skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll be surprised if this sticks, though FedEx may settle out of court. FedEx employees visit e-commerce companies all the time but not to inspect product. They are there to sell shipping and service the shipping computers. Is a FedEx salesperson or computer serviceperson supposed to be an expert on drug identification? Does that person really know that the stuff in those pill bottles is a controlled substance?
Show HN: LowTeX -- a plaintext formatter
Is it possible that perhaps the FedEx employees may have seen these so called "pill bottles" and were either told 1) they're legal supplements/medications or 2) had no clue what they were when they were observing the operation since they were only interested in the shipping logistics?

With just a cursory glance, it seems that it was written up by an overzealous federal prosecutor who wants to make his/her career's achievement busting a big company like FedEx as part of a massive drug ring with conflated charges.
I think a natural solution to this is to have Netflix charge all Verizon customers a $5/mo surcharge to pay for 4 more 10gbps ports.

But after reading this... am I the only one that thinks peering agreements are done bass ackwards? If Verizon's customers are _requesting_ Netflix access, shouldn't Verizon pay Level3, not the other way around?
Things like "Keep of the grass". Where if just a few people do something there's not a problem but where if too many people do it it could cause bigger problems.

I think most political arguments come down to what should or shouldn't be illegal but get confused with what is moral or not.
Does this, by any chance, use the 3D deforming based stabilization demonstrated here [1]. That was already an impressive demo when it came out.

[1] http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~fliu/project/3dstab.htm
What part don't you understand? Why FedEx is in trouble or why the pharmacies are illegal? I'm going to assume it's the latter and it's a bit of a gray area.

On the one hand, these pharmacies provide medications at a lower cost than in the US and some countries and would be beneficial to many. So far it looks like its moral and shouldn't be illegal.

Then we begin to think about the people who go online and buy medications they aren't prescribed, playing doctor on themselves. We can say that's their own problem but I'd side with the idea that it does more harm than good.

Then there's the fact that these pharmacies often prey on drug addicts who require treatment, not more drugs.

There's way more to it than that but regardless, it's pretty easy to see why people would be believe they fit into category 1.
This made me chuckle, because now I'm imagining that all taxpayers could also be considered partially responsible. We send money that is used on road improvements and projects and therefore critical to the transportation of controlled substances!
Why Managers Should Continue to Code
MOZjPEG2 Makes Pictures Smaller
> Remember, ISPs aren't utilities. Instead, they are supposed to provide more than just internet access(in theory at least).

like what exactly ?
In case anyone needs it, here is the command line to patch fail2ban:

sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get install --only-upgrade fail2ban

Although it's considered best practice to upgrade all packages, like this:

sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get upgrade
The two examples most familiar to me are the Jean Valjean scenario (stealing for survival) and the Jack Bauer scenario (coercion or torture to save lives).

In both cases, there's an argument that the underlying activity (theft, torture) should remain illegal. It would be difficult or impossible to codify all the permissible extenuating circumstances, and leaving the question open-ended and letting it be decided in court would be a disaster, much worse than existing carve-outs like self defense as an excuse for homicide (which is itself kind of a mess, legally).

Certain dour strains of penal theory would argue that the 'virtuous criminal' still requires equal punishment (Chinese legalism, for example), but I think the more popular stance in the modern day is that judges and state executives (governors, presidents) should have the option of leniency. This takes the fate of Jean Valjean outside the sphere of law and exposes it to popular opinion -- an unreasonable act of clemency would be faced with blowback (just ask Mike Huckabee).
How about rarefriend.com? You can have it if you like it.

Also, if you need any help with the site, let me know, I suck at graphics, but I'm a crack shot with databases of all sizes. I do know some good designers who would probably do the main + css for no fee.
After reading a little I thought "yep, this is gonna be another conservative screed." Kept reading and yes, it's another conservative screed. I realize the author(s) might think they are liberals, but they're not. They're reactionaries.

I can't be a conservative. I have eyes. I can't be a reactionary either because I've studied history, and I don't buy the sugar coated version of it. There is nothing worth going back to, and there is little worth conserving except insofar as it serves as a platform and scaffolding to build something else.

I just can't for the life of me understand how someone could be truly satisfied with this existence enough to want to conserve it... to protect it from change. Sure, some people are randomly selected by the genetic lottery to be handsome, intelligent, or born to wealthy parents or in a wealthy nation. I guess if you were one of those people and never bothered to contemplate beyond these immediate realities, nor to ponder the fundamental and utter brutality of that lottery itself, you might be satisfied.

