skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This does not read like the investigative work of someone who has actually read any technical history on the subject. (The Making of the Atomic Bomb is probably the best scientific history ever written—I cannot recommend it highly enough.)

First, this totally fails to address the enormous industrial capacity required for enrichment of sufficient fissile material. It is implausible that 1943-1945 Japan could have achieved anything like this, regardless of technical expertise. The speculation of multiple stockpiled bombs and at least one test is far beyond feasible; even if they could have afforded the required scale of investment, the facilities and staff involved would be too large to have hidden: it likely would have required literally tens of percent of the entire Japanese industrial base over this period.

Second, the enriched uranium gun-based design (Little Boy) required more than 1000 tons of uranium oxide ore for the production of a single bomb, which is as much as the entire supply the author cites (maybe) reaching Japan.

Third, the speculation about bomber delivery seems extremely out of touch. Even the (much larger-capacity) B-29 required significant adaptation to deliver the 5-ton Mk 3 (Fat Man) and Little Boy, and, beyond mass, the designs could only barely fit within its fuselage dimensions.

Much more likely, all of the source reports were the result of rumors and misunderstandings. The most they could feasibly have built, tested, or hoped to deliver would have been small dirty bombs (a concept also well-known at the time). Perhaps they did, and this was the origin of the rumors; perhaps it was simply hearsay and speculation at a time of atomic fever.
AppleScript is not a solid argument against natural language derived programming languages in general. AppleScript's problems have more to do with the fact that it looks like it should be flexible and powerful but in reality it is fairly limited and inflexible (and its documentation and error reporting are terrible, compounding its problems).
Hopefully, your ISP is using TR-069[1] to update your router. It's not perfect but it's not as bad as you might imagine. The router polls for updates and initiates a connection to the ISPs configuration server.

The servers are usually part of your ISP's infrastructure, not a third-party service on the public Internet.

I've seen TR-069 used very effectively to manage VOIP hardware (a lucrative target for hackers) however I was told that routers are more difficult.

The bottom line is, if you don't trust your ISP to update your router firmware, buy a different router. As others have said OpenWRT is awesome.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-069#Security_and_authenticat...
You hate tests, therefore want static-typing. You do realize that static-typing doesn't mean error-free code, right? Even with static-typing, it's probably a good idea to have tests.
It is an excellent and fortunate definition. If all you do is hold patents, sue people and companies, and do not make anything or sell goods or services, you're a patent troll. And that's exactly the label that should be slapped on this company.

Hopefully we can get all entities that fit the definition of a patent troll abolished. Also fortunately it's inevitable that the patent troll business will be destroyed. It will be made so difficult and unprofitable, few will attempt it. It's merely a matter of how long it takes and much economic damage is caused by the trolls first.
Debating the finer points of what constitutes a troll really isn't helpful. It takes the focus off of the real debate -- improving the patent system.
In this case I don't think this is a patent troll. They are an NPE but they aren't trying to bully small companies to settle out of court. If they win maybe more people will want to join the dark side and make large corporations pay. Maybe then they will put pressure on Congress to finally pass the bipartisan bill that Leahy and Harry Reid forced to be shelved.
In the case of the Sydney funnelweb, it's pure coincidence.

The spider is much more toxic to primates than any other type of animal, but evolved in Australia, with no primates.

The "selection" that's going on here is in our attention: our gaze fixates on the species that have poison or venom that's particularly potent against us, out of the thousands of species that have poison or venom of some sort.

