skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not as easy as steaming the packing tape off. Some security standards require tamper-evident seals on equipment. Either equipment makers are enabling these "upgrades," or tamper-evident seals aren't.
What started your interest in development?
I think stories about what first piqued a person's interest in development are great and can be inspirational - share yours
Careful. Thats a somewhat empty response. It's technically true, but its an enormous barrier— even if someone else compiles it for you, how do you know their binary is trustworthy?

Your claim is incoherent... if you don't currently compile firefox yourself, then you're in exactly the same situation, how do you know the binary is trustworthy?

If you do currently compile it yourself, what's the big deal?
I think you're overestimating 'Most' people. If Firefox has a ~20% market share, that's saying that there are hundreds of millions of Firefox users who use it for the freedom (as opposed to the competitive performance and the fact that it's not IE) - and that simply cannot be correct.
Hacker News is already using it, probably because of this.
Perhaps that was my fault. I don't think I was very clear. I was disagreeing with the statement that 'NaN' means the output of a function is not defined. That was the only thing I was disagreeing with. The rest of my comment tries to address some of the differences between the mathematical side and the computational side.
> Perhaps the whole existence of Mozilla was leading up to this point where it could commit ritualistic suicide and take this DRM proposal with it.

The only reason Mozilla taking a "we will not do it" approach to EME would be suicide (ritual or otherwise) would be if doing so would fail to derail the adoption of EME. If users would abandon Mozilla over not supporting EME (well, not supporting the sites that require it), then, sure, it would be suicide -- but it would be suicide because the sites demanding EME would be important enough to users that they would abandon Mozilla and Mozilla's usage-dependent revenue stream would dry up.

If Mozilla could derail EME by refusing to implement, that would also mean it wouldn't be suicide.
Time for a fork.
NaN == NaN should return NaB, Not a Boolean.
By making that decision there is no reason left to keep using Firefox, since technically, Chrome is a superior browser.
the global shared stories section of newsblur.
Have you looked at JsMockito?
I'm wondering: what do you suggest to artists, how shall they make money on their work?
That's kind of how it worked before everything was readily available online. There was all kinds of information about you available in the public record, but if your neighbors wanted it they had to go to the offices of whatever government agency held the information and get it from an actual physical record on paper or microfiche.

The meant you had reasonable privacy from curious and nosy neighbors and coworkers, but if someone actually had an important enough reason to need your information to justify the legwork or the expense to hire someone else to do the legwork they could get it.
So I'm guessing that this will backfire. Mozilla say that Adobe will create the software, which will presumably be bundled with the browser. This means that if Adobe's DRM gets cracked, suddenly every site using that DRM is vulnerable. At the moment, one just updates the client to obfuscate a bit better, which is then downloaded on next launch of the software. If it's all client side, surely then the DRM will have to be updated every few days - which would be a nightmare for sysadmins etc.
Ask HN: Thinking on creating a blog and need help (platform)
Hi everyone, i'm thinking on creating a blog and need some advice. It will be a programming based blog. I don't know if it matters but i'm primarily a .net developer. First, my main question, is about which blog platform to choose. Here are some of my requirements:
1. Really low maintenance - I already have enough to do. I don't want to add to the trying to maintenance on software/hardware a blog system unless its a no brainer.

2. Custom Domain Name

3. Ability to customize look/feel as much as i want including custom CSS

4. I don't know how possible it is but i would like the ability to migrate from one platform to another if i so choose. So if i choose blog platform x i can switch to blog platform Y if i like.

5. Ability to put whatever scripts i choose like google analystics.

6 Different Comment Engines - I don't much about it but i do want users to be able to leave comments so maybe Disqus?

Of course since i'm just starting i don't know what else i should be looking for.

I've looked at a variety of them (its hard to choose with so many) like wordpress, squarespace, silvrback, Ghost, Roon, Ect... One of them i looked at is "Postach" was pretty cool in that the publishing platform for your blog was evernote (which i'm a big advocate of) just don't how great it is.

