skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Any time you publish information on the web you need to consider whether you are defaming someone. This applies whether a word index is part of your publishing process or not.

These laws aren't written about 'word indexes' they are written about the rights people have to publish information about other people. That is what is at issue.
It really is that simple, though. Arrested Development was ripped from Netflix immediately after availability. There's nothing complicated about showing that it does not work.

There would be zero impact if Netflix didn't have DRM. People would still have to search and install third party software to download streams. At that point, it doesn't matter if it comes from Netflix or from some random torrent.
The code is 100% open source, so even if there isn't a GUI option for it, it would be easy for people to make builds without it. There are already many forked builds of firefox like iceweasel, etc.
How do you think this DRM will work?
You recommend something that hasn't been maintained in over a decade. Something that needs all sorts of random patches to still be useful? Random patches that may or may not introduce random vulnerabilities?

BIND may have had a (really) bad run in the BIND 8 days, but BIND 9 was surely an improvement.

And if you really want to stay away from BIND, you can go for something like PowerDNS. Or a combination like PowerDNS+Unbound.
Consider the three attacks that you've described here (preimage, second preimage, and collision) as differently constrained cases of:

H(m) = x = H(m')

Where m is the original message, x is its hash, and m' is the second message that you need to find.

For a preimage, you're given a value of x, and you don't even know what m is.

For a second preimage, you're given a value of m to start from. (And, thus, you know x.)

For a collision, you get to pick any m (and x) that you want to make your collision work. This last case is easiest to work with, since you can set up the messages in whatever way you need to exploit even a very subtle vulnerability. In a second preimage attack, the original message is given to you, so it may not set things up in an easily attackable way.

In a sense, a second preimage is a specific case of a collision. The critical difference is that a second preimage is a targeted collision.
But will using the immediate API hepl them grasp some of the concepts of OpenGL? Is there truly nothing that's learned that applies to other tasks in OpenGL? I find that unlikely.

In C, the canonical hello world example can help teach about the program starting point, return codes, argument passing, and IO. This extremely simple program can help the student learn these core concepts, even if in practive their program may ignore all of that for main except what the instruction starting point is.

Was the exercise pointless, or did it help cement core concepts which may help later?
Depends on your goals and situation.
I thought Gnome 3 wasted a lot of screen real estate

Fonts are quite large by default. I usually set the font scaling factor to 0.9 with gnome-tweak-tool, this also reduces the size of the top panel.

Since 3.10, the tendency for apps is to save space by placing buttons directly in the window title bars. For example, this is what Nautilus looks like in 3.12:

http://imgur.com/3a4zIfQ
I'm a solo founder, and it's hard keeping motivated, if i'm not committing to the code, it's just not getting done. If I had a cofounder there would be someone else adding code, and I'd feel compelled to do my share.

It's definitely doable though, and it's much more productive just working on your idea than hanging around meetups hoping to meet that someone special.

http://www.getwith.in/
So you're saying that keeping their userbase and losing their principles is better than losing their userbase and keeping their principles? Why do we care if users go to Apple/Google/etc. if Mozilla is no better than those companies anyway?
> I do see your point on the lack of trust though.

If you put that in perspective of recent privacy / mass surveillance issues, DRM is a perfect ground for various agencies to put their effort it. After all, DRM is already by design intended to spy on users and control what they do, plus DRM is massively deployed because many consumers accept it without second thought.
You say callous, I say realistic about the prospect of selling things to people using 10 year old hardware. If you aren't my customer, and most likely aren't going to become my customer, I choose not to expend (often lots of) extra work to support you.
log(-1) -> exception
1/0 -> exception
Problem solved. WTF is NaN even a thing??
Yes, I expect such thing to surface, but it would be nice if Mozilla could provide such options on their own too. That would be some small positive gesture towards those who don't appreciate their move and see it as a betrayal of Mozilla's core values. It would as well make this issue more apparent. Doesn't Mozilla care about educating the public on such matters? It surely would be a positive thing for the Open Web.
...and just paper over the ragged edges by hodoring a few scenes. After hodor, you hodor the hodor, hodor hodor hodor. Hodor hodor hodor, hodor.
Steve Hodas Offers Recipe for Re-Invigorating Intrapreneurs
Is it a fault that a website publishes news of someone's bankruptcy, or that a certain person was once convicted of a sex crime? This right to be forgotten certainly is not a concept I have every heard anyone advocate for in the US.

