skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's much better than it used to be. For example, Firefox 15 made a class of very common leaks caused by add-ons impossible. Firefox 26 massively reduced the amount of memory used on image-heavy pages. And there have been many smaller improvements over the past three years, under the aegis of the MemShrink project (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Performance/MemShrink).
Mozilla lost. DRM won. Five years ago, this wouldn’t have happened.
Interesting the company they feature, Picturelife, seems to be a direct competitor to their own new Carousel app.
The same arguments you have for 'renting' apply for 'buying' software. Why has software a cost associated at all when the copy (to download) is produced via 0$?

It doesn't make 'sense' too. Maybe in the very long term you are right and software as well as digital goods can be consumed for free (or via paying a special tax)
What is your point? That administrators really hate Java too?
Oh I absolutely agree that it's not an entirely unreasonable model. But nothing about the rhetoric coming out of the FCC is saying that they are looking at changing the entire payment model of the Internet. (Also of note is that changing something this fundamental does risk breaking the system in order to fix it on the other side.)

If you look at the deliberation involved in the rollout of IPv6 and compare to this, which is about as fundamental on the business side, there's no comparison. The FCC is moving in a haphazard fashion without addressing what a fundamental change this is.

It is indeed interesting to wonder how the incentives change if the funds ISPs get from service providers (SPs) overshadow the fees from consumers. In an unregulated market, that would possibly lead ISPs to acquire those SPs (a la Comcast-NBC) and make it harder to access content not owned by the ISP. So we could circle back to an AOL-like environment. The FCC is so far pretending that this is not possible.

Also note that under your scenario it's possible that the Netflix business would not be possible, because the ISPs would make the connection fees high enough to destroy the business model, instead shunting their customers onto their proprietary platforms. In fact, any time an SP becomes popular, it would be shareholder-friendly for the ISP to make a bad clone of that SP and then make connection fees to the original unbearably high. The FCC is again ignoring this likely outcome.

To say nothing of the likelihood that fewer SPs will get started in the first place. Given free reign, why wouldn't large ISPs charge a baseline connection fee for every SP? And why would we expect that fee to accessible to businesses without institutional funding? It would be "commercially reasonable" for e.g. Comcast to charge $10k annually for access to it's tens of millions of subscribers. It would be "commercially reasonable" for AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. to do the same. Don't forget that any web operator that wants to be accessible nationally/globally (if other countries follow suit) will need to pay that connection fee many times. The FCC is silent on this issue.

The point is there's a lot here that's not being addressed by the FCC.
This is hilarious and spot on. Still love HN though.
A SITE POSTS INFORMATION.

...Google indexes it...

Go after the site that posted the information!!!

Posting the information on a web server is the offensive and harmful act.

Mechanically creating an index of information on web servers is not.
This post was primarily written for a iOS dev-centric audience. I wanted to focus more on the underlying technical pieces than on selling Heap itself.

Noted, though, that we lost you with the piece's verbosity.
That is because you are comparing the wrong things.

If stripe started to charge two different companies based on which brand of jeans they were selling you had a point but that is not what Stripe do.

They treat everyone the same regardless of what they sell but not how much they pay. Thats the difference.
"My question is, why didn’t they tell you about that problem to begin with? Why did it take building the solution from scratch, with your own two hands, before you understood the problems it was solving?"

Exactly what we were saying the other day and getting slammed for in the thread on Agile and developers leaving (in response to somebody mentioning "working code over comprehensive docs").

Code or docs that explain the how and not the why are pretty subgood.

Code is better than docs at explaining the how of a program, so it makes sense to have sparse comments in certain places. The why, though, is much better served by a few thorough high-level documents that help give the framework and context for a bit of software.
You don't seem to understand that Google is a company run by people who are part of a society. Not some kind of naturally occurring algorithm.
The problem is nobody actually understands how digial media works. They have lived for decades now where on personal computers audio and video were scarce resources you got through curated gatekeepers.

Whenever I just copy stuff between computers everyone in my extended family is bowled over. It is literal shell shock to find out that this stuff is literally electricity that you can do whatever you want with if it isn't behind uncrackable encryption.
I second the motion.

I think he means that people who pay for internet access and then barely use it subsidize the people who do use it. Just like gym memberships that aren't used subsidize those that are.

But it's a specious argument. Just because some users are more profitable than others doesn't mean that it's OK to charge money to providers to not degrade the pipe that I'm paying for.

If I want to download at full speed 24/7, I should be able to do that (barring any specific limits in my contract with the ISP). Yes, I will be a less profitable customer than one who sends an email once a week, but those are the breaks: Either change the contract so its limits are clear, or make sure that the average profit stays enough in the black to cover the cost of the outliers.

