If anything this program gives FB more control over user information relative to third parties than the current FB Connect program.

[edit 2:38 CDT to add the string "/app"]
Update from AWS: 12:21 PM PDT We can confirm that we are seeing increased error rates and latencies for the EC2 APIs as well as connectivity issues for some instances in a single Availability Zone in the US-WEST-2 Region. Some EBS volumes are also experiencing degraded performance within the same Availability Zone. We are working on resolving the issue.
I'm just curious, what do you want to get out of using Facebook if you don't tell them anything about you? If you don't tell it who your friends are or what things you like, then what else would you do with the site?
We may eventually need to have a compulsory hospital stay (or something else) for antibiotic treatment so that a patient treated with an antibiotic does not have any leftover resistant pathogens to transfer to the public.
read my updated comment. you don't _need_ an out if you have your needs met and have the cash liquidity you need. since a lot of the people holding these things are libertarians with money, why would they sell them for dollars they think are worthless? they don't NEED outs.
Why most resources don't run out
How would you allow an app to log you in with Facebook without Facebook knowing about it?
As a security researcher I can confirm the existence of bullet-proof AdSense accounts mentioned in the leak.

There are some big accounts which can break TOS not being banned.

For example, localmoxie.com, a high traffic[1] malware[2] site uses AdSence [3].

1: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/localmoxie.com

2: https://www.google.com/search?num=100&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&safe...

3. Jan 2014 http://archive.today/jsfNy Apr 2014 http://archive.today/AkpoO
It's combined through a complicated weighting function, and we can certainly argue about that function.

But I'll note that just last year there were a pair of ballot propositions where circa 2/3rds of voters rejected raising height limits for a big new project:

http://ballotpedia.org/8_Washington_Street_Development-Initi...

And having lived here quite a while, I'm sure it's not only wealthy landlords who are opposed to unrestricted high-rise development.
Can you add Wikipedia citation formats?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_templates
Because if you're in Argentina, you can only sell them for Argentine pesos, which aren't a clear winner over bitcoins.
It's actually the other way around. Major landowners want to build more units because there's plenty of money to be made.

It's existing renters who are stopping new development. Long term renters have fantastic rates because of how rent control laws are written. And they want to keep their rent low (for themselves, new arrivals can get screwed), their streets sunny (instead of being overshadowed by high rises), and their neighborhoods not too crowded.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Persona
The Halo headband wants to make you smarter by shocking your brain
Facebook’s F8 keynote: Anonymous login, App Links and additions to Parse
Isn't that the entire point of Facebook though? You give Facebook your data so they can give it to your friends.
China also has nearly 3 times the USA's population, as well as significantly less land. They may be making more money, but they also have more people they have to divide it between. They're far less wealthy in that sense.
This is a landmark decision.

The patent statute has always allowed courts to compel losers to pay winners' attorneys' fees, but only in fairly rare circumstances. The specific term used is that the case must be "exceptional" - which until yesterday, meant something very, very narrow, and fee awards were consequently very rare.

Yesterday's decision in Octane Fitness (along with the companion case Highmark v. Allcare, also decided yesterday), did three useful things for patent defendants:

1) Ended the requirement that fees can only be awarded when the case is BOTH "so unreasonable that no reasonable litigant could believe it could succeed" AND is actually known by the plaintiff to be baseless.

2) Ended the requirement that defendants prove by "clear and convincing evidence" that the case is "exceptional" (saying instead that there's "no specific evidentiary standard" defendants must meet).

3) Clarified the standard for appellate review of fee awards, finding that district court awards can be overturned only for "abuse of discretion"

As a result, district court judges have substantially more latitude to grant fee awards in patent cases, combined with significantly reduced fear of reversal. The outcome should be immediate, and will have a chilling effect on new frivolous litigation -- while simultaneously providing an incentive to current frivolous plaintiffs to drop their cases sooner or on better terms.

BTW, one other thing to note: most of the chatter is about non-practicing entities, aka patent trolls -- but the decision isn't limited to cases brought by NPEs. Frivolous patent plaintiffs, even if they're active competitors in the market, are in a much weaker position thanks to this decision.

This is a great step toward a more sane patent system, and many startup founders should be delighted.
I have mixed feeling about it, having grown up in a country where it's the norm. Yes, it does seem to reduce barratry, but it can also be used to deter legitimate plaintiffs who don't have an open-and-shut case, because a loss in court against a wealthy defendant can easily result in bankruptcy.

'Faraway hills look green,' as the proverb goes.
Facebook has proven multiple times they will change settings when they please, and will do what they want with the information as they please. Platforms other than Facebook can facilitate what Facebook currently facilitates.
Rest in peace Ubuntu for Android
Seems like an interesting choice for a demo video to showcase Flipboard (i.e. regarding their own stake in this realm of products, Paper). Granted this isn't about that, but that was fun to think about.
The legal system cannot be considered in isolation. It's part of a broader apparatus for protecting peoples' rights. Other countries have higher bars for getting into court, but they also have other mechanisms for enforcing peoples' rights. For example, European countries generally have more elaborate and burdensome regulatory regimes, and use administrative proceedings to accomplish things that in the U.S. are handled through court proceedings.