(Source: Somewhere in this otherwise sort of stupid video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myh94hpFmJY )
Why not just regenerate a key and get a new cert?
Why revoke the old one if all your services will just reject it? I mean, you can do it just to be sure you don't make a mistake. But beyond this why?
I'm pretty sure he meant patent free open standards or freely licensed patents open standards.
I would love to know why my comment was down voted. I'm making a fair point that nobody else has yet made, and thus I would argue that it adds value to the conversation. Sure, my comment was short but I believe it was as long as it needed to be to make the point. To clarify though, in case I was wrong on that assumption, I'm stating that simply because one can't spot any breaks doesn't mean there aren't any. Maybe Eng did a really good job of splitting the wood along the grain and piecing the wood back together once he slipped each piece inside the bottle. And then he could have finished the wood in such a manner as to hide any cracks still visible.
Some universities are absolutely on the list of most aggressive and abusive patent trolls. Some universities are also among those fighting hardest to keep the status quo in place so they can continue to harm the US economy with frivolous patents and milk a broken system.
Is there any work on a project like this that you know of?
Presumably any such fix would have to start with specifying both a referer and a referrer header, so that legacy clients wouldn't freak out. That said, it's humbling to think that because someone made a mistake in, what, 1991? We still have to go around spelling referrer wrong all the time, and even include the incorrect spelling in new specs.

So, all you standards proliferators out there: used the goddam spell checker, all right?
Here's something that's even more "out there": an experimental OS and programming environment where all protection is done statically, at compile time. You can do things as crazy as run all "user" processes and the kernel in the same (kernel-mode) address space safely, because the system compiler enforces type-safety and memory-safety. It's pretty cool! (my memory is a bit weak on this paper so some of the details might be off, but it's well worth the read)

http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/?id=69431
Lucid dreaming is one of the coolest things we can do. People think that dreams aren't real, but that's far from the truth. They aren't real in the sense that if I find a COOL WATCH or I win $2000 in a dream I can't take it with me to "real life," but when you think about what our life really is, it's a collection of experiences...not accumulation of physical objects.

In dreams you can have the same experiences you have in waking life but even more so. You can take these experiences with you when you are done dreaming. Lucid dreaming takes this even further. You can imagine a problem you have is a tangible object (a bug or something) in your dream and squish it. Although this seems purely symbolic, you can take the feeling of having dealt with a problem into waking life, which will give you more energy to do the same in your interactions with waking life.

Not to mention in lucid dreams you can fly everywhere you want to go, you can have sex with whoever you want however you want, you can be a bear or a toad or a tree, you can be three of yourself at the same time, you can slow down time, you can travel to the bottom of the ocean and you can see distant planets or the inside of a star. Is it real? Yes, because you are actually having these experiences, even if you are the only one having them.
Javascript in this case has nothing to do with web browsers. It is simply a scripting language used to manipulate OSA (Apple's cross-application automation API in Mac OS X). Since OSA is not part of iOS, this likely won't affect iOS at all.

You actually can use Javascript to automate iOS apps running in Instruments (one of Apple's developer tools). This is used for automated UI testing in the iOS simulator or while your iOS device is tethered to a Mac. This has been around for a couple years and there's no indication that it will ever be permitted in released applications. There's actually no reason to enable it – it's only useful for snooping on apps (good for developers, bad for users).
Go is fairly strict in the use of goto: http://golang.org/ref/spec#Goto_statements

They have their use cases, and this code seems like a fine use of it. Goto is taught as one of those things you should never use but it still has a purpose. If you look at any C code goto still used. You just have to make sure not to overuse it.
A reading of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan's_non-nuclear_weapons_pol... makes this sound unlikely - it says in 1955 the mere consideration of equipping Japan with nuclear-capable missiles caused enough outrage that the US promised not to send nukes there without permission.
Ok, we changed "collect" to "detect" in the title.
I heard of a project a while back, but haven't seen it since and I forget the name. My understanding is that it's slow going. I think the best bet is, as mentioned, piggyback onto the blockchain somehow. Namecoin is probably the closest to getting this right.
I was thinking that exact same thing (re: Watterson and Patreon) after I wrote that.
Someone explain why you couldn't just build a plywood ramp and drive it out?

Or winch it up an incline too steep to drive?

