skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The trap exposes the dirty little secret: you're not building a product to sell to customers, you're building a product to sell to investors.

The exit is the massage.
15 Recommended WordPress Themes For Your Blog and Magazine
"the right to live should not be dependent on the ability to pay"
Wow, the rhetoric is strong in this one. Not only is this a catchy statement that will appeal to the masses, but it's also completely vague and devoid of any substance. I suppose if a medical treatment cost a few million dollars a pop, and it has to come out of his paycheck, he'll be very quick to put "buts" and "exceptions" in his statement.

If people really thought like him, we'd be getting our governments to be spending huge sums of money on health/healthcare/medical research. But we don't. So either he's one of the few that think this way, or there is something else at play.
This is not at all a good source for a submission on the broad topic announced in the headline. The tendentious language of the submission should be enough to alert readers that this is basically a press release, not a scholarly article about the various early texts from various places and times that mention claims about Jesus.
That is an excellent idea! Make it cross platform, and able to install missing tools, combine it with speech to text and you would be able to talk to any device regardless of the software installed on the device.

please open presentation X from my dropbox
Well said. I had the same conclusion - it's not research, it's confident sounding speculation.
IMEI blacklists are unimplemented in many places. On many phones, the IMEI can be changed. Even though there are laws against reprogramming IMEIs, there are plenty of how-tos on the Internet.

Stolen phones ended up in Russia and India, after having their IMEIs reprogrammed by professional fences. Many carriers opposed mandatory IMEI blacklisting laws/regulations on the grounds it is ineffective.
> phishing is a very big problem

Is it? What are the numbers?

So many annoying things are done in the name of "security" without much justification (both online and in real life); Chrome removed the protocol for no reason and Firefox felt obliged to do the same, and now we're removing the whole url just to help folks who can't be bothered to read it?

Another comment suggests "source code highlighting" for the url, where the actual domain would be emphasized while still showing the whole url: what are your thoughts on this?

(Disclaimer: I have not tried the Chrome version in question so I very well may not know what I'm complaining about.)
No, I didn't read the article, nor did I claim or indicate that I did in any way. Yet here is yet another front pager about Chrome experimenting with something that Safari on iOS has done for some time, as if people just discovered fire.
No they don't. What matters is your approach to design the system.
Find another? See if the handle is in active use and if not ask nicely if they'll turn it over to you (after you purchase the .com).
That could work, too, but could place limits on the type/amount of string error message returned and the lifetime of the struct. Most implementations just use the heap so there are no gotchas with what kind of message you can return back and when you can access it.
"Why do Chinese websites use numbers in their domain names?" http://dashan.com/blog/culture/why-do-chinese-websites-use-n...
So phishers buy domains with a levenshtein distance of 1 or two. It solves one problem, but creates an entire class of users that don't understand what a URL is. Who benefits? Google and search engine providers because now they can manipulate future internet users to believe that search engines are the internet. We've reverted to AOL in 1995.

There is nothing more that can be productively argued about this topic. There will be analogies about how complexity is hidden in various domains (cars, computers) and how beneficial it has been and how users are happy with it. Those arguments are fine and maybe they are being made in good faith, but it doesn't change the underlying future truth:

Marketing will now be changed to reflect Google keywords, not URLs. "www." and ".com" will become meaningless. Google will have put one more level of distance between what the users type in the URL and even what they click in the browser and what is reflected in the address bar.
There was a company doing that in their first class. http://www.sonyalabs.com/ (not up anymore).
I can give you an anti-pattern: for years IBM had an ideas program (I think called "Think Up!" but not certain). Employees could submit their idea online and it would be evaluated by "someone".

I turned out to be one of those someones. Any employee idea that mentioned "internet" or "web" in the 1990s got forwarded to me to "resolve". The problem I quickly ran into was that there was no way for me to say "Hey, this is a good idea, I have no means/method/funding to implement it myself". I could only accept ideas (which I then had to document how to implement and implement) or reject them. After getting repeatedly reprimanded for not acting on employee ideas I started rejecting them en masse. All of them, regardless of the value. If it ended up on my desk, I rejected it.

And I eventually won an award for being such a valuable "contributor" to the IBM Ideas program.

So, if you implement some sort of ideas program, make sure that there's some sort of process in place to move the idea from "hey, that's a great idea" to implementing it. Depending on the size of your organization, it's likely that you will get some great ideas from people who have absolutely no idea how to implement the idea. Make sure there's a way to catch these and figure out how to implement them.
I think that one of the problems is that the parameters used in analyzing e.g. visa requests, among other things, are not clearly laid out.

To some extent, we are reduced to anecdote, because an opaque and sometimes seemingly capricious (if not malicious) system -- or set of sometimes cooperating, sometimes competing systems -- leaves us no choice.

