skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not sure if you're just trolling, but the majority of the rest are probably close to being abandonware.
That's actually quite valid. Unless it's from a certified vendor like Microsoft, Google, Apple, Or Adobe, you shouldn't blindly trust your information to closed source, proprietary software either.
Pinboard does describe itself as "antisocial bookmarking" (and "Social Bookmarking for Introverts"). Delicious seemed to me to be about making bookmarking social. Pinboard seems to be about bookmarking with some social options.

[Edited to add more context.]
There was, by the way, a german artist (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdar_Somuncu) who commented that actually reading Mein Kampf exposes it as a very bad and simple book and no one should be surprised of Hitlers actions later after reading. Also, one of his point is that it is terrible in style and mostly rambling.

He also went on a tour and actually read the book on > 1000 occasions and won multiple prices.

Now, imagine Serdar doing that in 1946. He would - for good reasons - be ostracized.

Mahbod, even if he were "only" commenting on stylistic things, shows that he is lacking something very important: tact and empathy. This is not a triviality and as such not "okay". He also didn't frame the comment in any way (e.g. "I am surprised to see such an artfully...").

He should have seen that coming. If he hadn't, he shouldn't be leading any community.
SVG is just xml. You can use any xml generation library to make them, which many languages have. Or not use any at all and just echo/print the xml out. It seems like extreme overkill to fire up phantom js to generate some xml.

The things that libraries like d3, react, etc provide are transitions / tweening / animation, usually bound to datasets. Generating SVG on the server is a neat, but it does nothing to solve the animation and data binding issue.
Has contemporary philosophy come up with an answer to "what constitutes a good life?" or made measurable progress on this answer? Under what measure is it progress?

Just coming up with arguments without answers is nothing more than "structured pondering". It'd only seem useful to increasingly meta topics where data can't be found.
Me too. I've been speaking to a lot of nay-sayers recently but nothing they said was truly a deal-breaker. I hope they can overcome the difficulties.

And it seems that the public generally believes in this project too, which is a good sign.
+1, literally :)

Excellent article nonetheless.
Well, it was only a matter of time with this guy.
separate shoutout to the HTTP Archive
http://httparchive.org/about.php

Never knew this thing existed, but seems like a really nice resource.
"We can do philosophy better if we filter out thoughts that don’t meet a usefulness criterion."

Yep, as soon as I read that, I knew someone on HN would point to Godel somewhere in the comments. I'll agree with you as well on Godel and his importance. His theorem is easily one of the most important things to come out of the 20th century. I'd go: penicillin, atomic bomb, better farming tech and chemistry, Godel.

I've not got the chops for the actual proof, but the many 'for the layman's' books Ive read on it just point out how incredibly important it is. From AI research to Turing's tape to the nature of reality itself, the proof is just astounding. To put him up on Aristotle's level is obvious even to a math layman like me. Likely because of the difficulty of the proof, it is not very well known, and that is a shame. I'd love a torn-down proof easy enough for a high schooler to understand. The best I've found is: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/453503/can-someone-...
Since he was not claiming that only rap contains misogynistic lyrics, I am not sure what your point is.
Finally Someone Is Sending Car Salesmen to the Junkyard
I used to think that. Until I realized that WebSockets added the following features that raw TCP doesn't have:

- Multiplexing multiple logical WebSocket servers on a single port, through the HTTP host header and URI.

- Authentication through HTTP basic or digest authentication.

Very, very useful features.
Most people opposed the very idea of a TV remote control when wireless remotes were first introduced (Tog on Software Design by Tognazzini). Given the right system, features, and sales pitch, consumer attitudes can change.
I've been on a Ketogenic diet for 3 months now, lost almost 24 lbs. It's by far the best lifehack I've ever heard of.
a thread full of people from the community someone is a part of calling them a disgusting piece of human trash is a pretty good indication of a life being ruined.

