skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's no need for an organization to be immune from censure or regulation when its constituents are all themselves immune.

Let's take a concrete example, and suppose that the government outlaws corporations from criticizing government policy. If corporations don't have free speech rights, then it would be perfectly constitutional for them to do so. Do you think that this is okay, since all the individual shareholders still have the right to complain? Even if every individual shareholder gets up at a meeting and says "This new government policy is stupid", the company can be banned from passing a resolution that says "This new government policy is stupid"?

I can see how _some_ individual rights do not extend to corporations, but free speech is not among them. The right of groups of people to assemble and make joint declarations is a fundamental part of the right of free speech.
As one who has to deal with incoming (massive) .doc files from customers, partners and consultants, I'll assure everyone that this "stop using MS Office" requirement would be impossible.

I have a recent build of NeoOffice (OO packaged for OS X) on my MBP, and while I'm quite happy using it for casual day-day interaction with small, simpler Word documents (< 100 pages, < 5 Mbytes) - It's nowhere close to prime time for reading in larger, complex Word Documents; for any serious integration with Microsoft, you absolutely, positively, _have_ to have the native applications on your desktop. And even then it's not a slam dunk if someone created with a different version of MS Office on a different platform.

And, given that we all have to deal with those documents occasionally (Unlike me, who has to deal with them every day) - That means Microsoft continues to sell licenses to people who only use their software to deal with the rare Microsoft Document that blows up their copy of OO.

Seriously - Pages on the Macintosh (Awesome), or OO is more than enough for 99% of the worlds document creators - the only reason those 99% _need_ to purchase Microsoft Office anymore is for compatibility.

That's why Microsoft fights standards like ODF tooth and nail - once people have a choice, they'll make it.
I really like how it enables you to update the page efficiently after the page has been rendered.
Mozilla’s Camino Gets An Update
He probably means that he heard somewhere several years ago (before 2005, for example) that there were no implementations of Perl 6 and hasn't bothered looking in the five years since then. It's okay. It's a common disorder.
A scripting language that's somewhere between Bourne Shell and Perl: you don't need to spawn a new process to do a grep or sed, and also you use cat and pipes instead of file handles. Maybe when Perl 6 is a bit more mature I will look at implementing it as a source filter.
The Google Voice app in no way affects AT&T. Even with Google Voice, cell phone minutes and data are still used. SMS revenue is potentially at risk, but PNS is a bigger threat to that than Google Voice.

Apple is very likely acting alone. Have I missed something?
A shirt that says "FCUK" can start a conversation with a stranger, preferably the sort of boundary-challenging conversation that might lead to an opportunity to challenge more boundaries.

There's a practical purpose that has very little to do with fashion.
Turning Skills into Money
I think when he said 'cut scenes' he meant the 'machinima sequences' as opposed to the pre-rendered cinematics. And there really aren't very many of those, either, far fewer than you seem to think - it's a very rare quest that ends with or contains such a sequence.
I'm surprised Mint was successful at all, given that you have to give them your financial account login ids and passwords to use their system. Storing such data centrally seems like a big risk to me.
The engine-out glide capability for that aircraft troubles me.
ECC would work if you could read both the ECC and enough of the data out of the defective block. I am not sure how frequent this situation is, but I suspect full-block failures are more common.

Considering the trends in storage capacity, I think the mirroring approach done with ZFS is a clever solution. One could even conceive a file system that would position multiple copies of blocks of frequently accessed files all over the disks in order to maximize throughput, keeping only a minimum redundancy condition declared by file.

I am happy file systems are no longer boring ;-)
Since you mention it, the FCC just might call _you_ the criminal if you tried to modify your cisco box... :)

I won't claim to understand what's cooking in the DoJ or the FTC, but from my armchair, it seems like there's at least an argument here.

I wonder if this has come up before with different platforms, where a competitor was denied access to the platform basically because they were a competitor.