Credit cards, social security numbers, copyright work, stolen trade secrets, and other sensitive personal information are different. What this EU ruling seems to say is that if anything embarrassing or uncomfortable has ever happened to you in the past it should be erased from the historical record, as if it never occurred. That is kind of like in grade school, being banned by the teacher for reminding another student that they shit their pants.
You draw a lot a words out my comment just for the sake of comment something that you got on your mind even before i commented on this thread. Regardless i am mostly agree with you. But i don't have the energy nor mood to discuss anything that i am not even involve with, and there is nothing wrong to feel that way.IMHO,if you truly want to bring a meaningful discussion go to the source of this project and with the poeople that are interested on working on it, instead something so ephimeral like this thread.
I know how a search engine works. Saying I don't know simply proves that you are willing to make statements that you provably cannot support, which weakens everything else you say.

I simply disagree with your views on the responsibility of corporations for what they publish.

The comments about construction companies and programming languages are a straw man. The issue is the information that Google the company provides to searchers about people.

Google the company is providing a service for which they as a company are responsible. The methods they use to provide the service don't change that.
Well, then by that definition you are not refactoring either, and in fact nobody is refactoring. Because any change can unintentionally change the behavior. That's what we call a bug, and them bugs don't care about your definition.

And Unit tests alone cannot ensure that the non-happy-paths are functional.
Hodas outlines an approach for enterprise or large organizations who want to encourage innovation by partnering with startups and re-invigorating intrapreneurs and internal change agents:

define an API to share data;
elicit support from change agents on the front lines;
allow for a lot of experimentation;
only pick winners based on results achieved after months of perseverance.

This forces you to create platforms for experimentation, it sends a strong message you are committed to improvement based on results, and forces the entrenched bureaucracy to defend on many fronts instead of attacking the incoming executives new “anointed” solution.
The Rise of Nintendo: A Story in 8 Bits
The sentence is saying that collision resistance seems to be practically harder to achieve than second order preimage resistance.

One reason is a lot of hash functions are iterative in nature (you have a compression function repeatedly applied to a state, mixing the message into the state in small pieces). For collision resistance, finding a collision in just the compression function (or a limited number of applications of it) is enough to find a collision in the whole hash function (you can 'work outwards' from the collision). You can't use that effect in second order preimage resistance.

IANAC.
Skywalker-style prosthetic arm cleared for sale by FDA
What would the web gain if Mozilla could just be pushed into chasing whatever Apple, Microsoft, and Google decide to do for fear of some users jumping ship?

edit: Mozilla needs to cultivate its brand, and set itself apart from the other browsers through actual differences in philosophy. Maybe they need a John Legere...
Certainly there are limits. That's why it is an issue for courts and legislatures to decide what they should be. My argument is simply that it's entirely appropriate for courts to decide based on the social harms and that 'it's just an algorithm' is utterly irrelevant.
Alternatively, the video should be made available for download as a file.
The social network example is extremely poor. In the case of a social network, Facebook has no means to prevent its users from using other social networks. The value proposition of a social network is in its users, and any network that can attract users can attract other users on that basis. There is no exclusive relationship between the content (users) and content providers (facebook et. al.).

In the case of television and film content there are basically no non-exclusive relationships between content creators and their distributors. I cannot buy only the content, I must buy their distribution restrictions as well.
I begin to think that people that compare Linux's desktop like Unity, KDE, GNOME, Pantheon, etc with Windows 95, or 98 are just trolling around and shouldn't be taken seriously.
First gender identity/equality is more important than free speech, and now DRM is more important than freedom from submitting to vendor demands.

What's the point of Mozilla?
I, at least, am saying that keeping their userbase is better than becoming irrelevant.
That might work for simple cases but I'd be worried that switching all your asynchronous calls to synchronous has the potential to introduce bugs that your tests would then miss. Testing asynchronous functions is hard for lots of reasons, and only one of them is that you have to wait for it to finish.
Copyright is a government-created monopoly.
Something they don't mention until after you've signed up: the micro plan only lasts for two years. I assume any private repositories will become locked if you don't pay for a subscription after that (as with regular accounts).

In comparison with BitBucket (not to advocate, but they offer a comparable service): the restrictions they waive for academic accounts are done so permanently.
Relevant answer from SO:

Apparently Math.random() in V8 only works with 32 bit values (and didn't even correctly randomize all of those in the past). And with 32 bits, the probability of a collision reaches 50% around 2^16 = 65k values...

Here is bug report: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=276886
If NaN == NaN, we'd still have that test, it would just read

def is_nan(val): return (val == NaN)

It's true that it can't just give NaN or you'd be stuck.
"Content is king!" Have you never heard that before?