Meanwhile the rest of us are trying to find some way -- be it through spirituality, technology, art, science, or religion -- to build a ladder tall enough to climb out of the hell that is the Darwinian process that gave birth to us.

I'm not saying I hate my life. I actually lead a pretty good one. I have people I really love, a good job, a great looking future. I guess I got a decent lotto ticket. But when I open my eyes and step outside myself and look objectively at the whole reality of my circumstance and those of the people around me, I can't help but remember that I'm in hell.

So yes I sympathize with "disrupt everything," even though it's reckless and sometimes amounts to little in the end. At least it's trying to do something. I even find myself sympathizing on some level with religious fanatics. I don't share their metaphysics but I understand what could lead a person to that place. The thing that could make a person fast until near death, blow themselves up to achieve martyrdom, or drive nails into their own hands in imitation of Christ... that's the same fundamental dissatisfaction with our position in the universe that makes us spend years trying to solve hard technical problems and build rockets to the moon. If we were satisfied we would do none of these things. We would eat, drink, be merry, and die.
The Microsoft layoffs are a sign of an Economic Recovery
This will probably get dismissed as a conspiracy theory, but I have a suspicion about the Microsoft layoffs. They simply want to clean house and hire back the cream of the crop, when the economy improves.

They’re using the layoffs to soften up the employees they bring back on, so they can reduce wage pressure from the improving economy. In warfare, it’s not good enough to destroy the enemies equipment, you have to destroy their will to fight. I think that is what is going on. Pretty wacky idea? You decide.
Downvoting a well-asked stackoverflow question out of dislike for the design of the website the asker was building seems unduly harsh, especially as the author hasn't actually even seen the website.
I don't think in the history of the internet there has ever been a "balanced" traffic arrangement. The majority of people are always going to be requesting more than they are uploading.
Yes and no. Going through the paper real quick, we use similar technique, but do not analyze the video to reconstruct the movement of the camera, which allows us to speed up the algorithm significantly.
Not all online pharmacies are illegal. Think of companies shipping stuff like catheters, diabetic supplies, oxygen equipment....many of those require a prescription.
For me, the optional else on for loops isn't nearly as mentally destabilizing as the optional else on try-except blocks. An ex-employee used to love doing that:

try:
None.doit()
except Exception as e:
logger.exception('Nope')
else:
# now what?
pass
What about using "finally," which if IIRC is already a thing in Python and encapsulates this idea pretty neatly?
We went thorough RisingStars and then got into Techstars Boulder. It's an incredible opportunity to receive top notch mentorship and get your business pointed in the right direction.
Surely some form of "common carrier" applies. Otherwise innocent service has no reason/obligation/expectation to evaluate what they're transporting (be it data or products), and short of the gratuitously obvious/heinous has no responsibility for anything other than successful delivery.
I bet you're a real joy at parties.
We Built a Free App-Builder So Easy our Grandmas can Use It
After months of work, we're finally ready to start a gradual Beta roll-out of our free App builder.Works from a web browser - allows users to make functional native apps without a single shred of coding. So easy that we literally tested it on our grandparents first.No Credit Card required - just build and download your app.
Find Your Fight
From an internal memo about more stringent credit policies for internet pharmacies:
"Many of these companies operate outside of federal and state regulations over the sale of controlled drugs, which require diagnosis and prescription by a licensed physician. Drugs purchased from these sites may be diluted or counterfeit."

To believe that FedEx lacked knowledge of illegal activity, one must believe that they assumed some of these pharmacies were genuine and that while it was feasible to create special policies to ensure FedEx was paid, policies to verify the organizations legitimacy (which would also increase the chance of them being paid), were impractical. However, that will be difficult because one executive told another that: "...these types of accounts will always result in a loss at some point. They have a very short lifespan and will eventually be shut down by the DEA." (emphasis added)

They certainly can't argue, as many others in this thread have, that the companies weren't identifiable: They were doing it to enforce this policy. The credit department maintained a list of pharmacies that, at one time, had 600 entries on it.
Pizza? Give me a break. The police have to show up, every time, when there is a call for help. There's a risk there every time, not a statistical risk, not a worry that someday somebody will rob you. There's a robber or an abuser or a drunk at the address Every Single Time if you're a cop.
I've heard talk of plans for a generational, moving GC in future. It's just not something that can be implemented overnight, especially in a language with internal pointers (which Java, Ruby and Python lack).
There's a pretty good argument that intentionally disobeying the law in the commission of a normally morally neutral act is itself immoral. If a useful, just law is routinely flouted, eventually the usefulness of that law will collapse. If many such laws are frequently disregarded, eventually the credibility of the legal authority will be lost. (This is a good argument for not passing unenforceable or excessively strict laws.)