I can imagine this being the case with highly regulated industries (e.g. the TV/cable example), where the government is basically the gatekeeper of new competition, but here (i.e. Google Voice) it's not an issue of regulation.
I know that's totally beside the point, but I'd have coded the example like this:

print """
Happy Birthday To You
Happy Birthday To You
Happy Birthday Dear XXX
Happy Birthday To You
"""
As I wrote, "I read EvilPacket to suggest the time-limited challenge is a token stuffed into the cookie." I wouldn't recommend putting a challenge token in the cookie, but developers make mistakes.

Also, you know DOM injection is a very common problem. It's better if you don't have to assume the website has no DOM injection problems to do the right thing.

Therefore, I think it is reasonable to recommend asking password confirmation as a general best practice, since it's a straightforward way to be the safest. I'm not sure why you are arguing with that point.
I find it hilarious that two people responded with the exact same phrase: "Google disagrees"

We might as well automate this process!
http://FleeTheShame.com

A "Post Secret" type of a blog that would allow people to anonymously own up to those times they broke the law and got away with it. Bad idea all around.
The entire concept of "criminal liability" as pertains to corporations has always confused me. You can't effectively sentence a corporation to anything, you can only sanction it by enforcing (typically monetary) reparations, or by dissolving the corporation in extreme circumstances.

There's a reason that, when it comes to criminal acts committed on behalf of a company, individuals are the ones that go to jail: THEY committed a crime, whether they did it to help their organization or not.

The idea of corporate person-hood a perfect example of a (very) leaky abstraction
It's not a question of how much AT&T has to lose, it's a question of what Apple has to gain.

Here, yes, AT&T has something to lose if the app is allowed. Maybe it's not much, but it's something.

What does Apple have to gain by denying this app? In fact, they're the _only_ ones who have anything at all to lose by taking such action.

EDIT: good points in reply to this... (I can't reply any deeper in the thread, so I'll just acknowledge it here)
Does anyone know the law with respect to free speech rights of other non-corporation groups of individuals? For instance: labor unions, churches, charities, "community organizing" organizations... hell, political parties? Are these groups presumed to have free speech rights that extend from the free speech rights of their members, or is the government allowed to restrict them?
the wife's comment was funny because it was a pun. otherwise i agree with you.
Being fashionable gets you places. I used to be a shorts and t-shirt - stereotypical software engineer look. I just didn't really care enough to wear anything except whatever was comfy.

Then I was given a really nice dinner jacket for Christmas, tailored and fitted and all. I felt like a new man wearing it. Since then I've spent considerably more time (though honestly not that much) thinking about what I wear, and I'm still in the process of replacing my disgusting t-shirt-and-shorts wardrobe with something better.

News flash: it fucking works. I feel more confident, the clothes no longer hang off me like rags, they ARE more comfortable, and for the first time in my life women are hitting on me.

If you don't care how you look, don't come crying when people judge you based on how you look. After all, you don't care right?
Fashion is something to be aware of, but there's nothing at all wrong with being unfashionable. You can dress for any purpose without adhering to fashion. An attractive girl might carefully select an outfit that is extremely flattering to her particular colors and body type, yet not be "in fashion" at all. And it'll work. If she isn't famous or popular she won't set any trends, but she'll look fantastic. People won't look at her and think "clueless" they'll think "nice outfit."

Fashion is for when you don't know how to dress to achieve what you want.
Bet you're hoping right now that the old saying "Like mother, like daughter" is only a saying...
In my humble opinion, everyone is wrong in this article - Sotomayor, Butler, Marshall.

A corporation should not be considered a person in and of itself. A corporation is a contractual agreement between people over the ownership of property. This was the original understanding of a corporation, until the courts started creating this weird, and wrong, personhood doctrine. A corporation should not have rights - a corporation is a contract - the idea of a contract having rights is non-nonsensical.