A good example is products liability law. The EU products liability directive is implemented in Germany as the Appliances and Product Safety Act. It does not create civil liability to injured consumers, but instead is part of an administrative enforcement regime. Authorities actively monitor the products on the market, and have the power to issue recalls, fines, and even criminal penalties.

For most areas of the law that see significant litigation (products liability, employment, etc) the U.S. either lacks such administrative entities or has undersized ones compared to what is common in Europe. In the American system, more of these issues are, consciously, left to be handled in private litigation. Essentially, in Europe you have more bureaucrats, and in America we have more lawyers.

Also, note that "loser pays" countries aren't usually literally "loser pays." In France, for example, losers pay court fees, but attorney's fees are awarded by a judge in an amount that usually doesn't cover actual amounts spent.
It's not free - there are ads and they are intrusive.
(Ex-wave, sharejs.org author)

You should be aware that on the google wave team we eventually dumped the idea of 'SplitParagraph' / 'JoinParagraph'. We spent a long time trying to make them work, but eventually proved that it was impossible to make our OT system work correctly on those operations. I suspect that you'll have the same problem.

I would advise you to map your 23 operations down to a much smaller set if you want to get OT working correctly. With wave, we ended up implementing 'SplitParagraph' by inserting an empty <newline /> tag. We could remove that tag collaboratively (correctly), and all the OT semantics worked much better.
This startup sucks. I want to work at another startup.
There's an important difference between sharing information with facebook, and allowing facebook to share your information with 3rd party developers.

Pure auth has value to developers who want to verify a user without requiring a handshake of verifying an email address, having to manage against spam accounts, and so on. Yes it's possible to have multiple facebook accounts, but there's significantly more friction in facebook's system than in any home-rolled system you're going to come up with. While at the same time, significantly less friction from a "steps the user has to take to log into your app" point of view.
Wow, it seems like they finally got rid of the minimum e-mail, profile, friends and all that jazz. Just finished reading the dev docs and it seems we can finally limit the minimum scope. Facebook can now just be used as a standard login.

Though they now need to educate users so that they don't still feel that their privacy is being violated.
They may improve the upgrade process for users. It's also open source, I'm sure they'd love to hear about your upgrading concerns.

On the other hand, there's also the paid service, which you don't have to manage at all.
If anybody else is wondering what the hell "f8" is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_f8
I don't doubt it. But would it have been any better if the apartment owner had done the same specific things as the Airbnb renters? I'm assuming your problems involved noise or property damage.
I see only three good reasons for a merchant to hold reserve in bitcoin: 1) pay their employees, 2) pay their suppliers, or 3) good old speculation.

When you start to see large suppliers get into the market then you'll start to see a decrease in immediate conversions.
It's rather disingenuous to not mention the real problems of network non-neutrality. Specifically, rent extraction by those who have a privileged market position.
tl;dr: App gets no data and Facebook still gets the same data. Total win for Facebook.
This cookbook seems ideal for someone on retirement or disability benefits.
Exactly. Because someone else want to have that feature. You are not the only person who is using the web.
Either way can work. Some time ago, it was difficult to share data and networking between containers.

Right now, it is so easy that I even have (without CoreOS) a Hubot in a container, with its Redis brain in another container. Hubot can talk to Redis just fine, and that's the only container in that machine which can do so.

Maintaining the data storage backend gets easier this way. The Redis data is stored in a volume.
4$ is expensive.

I eat only white bread and cheese. Sometimes with a tomato. Those are the only things that parents buy. (Also meats but i'm vegetarian).

Potatoes are good and cheap (0.3$ per kg), but:

- I won't eat anything that I touched with bare hands, so I would have to buy some single-use gloves.

- Right now I don't have my own pot. And I'm saving for a phone so I don't want to spend 10$.

- It takes more than hour to prepare them.

I recently added multivitamin tablets to diet.
Almost all vitamins, for 0.1$ per day.
Moot. We have to rebuild our antibiotic-creation capability. The number of bugs is 2nd-order importance.
So, we're going to try to stabilize our currency by tying it to every failing currency across the world? If bitcoin gets mainly used as a replacement for hyper-inflationary currencies, then it's never going to be a viable alternative to an even marginally strong currency. Tying all the world's currencies together isn't going to create a stronger currency than, e.g., the dollar or the euro. Thus, those who work in dollars or euros have economic reasons not to use bitcoins.
Imagine if any two people who reside in the Bay Area would receive $3M at a $10M valuation within three weeks of asking for it (no questions asked) as long as they have incorporated and one of them can program. What do you think would happen to the Bay Area housing market in this situation? How can you not call it "buy pressure"?

Note: interestingly this is an extreme an unrealistic example, but it's not far from relaity!
I clicked a book on the Amazon Books homepage and couldn't get it to work with the URL, ISBN, or ISBN-14.

The Fault in Our Stars Paperback by John Green:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Fault-Stars-John-Green/dp/01424241...
Prolonged litigation.
Venus.
If you don't need outs, then you don't care about the value of BTC.

