skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Also, our secure server software (SSL) is the industry standard and among the best software available today for secure commerce transactions."

Hey! What the heck? I'm in the security industry and had no idea about this new "secure server software" and why is the TLA SSL? What the heck? I've been on vacation for the last week, when did it hit?

On a serious note, I understand that some security teams hire non-technical types into the team but it's always the responsibility of senior staff to make sure they are at least understanding the basics, especially when communicating with customers. Say it with me: Secure Sockets Layer (SSL). There's a credibility problem here somewhere.
from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=650311.0

Miners, now it is your turn.

A US-tax-funded violent underground organization is about to sell Bitcoins which got robbed from a innovative San Francisco startup, a marketplace which was creating a better because more peaceful world! A marketplace which put users, transparency, safety and quality first and not outdated laws and bureaucracy. A marketplace which enriched our private private lives and helped us having a better time together in love and peace. A marketplace which was ultimately against violence, guns, corruption, distrust and obfuscation.

Quote
Silk Road Reduced Violence in the Drug Trade, Study Argues - http://www.wired.com/2014/06/silk-road-study/

America's war on drugs is lost. We all know it! It is time to stop it before it does further harm to the people of this world.

Let's face it. Most likely only two people have the power to block the silkroad coins (https://blockchain.info/address/1FfmbHfnpaZjKFvyi1okTjJJusN4...) from being sold. They are the operators of the biggest pools: Ghash.io and BTCguild. Together they have more than 51% of the networks hashing power. If they do not want to (because they might be already saturated) all we need to do is to convince the majority of the miners to join other pools which do following...

HOWTO :: Technically speaking the ming pool operators need to (1) block all new transactions which are descendants of the silkroad coins which were located once on 1FfmbHfnpaZjKFvyi1okTjJJusN455paPH and (2) do not accept new blocks which contain such transactions as part of the longest chain (which you mine on).

The Bitcoin protocol remains unchanged and allows by definition such interventions. It is time to use them for the benefit of our society. And it will be a race. Let the longest chain win!

MINERS UNITE! It is finally time to stop violent tax-funded underground organizations like the FBI from exploiting the people who they were once supposed to protect! Do not let people who stay totally in dark take away more of your wealth for themselves and projects which will further limit your freedom! Join mining pools which block the silkroad coins until the legitimate owner gets access to them back or at least a fair and public trial happened!

@ Developers :: Build patches for mining pools which follow the HOWTO. Build also patches for the wallets which consider transactions invalid which originated from the FBI address or at least warn users after having received such transactions. Make it easy for people to express their opinion on this topic through software!

The blockchain is not neutral.

It would not exist without hard working people.

People who love freedom and honest behavior.

Good people.

It is time for your vote.
The idea that the Pareto-optimal situation is the one where everyone freely copies from each other may be appropriate for the market Tesla finds itself in, but is in general directly contradicted by the actual experience of the technology industry.

The experience of the technology industry is that innovation happens in periods of monopoly. That monopoly might arise from first-mover effects, network effects, lock-in effects, or IP protections (patents, copyrights, and trademarks). This has been true from Bell Labs to Xerox to Google to Facebook. Bell Labs had its heyday when AT&T was a government-sanctioned monopoly. The Xerox Alto, which pioneered the GUI, the mouse, and networking, was invented at a Xerox that had 100% of the U.S. copier industry, a few years before an antitrust consent decree forced it to license its patents to Japanese competitors, quickly destroying its marketshare.[1] If another search engine could easily copy Google's data and algorithms, they wouldn't have the money to be working on self-driving cars and AI. Facebook is a textbook example of network effects precluding perfect competition.

In comparison, look at the PC industry, which is based on open standards and an OS licensed on non-discriminatory terms. What has happened to the PC? They have become commodities and innovation is essentially dead. Companies like Lenovo eke out single-digit profit margins, and nobody can afford to spend money on R&D.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox#1970s
Is it better to censor an open forum than delete it entirely? This is a hard answer for a fan of free speech. I reserve respect for those willing to open a dialogue in an adverse environment. I respect Twitter, at least, for being open for business and allowing people to post. At least some people view it versus none. However, one must consider that when a government is allowed to censor, or “manipulate,” the content that is being seen by its own people, and possibly the world – then we have essentially created a forum for propaganda that may not represent how the people of that society actually view the world. Consider what we know of media in North Korea – are all North Koreans really in full love and support of Kim Jung Un? Think about how such a platform could have been used to support the Nazi agenda in World War II. Personally, I feel that when an autonomous corporation that was designed to allow for the free passage of ideas and experiences comes under the control of an oppressive government or dictatorship, that corporation is lending itself to corruption.
Code review that isn't boring
Meh... a bitcoin is a bitcoin is a bitcoin. If in the future the gov't is ordered to return X number of bitcoins they can simply go to the marketplace and buy them.
Uh oh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_(Baxter_novel)
Amazon launches Prime Music
Six Questions that Start Startups
You're wrong on the emissions point - even a contemporary, luxury electric car like the Model S causes less CO2 emissions from a well-to-wheels perspective than an effiient gasoline car, even if run exclusively on coal-generated electricity. The crucial part of the calculation is to also take into consideration the energy required to produce the fuel, which is often skipped when analyzing the CO2 emissions of fossil-powered cars. The drivetrain (batteries) is somewhat more energy-intensive to produce, but the difference is made up after 20,000 miles or so. There's a lot of FUD from the established automobile and energy industries on this topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf15nMnayXk