Just read this thread for a few minutes for a full dosing of that.
Sorry about that. I wrote that comment in too much of a hurry. Corrected now.
A highly visible man in tech praised the writings of a mass murderer. The writings in question encouraged and led to violence against women through the viewpoint that women should pay attention to men and given men what they want all the time, along with a barrage of woman hating comments. This problem of entitlement and misogyny from societal influences is also well known, and is pervasive, in tech. Mahbod praised the writings of someone who represents problems in society that lead to violence against women. He threw in his own misogynistic comments for good measure. He's not only encouraging dangerous behavior, but adding to it. Women, both in technology and outside of it, feel a real danger because of comments like these. No amount of apologizing would have sufficed here to keep his job.

I was personally disappointed that he was allowed to resign, as that's not sending the right message, which would be "this is a real problem, we acknowledge it, and we won't tolerate behavior leading to violence of women." The firing is more appropriate. However, when you have someone like that leading a company, chances are it's already worked its way into the culture. I never had a reason to use this service before, but now I have a reason to actively avoid it.
HalBox – Bash scripts to bootstrap Ubuntu Servers
>> "We're basically at the point where nearly any mistake can destroy the rest of your life."

I think in the past people could make these 'mistakes' in private and nobody would ever know. We're giving up more and more of a privacy and even if you 'have nothing to hide' you could very easily make a 'mistake' eventually. I think it's inevitable that in 50 years, when people have grown up without privacy and with making embarrassing mistakes in public people will be much more likely to forgive as they have their own errors publicly available.
But is there any research into how often the 'independent' connections actually mitigate against packet loss?

Even on HTTP if the packet loss comes in the middle of negotiating the connection for the CSS, the page is still going to be waiting for the three seconds timeout before re-negotiating the connection.
The takedown on Heroku's dyno scaling was impressive. But also funny how they got themselves in that situation to begin with. If there's one thing about this world, RAP music will pay for $20k worth of Dyno's a month! Sad sad world.

edit - I like rap music.
Averting Disaster – A Guide To Computer Backups (2014)
Why do people think that computer science gives them the authority to pontificate on any topic of their choosing? Clearly the author has no idea what they are talking about, as by their own admission, "I’ve only taken 1 metaphysics class" and has a "suspicion" about the entire field. And even considering the question of "is all philosophy simply word confusion" would get you laughed out of the room by any philosophy grad student. You wouldn't like it if some philosophy student wrote blog posts about how P=NP without having the slightest knowledge of the field, so afford other areas of study the same respect.
This isn't the 'hacker' community to badmouth patents (or legislature within the united states, usually) I've found personally.

Perhaps it's an indication of how the hackers here make their living.
I don't think the article gives valid criticisms of Paul Graham's essay.

Let's take a few points: "Let’s start with ethics. Suppose I’m wondering whether it is it right for me demand extra equity because I’m the guy who came up with the idea for our startup. This is not a question about the meaning of my words. If someone responded to my wonderings by saying, “It depends what you mean by the word, ‘right’,” we’d probably think they have missed something."

As another commenter has pointed out - of course it depends on what we mean by "right". Right as in "can I get away with it"? Right as in "what's best for people if everyone does what I do"? Right as in "what's best for society"?

This is exactly a case of being able to argue a lot without people defining what exactly they mean, and therefore their arguments are worthless.

Let's take another quote from the article: "Then there’s epistemology, the study of knowledge. How do we know that we’re not in the matrix? How can we know anything if all our beliefs rest on beliefs that are unsupported by evidence? (We’ve got to have some “foundational beliefs.”)

Again, if someone responded to these questions by saying that we are confused about the meaning of the word “know,” we’d feel that they have missed the point."

But once again, this shows the problem with philosophy - there are fields in which people discuss what it means to "know things". We've come a long way in certain respects, e.g. coming up with respected models like Bayesianism and others. If someone says "no, but how can I really know I'm not in the Matrix", the answers he should be getting should take into account modern thought backed by some kind of progress. If answers from 2000 years ago are just as valid, we haven't learned anything.