You say Mozilla should figure out what will draw users from other browsers, but you've outlined what will draw users from Mozilla to other browsers. In the end, people want content. The content providers have more control. If 70-80% of the browsers already support the DRM they want to use, the other 20-30% will follow or be left out. Which is exactly what happened here.
Aha (sheepish look)

That's great really - I guess there is a new -ism, sexism, ageism now Delawareism - the unjustified prejudice that everything is an American company.

Good luck !
> "Mismatched certificates are the single largest reason why strict certificate validation fails across all identifiers"

Say, does SMTP/STARTTLS support SNI?
There are plenty of good indie films - they just aren't desirable in the way indie games are right now. The glut of content is really helping sites like GoG or humble to experiment with different models and push things like no drm. Successful films, and successful indie films, are different.

There is a similar glut of tv content as indie games, so you see many more ways to access this content, but no real push for free-drm here. They are still following the ad-based method.

Netflix/amazon/hulu as they grow their own original content could get to a point where they can disrupt distribution (more than they already have). But all of them already have a culture of drm so it's not clear that they would follow a similar stance as gog given the chance.
We've started using openresty quite a bit in our shop. It's great for making certain things very fast. We looked at lapis, too, but it seems to be more than we need right now. Really, I'm afraid of doing too much complex development using a framework that doesn't provide you with an interactive debugger (like pdb).

Is there something out there that I'm not aware of? The following comment by the creator of openresty seems to indicate that there is not:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/openresty-en/VSIM8jY...
It's definitely complex and may never be completely solved. The biggest thing in my mind is learning how to talk to these people; if someone is trying to make sense of competing opinions with no good standard to judge them by, going up to them and saying "Fuck you idiot, clearly we're right and you're stupid for thinking otherwise" is not productive (granted, this is a straw-man, but some of the vitriol I've seen comes pretty close). You run the risk of creating a serious blowback effect, where your condescension drives them further away from accepting what you're trying to tell them.

It's like a Chinese finger trap: if you want to convince an anti-vaxer, you can't treat them like they're crazy, even if you have an impulse to judge. You have to be able to meet them halfway, and from that point get them to understand the safety profile of vaccines. You don't have to throw numbers in their face, but there has to be some way of speaking to them as a fellow human being: "I know you're scared and you don't know if this is safe, but we don't want your child being hurt either. We've done an incredible amount of testing to make sure vaccines are safe, and we firmly believe they will keep your child as healthy as possible, as well as improving the overall health of the community."

Of course, this is just my opinion. But I really think that empathy will make it much easier to mend these kinds of fissures in our beliefs.
In other implementations you can't tell if its using the DRM or not.

In the land of PDF you can find things like random federal agencies slapping the protection bits on complete inexplicable things, even though the content is public domain by law. ... just because the knob is there.

The 'you can not use it' opt-out ignores the cost of actually discovering that you should. The Mozilla proposal is better than that because it will tell you. This still doesn't solve all the issues, but its better than you'll find in other popular browsers.
Sure. Here's a binary: https://github.com/tom-seddon/the_silver_searcher/tree/_vs20...

The source code is there too, but I wouldn't look too closely. "Cobbled together", like I said. Though I've been using it all the time, in conjunction with ag-mode - https://github.com/Wilfred/ag.el - and haven't noticed any obvious problems.
Comcast Wants To Put Data Caps On All Customers Within 5 Years
`The presumption by internet companies and others that they can use peoples personal information in any way they see fit is wrong, and can only happen because the legal framework in most states is still in the last century when it comes to property rights in personal information.`
A squeeze on the arm could save lives in heart surgery
Well you see the internet is a series of tubes...

In all seriousness though, in the UK credit record agencies can only keep 6 years of financial information - a search engine is not subject to any regulation around this and could for example return an insolvency event from 16 years ago.

Reding is saying this is a double standard and infringes on an EU citizens rights and that they'd like to regulate this.
32bits of randomness seems like plenty for most applications, and if you need more than that you should really specify that explicitly. If it speeds up Math.Random() for 90% of uses that seems like a reasonable optimization to me.
The article and discussion is not about what you yourself put online, it is what others put online about you which is then indexed. The cost of removing from an index is insignificant compared to the personal cost to the person.
Browsers are really not good at rendering SVG. Both WebKit and Gecko are riddled with bugs once you start using the non-trivial features of SVG. Worse still, browsers don't even support the latest version of SVG, which suffered a fate similar to ECMAScript 4. However, vector illustrating programs will happily generate files which use the browser-incompatible newer versions.