Somehow, there needs to be a hole large enough to extract the dirt, bring in the structural elements, bring in the new foundation and the concrete for the pool, and bring in any large pieces of furniture. And large enough to get the digger in in the first place. Surely if you're bringing heavy stuff in, you can get heavy stuff out.

This story has to be nonsense.
Surely the diesel and oil could be removed very easily?

Anyway, this comment on the article you reference is interesting:

"The truth is somewhere in between, if the JCB's were mini diggers and secondhand it would make economic sense to bury the kit and not a lot of space would be lost..."

Also this quote from http://www.itv.com/news/london/2014-06-06/hundreds-of-jcb-di...:

"The diggers used are tiny little machines and they can be lifted out with a block and tackle. There is always an exit strategy for the equipment."
And independent inventors, and basically anybody that is not a huge corporation and creates something useful.

That popular definition looks too much like political propaganda.
From the spec, it seems that they've improved on a few things (integers being the big one).
It's not clear if this particular "invention" was developed for CIA, but there are also different types of government contracts, some of which assign IP to the government, some of which do not.
If you want lucid dreaming without having to wait for a Gamma Wave Zapper, there is one alternative. Sertraline (Zoloft). I've been on and off of it a few times in the past 10 years for anxiety. After a few weeks of being on it, the lucid dreaming kicks in. Sometimes I wish I could record these dreams and make them into movies. It's quite the experience.
> This is, and always has been, a problem of bad legislation.

Exactly. The legislation and regulatory apparatus built around it allow people to claim exclusivity on ideas and techniques that are already obvious to most people in the field. This must be fixed with legislation.

Calling companies trolls on internet forums unread by the vast majority of citizens really doesn't help the cause. These companies make their living enforcing patents. They aren't going to stop because people say mean things about them. They are going to stop when the law makes their business obsolete.
Mailonline tests Soylent
If the creators of this project are reading this thread, I hope you don't take the criticisms here too personally. I don't know why nearly every new project on HN gets completely ripped apart nowadays unless it's some clever hack or backed by a popular/famous creator.

I think the app looks great and compared to the desktop/mobile versions of the Wikipedia website, it is a significant improvement when it comes to readability. So what if it doesn't do justify or support editing content. Justify is a minor setting that can be easily implemented and editing could be a v2.0 feature if the project gains traction.

I love reading Kindle and iBooks on my iPad and it's fantastic that I can now access Wikipedia with the same readability features. You should definitely continue to make improvements, from tables to justification. Keep adding more integration with Wikidata. Maybe allow users to treat any Wikipedia article like an e-book by enabling notes, bookmarking, highlighting etc. I know it's hard to deal with ever changing content but maybe let the user save a specific version with highlight/notes to the iPad (and enable cloud sync).
For what it's worth, Wikipedia notes:

"[D]ocument co-author Roy Fielding has remarked that neither 'referrer' nor the misspelling 'referer' were recognized by the standard Unix spell checker of the period."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_referer
even something slick like this[0] can be generated using json_resume. Just a new template has to be given.

[0] https://www.writelatex.com/read/tktqrbmhnyqp
>Natsume said Soviets arrived so quickly that they captured seven key scientists. Russians tortured the scientists by thrusting burning slivers under their fingertips and pouring water into their noses.[20]

Waterboarding: Torture enough for the Soviets.
But with a laptop you can just use a graphics tablet and you'll save trees from getting turned into paper.
Future of Network Security via IoT(Cisco/IoT)
Ruby Special Case Objects
> The fact that a viewpoint is shared by a number of people is hardly an argument for its validity.

This is actually _exactly_ how language works, and that's precisely what's under discussion here: whether the term patent troll is accurate.