And once again, clarifiying that the actual argument isn't about the matrix at all, but rather about the nature of knowledge, is exactly the right approach - trying to clarify what it means to know is what will solve this issue.

Paul Graham's essay isn't the best or most complete criticism of philosophy, but it certainly makes a strong case in a clear way that's accessible to many people, and that obviously many people connect with.
All of the:

git <command>

commands are executables of the form 'git-<command>' in specific directory:

$ git --exec-path
/usr/local/Cellar/git/1.9.0/libexec/git-core

$ ls $(git --exec-path) | head
git
git-add
git-add--interactive
git-am
git-annotate
git-apply
git-archimport
git-archive
git-bisect
git-bisect--helper

In git's earlier years, it was just a set of git-<command> commands in $PATH, until the master git command was created (to 'rule them all' if you will).

git will actually pick up anything in $PATH of the form 'git-<command>' and allow you to run it as 'git <command>'. The downside of this, is that commands of the form:

git <command> --help

are intercepted by git and converted to:

man git-<command>

So your command cannot process the --help option itself when called like this (or it used to be this way a couple of years ago).

Edit: Another downside, is that some 'smart' command-line completion settings either have a hard-coded list of 'git <command>' commands, or look for said commands in the value returned by 'git --exec-path'. So you can't tab-complete git-<command> commands that you just drop into $PATH (at least not out of the box).
Thanks! I've amended this in the current version
Testing
Skin Deep
The rest of your life? Some rich dude in a very public position got fired for doing stupid things in public. Boo-hoo. How very, very tragic.

He will manage, no doubt. He will not die poor. Maybe not a billionaire, but no one’s entitled to that. What’s with all the unending sympathy for rich people in public positions with lots of power making stupid mistakes and having to face the consequences for those?

The supermarket cashier being fired for picking up change from the floor, now that’s tragic. This? Doesn’t matter. Do you really believe his life is in any way ruined? Maybe because he won’t be able to become a billionaire in the future because of choices he made?

I have exactly zero sympathy for rich people in public positions of power being scrutinised. That’s the price you pay.

Really, I want someone to explain to me why it’s somehow not ok to critically examine things who are working in public do in public. I really don’t understand the argument for that.

Should some lowly employee be fired for what they do in their own time public? No, of course not, it’s none of the employers fucking business. Should leadership in public positions (representing the company to the outside) be fired for what they do in public? Yes, of course, how could you ever think otherwise?
If your data touches the network, conform xml parsing is an attack vector (billion laughs, external entity exploits, ...) and non-conform xml parsing ends up being a headache. Even more, the sheer absurd complexity of xml contains so much stuff, who knows how many more exploits by specification are in there.
Aw. Seems like you're correct. Darn!
I mean, I don't get all the fuss. One look at his twitter and it's pretty clear that he really doesn't care about being "tasteful." Was this just the straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak? Because it's not really that much worse than anything I've seen on his twitter.
> Larry Wall decided ... declared Perl6 to be The Future(tm).

Aiui it was a group of leading P5 devs that made the decision in 2000 to create a backwards incompatible P6, not (just) Larry.

Similarly for Python, Python 3, and GvR.

> Larry decided ... Perl5 wasn't fun anymore

Neither Larry nor GvR has said that about their earlier creations.

Larry did say "We intend to abandon the Perl 5 porter's model of development, which demonstrably leads to a lot of talk but little action." but that's the closest he got to saying Perl 5 wasn't fun anymore. (And P5 regained steam without abandoning the porter's model.)

When announcing P6 Larry said, of P5:

"We all like Perl 5 a lot. We all use it a lot. Many commercial interests will guarantee that Perl 5 continues to be well-maintained ... five years from now a lot of people will still be using Perl 5".

Unfortunately folk jumped to conclusions so this apparently measured statement was still in effect an Osborne One announcement.