I don't mind paying for a platform as long as its worth it. ($5-$6 a month).

On an aside when creating a blog do you recommend just using your main site such as "mysite.com/blog" or do you recommend creating a domain specific to a topic? For example i plan to do some post about Angular. So would it be better to create a domain like "angularisgreat.com". That kind of limits you when you want to talk about something else though :P.

Anyways, any help/advice would be greatly appreciated.....
I had a frustrating work environment where we didn't have access to the tools we needed to do our jobs. We did however have access to a variety of scripting languages. So i learned to code in order to make the tools we needed and enjoyed it more than the original job i was doing.
Anybody taking Snowden's revelations seriously would switch to Chrome or another Chromium build. The leaks contained information on exploited vulnerabilities in Firefox. Chrome's sandboxing makes it a safer browser than Firefox.

This is opposite the choice somebody would make if they were philosophically opposed to DRM.
If it ends up removing the whole page for any query:

Got a competitor out ranking you with a page that has comments? Write some personal details, get it approved... then request that page removed.

But it'll probably just stop it from showing up for that persons name (and related queries).
So Hacker News is about selling?

I'd be interested to see if this is one of the big divides here.
> All video will now have DRM.

No, it won't.

> We have lost video that did not have DRM.

We may lose some because it may get easier to implement DRM and that may tip the balance for some content source.

> It will now be almost as easy to implement video with DRM in production as it is to implement HTML5 video without DRM.

But plenty of sources will still choose not to use DRM, as is the case even with other formats where DRM is well-estbalished as an option with simple toolchains.
Url changed from http://boingboing.net/2012/07/09/you-cannot-poison-an-opossu..., which points to this one.

Submitters: please read what you post and, if it points to a more original source, post that one instead.
It might be the right choice, but it would be nice if somehow they displayed that the content displayed is protected by DRM (like for encryption, http/https). It might help people choose different sources for information/entertainment/etc..
> I have no idea where you heard this fairy tale.

4 friends and coworkers who had it happen, mentioned separately and on several occasions this happened in a group setting and was immediately confirmed by other people who had the same experience.

You'll forgive me for finding them more convincing than your argument from incredulity. It's entirely possible that this a grassroots thing but the people affected spanned ~100 miles and multiple states.
No. Any other demands, while you're at it?
Mozilla: Goddammit EFF, you fucking asshole. Everything's a fucking travesty with you man!

EFF: I'm sorry, it was an accident.

Mozilla: What was that shit about the open web? What the fuck does anything have to do with the open web?

EFF: Dude, I'm sorry...

Mozilla: What the fuck are you talking about?

EFF: Dude, I'm sorry...

Mozilla: Fucking... fuck, EFF.

EFF: Come on, dude. Hey, fuck it, man, let's go bowling.
Do I need a source? AFAIK main Encrypted Media Extension advocates were Netflix and Google. See https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/lowering-your-standard... and such. Google has a dominant user share of browsers, so just by supporting DRM Google already creates pressure on all browser developers to support DRM as well. But aside from that, Google is also a major (90%) funding source of Mozilla/Firefox.
git-annex is quite difficult to use, even more so if one of your nodes is a Windows box.
Show HN: iFlix.io
I noticed that you said that, and expected others to notice as well. I don't really think your post unreasonable. I'm just a little concerned that, even in a case of pure intentions and desire for balance, extension developers may feel pressured to make changes and end up sacrificing features or effectiveness.

Did you notice how some people here, and at your blog, proposed modifications what would trade coverage for memory consumption? Even if that would result in known filter hits being eliminated, and also without qualifying that if such an approach were adopted it should be preference based?
What is the proportion of Firefox users using Netflix. Most of Firefox users are in other countries than the US which typically don't have access to Netflix anyways. As soon as DRM becomes accepted by all major browser vendors nothing prevents other site from adopting the same thing which then spreads the usage of DRM. I don't think this is desirable.

