skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In celebration, most of the patients on their website are just $50 away from being funded: https://watsi.org/. Go fund one of them!
Yes, and abolishing slavery was also hard … (I do explicitly not want to compare the severity and impact of borders to the severity and impact of slavery or even racism today. It’s an analogy.)

I know there are practical issues in the way that prevent abolishing borders. I know this won’t happen quickly, probably not during my lifetime, probably not in a couple centuries, but working towards a world where this is possible seems like a worthwhile goal to me. Why should people be arbitrarily bound to the place they were born? It’s insanity and highly unethical.
Really, Google shouldn't encourage bad behavior by asking you to re-enter your credentials in the existing tab.
>the other 9 candidates who are waiting in line don't want that [to wait for the first candidate to contemplate the offer]

If any of them have other offers, they might appreciate _some_ extra time to decide between them.

EDIT: Nevermind the previous bit--I was still thinking in the context of multiple simultaneous offers, which I guess is not a thing.

And if not, then if the first choice turns it down, you make an exploding offer to the second (to be fair to the next 8), and again to the third (to be fair to the next 7), etc. Is there ever a situation where an exploding offer is not in everyone's best interest?
>That having been said, the U.S. doesn't going blowing stuff up in Europe to make this advantages happen.

No, just in the third and developing world.

In Europe they just push and abuse diplomatically lesser states (up to the point to having supported or even established specific goverments and even dictatorships over the last 60 years) to get the trade agreements and diplomatic support they want.
Next all you need to add is graphs of the maintainers.
If you have a nightly desktop build you should see a "New E10s Window" in the menu. This starts up a multiprocess browser window allowing you to test the feature.
Go also has a set of "annoyances" (some close to the same, some totally different from Swift) and while I was initially annoyed by some of them, over time I've grown to really love Go for it because there is a payoff to the annoyances (at least in Go, I don't have enough experience in Swift to say the same):

If the code compiles, it probably works. Not 100%, of course, it is always possible you made some stupid logic error or an off-by-one, but in my experience compared to any other language I've used (including a lot of C, C++ and Java not to mention dynamic languages), Go code that compiles is SO MUCH more likely to be functionally correct, and I believe this is because it is such a nag about code correctness and eliminating any ambiguity as to what the programmer intended.
> Attempts to force good behavior invariably fail.

Except this isn't forcing good behavior, it is forcing being explicit. Go ahead and use `!` it will work like you are used to.

> No, annoying is not good. Annoying is annoying.

Different strokes for different folks. I for one think avoiding ambiguity is good given the ratio of code written to code read that most developers experience in their day to day lives.

> I once saw someone write that the 1st and foremost goal of a language was to disallow mistakes.

You are misinterpreting that requirement. What you are doing is you are forcing the choice to be made when you write the code. More flexible compilers make the choice when designing the language.

Many people believe that you know best when writing the code so stopping you there to correct it makes you avoid problems in the future, that is what "disallow mistakes" means.

As I said it is perfectly valid to instead say "I think the writers of the compiler have good enough defaults for these situations" but I for one don't trust them that much.
Show HN: Perspex – a next generation WPF?
Tinder and IAC Settle Sexual Harassment Suit with Early Employee Whitney Wolfe
Well, don't take it hard on yourself. We all are sometimes!
That's interesting. A computer hits a pedestrian, then presumably the algorithms are updated and the probability of that scenario playing out again drops to 0. While A human hits a pedestrian, and that scenario is likely to never occur for that driver again, but for all other drivers the probability remains the same.
The C11 safe string functions suffer from the fact that the error handling depends on a global state. The default states can either abort the application or make the functions return an error indicator. But IIRC the user can provide anything else for error handling as well. Therefore using them in a library comes with the risk of those functions handling errors different than you expected. Using them in the application comes with the risk of some library messing with it.

That's why many people are opposed to them.
You're using a time-span that's a full 20% of the item's lifespan. Anyone with a single college level statistics class wouldn't be able to keep a straight face reading this.

over the last five years of its existence
The first exchange didn't come online until summer of 2010.

What's the 1 year picture like for everyone who had coins in Mt. Gox?
The Sustainable Smart Home for Everyone
The goal is to one day have this app moving money when you choose not to spend on the small things. That would for sure make the act of "saving" more real. For now we just wanted to test the concept of tracking when you don't spend money instead of when you do spend.
I don't believe that is correct. A page that asks to be kept confidential from one year ago (S13) clearly indicates that founders are to decide the same evening that they receive a call back.