So while it may be possible to target SVG as a backend for rendering basic drawings, displaying arbitrary SVG files is, in practice, a lost cause.
How shared endorsements work
That was a very interesting read. I always thought NaN != NaN was because it's a class of values (there are many binary representations that are NaN, as it just requires an all-ones exponent and a mantissa that isn't all-zeroes) but I guess I was considering it too simplistically.
Mozilla gets most of their money from Google. When Google says "jump", Baker says "how high?". They've become so addicted to the funds from Google, that they can't live without it.
Thank you. Watching people on this site verbally fellate Chrome and Safari on the basis of incredibly trivial things like look and feel and "minimal UI", while ignoring the incredibly important things like the company building the products and it's positions is frustrating, even more so now that they are all crawling out of the woodwork crying alligator tears.

The tech community brought this upon itself when it switched over to browsers provided by two enormous corporations fully beholden to their shareholders, instead of sticking with a browser developed by goddamn public benefit corporation.

The tech community brought this on itself when it couldn't be bothered to test sites in anything other than Chrome and maybe Safari on their iphone.

The tech community brought this on itself when it started making websites webkit only, without a thought for what vendor prefixing would do to web compatibility.

The tech community brought this on itself when it decided that per-process tabs were more important than preventing the future of the web from being controlled by 3 enormous corporations.

So I say that we stop complaining and start getting used to it. This is what we all wanted, and now we can reap what we have sown, while the gentle glow of the chrome url box lights up our screen.
Trash: safer alternative to rm (cross-platform)
Er, you claim Google has power. What if Mozilla, Microsoft and Apple implemented EME but Google didn't want to, and then everyone stopped using Chrome for all of the reasons mentioned in this thread? Then, Google doesn't have power. Contradiction!
Yep, we manage all of the infrastructure so you don't have to. We should make our pricing more up-front but here is a direct link: https://kickflip.io/pricing
Throwing exceptions for everything isn't a catch-all solution for writing better software—take a look at the Ariane rocket failure, which was caused by bounded numeric types throwing exceptions aggressively. Some modern programming styles tend to avoid enthusiastic non-local returns anyway in favor of things like monadic composition, such as Maybe in Haskell (which is more like NaN than it is like an exception).

The nice thing about NaN is that you can just do a calculation as normal, and check for NaN at the very end. This means you don't have to do an expensive test/branch after every arithmetic or other numeric operation. The hardware is much, much easier to design if you don't have to make it branch, and the code is much faster without the compiler inserting branches. People who work with floating point numbers every day care very deeply about performance.

If you don't care as much about performance, why not write your code in a language that does throw exceptions? Python, for example.

Those of us that do use numerics love NaN, love signed zeros, and can live with NaN ≠ NaN even though it's kind of dumb.
How many users would stick around when YouTube or Netflix stop working though?
Because ISP's are selling unlimited bandwidth packages. If they don't want people downloading 24/7 then they should go back to selling limited bandwidth packages - and not divide the internet into a fast/slow lane.
A prior dispute over the "right to be forgotten" directly involved Wikipedia, in Germany.

The NYTimes coverage of that 2009 case includes a hilarious dig at those who expect journalists to fall in line. Read the whole thing:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/us/13wiki.html
That animation is really freakin' sweet
Performance should be in the same ballpark, but I'd rather go with whichever achieves its security level most efficiently. Goldilocks looks good by that metric [1], so I'm curious how a Curve41417 implementation compares.

The rationale for an "extra-strength" curve is the hope it might resist future cryptanalytic breakthroughs. The extra bits aren't needed for brute force, but if some cryptanalysis comes along in 20 years and lops a bunch of "security bits" off, you might be glad you had extra ones...

That's a hard thing to quantify, but if we can get, say, 96 extra security bits for only a ~3.5x slowdown over Curve25519, it seems worthwhile.

[1] https://docs.google.com/a/trevp.net/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aie...
What do you mean by "share the costs"? Our pricing plans are based on usage tiers: https://kickflip.io/pricing
As the blog post mentioned, the EME stuff will be an option that the Firefox user would need to agree to install. That would be an opportunity to educate users on the topic, I think.
The irony here is that in order to be able to get people forgotten, companies will need to do a much better job at knowing what information belongs to whom (build an identity) so it can be forgotten. The problem also becomes, people who share names etc... and by extension should we be destroying news papers from decades ago? I believe many are archived in libraries and be used for the same kind of research, albeit less convenient, of information that has not been forgotten...
Obviously compulsory copyright licensing only applies to things that were being sold in the first place.

Anyway can you explain your widget scenario more? In particular, how is it less fair than existing compulsory radio licensing?
I think forks and hooks are also interesting higher-order functions.
The FCC is Going to Ruin the Internet This Week