There also appears to be no effective and consistent gradation in risk management. No ability to elicit further investigation and potential resolution of open questions -- whether they are legitimate or the result of an inept initial evaluation.

A prime example of this, not with respect to visas but with respect to ongoing travel, with plans already made and tickets already purchased, is the "no-fly list" and other apparent, more obscure and hidden lists and qualifications having similar effects upon travel.

Are you on it? We can't tell you. Why are you on it? We can't tell you. I (general "I") have a mountain of evidence I can present demonstrating that I'm not a threat. There's no effective appeal process (never mind any "ostensible" appeal process; much reporting has demonstrated such to apparently be entirely non-functional). I'm willing to submit to search to demonstrate that I am not nor am carrying any immediate threat. Not an option.

That and why you are on the list is a secret. Options to mitigate a perceived risk and allow travel are not an option.

Hardly hallmarks of an "open" society.

I mention the "no-fly list" also in good part because it applies also to U.S. citizens. Such cases are not a matter of a foreign national soliciting the U.S. for a... "privilege". They reflect a government opaquely and apparently extra-judicially limiting free association (via travel).

The U.S. is still the envy of much of the world, and not without some good reasons. And the majority of trips both by foreign nationals and by U.S. citizens take place without undo circumstance. But the trend in travel restrictions worries me, for one. And, as an ostensibly self-governing citizenry, how are we to effectively govern as such policies increasingly cut us off from controversial parts of the world we might do well to actually pay more attention to? Such governance includes foreign policy. Also, foreign examples can serve as useful lessons in guiding our own domestic policy -- if such examples are though of as "bad", then as examples of things to learn from and hopefully avoid.

token, I know you as an open-minded, insightful, and "fair" participant, here, and I don't mean my response to come across as overly "argumentative" or upset. Rather, I take your point, but present my own not so much as a counter-point but as an adjunct that I think also needs to be considered, and so I'm mentioning it in this response.
As a developer, if this is going to hide any useful information on first glance I am not sure how I feel about that. I already feel like Chrome has started shunning developers with that over the top annoying pop-up any time I open a new window (Ctrl+N, type, stop typing because I have to move my mouse to close the popup), and moving towards forcing developers to distribute their extensions through the play store (which kills any small-time extensions for tiny communities & friends).

I appreciate trying to make Chrome more secure, but please don't forget about the developers. Annoy them too much, and they might move their development to another platform.
Why do Chinese websites use numbers in their domain names?
I think internet was the real game changer. Once bandwidth got good enough for downloading software, it got easier to sell and patch anything. I can't imagine living 7-8 months without patches.

AppStore is definitely a step up, but it may be too crowded.
interestingly, cookies would not work for this url in IE.
You're probably thinking of Marte Dalelv, a Norwegian woman on a business trip in Dubai†. Or possibly Alicia Gali, the Australian woman raped and then jailed 8 months in Fujairah UAE‡.

†http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecution_of_Marte_Dalelv
‡http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alicia_Gali
My first reaction when I saw this change was, 'Oh, good, this website uses HTTPS now'. If I wasn't tech savvy, I would probably not have noticed that I was wrong. Given that, when I learned what had been done, the first thought that popped in my head was, 'Phishing only has shifted from one form of deceit to the next'.

Also, while reading Jake's post again, I realized that having the URL path colored in grey was already a big hint that something was off. Going all the way to white doesn't make a valuable difference; maybe using blue rather than grey would make the difference more striking.

I'd love to know exactly how the experimentation works. Do you perform user surveys? How do they work? What is the criterion that decides that any particular experiment failed and should be scraped off?
Google sued for secret deals that may have increased the cost of Android phones
If you're after cheap thinkpads I've got no stock at the moment (other than a dead T420)
I find this is the first thing a lot of C++ devs do if the wrappers don't exist. It is actually kind of important in C++ if your app uses exceptions and you want to have exception (somewhat-)safe code. Using the C API directly would require a lot of boilerplate to ensure all allocated things are cleaned up if an exception is thrown.
McAfee has lost almost all credibility. That's not an attack on the merits of his new chat app but I really don't think that he's in a position to request to be trusted (again) and I fail to see what the team behind this thought they would gain by having McAfee's notoriety attached to their reputation.

See DropBox for another recent example (though arguably, that one had a lot more going for it from DropBox's perspective).
wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a payment to somebody to burn down the lighthouse and an insurance contract

A prediction market provides trust that a payment will happen if a specific event happens.