> some remaining stuff that's running in Perl5

That's like saying there's some remaining stuff that's running in Python 2.x. True, but grossly misleading.

> some enthusiasts that use Rakudo ... in an attempt to reach the Shangri-La of Perl 6.

The attempt is to produce a compelling option for many future programmers. P6ers may eventually arrive and get stuck at Shangri-La but they clearly hope or think they won't.

> and Parrot

Perl is not tied to Parrot.

Rakudo (or rather the underlying NQP toolchain) is no longer constrained by Parrot because it has its own new dedicated VM. See http://moarvm.org

> blackmailing the users by declaring the "not as fun" old version of your language dead should not be done lightly if you don't want to become the next Perl.

I don't agree that GvR is blackmailing Python users.

But the issue isn't how things actually are. The issue is how things are perceived. If it seems that GvR is blackmailing users, and especially if a bunch of folk are saying as much, there's a problem.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I also avoid books by Thomas Harris because they glorify cannibalism.
If those are his credentials, I would have preferred he debate Wittgenstein instead of PG.

In the article, he could have simply acknowledged PG's essay for re-igniting his critique of Wittgenstein. And, as a bonus, a blog title of "Why Wittgenstein is sort of wrong about philosophy" might have attracted more hits.
Yeah, just look in the Greek and Roman classics sections of your local university library.
> Furthermore, privately run systems should be more efficient because consumers have a choice. Don't like your current doctor? Go get a new one.

You are assuming an efficient market. That would imply that patients have access to perfect information about quality and cost of care, and make decisions rationally. I find this extremely questionable.

> Monopolies are bad.

I am far from convinced that the US health care system is competitive in any meaningful sense of the word.

> I've never heard of anyone being forced to wait for weeks for this kind of stuff in a normal hospital in the US.

This is not evidence that the US health care is more efficient, it is evidence that the US makes a different trade-off in cost:quality of care. Without question, a subset of the US population receives better care for non-emergency medical issues. But also without question, this improved service comes with a substantial increase in cost.

Hospital capacity is extremely expensive. A Canadian (say) hospital operates at nearly 100% utilization, nearly 100% of the time. In order to do this, it must maintain queues for non-emergency care, in order to smooth demand. By comparison, in order to avoid queueing, an American hospital must maintain capacity to satisfy peak demand, which means it does not fully utilize its capacity most of the time. Both systems maintain large bureaucracies (I have been party to Canadian health care workers marvelling at how an American hospital might dedicate an entire floor to its billing department). Which is more efficient? This is hard to say. Do Americans have the freedom to choose where they stand on the cost:quality-of-care spectrum? It seems not, to me.
Same, 6 months here and 45 lbs (255 to 210). I don't stay on it for the weight loss anymore, but rather because I feel great.
It seems likely that he would have done the same to a male in the same situation, so I fail to see how that relates to misogyny rather than a general culture of violence.
Eliom 4.0 Released
Thanks, this looks interesting. I'm not clear on how the master seed gets regenerated at every save.

Presumably the secret key used to generate the HMAC never leaves the YubiKey? So when you want to change the seed, you need to ask the YubiKey to sign the new seed? So saving the database requires pushing the button on the YubiKey again?
Please tell your programmer that he/she has a lot of work to do. You've miserably failed the Turing test.
This is actually the least defensible claim there. I posted this in the comments:

"Every Voting System is Manipulable" is an exaggeration of the implications of strategic voting. Yes, the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem proves that a dishonest vote could profitably exist in any system, however there are already systems where intentionally doing so requires the voter to:
1) Have perfect (or near-perfect) information about exactly how everyone else is voting, and
2) Solve an NP-hard math problem.

When breaking the vote requires more knowledge than any politician has, and more computing power than breaking the cryptography of all the world's banks, I'd say it's not particularly manipulable.
Replaced occurrences of master/slave terminology with leader/follower
I worked at SUN in the distant past, the backwards compatibility was the mantra #1. Both latest Java and Solaris were expected to run the oldest possible code, and they considered it one of the most important assets.