Am I missing something?
Well, macros, closures and GC haven't been "new" or "limited to LISP" for like 40 years.

So, if LISP had them since 60 years and others got it 20+ years later than that, hardly matters by now.
No. They've been quite clear about this. CA's are still selling SHA1 certs because customers are asking for them. They're asking for them because they're compatible with more apps/devices and - until now - browsers treated them the same. So why sacrifice compatibility for no improvement.

The Chrome team are right to push this along, but I do have some sympathy for the CA's here too. I read the whole discussion and it's pretty clear that there was some epic miscommunication going on here. Notably Google thinks that removing the padlock icon is not "deprecation" according to the timetable Microsoft established, but all the people buying certs disagree; that's why they're doing it.
What a wonderful thing to have created. I know I'm just some random dude on the internet, but you should all be incredibly proud of yourselves. I've been meaning to start donating for some time now, and the $50-to-funded thing pushed me to do it.

The act of funding a person rather than an organisation really connects me with the importance of giving the gift - it de-abstracts the situation somehow, and brings home the fact that for not-that-much-really money you can completely change someone's life.
Getters and setters are not just there to work around the visibility system. Just making everything public doesn't change the fact that C++ lacks properties, and you cannot change a concrete value into a calculated value without changing the API.
Hey I work at Braintree on our SDKs. You can find the list of things you need to do to enable one touch here[1]. For Android there is nothing outside a normal Braintree integration you need to do and for iOS you need to register a URL type as well as make two changes in your app delegate to tell us about it.

We generally think about two ways you can integrate with Braintree on the front-end: the drop-in UI and custom. Drop-in [2] means you yield control to us, but you get a dead simple integration which includes one touch paypal and venmo out of the box. If you go the custom[3] route it's obviously more work to integrate, but adding one touch only requires some button that starts the paypal or venmo flow.

Edit: You can also download ParkWhiz (https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/parkwhiz-find-book-parking/i...) and install the PayPal app to see the user experience for yourself!

[1] https://developers.braintreepayments.com/ios/guides/one-touc...
[2] https://developers.braintreepayments.com/ios/sdk/client/drop...
[3] https://developers.braintreepayments.com/ios/sdk/client/payp...
A great startup.

But the linked webpage... when did design like that become normal?
To speak on civil engineering, of which I have only observed from the outside:

They do use formulas and calculate things, but they do NOT recalculate the constants, even though they may be derived each time. The tensile strength for steel is just assumed, from what I can tell, even though it falls out of tests and formulas itself.

In fact, I would trust the computer better than the deriver. The guy that just plugs it in, in a proven system, is safer to my ears. The guy that recalculates everytime is bound to have false positives and negatives and whatnot in the calculations. A good aphorism is 'A man that has one watch knows the time, a man with 2 is never sure.'

I do agree on the standard values though, it does give a ball park, and that is valuable.

One thing to keep in mind is that the brain power required to do all these calculations simply does not exist. Physicists typically are less then 5% of a undergraduate class, I'd actually argue for less, but I haven't a source. These are the guys that can run the calculations through everytime. However, the need for the various jobs is FAR outstripped by the output. Hence you get engineering and the margin of safety, as we know you can't get the proper people in there, but you have to get someone to check at least something otherwise the people will just make it regardless of safety. And then boom, bob's your uncle, you get the casualty differences between Chinese earthquakes and the 6er in Napa.

Yes, it's not much, but it's better than nothing.
Just wanted to say this is pretty fantastic. I have been touching up my personal site/resume lately and wanted something exactly like this.

Will be on the watch for any premium features you add in the future just for the sake of throwing some cash your way.

EDIT: One request. There doesn't seem to be a way to print from the private url. The page itself doesn't seem to be printer friendly nor is there an export button the page. It would be nice to be able for people to view my resume from the link and be able to download a copy for themselves.
> More far-reaching reforms, though, will need the approval of Congress, which is unlikely

Look at what happened in Australia and New Zealand since the 1980's (and Canada?) and you'll realize congressional approval is likelier than you think. Allowing students to stay boosts house prices and rents - that's what people will vote for. If one government doesn't do it then the next one will. Giving their children a US education, residency, and home is what most Chinese work for and the US foreign currency holdings that China's holding over America's head is how they'll do it.
Although you technically may be right (depending on how easy 'updating the algorithm' turns out to be - it being as easy as updating an app seems a bit on the crazy side to me) I don't know that the likelihood for all human drivers of hitting a pedestrian is necessarily high, though.