But insurance also requires another kind of trust. If you want to insure your goods, the insurer needs to evaluate the moral hazard in order to determine his rate. But here, he doesn't know if the buyer of the contract is the owner of the lighthouse, so there's no way he can do that: maybe the buyer turns out to be someone who won't suffer from the loss of the lighthouse and who can easily commit a crime. Because the moral hazard is huge, the insurer can't provide insurance at competitive rates.

Insurance contracts where the buyer of the insurance is anonymous to the insurer don't seem desirable to me. They enable assassination markets but have no real use (except for small amounts that won't create moral hazard, but I'd call that betting rather than insurance).
In the US, you can actually get a second password. There are a few reasons for doing this. The most notable is that there are a few countries for which getting a visa can be a relatively lengthy process (e.g. India)--which is a problem if you're doing a lot of international travel and can't have your passport of of your hands for that long. It may also be useful if you travel to countries that are in various stages of conflict with each other.
While I agree that this will be great for security, with changes like this I always wonder: what happens when we idiot-proof and hide implementation details of almost all consumer products? How does the next generation of hackers pop a path into a URL and learn about path traversal attacks, or code into query params and learn about XSS when we've hidden all that away from them? There's some value to that, too.

For me, that was exactly how I got interested in software development, first learnt about application security attacks, and even some scripting languages. I'm not sure any of that would've happened as well, or at all if my first device was a locked-down iPad (which it frequently is, for kids these days.)
Not only is it explicitly stated, but it's done so in the very first sentence.
"It is a long and tough debate, and there is no right answer. However, for those that think Cipla is all about saving the world, remember that it is a for-profit company."
Ah yes, the non-profit/for-profit organization fallacy. Boils down to something like: Organizations that don't make profits will only do good. Completely disregarding the fact that a lot/most of its leaders/workers are there working for-profit via a salary, and it's in their best interest to perpetuate their organization. And also there is an incentive to not fix the problem the organization is supposed to solve because that will mean the dissolution of the organization.

Now, don't get me wrong. Some of these organizations do a whole world of good, have very passionate and dedicated individuals that are probably working for free, and there are a lot of causes that benefit greatly from their presence. But let's not fool ourselves into putting non-profit organizations on an almighty moral pedestal where we claim they can do no wrong. While simultaneously demonizing organizations that try to make a profit out of giving people what they want/need.
Many people in this thread will confuse a clean interface with convenience and sloppy conclusions for protection.
Chrome has been highlighting the origin component and de-emphasizing the path since its initial release, but the fact is that the vast majority of users are still very unclear about the security relevance of origin and easily fall victim to phishing attacks. So, the team that's working on this is intentionally investigating larger departures from the current URL display. Accepting that, what you see right now is an incomplete experiment, and no one involved would be happy with the result if it damaged the utility of URLs or made Chrome less useful for web developers.
Before I got good at programming I wanted a mentor too. At various points in my career, at times I've had a person in my life who acted as the role of "mentor" for short periods of time (one to two weeks). IMO a mentor isn't really necessary. If you're motivated to learn enough and to always keep your mind open you'll become good. Keep doing what you're doing. A mentor isn't going to be able to automagically transfer the knowledge and experience in his mind to yours via USB; Looking back in hindsight I wanted a mentor at the time because that was what I mistakenly believed in (that I'll be able to learn faster/better with a mentor). I admit it does feel good when someone with more experience compliments my programs. Did that contribute to how good a programmer I've become today? Not really...

"Build a Django app? Learn Java and build an Android app? Learn Haskell? Learn C?"

I've done all of them, each in my own time, except Android; I created some (toy) iOS apps instead.

Just keep going to where your mind takes you.

I would like to add that I did study software engineering at university several years after I started learning to code, and that it did help me figure out what I wanted to learn. I would not disagree with you too much if you suggested university took the place of a mentor for me.
I can't believe this is being upvoted so much. I have several issues here.

1. There's so little meat in this article about anything.

2. It treats the Gospel of Barnabas as a new and groundbreaking discovery that will challenge the faith and beliefs of religious people, while also claiming that it supports the Muslim version of events. What are they saying, that Muslims aren't religious?