I'm paying for a service. If they aren't providing that service, and they are limiting my connection to try to shake down providers, they're doing it by hurting my service experience. And if they're doing that in a market where there are no ISP options, then it's an abuse of monopoly power.

And any "half way decent free market economist" should recognize that monopolies can and should be regulated. Especially when the monopoly is on something that the UN has declared to be a human right. [1]

[1] http://www.thewire.com/technology/2011/06/united-nations-wik...
Nice catch! :)

The python library and client is still work in progress.

Still, I've open sourced the repo so those who are curious can take a peek, although there isn't much worth showing there yet. We'll make a larger announcement when that happens.. there's a lot of stuff we've got planned for the desktop yet.

Here's the fixed link: https://github.com/Kickflip/python-kickflip
<repelled via logical fallacy>
I believe the European Court of Justice's ruling applies to all of the EU countries, not just to Spain. I think it's unimaginable that Google would stop serving the entire EU market on principle.

But you raise a neat question: assuming it was just Spain (or the next similarly sized country to reach this decision), what would happen if Google threatened to entirely pull out of the country--i.e., stop serving search results or supporting any Google services there? Are they powerful enough to influence national policy? It seems unlikely, but it's a neat hypothetical.
LiveRamp to be acquired by Acxiom for US 310 million
Hardcore pirates don't watch this BS, they just get the entire season off Piratebay in 4k with surround sound.
You can use this https://github.com/Jakobo/redefine
How can people that stupid be allowed to operate airplanes?
>Some just like making pretty pictures. Some are thinking of themselves as future game-engine writers.

Both of these students will learn more using a framework or game engine than immediate mode OpenGL.

> I teach low-ish level graphics programming so that my students will know low-ish level graphics programming.

What you're teaching isn't the real graphics pipeline anymore or even an abstraction of it. It's limited high level graphics programming that both doesn't teach how modern high level graphics work is done and doesn't teach fundamentals either. You're really just teaching how to write code for 90s fixed function APIs. I agree that it is a valid stepping stone (many of us started there), but I think there are much better options now than there were 15 years ago. Anyway, OpenGL is not an educational library and making the lives of educators easier should not be a concern of Khronos (or anyone). As an educator you can always build your own framework that has the appropriate level of "low-ish" levelness but holds the students hands enough to not confuse them, if you don't feel that current options are sufficient.
We actually don't use FFMpeg to do the compression, we use the hardware encoders, so it uses much less CPU. That's how we're able to broadcast at a much better resolution.

It's also bandwidth adaptive streaming, backed by a global CDN, and generates both Live and VOD HLS streams.

But, more importantly, we've designed it in such a way that as a developer, you don't even have to worry about that! The library just exposes a really simple API that does all of the video magic for you.
Burn the library down, because you were offended by a book.

Card catalogs should be illegal.

Let's dig up Melvil Dewey and desecrate his corpse.

The fundamental question is: is it harmful to run a word index algorithm on the internet's data?

You're saying YES.

Don't you realize how backwards and harmful that is?
> How do you hire your first employee as a solo founder without giving them 50% of your venture?

> I've developed the entire business plan and written the initial app myself

It's sounds like you already have an MVP ready. Depending on the specific nature of your startup, I would most likely launch it before thinking about hiring any employees. If you can get some recurring revenue by yourself, then you can hire and give them very little shares <2% with a good salary. If it's more of a B2C venture you'll probably have find an angel investor soon, which is never easy (esp. for first-time solo founder).
So you were wrong about the gun analogy and are ignoring the point that the operators are responsible for what Google does.
Also WordStar has its own system of key bindings, powerful and for the writers need. You could easily count your words with Ctrl+K?, for example.
>Why can't the young people of the United States grow up with a sense of purpose about improving themselves and the world around them, as earlier generations of Americans apparently did?

Because there are no jobs in that. Cynicism and snark aside, nowadays the purpose of education in America is to get you a job: for a lower-class student, to get a job at all, for a higher-class student, to get a cushy job.

Actually, doubling back, the purpose of education in most of the world is to get you a job. The number of people who learn just to improve themselves and the world is, well, really tiny, actually.
Well, that's because we're the only live video broadcasting SDK which can do 720p!