For DRM to work it needs to have direct access to the hardware. Otherwise it's too easy to run the plugin in isolation and capture the output. So while the API surface is smaller it's still problematic because DRM bypasses all the sandboxes. Issues like cross-platform support still aren't resolved because DRM providers don't typically provide linux runtimes. I really don't see where this is an advantage versus no DRM.
That's pretty much Google's business model, as it was for Microsoft before them: get more market share by making it just a little bit harder to use your competitors.
Option 3) Stick to your laurels and refuse to implement DRM in the browser, but let people install a third-party plugin that adds the DRM capability. Keep your own hands clean, let Adobe do the dirty work (the DRM blob was written by Adobe after all), and keep all your users too!

The greatest thing about Firefox is the add-on/plugin ecosystem. Why not take advantage of it to give users a real choice? Firefox already does the same thing with Flash, a proprietary but easily installable plugin.
Elon Musk says yes to The Oatmeal's $8M request for Nikola Tesla museum
I certainly hope their new syncing is better than their Transmit Dropbox implementation. I had to stop using sync it was so bad.

I prefer MAS apps because of how easy it is to purchase, install and update. I'm particularly annoyed when an app is available in the App Store and is then pulled out later. By then, I've already purchased and have to transition, awkwardly, to a non App Store version.

This isn't the first developer tool that's done this for me.
The problem is not that there's no DRM-free alternative, it's that major content owners would prefer no HTML5 solution to a DRM-free HTML5 solution. There is literally nothing Mozilla can do about that. People who want to do DRM-free HTML5 video already can, but that's not the problem.
The thing about money (and in turn, power and influence) is that it doesn't have to come from one source.

Diversify your sources and wean yourself off the Google teat. Even if Google does outbid everyone, profit shouldn't be the primary motivator at the Mozilla Foundation.

Wikipedia might not be the most glamorous of sites but they are a shining example of what it means to not compromise on your values. Those people are starving while Mozilla employees go to the bank - that is true courage and power. The power to not let profit be the absolute driver of your ambitions and values.
> Then break them up.

That's effectively what I'm advocating--by removing their monopoly power to be the only ISP available to the customer on the other end of their lines. Breaking them up into regionalized monopolies doesn't give consumers a choice, but opening the lines to competition does.
>Except if you use the new Firefox you may have better privacy and security than you currently do with flash and silverlight.

"May". We're still changing a closed plugin to an even more closed black box (or actually multiple black boxes), which could be doing god knows when you're not looking (and even when you are looking). And even if Mozilla manages to negotiate some promises of privacy for Firefox users, what about other browsers - will their users get it just as good when they switch from Flash/Silverlight to some DRM black box? You might say that "it'll happen anyway" since other browser vendors are already in bed with Hollywood on this but Firefox hopping in surely doesn't help the situation any.
Can I suggest that the European Courts of Justice is "irrelevant or outdated" and should now be deleted from Google?
Great work Mike.

It would be great if you could add more comments to the code, or a simple separate guide for each of the projects. They are all amazing, and I'm sure many would want to learn more.
Your arguments are bizarre, and you claim I have said things that I have not.

I am not opposed to the operation of search engines. I simply think they should be held responsible by law for the effects they have on society.
James Mickens drops wisdom on distributed systems
>Perhaps if FF had Chrome's current marketshare, they would have been in a position to say no

It still would have accomplished nothing, because websites would just have a "this site doesn't work in Firefox, try switching to Chrome or IE or Safari" block page. And no amount of Firefox marketshare could make them not have that block page, because if they let Firefox access the content DRM-free the sites would lose their licenses on the content.
Corporate attacks on all fronts on users. Revolt we must.
My MacBook Pro on Mavericks won't let me use Shift + F12 :(
Yeah, SQL's handling of nulls tripped me up a couple times while I was getting used to the language.
Though this excerpt of the "Console Wars" book is about Nintendo, according to this Wired article[1], the book focuses heavily on Sega as well, and Sega of America is the protagonist of the story.