3. The Gospel of Barnabas is not a new thing, has been analyzed to death, and is not considered to be high-quality source material by many high-profile scholars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas

If it were any other topic, I bet it'd be flagged really easily. But there are a lot of people who just eat up anything anti-religious without using the same logical analysis that they would for any other topic. :(
Colin, why should we even care in 2014 what this person thought about Khan Academy in 2011? Khan Academy has changed[1] since then, and looking at recent posts from the same blog doesn't inspire confidence that the author has a lot of thoughtful things to say about education improvement.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7674168
I agree. Before any "AppStore", there were countless avenues to getting software. Plus, software finally got online "profiles" so to speak that allowed people to learn more about it before purchasing/downloading.
Cows will do this too (Warning, gross picture):

http://pics.ww.com/v/jacques/trips/us2/dscf0622.jpg.html

Basically any animal that's got a pretty good seal going and that is in a prolonged state of decomposition will eventually puncture like a balloon at its weakest point. The reason is simply the gases created by the bacteria that decompose the body have to go somewhere, the better the seal the bigger the eventual bang.
How Facebook Connect (And Other Social Logins) Can Expose You To Hackers
Here I was expecting numbers. The cynic in me doesn't think this will really have any impact at all.
How could you have gone ahead and posted such a banal, irrelevant comment long after I made it clear that the linked content doesn't matter? Sad attempt at a dogpile?
Why does this show up once a month on Hacker News? Seriously. We've discussed this tool to death. And every time, the same discussions follow:

"Hi! I'm a purist. I use VIM to edit my Github textfiles. If you configure VIM correctly, it'll work better than anything in the world!"

"Hi! I'm a non-purist and have tried 50 different tools, let me list them out!"

I don't ever see any other tool or article reposted as much as Prose.io
You can avoid 3rd party libraries being counted in by following some conventions, see the patterns ignored by Github's linguist https://github.com/github/linguist/blob/master/lib/linguist/...
>In a lot of Europe you would not know that you had crossed a border, it is no big deal. Even in and out of Switzerland that is not 'part of Europe' in the EU sense. It feels good when nobody cares to look at your passport and you can just roll on in.

Well, that's because most of the EU (plus Switzerland and Norway) is part of the Schengen Area which explicitly allows for free movement between countries. I assure you that you can't just roll into the UK which is not under that agreement.
because writing yaml is way easier than writing a bash script.
Ask who? Twitter?
Two potential problems:

1. People are punished for failing to rig the vote. If a collective does manage to push through a counterfactual vote, everyone who tried to stop them is punished.

2. Voters in smaller betting pools will be low-information voters. Take a local election: there may be a few dozen or hundred local participants in the prediction market, enough to support betting, but there may be only be one or two legitimate news sources. Voters outside the local area could be easily misled by fake news sources. So throw up a couple of fake websites, use them as sources in a Wikipedia edit-war, and you might be able to trick the low information voters into voting your way and drowning out the local voters with personal knowledge of the event. Your deception only has to last long enough for the bet to be settled, and there is no way to punish it within the system. (If it falls through, the dupes will be punished.)
"Tries" is the operative word here. There is a documented history of utter incompetence in Linguist.
Companies are usually reluctant to raise a down round due to anti-dilution provisions:

http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/jan2009/sb20090...
I don't find bitwise operations incredibly rare. I use them fairly often in my side projects (various simulations and optimizers).
I do not intend to imply that by being a for-profit company Cipla cannot do any good, nor do I argue the reverse. I do argue that Cipla, as a for-profit, has responsibility to its shareholders first and foremost, and has a goal of making money. It can, and as we saw does, much good in India, Brazil and other developing markets.

Nike's corporate responsibility over the past several years and its investment in new technologies and supplier monitoring is a great example of a for-profit company doing good.
respectfully ...

chrome is already breaking half of the copy/pastes i do because it's from my history and not a page that's already loaded.

do you have any idea how many people actually use copy/paste? i would venture that ctrl-c/ctrl-v is probably the only key binding that the majority of computer users of all walks of life use.

half of the places i seem to be pasting links into don't pick up the links without the http. Including things like markdown in github issues, many chat systems.

Messing with the url bar when you did it last time has been a constant daily sense of irritation to me. So no. I don't want you to mess with it any further.

just please stop.
For some reason I'd never seen Homebrew Cask before, which looks very interesting! Does anyone have experiences with Cask to share?
you can show the entire url while highlighting the root domain. its a design issue, lets hope the solution isn't hiding the entire url
..., not having unsigned types, as in Java, ...

Unsinged integer exist in Nimrod, you just have to

import unsigned

when you use them.
Kind of OT, but since we're talking language interop, Fortran has neither eager nor short-circuit and/or and it is completely up to the compiler what optimizations it makes. Since Fortran ABI works directly with C (and by extension C++) natively, I've seen a whole class of bugs opened up by C/C++ devs either reading or writing Fortran not aware that this could happen. Try removing that from your mental model of how boolean logic works!
Many clusters have tight interconnect, yet I don't call them supercomputers.

Supercomputers are more defined by their capabilities and max capacities: they tend to be orders of magnitude larger in their max memory, and their ability to do X, Y, or Z. It's really just a term at this point, not something truly differentiating.
This reminds me of the book, The Masters Of Doom.

John Carmack, et al. Had to be quite creative on the programming side of things.