There's a different discussion to be had (which rayiner is also alluding to in his comment) about whether this definition has negative side-effects (like being too broad), but being clear on the terms being used in a discussion is important.
I've been using an older tablet PC for notetaking for a few months, switching from a combination of typed and pencil + paper notes. Anecdotally I think think is the best notetaking solution I've yet tried since:

* No smudging (left-handedness issues solved!)
* Never out of paper or space to write
* Very fast erase, almost no cost to correcting mistakes
* Can move things around on the "paper" very quickly
* Copy and paste, resizing, shape recognition, ...
* Can insert graphics, formulas, etc as needed, quickly

Honestly the only downside is battery life and I'm working around that with a 2nd battery. My overall note quality has massively increased and I find I can keep up with lectures without any trouble, something I often couldn't do with only pencil + paper due to my slow writing speed and frequency of mistakes.

Specifically I use xournalpp [1] and ipython with a custom onscreen keyboard layout for math-related activities. It works exceedingly well for a ~$300 total investment (used PC + FOSS apps).

[1]: https://github.com/xournalpp/xournalpp
This attack isn’t new – the first proof of concept I know of that worked well is from 2011: http://lcamtuf.blogspot.com/2011/12/css-visited-may-be-bit-o...
And has been largely fixed for several. See e.g. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Privacy_and...
[IANAL]

My understanding is that the US Federal government cannot be sued for patent infringement. If correct, there would be no value for it to acquire patent rights and if the technology was to be controlled, classifying the design would be better than filing patents.
Zip code. Yes. That's what I meant.
JenkinsCI User Conference 6/18 in Boston
>> If I understand correctly, the participants rated their experience of these three factors on a scale of 0 (strongly disagree that I had such an experience) to 5 (strongly agree). Now if we look to see the scores they gave for how much dream insight, dissociation and control they had, we find that the averages for the gamma stimulation condition are around 0.6, 1.3, and 0.5 respectively.
>
> That’s a pretty low score, even if it’s higher than it would’ve been without the brain stimulation.

Maybe, maybe not. Averages work for some things, not so much for others. Suppose 4-5 are no-fooling-definitely-lucid dreams, and 1-3 are questionable. If the average is being driven by a few dreams falling into '5' and otherwise scores are unchanged, you'd get a worthwhile effect but only a small shift in average on your 1-5 scale. I'd want to read http://www.blogs.uni-mainz.de/fb05philosophie/files/2013/04/... more carefully looking at how the overall rating distribution looks split by condition and whether the rating scale is masking a binary effect.
> But the crazy thing is that the many college students being distracted by their laptops are simultaneously paying tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege of doing so.

No, most students are paying for a credential so they can get a job, and also for social and other aspects of college. While there may be some students who want to listen to a lecture but get distracted, I think most choose not to listen because lectures aren't usually that interesting or even helpful.

You need to be actively involved to learn a topic, and taking notes may be the best option available in a lecture. But once you leave the lecture behind, students can be involved more directly, such as by working on challenges as they learn. It would be interesting to see a study that compared students who took notes to those who answered questions.
The problem with this definition is that one of the purposes of the patent system is to enable companies that don't produce products but rather produce R&D.
Pycontracts does that.

Racket is more powerful, but that is a bad example.
It's not about wanting only Tesla stores. It's about wanting Tesla stores at all.

If consumers really do value dealers, then dealers will continue to exist. The reason that dealers are scared is that the dealers themselves do not believe that they provide a valued service.
I had a lot more insightful discussion on now-defunct .onion forums and IRC channels than I ever had on hacker news.

Much more interesting links, as well.
> What are the reasons for not showing shipping fees?

Lazy design. They want you to finish shopping. I also think they want you to commit first. If someone goes through the hassle to set up an account, add the items to the account, type in billing information, only to find out the shipping is going to cost $5 or $10 more than they were expecting to pay, customers then might just decide to eat it. It’s too much work to go through all that again somewhere else.

Mind you, this whole issue is a lot better than it was years ago.
Nobody Is Thinking Clearly About Robot Cars At All
I really like OP's suggestion.

“Interesting” ≠ Better right?