[1] http://www.wired.com/2014/05/console-wars-book-sega/
Have you tried LINQ to DB (not LINQ to SQL) the successor to BLToolkit? We've had good results with it, but we like to keep our queries and datalayer as simple and thin as possible.
Such a webbrowser would be unable to render a large chunk of the internet, which doesn't sound overly useful.

It wouldn't be able to render a large chunk of the Internet as designed, which, frankly, with 1106 local custom stylesheets applied to fix a huge range of crap and annoyances, sounds very useful and desirable.

Web design isn't the solution, Web design is the problem.

http://redd.it/256lxu
I've found some great apps that were Mac App Store ONLY options, at least as far as I could tell at the time.

That said, by default I generally find apps via recommendations, random packaged deals, or via their website so I don't necessarily "go looking" for them in the Mac App Store either. All of the above mentioned apps that I found that were App Store only falls into this category.

If there is an option for both (App Store and direct purchase), usually what I do is check if there is a price difference (usually not but some times can be). Go with the lower price. If there is no price difference, I go with the Mac App Store version, then proceed to email the developer/company with proof for a copy of the non-Mac App Store version anyway. Usually this isn't a problem.

I agree with everyone about the whole sandboxing issues and how frustrating it can be, but I definitely recommend taking a look at the App Store anyway as a user. You never know what you're missing out on.
That seems so much better that we'll just change the url to it. (The original url was http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10034149/why-is-nan-not-e...)
http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-27405267

> A stag gore victim who complained that six newspapers made "inappropriate" references to her transgender status has said the press "trampled all over" her private life.

> The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) said the six papers had agreed to amend their online stories.

> Dr Stone, 44, said she hoped fewer people would now face press intrusion.

> She complained to the PCC that the Daily Mail, The Sun, The Scottish Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Telegraph and Daily Record had made "irrelevant" references to her gender when covering the story in December.

She is a transgender woman. Six newspapers made undue reference to her transgender status. She claims that it is irrelevant to the news articles and that she has some right to privacy with that part of her life under article 8 of the ECHR.

I tend to agree with her, and if companies operating in the EU ignore her polite validly formed requests she goes to regulatory body, and if they decline her request she goes to law.

The correct target here is the people writing the original factual but intrusive articles, and not the people linking to those factual but intrusive articles.

I'd be interested to see if Google's registration with various data protection bodies across Europe is in compliance with whatever this ruling supposes. This ruling feels like a big change to make Google more responsible for handling personal data than they were before.
The Artificial Womb is Born
If you aren't already using DRM , why start now?
Practical Cryptography Corrected (2011)
Physics students use quad-copter drone to map street lights and reduce crime
The organization dying or not is off topic. We're talking about which company has the clout to stop the DRM via not implementing it in their browser. Surely Chrome would die out just like Firefox would if Google decided to Do No Evil here. Chrome/Google would fail to stop the DRM, so Chrome/Google didn't have power.

Or do you think that because of Android or something, Google would be able to stop the DRM when every other browser/device supported it?
That's a separate issue: fraud or false advertisement. You'll notice that they probably don't actually sell you unlimited bandwidth.
Ok, let's say I agree with you - how many users switched to Chrome or Chromium following those allegations? Practically none. That proves the point, users don't seem to care about this.

(But I don't agree, that was just to make the larger point.)
Stuff like this is why I muse about building a RPi based head unit. The biggest thing for me is I enjoy HD Radio (LA has a great 80s Rock HD2 station) but there's no chip readily available (for hobbyists) I'm aware of that implements the HD Radio spec (AM/FM being A-OK). All I really want in a head unit is:

- AM/FM/HD Radio

- iPod/iPhone compatibility with preferences for how and when it will turn itself on

- Simple to use Nav with easily, cheaply (or free), upgraded maps

- No bloat or bizarre features I'll never need

- Backup (and perhaps curb clearance) camera support

- A touch UI designed for actual use in a car that's moving i.e. big pancake buttons and nobs for tactile control

- A quality Amp with actual EQ settings

- Carplay and/or Native App support of some kind

- An oscillator/vibrator in the screen to give some tactile feedback (road quality allowing)

A RPi with a peripheral/support board running some combination of XBMC and an App switcher would probably handle that.

