skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is only a side point, but I wrote objdump (any objcopy) mainly as a debugging aid when starting to implement bfd. We included it for people porting bfd, rather than as a normal user program.

Thus it is weird, though gratifying, to see it actually used for real work. In fact I use it instead of nm, size, etc but I thought I might be the only one!
Ah ok. I figured since people can actually see their data and the Regard project itself that it was ok to post a Show HN. Thanks for the advice.
What are you talking about? Microsoft doesn't source even an appreciable fraction of the exploits for exploitable bugs in Microsoft products. There is a 9-figure business in reversing WinAPI software, discovering vulnerabilities in it, and weaponizing them with exploit code. Microsoft is a bystander to that industry.
I had this problem with PNY with one of their other products - I bought a mid-tier video card from them (GeForce GTX 570), and after a hardware failure, sent it in for an RMA. Over the course of multiple RMA mailings, at various times they would send back a visibly physically damaged 'replacement' card, a 'replacement' card that was a different size/shape (and obviously a different model), and in one case my broken card, that I sent them initially. It was as if they had a pile of 'works well enough to boot Windows' cards and RMAs that weren't totally broken got put into the pile, while they pulled other cards out of the pile to ship to customers.

It was pretty impressive to be able to watch shady cost-cutting in action. Too bad it cost me around $120 in UPS shipping fees.
No. Please read my link above. This is thing #2 in my link above. Christine Petersen coined the term. OSI was then formed under this term.

There is an unrelated "open source intelligence" older term, about how to spy on people using publicly-available sources, but nobody called software "open source" before OSI. Eric Raymond confirms as much:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/open-source.html
Keep in mind this is a brand-specific change. Unilever, the owner of Breyer's, is the worlds largest ice cream manufacturer and also owns Ben & Jerry's, Klondike, Popsicle, Magnum, and a host of other brands. Breyer's being one of their non-premium brands, it's one of the few they have that's so price sensitive that they'd risk so blatantly using filler substitutes.
Hm: is "non-European" the word you wanted?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm really not sure. Even quickly skimming http://www.census.gov/geo/reference/pdfs/cenpop2010/COP2010_..., it's not clear to me whether slaves were excluded from this tally.
Only on HN, Reddit, and Slashdot is a recommendation of Bitlocker "inexplicably naive" because it's "closed-source". Meanwhile: I trust my sources a lot more than I trust your totally unfounded, straight- out- of- the- first- thoughts- that- came- to- your- mind speculation. One substantive difference between my sources and your speculation: I actually have sources.

The fact that the "warrant canary" scenario with Truecrypt is also silly also weighs heavily against your argument. Try to game out the scenario where Truecrypt is actually compromised. Especially funny: it's compromised at exactly the moment when a third party crowdsources an expert review of Truecrypt. That's when they choose to backdoor it. Seems legit.
No. Please read my link.

It is not naturally described as such, because nobody described it naturally as such before OSI came along. The dictionary definitions in this case lead you to the wrong conclusion about the meaning, just like at least one dictionary definition of "free" can lead to the wrong conclusion about what free software means.

I am being pedantic about this because I want people to value the principles that open source is supposed to be about. I don't want people to forget what open source really means.
Using SSH and OpenWrt to access your home network from the outside
>Open source means the source is available under an open source license, as recognized by the OSI. //

I've been part of the [F]OSS community (mainly on the receiving side!) for ~15 years but have never seen it specified that OSS has to comply with an OSI definition.

"open source" [de-capitalisation is purposeful to distinguish with "Open Source [OSD]"] has always simply meant that the source was available to view for those the program was distributed to. For example - IIRC - Star Office was a paid application initially but was open source as those who purchased it could request the source code. Way back in the day people/companies would even make nominal charges to cover media and distribution of the source and still be "open source". Of course not all open source is free-gratis, clearly one can charge for open source. But, moreover, not all open source is free-libre either, just being open source doesn't mean that you have to have a GPL/LGPL/Berkley/CC or whatever compatible license.

I'm pretty sure I recall the OSI starting; we had open source software before that. The OSI's "Open Source" is not coterminous with "open source". For example someone distributing a linux distro that specified that no proprietary software could be bundled as part of the distro would be excluded by the OSI's definition from terming the distro "Open Source" whilst it could very clearly be completely open source. Similarly if you say "may not be used for development or activation or control of weapons designed to cause harm" as part of your license you can allow any type of source manipulation you like but the OSI's definition would say your software is not "Open Source".

FOSS (Free [-libre] Open Source Software) gives you the freedom to modify and reuse it, though there still might be relicensing controls. That's why we have FOSS and OSS definitions in the first place, the Free-libre bit wouldn't be necessary otherwise. No need to try and overload the language to push an ideological position like OSI appear to have done.
Go west, young man!
Well that sucks. It should not happen, yet it does. And it should not definitely spread to more industries.