On the climate change front, you're probably in disagreement with scientific consensus, but this is not my field of expertise.
no value is inherrent and it makes no sense to talk about it from that perspective.

You are confusing historical with universal facts.
Ask HN: Judging the state of a startup
Background: this is my first job out of college, and I joined the startup ~9 months ago, right when they launched (I'm engineer #2, before me, the founders outsourced the prototype to an offshore team). The company is working on ecommerce/ affiliate model with a small twist
Right now, we have ~1200 registered user, with about 100 active users, and we gained about ~100 users/month. On the development side, we have a straight up waterfall process with 1 hour "scrum meeting" everyday, we have 5 developers right now. We have no automated testing at all, a deployment update every ~4-5weeks, and a tech stack/ jobs advertisement that would look like it's from 2006. A few months ago, I tried to write some unit tests, and I was asked to removed it from git because the CTO doesn't want git to be polluted.

I believe that a) Our rate of growth is too slow, and b) Our development process is a bit less than ideal and c) Fundamentally, something is wrong with our company (at least, from the tech side), from all the things that I've heard and read. However, I acknowledge that startup is far from the pinnacle of engineering, and even the user stats could be misleading. I talked with one of the founders about speed of development being too slow, and he (with a business background) said that from his experience with other startups, it's not slow, with which I firmly disagree. So the question I'm wondering is, how could I judge the state of the startup right now?
Isn't it all copying on the web/cloud? Your file isn't lost on your end when you give/publish/share/etc.
Elon Musk's response: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/477223079421046785

"Apparently, lots of confused media inquiries about blog title. Look, we just to make sure they don't set us up the bomb."
Yes, but that was a child of a US president, also a song, in a musical and a movie, is used on US Naval vessles, and was one of the original X11 names. And it was picked because it is the specific blue of her gown.

My heart goes out to Eric and his family; I practically learned CSS from him. But I don't think that inclusion of what seems to be an arbitrary purple makes sense.
Cocaine was once legal too.
Just the people with a large role in the CSS community. I don't see how this is any different than a city naming streets after people or a property developer naming cul-de-sac streets after their girlfriends.
I was going to point out some, but mhurron did a much better job. One of the odd things I remember is that VMS had a version of Diskeeper that predates the NT version.

I don't like Microsoft, but I have no issue in recognizing their technical merits when they have some. I'm using a Microsoft keyboard right now and was, for a very long time, an MCSD. What people misinterpret as an anti-Microsoft bias is, usually, the effect of a wider perspective than the average Microsoft enthusiast.
I thought something similar, except for OS/2's support for running Windows applications. (Showing my age, I guess...)
and that part about the right way to hit different parts of the body.

a slap is almost as hard, and won't hurt the slapper.
What's the recommended team size?
Thank you for your rational and neutral reply! My intention is not to just troll around.

You ask:
> Couldn't this reasoning be applied as criticism for the funeral of Michael Jackson, Jim Henson, basically any celebrity or political figure, and any soldier who returns from military service in a casket?

I don't see this as a rethorical question, and I am going to answer it: Yes, definitely. In my opinion valuing the death of a politician or another person of public interest in the media higher than all common-day tragedy is an insult. My brother lost his very best childhood friend in a tragic car accident. My grandma commited suicide (which surprisingly, tragically is actually not that uncommon with elderly people). Where is his hashtag? I am not trying to make the same argument or really claim the same sympathies, but I am trying to point out that loss is universal, sad and never fair.

In some cultures the idea of absolute equality in death is prevalent. This concept is canceled out by the media attention of the death of a person. I feel very hurt, and loss is bad, there is no question that the individual has a right to mourning and grieving over the loss. But since there this is a universal concept it is unfair to bring other people into this. I do not blame Eric, but I am not sure I understand the motives of making this in to some sort of hashtag campaign.