For many people in eCommerce and banking the arrival of Java was a "manna from heaven", as before they had to deal with the crazy complexity of CORBA and similar technologies. Java simplified this significantly and added at the time modern easy-to-program and fairly safe multi-threading that allowed software like Apache etc. This made Java famous and gave it a "huge karma" amongst developers. Without Java we probably wouldn't have experienced the massive expansion of eCommerce, and now we are lucky to see all the Java's issues - a good problem to have ;-)

Java and JVM as a consequence have their share of problems that arose from initial design decisions such as type erasure (which .NET's CLR avoided) that still deforms all languages based on JVM to this day. Massive boilerplating, J2EE's unreadable XML mess, complex design patterns invented to cope with the limitations of the language are some of the other problems. The compatibility with the old code is still there though.

I've never played with Ruby, I've heard it's still used by many young web companies for their frontends (like SoundCloud) and have heard they had some release that broke most of the compatibility which alienated many of their users. From this and from Python's example I would suggest keeping both the old way and introducing the new ways in parallel so that developers don't have to rewrite/reinvent the wheel when somebody decides to change a part of the language. This served C/C++ pretty well, adding slowly new features and instead of forcing users to use the "current right way", they allowed to live multiple different approaches together. I think that would have served Python well as well - even Py3 feels at places like a hack, similar to Py2.
Well, holding fallacious beliefs prevents you from arriving at the correct answer. Since philosophers have refuted many fallacious arguments concerning that question they have, therefore, made some measurable progress.
> It's hard to separate the product from the creator. We can demand a higher standard of creators, but one of the consequences will be fewer creations.

It's not a "higher" standard. It's the same normal standard of professional behavior I expect from anyone I do business with, and Rap Genius consistently fails to meet it.
It's interesting to see how this founder firing was handled so much better than the guy who nearly beat his gf to death recently. In that case, the founder, VC's and board paid the girlfriend off and then tried to cover up the whole story before the press ripped into them and finally forced his firing.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/us-canada-news/Indian...
I took a degree in Philosophy - I'm anything but anti-intellectual. Being intellectual doesn't mean feeding the trolls or suffering fools. I don't bother seriously debating the people who knock on my door to ask me about Jesus nor do I see fit to waste breath on climate change deniers or gun nuts: they're all religious beliefs of one stripe or another.
Why the hell they are writing a spec with a commercial product name rather than the material contained in it is beyond me. If the contractor knew they were looking for a certain kind of clay rather than cat litter, this would be nearly impossible.
Congrats on That Diploma. You May Not Need It.
Wouldn't this defeat the YubiKey's purpose? One of the points in the pull request mentions only supporting a single YubiKey, which I believe is how you'd most commonly solve this issue (having a backup YubiKey). It's also possible to store a backup of your KeePass database with a passcode somewhere safe.
> Just like they admitted that XHTML 2 was a mistake and scraped it

But "they" (the W3C) didn't do that when people were just complaining about issues with the XHTML 2.0 approach, they did it after a competing approach was developed via an extensive, multi-year process through an outside group (WHATWG), and even then only that after a short period when both approaches were the focus of official W3C working groups.

They didn't adopt a "this is limited, lets throw it away and start over" approach as the original article here calls for with regard to HTTP/2.0.
I hate that we're still talking about this, but this is vastly different than the Eich incident. In Eich's case, what he did happened 6 years ago, and with no intention of making it public. In this case, he's openly telling juvenille jokes in an environment with a hightened intolerance to this kind of rhetoric and behavior.

After enough of these cases happen, it just gets to the point where if you don't realize the need to censor yourself, then you are not a very smart person. I, for one, am encrypting all of my communication from here out, and only telling tasteless jokes with close, trusted friends. It's sad, but you have to ask yourself if it's more important to run a major company, or have the freedom to tell tasteless jokes. One of the reasons why running a startup sounds less attractive to me by the week.