But that really is no argument. I am sure the car manufacturers did not downgrade the car so that it runs at half its speed/milage. Then they came up with a fake benchmark to prove to the world that it actually does (even if it does not). Come on that is an insult to one's intelligence. These guys are ripping their customers. Whatever reviews for the product exist are based on the specs that no longer are. That is pure evil.

What can someone do to stop this ? Besides not buying their products.
Poll Everywhere (YC S08) hiring Customer Support Hustler
They certainly had issues with issuing cert for domain name suggesting it is doing financial operations, but otherwise so far every purely commercial-nature domains successfully granted certs in my case. But obviously it is startssl call and they might change their mind anytime.
I agree, I should have made my point clearer. I suppose a better analogy would be the person shouting the tweet in a public place where a police officer was present to witness it. They aren't directing the offensive comment at anyone. In that situation I doubt an arrest would be made.
Cheat sheets that I printed out: emacs, git, tmux ... What are yours?
Harassment. If you are directing the negative comments at someone in particular I think you would be charged with harassing that person.
Thanks for writing and publishing objdump. I use it often along side of gcc's assembly view. I find the output handy for taking notes, and the format is simple for scripts to parse.
HathiTrust’s Top Most Accessed Volumes, May 2014
There appears to be no activity or information about this process that is publicly available.
Ok, now I see. But - what is it telling me?
More information: For personal (as in human genome) sequencing, I'm not entirely sure how useful this is... We already have a scaffold for the human genome (that would be Mr. Venter himself) and MAYBE you could get some haploid information out of it, but you'd worry that the base pair you care about for any given individual is in one of the wrong stretches.

For organism sequencing, I think this could be even worse than pacbio; there are modestly sized gaps in the sequence compared to relative to the known pseudomonas sequence; imputing the correct sequence when you have no available template is going to be a nightmare. It's easy to say "15% error" when you know what the 100% correct result is. But if you have no reference correct sequence and all of your parts are up to 15% wrong, the difficulty is compounded.
They actually found the bug and released a fimware update fixing it before anyone's SSD was 5000 hours old, and SSD owners (at least back in those days) are generally expected to install firmware updates. It was quite well-publicised, too; they handled it really well, except for the actual release.
Nothing prevents you from using a function (`last(myArray)`). In a dynamically typed language what you are proposing makes only very limited sense.
Lab-Tools FPGA Binning Co-processor for APL (2012) [video]
(Shameless plug:) It would be great if someone would leverage the pretty successful technique (i.e. found a couple hundred bugs in GCC and Clang) we recently devised to detect miscompilations, Compiler Validation via Equivalence Modulo Inputs[1], to test ARM compilers.

In short, the idea is: profile a program running on a specific input; mutate the unexecuted code with respect to that input; compile and execute the mutated program and expect the output to be identical given the input.

[1]: http://mehrdadafshari.com/emi/paper.pdf
It is pedantry of the same kind as RMS insisting on using GNU/Linux name instead of Linux. I have several projects under GPL and MIT licenses, some are over 10 years old, and I still think it's perfectly fine to describe something with publicly available code as "open source". Whether it is released under an open source license is another matter, and in many cases it's not, including TC and most of what Microsoft releases. But in conversational English TC is open source, because there's basically no other established term to describe the fact that its source is available. If you are aware of one, I'd like to know it.
ProtoJolt, mistakes and lessons learned from a two week "hack out"
Transitioning from code to product
I might consider using this if there was an SDK for Node.js or another platform that I was into. That call is not really complicated, but having an SDK ready to go would make it a much easier decision to try this out.

Also ODT is the most flexible but if I could log in, pick a pre-existing HTML-based template from a library of common things like invoices or whatever, and edit it in my account with Aloha Editor or CK Editor or something, that might be just fine unless I needed special headers or something.

Then the API call could just give the name of the template.
I did the third one (mv, not rm) to a system I cared about with a full hard disk early in my linux tutelage.

Educational day.
In theory, speech in the UK has for some time been subject to tight controls even outside the internet. Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986, as modified in 1994, states that

'A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he— uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.

...

A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.'

(Above text somewhat abbreviated.)

There's also section 5, which is more or less the same offence but without intent, which has a fine (level 3) as it's penalty.

I believe the latter is the one more commonly used. But it strikes me that much of the day to day interactions people have with the legal system are subject to what you might call a policeman's 'give a fuck' level, rather than being a reflection of their potential powers from statute.
That article first claims that prices stay the same, but then contains this:

"They're grateful that the Jetta's base price is down $1,740."