I feel that this is very unfair, because in this emotional discourse there is no rational argument allowed. I hear people say that "Well what would it hurt, it is just a name in a spec!?". Would we feel the same way if religious groups would claim to influence technology in such a way? How about a Jesus Blue or a JHWH-Green. Religious feelings are also not up for debate, which is why I am claiming to feel molested, because there is no arguing allowed.
Get position (x, y) from a index in a Ulam spiral in JavaScript
I often recompile packages from testing or unstable on stable, to get newer versions, or because I need to patch something. This is usually more productive than installing from upstream source. (Exceptions are packages with a big tree of dependencies, where chances are high that something won't build.)

More often than not, I'm checking the source package signautures (gpg) myself, though, because in the past doing it automatically wouldn't work or so. I wonder whether those signatures are concerned in this bug. I've tried to get at the source repo, but no luck (stable has a bzr repo that redirects to a 404, another url nearby does not contain recent changes; sid is in Git, but doesn't appear to have changes related to the bug). In the end I diffed the source of the apt package against its former version, I've put the diff here:

http://christianjaeger.ch/scratch/apt-0.9.7.9+deb7u1_apt-0.9...

I haven't studied it enough to get the answer (yet).

Edit: it seems this really concerns repository signatures only, not package signatures; assuming that you're verifying that the package signature (the one in the *.dsc file) is correct and the hash sums match the package files, the only possible attack will be to refuse access to the correct/latest version of the package.

Edit 2: but as the bug report points out, the .dsc signature check can't be relied on automatically (even if the check fails, apt returns success, you have to read the stdout/stderr instead).
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=749795

So the only way to have been safe was to check every apt-source'd package individually, with manual eyeing or running of gpg.

And, this bit (from the bug report) may be most worrysome: "(..) all debian build systems which probably rely on secure APT." (i.e. the binary packages may have been built automatically based on source that was fetched without protection).
Can confirm. Getting hit by a 200+ pounder sucks. Getting hit by a 130lber makes you wonder if they're even trying.
They're on some painkillers, too, and have short careers.
So, you like languages that are prone to obscure bugs because they allow you to remain competitive with the NSA?
A New App for Dancing with Your iPhone
The deepest artificial point on Earth
As someone who took part in FRC this year and last year, I'd agree that the inter-team collaboration is definitely very strong. We got a lot of help during competition (and occasionally helped others too).

But part of that might be because during qualifying rounds, you are on teams of 3, which change every game. So by the end of qualifying rounds, you play with (and against) most of the teams there, so it makes sense to help the other teams (since you will probably play a game allied with them sometime).

The other reason is that the culture of FIRST emphasizes those ideals, and so they're maintained that way too. One of the core values is Gracious Professionalism, and it really is emphasized everywhere.

I'm not sure which factor is the most important (I suspect it's the second one), so I'm just thinking out loud, but I thought I'd get some more information out there. But I think the rotating teams gives strategic value to helping other teams, which also increasing collaboration.
> I just want it to be Linux.

You shouldn't.

Linux is a member of a long lineage of operating systems that assume centralized processors connected by a slow bus to volatile memory that only temporarily holds information that needs to be backed up by other devices connected to buses much slower than memory. Every OS in current use is based on these ideas that haven't changed much since the 60's.

If you want, you may imagine Smalltalk running directly on metal with no OS underneath it, with all your data being just part of the image you work with. This is the kind of machine that this makes possible. This was, of course, done in the 80's with technology that was barely sufficient.
Why would this be unreasonable? If I were to propose a scientific theory and a discovery were made that provided evidence that the theory were correct, we would call it good science. Why is it considered anything less to point out that the Bible made a statement that is strengthened by the same discovery?
As has been mentioned in the post about the onboarding process, it gives you suggestions of who to follow when you sign up (first as a random list of celebs, followed by another list of big names in broad categories likes music/technology et) – but doesnt give you context for why.

To me twitter is an “interest” network, as in, I want to find out more about x or keep up with the latest on y etc – and I think this is the biggest failure of twitter ie not communication this aspect of its value proposition effectively.
Ironically, Twitter themselves have called themselves an information network and not a social network.

So, if before making suggestions on people to follow if it were to
a) position itself (better than it currently has) as a way to get massive value from keeping up on things of interest and
b) ask users to type in, say, 5 things there were interested in – and then serve up suggestions of who to follow…
… this would not only personalize the feed but be immediately relevant which should raise engagement/retention etc.
I think such an approach would get users to their aha moment about twitter much quicker.