I kind of thought JSON is [essentially] HR-XML. lol. But then again, I have not heard of Human Readable XML, and sort of chuckled at the thought of “HR” meaning human readable (until I googled it — __face–palm__).

Anyways, this is begging to feel a little like; http://xkcd.com/378/
You know that, because you already know how "rand" is implemented
These are reasonable people, they decided it will not be available in our society.

You are worried comcast goes bankrupt?
Sistema Para "Revertir la Diabetes"
Si estás viviendo en carne propia los horribles problemas causados por la diabetes, esta información es de gran importancia para ti.
> now-defunct

To be fair, that's kind of his point. The relative advantage of the Internet in this case is already having critical mass.
My first thought (from a sysadmin view, and only reading the title ;) ) is - firstboot scripts that only run once? The question sounds like they're looking for something a little more malicious I guess?...
That's what I thought this post was about, but I guess it doesn't matter because a holier than thou nerd has claimed it as his own now.
Good. When the big companies have to pay real money, they'll fix the software patents problem.
$300 Billion Broadband Scandal (2009) [pdf]
In the previous thread there was a discussion to give the details of how the phone companies were able to charge customers excess profits and get tax perks that were supposed to be used to upgrade the networks.
This book -- link attached --- has a description of how we calculated the numbers -- though it was written in 2004 - the 20th anniversary of the break up of AT&T.<p>We have a new book coming out where we update most of the stats, but essentially, the phone companies were able to claim -- en mass --that they were going to replace the copper wires with fiber starting in 1991, and from 1993-to about 2005 they did nothing (with some exceptions) but they were able to get state laws changed to do funding of the upgrades. No state ever went back and examined the commitment and got refunds—so all rate increases are based on the original ‘commitments’—and changes in the law.<p>In 2005, after they closed the networks to direct competition they started to do new upgrades-- "FiOS-Verizon" and AT&T, which simply used the old copper wires, added some remote terminals and called it U-Verse.<p>
Yet, Verizon and AT&T were able to charge basic POTS customers -- phone customers in most states for upgrades-- again. -- even if they will never get it.<p>Our new report on Verizon New York shows that the 'affiliate companies, such as Verizon Online or Verizon Wireless, are able to use the networks and get expenses paid for by regular phone companies-- even though Verizon had announced no more upgrades
http://newnetworks.com/verizonfiostitle2/

The cringley numbers are also our stats.<p>The one thing to keep in mind is that we've been tracking this since 1991-- and so every year the numbers are going to increase.<p>... thus differing amounts based on the date.
Incidentally, I'd still mostly agree with your comment, as the underlying script runtime isn't really designed with application development in mind. For example, I'm pretty sure Xcode debugging support for AppleScript doesn't even include breakpoints or related features like single-stepping (Apple's Script Editor certainly doesn't), and that Script Debugger had to pretty much implement its own AppleScript runtime to support these features.

On another side note, while Yosemite is the first time Apple has supplied or supported JavaScript as an OSA language, third parties have integrated the Mozilla JavaScript engine into OSA in the past in what I believe is an abandoned project (Google "JavaScript OSA").
> I don't know if it's fair to call VirnetX a "patent troll."

Filing in East Texas pretty much defines you as a patent troll. If you have a real case, you don't have to go to East Texas to litigate it.
Brain surgery with regular Bosch power drill
Wikipedia is a tool not an app. Tools are designed to be useful not beautiful. Wikipedia extremely useful as is. Any significant change must be a large leap in usefulness to overcome the burden of having to re-teach hundreds of millions of people how to use the tool. Having a specific platform with a unique interface is counter productive at best.

Wikipedia is not stuck in 2004, it's not stuck anywhere. It continues to grow, flourish and be useful to hundreds of millions of people over all sorts of connections and on all sorts of devices.

Thinking how much better wikipedia would be if it were beautiful is like thinking how much better your hammer would be if it were beautiful.