(Ok, it's actually just because it's an awesome trick. The 720p thing is just a coincidence.)
Doesn't make Java any less of a bad language.
archive.org is perfectly happy with censorship, and does this retroactively. Its right there in their FAQ:

Archive, does respect robots.txt instructions, and even does so retroactively
+1 At apitools.com we use openresty as well. We chose lua (over javascript) because it's super fast, and because it has good sandboxing/ isolation properties which make it safe to handle arbitrary middleware.
<nitpicking on a detail of said experience then going on a tangent about an obscure technical issue not relevant to the rest of the discussion>
This one is actually legitimate. Saw it on HN a while ago, really funny:

https://github.com/jterrace/js.js/
I'm the author of the post. I was extremely careful to keep the tone of the post neutral. This paragraph sums it up:

> So, it’s clear that ABP greatly increases Firefox’s memory usage. Now, this isn’t all bad. Many people (including me!) will be happy with this trade-off — they will gladly use extra memory in order to block ads. But if you’re using a low-end machine without much memory, you might have different priorities.

If you think this post is unreasonable, I think your skin is too thin.
What have these straw men got to do with anything other than that you don't like the idea of Google having any responsibility for the negative consequences of their service?
Lot's of software is sold without DRM just fine. So I don't understand what your point was. I never said about anything about getting all for free. The discussion was about that renting doesn't make sense for digital goods (buying does).
No, he should sue the sites which host the original article IF they're causing a harm. Since the articles are factually correct and dated appropriately, I don't think any harm is being done to him merely by the presence of those articles.
"I know this is hard to believe, but Facebook really is a commodity product, and Friendster and Myspace have been doing it since years ago, and Diaspora is going to do the same thing, except be private and secure" - said someone everytime FB added a controversial feature.

There's definitely buy-in and momentum of established products...but sometimes, products in the same space can be differentiated in ways not directly related to their core. Github makes it substantially easier to share and collaborate. And that is why many people prefer it. If you reduce it to "Well other places have git, too"...then that's missing the point of why Github appeals to so many.
"No, DRM can't enforce it (since this stuff is pirated practically instantaneously). So why is it used?"

Strongly suspect this is due to contractual obligations with the studios.

The agreements will almost certainly stipulate that content must be sufficiently protected. Hence Netflix plays ball, if it wants access.
Save, Share and Discover the best of the web with Snipify
> in the meantime Firefox and Opera relied on the promise
> and then were forced to start implementing support once
> they realized Google was not going to keep the promise
> and it was hurting them and then included support(I don't
> think Opera ever did?).

Not only that, Mozilla partnered with CISCO to make h264 usage free for all. Now, people can modify and redistribute Firefox and still retain the ability to play h264. Something that Google gave a shit about when they included h264 in Chrome, but not in Chromium.

If you are using Chrome, don't fool yourself, you are not using an open source browser, but you are helping Google further the agenda of its stakeholders, and they made it clear what their priorties are when they took the first step by implementing this on Chromebooks.
What justifies giving the searchers an advantage that the victims don't have?
I agree...

AT&T never says they will not inspect the packets nor keep the Government from inspecting the packets. They just give a lower priced option where they target you with ads/or sell your browsing history, etc. NSA is splitting off the packets 100% at the major uplinks regardless of what AT&T or any other provider does.
I like this as well, even works great for windows 8 IE which there is no ad block for otherwise, but sometime I need to see ads and then switching is not worth the hassle. I've been thinking of developing a system tray hosts file switcher for this purpose. You think anyone else would use it?
I agree it's unfair to the customer, but the message is still being twisted to serve corporate interests. ISPs have been throttling bittorrent for a while now and no one was making a fuss about net neutrality then...
My question "why" was not pointed at Netflix. It was pointed at publishers (studios, etc.) which demand that DRM. They have no valid answer for that question.

While Netfilx aren't an ideological champion for DRM, they are a huge proliferator of it. Compare it to distributors which sell only DRM-free content and actually attempt to influence publishers to sell through them (like GOG for games). Those are actually doing something good! Netflix just help to spread the sickness claiming that "they have no choice". But that's a poor excuse.
Also: "Must not have been used within your last 20 passwords."

So you just have to provide your last 20 passwords.
link to the EFW http://efw.livejournal.com/
> Federal "net neutrality" regulations freeze into national law a particular formula for access

Er, no it doesn't "freeze" anything. FCC regulations of other regulated industries are very frequently updated. And regulations, while given force of law by the laws authorizing regulation, are not the same as law particularly with regard to being "frozen", as they can be changed by either changing the law on which they are based, or by change through regulatory process. They are, therefore, strictly less "frozen" than law.
Don't forget "In Through the Out Door" (front and back), "Physical Graffiti", and "Presence". So, at least six panels have references to Led Zeppelin cover art.
I can buy that.

The point to me is that you might treat people differently based on what they pay you, but you don't treat them differently based on what they are selling.
The victims are blaming the wrong person.

The victims should blame the person who posted the information on the internet.

DUH.
It is not a good idea to compare 2 unrelated industries directly. In the ISP Industry, the customer pays for X Mbit of Bandwidth. In the payment industry, the customer pays for the transaction fees indirectly. Hence, if you were to get your internet connection for "free" and pay for it indirectly, then the comparison could be made.
No, it isn't /that/ bad underneath.