But Sotomayor is also wrong. The people running the corporation, and the people owning the property do have rights. Just as Arthur Sulzberger has first amendment right to hire people to speak for him, shareholders of a corporation have a first amendment right to hire people to speak for them. The government has no right to restrict the freedom of speech of employees or shareholders of a corporation.
From Krug's Book "Don't Make Me Think"
http://www.amazon.com/Think-Common-Sense-Approach-Usability/...

A must read.
http://www.pecimplants.com/

http://www.temporarytattoos.com/

http://www.extremewigs.com/hhbeard.htm

It's not saying much to say that different signals are easier or harder to fake.
Every man absolutely needs to know a tailor. Mass market clothing is affordable but generally ill-fitting. Mid-range clothes have good material, but likewise poor fit.

High-end clothing is, well, expensive.

I know a tailor who charges very reasonable prices for his work, and I've gotten many a pair of mid-range jeans or jackets fitted. It is often that I walk in on a sale, walk out with an item that I really like but doesn't fit quite right, and spend an extra $30-50 getting it altered. Makes your dollars go a lot farther.
Gandhi's life
I hate what Apple is doing with their app store. But the fact that the FCC or the FTC would even be involved in this is ridiculous. At least under their current mandate which is to prevent large scale market abuse.

AT&T has sold 10.4 million iPhones as of 2Q 2009 (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/07/att-activated-24-m...). Compare that to 271 million Mobile Phones in use right now in the U.S. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_...). That's a little over 3% market share.

So Apple isn't big enough to have an impact on the larger market which makes the government attacking them unjustified. They just gets a lot of hype which makes them a ripe target for an overzealous FCC.
The employees and the shareholders of the corporation have the right, not the corporation itself. In practice though, this is the same thing.

Note that all the actual human beings that are part of the corporation (i.e., stockholders, employees, directors, etc.) have their own free speech rights and can exercise free speech as long as they make it clear they are not speaking on behalf of the corporation.

No, this is wrong. A person has the first amendment right to speak on behalf of whomever or whatever they please.
The newest line of clothes at the local French Connection has a shirt with the word "SCREW" in huge letters on the front, and there's also a shirt that says "FCUK off and die" with a sketch of a decaying corpse on the front.
Except that a filesystem can tune the redundancy of the data to the amount of free space in the storage pool. It could be considered full when a minimum of redundancy was reached (like every block being stored at least on two different disks).

As soon as a disk fails and is taken out of the pool, the file system could (conceivably, at least) start replicating all data on the remaining disks maintaining the redundancy minimum and shrinking the window of vulnerability to multi-drive failures.

By the time a second disk fails, all data on it could be replicated elsewhere and all you would observe would be a shrinking file system (and urgent messages from the server).
To be fair, he didn't say that only an idiot would buy a gas hybrid, he said that the Chevy Volt was a car for idiots. Still a fairly inappropriate and, I think, inaccurate statement, but not in direct conflict with other parts of VW the way you might suggest.

The trouble with the idea that everyone is gonna use diesel is... what are we gonna do with all the regular gasoline? IIRC fractioning of crude oil produces a certain amount of diesel, a certain amount of gasoline, a certain amount of kerosene and so forth, so somebody might as well be burning that gasoline.
where's the point of learning python with this?

well... :-)
The well-deserved success of Mint, and what other businesses can learn from it.
Who Decides When To Exit?
Diesels are already popular in Europe, so there's no problems there. I'm not sure about the rest of the world, but I suspect diesel is popular in most places outside the US. The US is the place built around cars, the US is the place that spends the most on oil, and the US is the place with an atypical dislike for diesel and a lack of diesel pumps. Thus for this car to make the biggest difference it has to become popular in the US. And while anyone who can read English can read Wired on the Internet, Wired is a US publication.

But other then that no, nothing US specific about this.
Isn't French Connection the company that created the whole FCUK trend five years ago? If so, they lost my respect way back then.
some backend stuff to analyze the keywords.
brk, thanks for the response.