One of the interesting things about laws is that in many cases people follow them without regard for the consequences of not following them. A society where people will obey laws because they are valid, just, and reasonable is much better than one where they obey laws because the alternative is a flogging or hanging.
Crash claims top AIDS researchers heading to Melbourne
Ridiculous. You don't expect an abuser or a drunk at every single house you paint; every customer in your cab's back seat isn't belligerent. Again, ride along with a cop some day, it will change your view forever.
finally blocks are always executed; this kind of else block is only executed if the for block exited normally (i.e. did not throw an exception).
and shooting down civilian plane helps them how?
>The recency of the seed --- a point Linux's interface worries a great deal about --- has nothing to do with security.

Unless you are concerned about where the seed came from (e.g. not storage like /var/run/random-seed) or have any concerns that there is a flaw in the PRNG that could leak information.
It's worth looking at the Eff language, which is an OCaml variant. Much easier to understand, especially if you're monadically challenged. This paper is a great introduction to the idea of algebraic effects:

http://math.andrej.com/2012/03/08/programming-with-algebraic...

Shameless plug, I gave a talk about this at the NYC "Papers We Love" meetup. Audio & slides can be found here: http://www.mixcloud.com/paperswelove/bbloom_3_17_2014_progra...
Running a firm and doing client work has two major aspects: your technical ability to execute the work and your client relationship skills.

Just like any skills, you will need to learn not only how to code well, but how to communicate to clients who are not as technically inclined, how to sell, network, and provide value to your clients.

I would recommend finding a very specific niche, some type of business type you would like to work with. Local businesses is too broad. For example, lawyers have very different needs than a plumber. By finding a specific niche you can learn what that type of client needs, what they value, and you can better position yourself to become an expert in that area.
Don't be silly; you made all that up. Some cops are aware of bad behavior and don't 'out' it. Some do. Like the rest of us. The rest are on the street doing good day after day. One doesn't 'cancel' the other in any way.
Right, and if it is flawed to long term analysis in some way, you want it to be frequently re-seeded.
This article outlines an argument that could make your life miserable just by knowing it.

Thankfully we have some potential antidotes: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk#So_you.27re_w...

I personally subscribe to the "ignore all blackmail" philosophy.
This trend might've come from existing desktop UIs with clickable elements that didn't show any obvious signs of being clickable - I believe XP's visual style was the first to have subtly changing buttons on mouseover, and that spread over to web design. Then maybe someone thought it wasn't obvious enough, so they made mouseover changes even more obvious and attention-getting, to the point of being distracting.

I find that a lot of web designs considered "modern" now are certainly excellent at being attention-getting and flashy, but have much lower information content and usability -- it's the equivalent of someone screaming in your face, and more loudly than before. It might be a reflection of lowered attention spans in general, or a contributor to it; I don't know.

I would hope that the cursor changing from an arrow to a pointer hand is obvious enough that something is clickable...
It can be used as the main backend for an API just fine. It's also very easy to override just about every piece of what DRF offers. This is pure, unsubstantiated, subjective FUD.

Use the tool that you are most comfortable with, change it up if/when you get big or busy enough to have to. There are some huge sites running Django/DRF successfully.
Why has nobody mentioned https://unhosted.org/ yet?
I agree with your point, bringing up Apple is irrelevant. But Halo did end being released on both PC and Mac.

http://www.amazon.com/Halo-Mac/dp/B00006IQTH
Definitely not. They're not the post office and for that reason the police can just ask to see your mail. And they'll show it to them. The post office need to see a warrant. It's like how your papers need a warrant and your email doesn't (after a year in the US). If a company has it it doesn't qualify as private papers.
I think he's trying to say that it's hard to tell because of the effects and filters added to the video distract from the example of stabilized video. The additional edits are unappealing to some so it's hard to get a feel for how the footage looks.
try/except/else used to throw me, but I've grown to like the idiom.

All it means is the try clause didn't raise any exceptions. And a "finally" clause is ran whether an exception was raised or not.
Looks the same on Ubuntu.
Treatment reverses symptoms of type 2 diabetes in mice without side effects
I wasn't making a statement about human intervention at all. One minute it was doing well on the front page, the next minute it was gone. I noticed that something disappeared/yanked/punted/hid it.

I guess this sort of protection can be helpful, but I hope that it doesn't keep other high quality but less known content out. DRF is popular enough to overcome this false positive, but I wonder if some other lesser-known (but interesting) stuff would be.
I don't think that is a fair assessment. I have been an active contributor for the past couple of months.