But bind is a fairly big and complex code base. Which is probably also tied to why people use it - it's got the features people need (and a _huge_ community and install base.)
Maintainable CSS with BEM
What framework were you using before that required 5 medium ec2 instances? I'd really appreciate knowing what you were comparing Lapis to.
Am I correct in saying that you think it is harmful to run a word index algorithm on the internet's data?
From Hacker to Venture Capitalist
Note that djbdns wasn't vulnerable to the attack, because it was designed from the outset to exploit other sources of randomness. (I'm a little rusty here, but) The countermeasures djbdns employed against the attack were known all the way back when djbdns was started, and proposed on mailing lists before it. But BIND didn't employ them, because (I think, but could be wrong) that the BIND architects believed DNSSEC would be the operationally "correct" solution.

I trust djbdns more than perhaps any other piece of C code I run, and recommend it.
Have you tried RescueTime? There is a free tier and the paid version has more fine-grained reports:
http://rescuetime.com/

Using Rescuetime I am able to see how long I at the computer vs what I am actually getting done.

When I working on a client project, I track productive time as billable time (hint: create a goal for all productive time and use the calculated number).

I also have an alert for when I go over 30 minutes of "distracting" time. This applies to weekends too!

Flaking out then staying up late to finish your work.. join the the club! I noticed that I am like 3x as fast though, so it might be a good thing.

I think the answer is to just enjoy the day and work at night. That is my next experiment.
I recommend djbdns.
> How I ported the control software of a nuclear reactor to reactive Javascript

> How To Make Your Flat UI Flatter

> I decided to re-implement Javascript in Javascript. It failed. Here is my story.

Made me laugh!
If the corporate interests align with my interests, I'm fine with them standing up for my rights by accident, as it were.

I'd like to see a world with no BitTorrent throttling too, but given that I don't watch BitTorrent video in real time (or even use it for the most part), it's harder for me to get worked up about that.

Don't get me wrong: I support the concept of complete net neutrality. It's just harder to achieve a political goal when only a small minority of people are affected.
This looks really ace!
I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out what it was they had printed until you said it was a ship (upside-down of course). The best I could come up with was the flying spaghetti monster.

I guess they're showing delicate things like this because the popular/cheap extruded plastic filament printers of today can't do things like that easily.

In fact, this BBC article goes into more detail about their thinking and plans:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27412849
Google is duplicating the information just as the other sites have done. The difference is that it has far more reach.
Yeah..those people are not me and probaly anyone i know, so don't even care.
Yup, we use ES and love it! Thanks for the offering, I'll let philipDS know if he hits any stumbling blocks to get in touch.
I wasn't implying that these features were unique to GitHub, just that there can be reasons why one might prefer to use GitHub beyond it just being a place to host git repositories.

I don't think "hosted git" accurately captures the appeal of GitHub (or bitbucket for that matter). While this is the main premise behind both products, I don't think they're necessarily interchangeable in the way you describe.
The harmful information was shot out of one website, and bounced off of the Google index.

Why are you so completely incapable of blaming the person who actually pulled the trigger? The original source of the harmful information?
So, you're saying, we should trust the business that's currently trying to milk more money from any tit they can find, to lower their prices because they're bringing in a new revenue stream elsewhere? The same business that has no incentive to do so because they probably only have one competitor in a given geographical area?

The internet itself was basically built on equality. Look at any of the articles and blog posts being written by the actual internet backbone providers. They've been keeping the equality stable through the years with their peering agreements.

We would basically be giving the rights to providers like Comcast to say "We've decided that Wikipedia should pay extra if they want consumers of their information to continue to receive it in a timely manner." "Oh, we're also starting up a new service called Xfinipedia that provides a similar service, but one where we moderate the content."

Call it paranoid, but this is exactly what they're intending to do with video streaming services. They want to provide on demand video streaming to their online customers, while making it more expensive for competitive services to operate. What prevents them (or other providers) from doing the same with any service?
Which in reality translates to: DRM is about screwing honest users, pirates always find a way around it.
I voted yes but it's not so much that I regret not going as I regret not being more open-minded while I was in college. All the classes I considered a waste of time are now subjects I find to be interesting (or useful). For instance, psychology seemed totally unrelated to the my EE/CS curriculum, but now the psychology of why people click on one button or link versus another is enthralling.
If this was reddit I'd be posting a picture of Fry squinting ...
Google pulled out of China on principle.

China is a hell of a lot bigger than the EU.
Autodesk Joins the Consumer 3D Printer Wars
Creating a Planet Lisp mobile app in 15 minutes with mocl [video]