Then you're just getting less value for less money, which seems fair to me.
New York here -- not in the startup scene, but still technical and happy to talk things through with folks if they're interested.
Sudan bombing hospitals with SU bombers from Belarus
Oh man. if their is anything I have learned about the command line, its don't fuck around with rm.
It was fixed quickly and that's been the only major complaint I've seen. Further, the bug would cause reboots, but wasn't outright destructive. This is about the same time Sandforce based drives were failing left and right.

tl;dr - Crucial is one of a handful of brands I do trust, and I've owned a number of the M4 series.
Samsung has been known to ship Android tablets containing completely different SoCs under the same model. For example, the new Galaxy Tab S might contain an Exynos SoC or a Qualcomm SoC. They're essentially two completely different tablets with the same name and exterior.

Though, my understanding is that in their case it's not so much a bait-and-switch as a supply chain issue: they actually want to sell more units than any one SoC provider can deliver.

Big pain for developers, though, when they're trying to track down a user-reported bug on one of these things.
Or that you're completely average :)
But proprietary in the sense of that there is only one implementation and it is maintained by one company (Google).
Since I have only one eye, I can relate to your annoyance at "the question". I've coped with this by concocting creative and somewhat-unlikely lies. "I lost it in a knife fight." If the questioner is an acquaintance with whom I share one mutual friend, I'll say that mutual friend poked my eye out. The goal is to tell them something just barely plausible enough that their confusion will make them more uncomfortable than their presumption made me.
http://www.mouseprint.org/
I agree that legs didn't actually evolve for walking exclusively. They evolved for a myriad of purposes, including walking, running, jumping, swimming, and more.

The fact other parts of the body also evolved to facilitate these features is not a contradiction.

Evolution is like a parallel computation looking for a local optimum. When climbing the hills of the possibility landscape, various features that exist at the top of these hills can be described as the purpose of a particular search path.
I think you misread my comment. That is exactly what it is. I meant not as extreme in comparison to terrorism where it's perfectly acceptable to kill civilians etc.
42.zip (2004)
And OS/9 a sweet bit of code...
I hate hearing about these stories from manufactures, it totally kills their rep for me to ever trust them again. Why do companies go against just building solid products, even if it costs a little more money. It's exactly how Apple has gotten away with charging premium dollars for similar hardware - build quality always wins.
These are all pretty minor things that can already be done in ES5.... The biggest thing I want in ES7 is immutables.
_WIN32 used to be defined for Xbox - it probably still is for Xbox360 and XboxOne too... - as well as Win32/Win64. All very different systems. Cue hilarity!

You really, truly are best off making your own defines. (If you absolutely don't want to specify them in the build setup, you can usually autodetect many of your own defines by checking for _WIN32 and _M_IX86 and _MSC_VER and __GNUG__ and so on. Then there's at least only one place to get the logic wrong.)
Yes I also think this is a part of it. As the world becomes more internationalist and multi-cultural, it makes it harder to dehumanise please who we now have the chance to communicate with in an instant, read about, travel to their country etc
Stallman and his toe cheese have nothing to do with this.

I think the term "visible source" is quite unambiguous, but perhaps I'm wrong. Microsoft prefers the term "shared source" for what you describe.
I did a stint of hardware repairs for an Amsterdam based computer retailer (ugly story, owner committed suicide). I was the guy in the 'back room' trying to piece together working machines from DOA's and within warranty failures.

The failure rate of Commodores was incredible. I got pretty good at the strip down, test, combine 6 bad machines to make 5 working ones routine, it wasn't rare to sell 50 machines on a Saturday and to get back a few of those by the time the week was out.
I remember noticing this as an 10-year-old with bags of chips -- $0.79 bags would become bigger $0.99 "big grab" bags with a big exclamatory balloon, then the size would later go down to before, but the price would stay the same.

Even as a kid, it seemed kinda sleazy
The unfortunate thing is there are probably so many people who just buy that shit because they need it. My initial reaction was that piece wasn't necessary & is more due to companies coming up with shit products & flooding the market, which happens in IT too.
Came here for for this comment. Did not disappoint.
It helps to think of Braben & Bell as the 1980s version of John Carmack & Markus Persson.
That's nothing. How about an infinite zip file :)

http://research.swtch.com/zip
It's just as extreme, and within the terms of the ethic being taught civilians are still fair game in military engagements. Even recent history has plenty of proof of this.
Parents investigated by child protective services after giving birth at home
A Field Guide to Streaming Music Services – Personal Tech News – WSJ
Mapbox | Design and publish beautiful maps
gcc and clang can handle mixed Objective-C and C++ in a single source file (some call it Objective-C++). The only tricky part is linking since C++ and ObjC++ use a different symbol name convention than C/ObjC; but you can still link between them by using extern "C" declarations in the right places.
Indeed, as long as it doesn't show any signs of usage. And as someone has mentioned, it works only when ordered and delievered - picking up something at the store makes return impossible (since one had a chance to see and evaluate the item).
> Yes, there's some confusion because the term "open source" was around before OSI attempted to define it.