What do you mean by "a good indicator ... to fraud and such?" Are you implying that fraud should be accepted as just something inherent in society and shouldn't be something we try and prevent? Also, I would contend that the facebook marketplace has less fraud than the craigslist marketplace, thus giving craigslist something they could shoot for.

Also, I'd like to refine "better" to "safer". General feel and aesthetics are subjective where as safety is objective.

Craigslist leaves millions, if not billions, of dollars on the table every year, it would only take the inclusion of one or two more markets in their pay-to-post-real-estate stream in order to hire some really smart developers to come up with smart and subtle fraud prevention mechanisms. It's possible for them to raise some dough for this issue without harming the culture, so why shouldn't they?
And the web is not keen on PDF. Oh the irony.
Jason, time to get out of the tub
I wonder if you could use the same incentive that we use to pay authors (which is to say, personal credibility and authority) to pay gatekeepers? I mean, there's nothing inherently expensive about doing it, you just need a person with good sense, good ethics, and a reasonable knowledge of the subject matter at hand.

I somewhat doubt it. There are two problems:
1. Even with authors, you can only get certain types to do that. Many technology books are written by professionals with a day job and they often are more worried about some combination of contributing to the community, improving their resume, getting personal recognition, etc than they are about money. This is not true about professional authors.

2. To be effective, gatekeepers need to already have credibility and authority, so that is probably not the best of motivators for them. Also, someone needs to do the grunt work of fact checking and grammatical editing. Many people consider writing to be fun, but few consider fact checking fun and fewer still consider grammatical editing fun.
There's no need for an organization to be immune from censure or regulation when its constituents are all themselves immune.

I think this requires some clarification. Obviously it's important that the government can't pass laws preventing people from engaging in collective speech. If two people get together and publish a birth control pamphlet (or a right-to-life pamphlet) the government shouldn't be able to say, "By the terms defined in Statute 778-B, you two are a Filth Advocacy Organization and thereby forbidden from advocating birth control." However, a corporation is voluntarily and explicitly incorporated in order to gain certain privileges from the government, so restricting the speech of corporations doesn't present the same threat to free speech.
The problem, is that isn't true. In practice, save via a very expensive proxy fight, shareholders have almost no actual voice within most corporations.

Only the deeply cynical could hold that up as an analogue to democratic government and even they wouldn't say it was a positive state of affairs worth emulating.

there should be a way for people to speak as a group
There is. You just couldn't speak, as a group, through a shell entity that has its own inalienable right to free speech.

Not having freedom of speech equivalent to individuals doesn't imply a complete re-write of corporate law. It simply means that congress can (constitutionally) make laws abridging and regulating corporate speech.

No-one's proposing a change to how we handle corporate fraud and responsibility. I fail to see how the right to free political speech has any bearing on those areas.
I don't think the PDF offers any new insights for existing web developers, but nice to emphasise it nonetheless. The F-Shaped reading (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/reading_pattern.html) and banner blindless (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/banner-blindness.html) findings by Jakob Nielsen are equally relevant and contain more data.
http://www.magicbeef.com It's going to be huge... As soon as I get some free time and finish it. GAE and full of bugs ;-p
They don't store it themselves; they use Yodlee to actually store everything, and Yodlee is the one that actually has done all the work (and it's a huge undertaking) to keep everything secure.
Flagged for random-topic-ness and suspected politicsness.
I promise I'm not gunning for any legal action here (cause I get so much done w/ my Apple tools) but...

http://gizmodo.com/5240272/federal-trade-commission-investig...

FTA: "The biggest issue here seems to be that Apple and Google share two directors, in this case Eric E. Schmidt and Arthur Levinson."

Basically, I don't claim to know why this stuff happens, or why X investigates Y... and you know what? Maybe you're right that it _would_ be ridiculous.