It exists, obviously, but I think human drivers already come with the "don't hit pedestrians" firmware installed, and it mostly seems to work.

To me it won't be demonstrable that driverless cars are vastly superior until there are a decent number of them on the streets, mixing it up with traffic in all kinds of weather, dealing with unexpected hazards and inaccurate maps, for an extended period of time.
A judge, a jury, it depend on legal system. In the legal system that Mojan resides in, Sweden, the lowest court is made up by 3 politicians and one judge which then vote on the issues at hand. To simplify, lets call it "a judge decide", but in truth, it depend on the justice system in the nation that the case is put forth in.

> plagued software copyright law for 20+

For something to plague, it has to inflict it. The question about derivative work is not brought up in cases around copyright law. Lawyers are not arguing about it in court, judges are not deciding about it, and juries are not asked to vote on it. At most, it has plagued software legal scholars, but then that claim would have to be supported by statistics from academia.

>Is there no precedential case law...

Industry standards is not precedential case law, its just the defined status quo. If one for example read the US supreme court decision around Aereo, one find that industry standard and status quo has a considered impact on judgments. The legal system in Sweden commonly uses industry standard when defining legal theory in unprecedential areas (See the Pirate Bay trial for example).

> In any case, there is literally no industry standard here

I strongly beg the differ. Larger commercial companies both uses GPL and LGPL, and the praxis is to differentiate the licenses on linking. A company like HP and Apple will distribute GPL software, and will combine LGPL and proprietary software. Someone could argue in court that the perceived praxis do not exist, but I suspect a number Amicus curiae would then be sent in arguing the opposite.

> no intent in the written license text

"The GNU General Public License does not permit incorporating your program into proprietary programs." - GPLv2 and GPLv3

If a client of yours take GPL licensed software and incorporate it into a proprietary program, I would strong doubt arguing the definition of derivative work in court will yield successful result. Its the primary reason in my view why there is no precedential case for derivative work in GPL licensed software.
Uber Has No Acquisition Plans, CEO Says
Shouldn't the certs related to OS / app updates be self-signed (the root of trust being Microsoft/Apple/pkgmanager*), rather than anyone in your CA? Like, a new Java update should be signed by Oracle, not signed by Joe Schmo's Honest CA.

Also, forgive me if I'm wrong, but the original Evilgrade exploit for Apple was completely unencrypted, right?

Edit:
You use "these guys" to refer to the attacker quite a bit in your statement above, it'd be smart to think about your threat model a bit. For instance, it's likely that some actors can get a root WEB CA, and somewhat unlikely that they've gotten into Apple's chain of trust. These are different targets with different threat models.
Cool Startup, Bro. --Curated Startup Videos
Why I’m Moving from San Francisco to St. Louis
Reddit’s tax on Amazon purchases
I have never, ever found the "visual experience" to be the reason that I enjoy using an IDE. Besides, even if it were, what about that procludes building a nice UI around existing modules?
Stopping animation or other CPU-costly visual processing that won't be seen? Stopping sound playing? Pausing a game?
I believe it's more like ES3/ES5-ish. Latest/full spec isn't necessary for embedded work.
Something like https://github.com/rogerwang/node-webkit?
As someone who has had a semi popular Firefox plugin going on 8 years now, I agree 100%. We are trying to figure out how to dump our main plugin, but so far no buyers exist. Maybe I should just sunset it. :-/
what extra correctness does Go guarantee over Java?

I can imagine less concurrency bugs, but ATM I don't recall any particular language feature that should prevent more bugs than any other statically typed language of the last decade.
Amazon drops price of Fire phone to 99 cents
Public storage brought to your doorstep
My true colors were there from the beginning, if you cared to look[1].

No, ban bitcoin is a huge mistake IMHO. BTC is a great innovation and has extremely interesting features. I already mentioned transaction speed elsewhere.

I believe that we need to wait and see if volatility stabilizes at some point. Then I'd like to see an easier way of conversion from currency-to-btc and back.