I am NOT part of any club. I live in upstate NH. I'm certainly not cool.

However I do think that you are noticing a trend that I have as well.. the actually innovative or disruptive products end up not getting as much attention as they maybe should.

What I am interested to see is the social graph that get's developed based on our product preferences.

I think it will be less about product leaderboards and more about product discovery.

my .02
I'd think if we're in a simulation you should act like Everything Is Real and continue on as you would normally instead of messing up the data set.

edit:

I also occurs to me that if we're being simulated by an AI

a) I don't really care about my super self that much

b) Any AI that is simulating me can, by definition read my mind so it'll know I wasn't serious anyway

c) This AI can also plant thoughts in my head.

At this point there's really no point at all considering anything else because either nothing matters and I have no control over anything anyway or it's reality, I do and I'd do what I do normally.
Verizon made an enemy tonight
Surely some form of "common carrier" applies.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. (I'm not sure if you are writing as a lawyer, or as a member of the general public.) I remember attending a trial in the late 1980s in which a UPS driver testified that he discovered an illegal drug shipment because he thought the shipment looked funny and he opened up the package. Further testimony at that trial disclosed what we should all know if we read the fine print of our contracts with common carriers like UPS or FedEx: the carrier has the right to open any package for any reason or no reason at all (in the interest of the safety of the carrier's employees, safety both from actual physical danger and safety from legal liability). The person who delivers packages to your door through the service of one of those companies can do a lot by way of inspecting those packages before delivering them to you, unless something very radical has changed about those contracts in the years since I heard that trial. (Does anyone here on HN have a full standard form contract of carriage from FedEx to post here for us to check the current wording?)

AFTER EDIT: Of course I found this myself with a very easy Google search. FedEx's standard terms and conditions include:

"9. Right to inspect. FedEx may inspect the shipment at any time and may permit government authorities to carry out such inspections as they may consider appropriate. FedEx, in addition, may reject or suspend the carriage of any prohibited items or one that contains materials that damage or may damage other shipments or that may constitute a risk to FedEx equipment or employees or to those of its service providers."

http://www.fedex.com/mx_english/services/nacional_terms.html
Question for Matt (or anyone who knows):

What's the best or most cost-effective way to get an entire family sequenced? My younger brother has a rare disorder (diagnosed as autism and twelve other things that mean "we're not sure"), I don't have it, and we've wanted to get everyone sequenced for some time. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
If this gets too hairy, just shave with Occum's Razor.

The premise is just so unnecessarily complicated, and assumes too much about the particular character of the malevolent AI. Must the AI be benevolent or malevolent? Or, can it be indifferent, like physical laws? It could be 1,000 different flavors of malevolent, not just the one that proposes blackmail in this way.
For this reason, vendors on darknet markets almost exclusively use USPS for domestic shipping.
Marc A.'s firm has invested in bitcoin infrastructure companies which is in that direction.
AT&T Net Neutrality Comment to FCC [pdf]
There are quite a few layers between what's discussed there and this article. In particular, static typing is an important component of monad transformer stacks, though it's possible to express them without it. Without types, however, it's hard to have a conversation about what's actually going on.
>No. That's not how the internet works. Nobody PUSHES data. People PULL data.

Uh, I don't think he meant it the way you took it. I think he knows how network traffic works.
> apps are silos out of Google's reach (though they're trying to combat this with app indexing)

They also own AdMob, which is one of the more successful in-app-advertising platforms.
Well written, good read. His final paragraphs tied it up neatly with some good points of his own, and it's a fun thought experiment. Would be great to run a poll to see who sides with the robot devil.
Honest Dad
Don't they own AdMob, one of the top ad platforms on Android?

http://www.google.com/ads/admob/
The exploits in the article you linked to requires physical access and modification.

This is about bluetooth and CD sound hacks, hopefully those have been locked down on future models since it's been known a while. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/business/10hack.html
Charlie Stross (author, https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=cstross)

Has written some good criticism of the basilisk concept http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/02/rokos-ba...
Conversely the first thing that happens when you educate women is they tend to enter the workforce on their own, at which point they gain better access to the means to control their own fertility.

It's a nuanced issue to be sure.
For a lot of people, the real thing to do if they believe they are in a simulation is to try to mess it up.
I downloaded and took a look at your lesson plan. Nice. It's solid and covers a bunch of usage patterns that aren't clear in the react tutorial.

My one suggestion: host it on github pages and put a link to that in the README. It's already basically ready to roll. Way more accessible than downloading a zip and opening an html file.