Lets make this more explicit: Why are you so attached to the value of BTC? Dollars for instance, are worth less than a Euro and less than a British Pound. It is only in the insanity of the BTC market that people seem to care about making BTCs "worth more".
Serious question: why not strive to make a filesystem the universal service API? Filesystems offer built-in CRUD semantics, notions of listing/grouping data by key (i.e. directory), notions of read/write/search permissions, and notions of tagging records with arbitrary attributes.

Advantages:

* It doesn't take much effort to create a filesystem API. The service only needs to expose 12 basic methods to get off the ground (open, close, read, write, creat, unlink, mkdir, opendir, readdir, closedir, rmdir, stat). It could go on to implement trunc, mknod, rename, link, and maybe others if it wanted, but that would depend on whether or not there's a semantic "mapping" of these methods to the service's features. Also, if per-record attributes are needed, then there's only 4 additional methods to implement (getxattr, setxattr, listxattr, removexattr). Higher-level operations, like transactions, can be implemented in a client library as compositions of the 12 basic methods.

* It doesn't take much effort to understand a filesystem API either. Programmers usually learn how to interact with a filesystem early on, so they'll understand the basic semantics of your service without much more experience. This lowers the barrier to entry for writing applications that use your service. Moreover, existing tools that expect to interface with a filesystem can now interface with your service's data with little/no modification.

* If the filesystem becomes the standard service API, then applications can trivially create mash-ups of data from multiple services by mounting them within the application's own filesystem namespace.

* Despite having a fixed API, the filesystem doesn't constrain the semantics of the service, since the service can namespace data by the extra semantics that apply. For example, records under the /Users/ directory could be made to have tighter consistency semantics than records in /TemporaryData/. Another example, writes to files in /StruturedFileData/ could be rejected if the write() doesn't contain properly-formatted data. A third example: files in /EncryptedData/ could each be required to have an extended attribute called "encryptionKey" that contains the symmetric key needed to decrypt the file. A write() on a file will fail until the "encryptedKey" attribute is set.

* For service functionality that for whatever reason cannot be exposed via a filesystem (and to be honest, I'm having a hard time thinking of any), the filesystem still lets you "emulate" RPC by creating or reading a file whose path describes the serialized method and arguments. For example, fd = open("/API/this_is_a_method/and_this_is_the_first_arg/and_this_is_the_second_arg/etc", O_RDONLY) would send the request, and read(fd, 65536) would get the result. The /API/ namespace would forbid opendir() and readdir(), and the path resolution implementation would treat the rest of the path after "/API/" as the method name and arguments (instead of directories to be searched).
The point of these benchmarks is that, given the same database and the same queries, languages have different performance profiles.

If I build an application in Java and Python, with the same database backend, running the exact same set of SQL queries, the Java application should perform better.
>it protects poor people's work from being appropriated by rich people

No it doesn't. Major corporations like Target and H&M rip off small designers all the time. Litigation is expensive, and unfairly favors wealthier parties.
The fact that US will become China's bitch sooner or later is a foregone conclusion. The question is when and how fast.

Present day US still remains a force to recon with. It still has an astronomical military budget. But it is also a debt ridden country who is stilling from the productive parts of its society and burning it off on the least productive people in society creative very perverse incentives which are exactly opposite of what happened in the 19th century.
The interesting part: http://www.poachbox.com/home.html
"Will". Cute Americans.
Well technically if you're a bitcoin merchant you can just as easily convert to USD or any other currency that is more stable than the Argentine peso.
> I suppose it still tells that service that I have a FB account.

Which barely more invasive than telling them you breathe air, no?
"If you use facebook login for your site then you are shooting yourself in the foot if you care about users." The vast majority of Internet users would disagree with you here. From the user's point of view, FB login lets you sign up to things in 2 clicks instead of having to fill out forms, most users would consider that a blessing.
Thanks -- this is very helpful!

(Wonder why I despise Markdown? Take a look at the paragraph immediately under the heading "Type Classes". I suppose this could be a formatting error, but I'm betting it's a Markdown misinterpretation.)
I have a photo collage app that produces a jpg. The user usually wants to share the collage on social media like Facebook or Instagram. Keeping up to date with the various APIs is a pain in the ass (and I use ShareKit, a library to aggregate these services), and the user still has to sign in to give credentials to import photos or post to social media.

Linking could simplify the exchange of data here, where I could just pass the photo to the relevant app to handle.
A win for new sites that are starting up and can leverage the FB sign-in framework.

An example: I've wanted to try out https://giveit100.com/ since launch, but have been waiting for an alternative sign-in.

Thanks FB!
For CS I did it almost like that: Typically you write papers in LaTeX which means you need a correct Bibtex entry, and correct means its better be curated by someone else. Since most of the relevant CS publications are in DBLP [1] I wrote a small script that scans missing citation keys in your LaTeX file for actual DBLP keys and automatically builds this into a bibtex file that you can use [2]. If you integrate this command in your regular build cycle for LaTeX using for example latexmk manually maintaining bibtex files is a thing from the past.

[1] http://www.dblp.org/search/

[2] https://github.com/grundprinzip/dblp