Most of these features, save for the UI and Bloat-less experience are available on the AVIC and other aftermarket head units... Just not always in the same unit (HD radio seems to be either not listed on spec sheets or not as common as I'd hope). I have MyLink in my Camaro, which mostly works fine, save for lacking HD radio and its tendency to default to XM when I unplug my phone. My car didn't come with a backup camera which means I may or may not need to get the radio reprogrammed (Via a USB cable and GM software) to use one ($200 or so depending on the dealer). A lot of the on screen controls aren't available via physical buttons and the buttons are too small to blindly tap at.

Stuff like that is just frustrating since a lot of other consumer electronics (i.e. Phones) have improved so much UI/UX wise. A lot of open source projects aren't known for good UI/UX but I feel like an OSS solution would go a long way to fixing these issues.
You don't need a new or changed browser to do any of that. Firefox still renders plain-text HTML that contains nothing more than <h1>, <p> and <a> just fine, blazing fast and I bet it doesn't need much RAM either.

But someone needs to create that content. And you're not getting it from the New York Times unless they can put flashy ads and interactive graphics that entices the majority of the users on the net (who actually enjoy the multimedia platform version of the web).
One of the coolest things about this gist is how little code is used for the animation; basically just these lines:

d3.selectAll(nodes).transition()
.duration(2500)
.delay(function() { return this.depth * 50; })
.ease("quad-in-out")
.tween("position", function() {
var d = this, i = d3.interpolate([d[0], d[1]], [d.y, d.x]);
return function(t) { var p = i(t); d.t = t; d[0] = p[0]; d[1] = p[1]; };
});

The tree layout auto-magically gives every node a depth property, we delay the transition by an amount proportional to the depth, and then over the course of two-and-a-half seconds tween the line segment into the new position. Simple and effective. The hard part is generating the maze.
Still.

Are those problems so bad, that even you stooped as low as using a proprietary browser? Was that a sufficient price for your freedom?

Mozilla made mistakes, but it doesn't excuse the blindness of its users. Reminds me of GNU/Linux vs OSX. Apple made a shiny new OS that "just works" on their own hardware, and a good chunk of the tech community went drooling over this, instead of getting its act together and fixing the Linux desktop. Again, I guess this is the price of freedom.

Freedom sure has come cheap these days.
You can change that. Goto Systems Preferences | Keyboard and then select the Shortcuts pane. Click Mission Control and then un-click the checkbox that binds F12 to Dashboard (which you probably do not use).
Other than Windows XP pre-SP3, does anyone have a list of operating systems and/or devices that will have a problem with SHA-256 certificates?

I tried loading https://cert-test.sandbox.google.com/ in Android 2.3, the earliest version of Android that I care about. This is an OS that has given me much pain because it doesn't support SNI. So I was pleasantly surprised to find that it recognizes the SHA-256 certificate just fine.

What about OSX and iOS?
Indeed... this is just throwing in the towel completely without putting up a fight. Here are various other ways:

- do the work to implement the DRM thing but keep it disabled ready to hot patch in once evidence shows that they'll be fucked without it

- display "this is bullshit DRM content you shouldn't support, read more HERE, and click HERE if you really don't care and will use another browser to view this anyway" in place of the DRM content initially

etc.

Immediately giving in is hardly "dragged kicking and screaming".
These kinds of things really suck, when people you rely on supply you with things that breaks your stuff unexpectedly... Breaking stuff is okay, surprising the customers is not, imho...
Where Americans Think They Live