Add to this, the most powerful features of Twitter which most people still don't use/know about is Lists. So once you were onboarded and had say 10+ people you were following, if you were prompted to segregate these people into lists by topic, that would make consuming twitter 10x easier than it is.

It seems that at times twitter still behaves as if it was something only the technorati (early adopters) use – who will figure things out. That is clearly not the case anymore.
Honest question - Are you going to also make a list of all the other products that you've used to live your life and make your money, so that anytime anyone in the family of one of the product developers dies, you can do something like this?

I think almost everybody understands human loss and can empathize. It's a bit rude to assume that someone doesn't, just because they don't want to support this rather tasteless memorial.

A child's life ended and now there is a color named after her (or some site changed a color band). What exactly is that doing for anyone other than adding a bit of trivia to the CSS spec so that people can read about it and say "Oh, that's horrible!" and then move on with their lives? What is that doing for the parents? Is the perception of this named color supposed to invoke some kind of warm feeling? Is it to let the parents know that "we support you"? If so - don't you think providing some actual support in the form of something useful would be much better?
It would be so cool to get a sample of that water (assuming it does in fact exist) and see what type of life is in it (if any). It would be almost like seeing life from another planet.
My apologies. In retrospect, my comment was curt. I only meant to continue the conversation, but it probably sounded like I was arguing.

I'd love to get your thoughts on the parts you disagree with, if you have the time. What do you think about bitcoin?
Depends. Two guys who just want to fight are probably going to have a shoving match which will end when one gets pinned and the other guy gets pulled off.

Two groups of guys who have some need to fight over are more likely to use tools.
Revealing the deck after the game is over works for Blackjack, but it would be a problem for Poker. There, players who fold do not want anyone to know what cards they held. Is there a way to make a protocol that can reveal cheating while not revealing the actual cards?
> In fact other systems actually encourage cooperation and favor candidates that are more in the center.

Actually, single-round winner-take-all democracy induces a race toward the middle, not polarization. (If everyone is aligned on a 1D spectrum and votes for the candidate closest to their position, then both candidates are incentivized move toward the median position.)

What you're really getting at isn't the idea of polarizations versus moderation, it's voting coordination (i.e. political parties) aka collusion. Unfortunately, alternate voting systems don't eliminate collusion, they just push it to a different level (e.g. proportional representative systems still have 51% coalitions at the level of parliament). You might reasonably argue that that's a better level to put that collusion, but it's definitely not eliminated through some simple choice of voting system.

If you really want to eliminate collusion and induce consensus making, you can consider "randomized parliaments". They operate in a way very analogous to the mechanism that makes poker showdowns rare. Although he chooses an unfortunate name of "quantum parliment" (since there's nothing quantum about the randomness), Aerts explains the idea well here: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0503078
I guess I can see that. What I meant was that it gets put into your app list and can be launched, be put on your homescreen, appear in the recently-used app list, etc., like any other app. I wasn't making a statement about the performance or "nativeness" of any particular app.
Go the fuck away
If USA government starts printing extra tens of billions every single day, then investors project that out and that has a significant effect; it was called quantitative easing.

Similarly, if USA government had now started to do sales like this (and larger) every other day, then it would be grounds for some major effects - but they are not; the government does not have many more bitcoins in custody, they have a few limited amounts like this one of less than $20m. Why should such a comparably small sale cause any market disruption? If some $20m re-entering the market does that, then that's a sign of a very, very small and illiquid market.

If any real scale business would start using BTC, gets a few thousand BTC in sales, and wants to swap them to another currency - do they have to think of themselves as 'market influncer' that should be careful on how to sell them so as not to rock the boat; instead of simply immediately getting the current exchange rate for that?
I don't have room in this margin (actually, mental-bandwidth constrained right now) but the gist is 1) mechanisms to expand and contract the supply of money in circulation, in response to 2) mechanisms to determine whether money is over- or undervalued. A number of methods for the former should spring to mind. For the latter, my thought is that you add a type of mined block that contains proof of an outstanding bid and offer in each of the products you're pegging against, verified by some exchange/clearinghouse[1]. Such blocks would be accorded "difficulty" according to the tightness of the spread in each of the products and the size of the orders, as well as the subjective trustworthiness of the backing institution (including a penalty for being too common in the chain relative to others).

Of course, if it's known that the currency will correct itself in the long term, market makers would be expected to keep it stable in the short term.

Countless other details, but that's the gist...

[1] Unfortunately, this is not completely trust-free, but a level of decentralization is maintained by encouraging multiple such institutions, and of course people can broadly recognize and react when one becomes untrustworthy, and it should be fairly observable when they do.
Tiny sliver? There is approximately 2.4 times more water on the surface of earth than there is land:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=earth+surface+covered+b...