No, it was not. OSI coined it. Specifically, Christine Petersen coined it.

It appears to be such a natural term now that we have become convinced that we were using it before OSI, but we weren't. The earliest OED citation for "open source" is from 1998, around the time when OSI coined it. If you have an earlier citation, please submit it to the OED. I don't believe one exists.

There is an unrelated term "open source intelligence" which is indeed older, but nobody called software "open source" before OSI.
I agree. C# has this feature. They call them extension methods. They alive the scoping issue quite nicely: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb383977.aspx
Harvard Nanopore Group
That is extremely clever.
Aliasing conflict!

This is about doing histogramming on an FPGA, not a tool to group FPGA dice into speed grades :)

Would be interesting to see how an FPGA stacks up against a GPU on this problem. GPUs are very fast at parallel histogramming, but hardwiring the number-to-bin-index computation for a particular problem instance might buy you quite a bit of energy efficiency, or even possibly a bit of performance if the computation involves a divide.
If the bins are of non-uniform size and the indexing computation involves a binary search on a lookup table, it seems like the much higher clock speeds on a GPU would win out.
They should just provide an operator like ::, then features that can be implemented without special language support don't need to bloat the spec.

array::last()

would mean same as

last.call(array)

that means `last` can just be a regular variable in scope
Ask HN: iS Xcode 6 still under NDA?
Hey everyone, I'm a little confused. I thought Xcode 6 was under NDA but I came across this Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZuwF7Hfc5s8o_yuMcifyng Where they are using Xcode 6.

If, Xcode 6 is still under NDA - Should this not be reported? also When will the NDA be lifted?
Things I’ve Learned From Marc Andreessen
My guess on the contrary is we are well designed for combat but designed to use weapons. Look at the historic interaction between humans and pretty much any large animals - usually we wipe them out.
If you're going to buy a SSD go with Samsung or Intel
No, there is a meaningful difference [1].

Free (as in freedom) Software guarantees that the end user can always get, modify, and redistribute the source, by requiring any use of the source code to be under the same license. In short, copyleft.

For example [2], since linksys modified and extended GPL'd code (the linux kernel) in creating the WRT54G wireless router, they had to release their work under the GPL too, which is how to OpenWrt project was created.

The term Open Source applies to projects with more permissive licenses, such as the MIT license, where there is not obligation to release your modified version of the source to the end user.

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.htm...
[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenWrt#History
I too find it extremely useful for reading the disassembly of things.
That's a good test for pass-through antivirus appliances :)
I recently published an open source win/mac wrapper library in C. It is not well tested, and only covers the specific subset of functionality I needed for my current project. It may still be useful for others learning which pieces of each os handle which common tasks - things like CoreGraphics vs GDI, file system quirks, how to play audio, etc.

https://github.com/tylerneylon/oswrap
Sharethrough – The In-Feed Ad Exchange
https://hn.algolia.com/?q=mapbox#!/story/forever/0/mapbox
Linux 3.15 list of changes
Interesting this comes up now, there was a talk at my lab a couple of days ago by Jim Bell of ASU - he is/was responsible for the Pancam payload on MER, i.e. the main stereo cameras. The talk was about colour calibration used on these rovers.

Essentially as Spirit and Opportunity were only designed for a 90 day jaunt, the calibration target wasn't designed to be in use for very long. Over 3000 days later it's covered in dust. However, there's also a white/grey patch that has a ring magnet underneath it. The centre of the magnet is totally clear of dust (which is largely magnetic, lots of Iron on Mars), and is pretty much the cleanest part of the rover as a result. Turns out it's quite useful because as more dust accumulates, we can better simulate the Martian atmosphere. You can see the magnet in the top right, note the centre is still white!

http://www.hour25online.com/pix/Spirit_dust-comparison_feb05...

MSL Curiosity uses the flight spare from the MER project. It's the thing that looks a bit like a joystick.

https://planetary.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/images/z_changeove...

The six rings on the surface are where the new 'sweep' magnets are, you can see some small debris has gotten stuck to them. It looks like they upgraded it a bit and put them on all the colour targets.

This approach is also used for other sensors onboard (UV photodiodes in this case):

http://www.spaceflight101.com/uploads/6/4/0/6/6406961/977765...
Yo Facebook, Ban Links With Fake Video Play Buttons
This is pretty neat in the art and navigation around the ship alone. I'm not sure otherwise if I understand the objective :-) Are you planning to make it interactive?

Thanks for the nostalgia.
Looks good, can you offer more info about what engine you're using etc? Also, is there a point or just wander around and admire the ride?