EDIT: (posted in reply to TomOfTTB, below) I completely agree that it's a separate issue from the GV product. I mention it because there was recent discussion of the FTC, Apple, and Google.
Best case scenario for the new Quicken Online:

.htaccess:
Redirect 301 / http://www.mint.com/
Free Open Source Ajaxed MySQL Table Editor, easy to create admin pages.
I don't think you need to add anything. As you get better at matching buyers and sellers you get closer to equilibrium and make everyone happier.
Greg Bear's Darwin's Radio is an interesting scifi take on the idea that some junk DNA could be just one evolutionary step away from being activated.
Sure they are myopic, I'm human. But I was not talking of capabilities, but of things, anything, that transcends the flesh.

Cheetahs are faster then humans and birds fly, etc, but that's not what I'm talking about.

Or to put it another way, do you think that death, pain and suffering cease to exist when you're not eating animals? Do you think living in the wild is like a happy frolic in the park?
A Functional I/O System or, Fun for Freshman Kids
Don't Copy That 2 (Official Sequel to Don't Copy That Floppy) :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUCyvw4w_yk
How is the statement inaccurate? What is the value proposition for the Volt? $45,000 makes no sense, and even with the government subsidies, you won't come out on top. Most existing hybrids don't even make sense on cost basis.
What does AT&T have to lose since they allow this on other phones on their network? How many times do people need to be reminded of this fact?
AT&T already allows Google Voice on other phones. I find it fascinating that so many people continue to blame AT&T well after it's very clear that they had nothing to do with it. They just can't imagine that their poor little underdog Apple would limit competition on their device.

Apple has a lot to lose if this app is allowed. Search and maps is already provided by Google. Add in call management, voice mail, and SMS and you have a phone almost completely powered by Google software -- that's not a position that Apple wants to be in! Their excuse of "duplicate functionality" really is an honest answer. Remember, they also denied Latitude.
What does AT&T gain from Apple rejecting the Latitude app?
HA-HA.
"37signals' Fried, by the way, is a rare case in the Internet industry, in that 37signals has never had to raise a significant amount of venture capital."

That statement really shows how ignorant the business press is of the reality of business on the web. The vast majority of web companies never raise money. They are not glamorous, are not written about on the blogs every day, and many are very small, but some of them do become very large businesses as well.
"Move to Applications Folder?" Dev on how he simplified Mac app installation
Do you think that this is okay, since all the individual shareholders still have the right to complain?
Absolutely.

Why should the corporation need a right to speech to furtehr its interests over and above what a partnership, club, community group, or fraternity have?

As I understand it those organizations make joint political declarations all the time, without the benefit of being able to contribute to their chosen political campaigns above and beyond what their members can.

Why do corporations need an extra leg up in defending their political interests?
Just because a corporation does not have rights of free speech under the 1st amendment does not mean that all of its speech rights should be destroyed.

Yes, but the point is that they could be. The reason that rights are explicitly set out in the US Constitution is that governments, left to their own devices, tend to eventually find an excuse to take away any freedom they're not explicitly forbidden from taking away. This isn't because they're bad people, it's just because they're people.

In this case, I'd be very concerned about governments wanting to take away rights from corporations. Governments have always been uneasy about large corporations since Washington tends to dislike the idea of any power centers other than itself.

Giving governments the power to make laws restricting political donations is particularly dangerous, since the party in power is always going to try to twist these laws (always with the most noble-sounding stated intentions) to restrict the ability of the other party to get funding while protecting its own.
There are about 75-125 WoW servers (parallel instances of the game all hosted by Blizzard), each having several thousand to the low tens of thousands of users. 2056 GMs for that puts it at about 20-30 GMs a server. 20-30 people to police ~15,000 players seems reasonable.

If a small percentage of people are having billing issues, that's tens of thousands of people with issues, and billing requires detailed, one-on-one interaction from a Blizzard employee, so 340 to handle all that seems reasonable to me.

Based on the size of the player base the numbers seem right. The support staff will have to grow with the userbase.