That said I'd never put the faith of a country to BTC, but sure as hell I'd like to have it around and use it as I see fit (either as an asset or an investment). But relying grandma's pension on BTC? That's unethical to me (and stupid).

[1] http://www.convalesco.org/blog/2014/02/11/on-the-matter-of-b...
The use of SHA1 with HMAC, inside as well as outside of the context of SSL is still acceptable, yes. Even against a nation state attacker. The reason attacks on HMAC(k,m)~=SHA1(k||SHA1(k||m)) are much more difficult than general collision attacks is that as an attacker you do not know the internal state of the hash function when you are trying to create a collision with m, as the secret key is input in the hash function first.

The attack vector for TLS certificates is the (asymmetric) signature which signs a plain SHA1 hash message. I'm still disappointed that after all the experiences they have had with MD5 they haven't yet started to randomize the hash in the signature (sign SHA1(random||message) instead of SHA1(message) ) which would boost the signature security to that of HMAC.
The Wrong Size
To be clear, you can autoderive the JSON encoding for Aeson, too. I just wanted to demonstrate the full thing.

Also, the XPath implementation I noted is special over Rust's because it forms a Lens (Prism, really) so you can get and set at arbitrary positions or even sequences of positions:

v & ix 3 . each . _Integer %~ succ

The above increments each integer in the array stored at index 3 of `v` if one exists.
I worry for humanity in the long term if the only broad direction we can give ourselves are evaluated in the framework of ROI. The very calculation of ROI assumes that there's a known and stable model for predicting both the investment required and a known output. Comparing many ROIs estimates assumes the slate of options covers the gamut of where one should invest - it could work very well for a small or midsize company with limited options going forward, but it feels like a huge fallacy to assume that covers an entire nation - let alone all of mankind.

The best answer I can muster against framing the question in terms of ROI, is that we suspect we could go to the moon and stay there longer than ever before, and that puts us on a path of opening up vastly more unknowns, more rapidly than we would otherwise encounter by staying on the Earth and sending probes with limited sets of instruments, with narrow perceptions into space.

Indeed, why would anyone travel anywhere on Earth even, when it's cheaper to look at pictures of the destination from the internet, or read the guidebook and be done.

You could dismiss this as a purely humanistic argument, but if at least some of our resources aren't allocated to get to places where we simply don't strictly know the outcomes, we will simply will never grow beyond some confines.
Hi, current maintainer here!

That documentation is pretty old, I'll be updating it pretty soon.

Current .deb development packages can be tested from http://devel.trisquel.info/icecat/
The "toutatis" repo should work on Trisquel 6, Debian Stable and Ubuntu Precise, while the "belenos" one should work on Trisquel 7 (beta), Debian Testing and Ubuntu Trusty.

Main changes from the previous version focus on providing better privacy, in particular protecting the user against fingerprinting. The settings have been tweaked to prevent the browser from leaking information through referrers, cookies, useragent and other methods.

The current version comes with this main extensions enabled:

* LibreJS to check for the freedom of the javascript you run
* HTTPS-Everywhere redirects you to secure versions of the sites you browse
* A customized Adblockplus blocks known privacy trackers, and when in private browsing mode it blocks all third party content.
* A custom homepage lists this and other features with links to documentation and the possibility to disable them quickly if needed.

I'll be publishing a more complete list of features through the bug-gnuzilla mailing list soon, along with a beta release. Stay tuned!
That's called progress: http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=3465
Good to know. Did you post the opening or search through a "who wants to be hired" type thread?
That was originally the plan, but I don't believe that's been true since Loic Duros replaced Giuseppe Scrivano as the maintainer.
What point are you making? A chimp can understand this need to control land access. Saying "westphalia" over and over sheds no light. Control over immigration and land use was not invented by 17th century european diplomats if that's what you think. To the extent nations failed to control their borders in the past they were simply unfortunately weak nations.
$899 for a 720p video camera? I expected night-vision or 12fps with that kind of price tag!
I'm sure Sam's heart is in the right place but I'm not sure I agree with him here:

"Exploding offers suck. Founders should be able to choose the investor they want to work with, not have to make a decision based on time pressure."

and investors should be able to choose the founders they want to work with. And accelerators are the one's who make it all about the calendar. So they inject the notion of time and deadlines (YCSpring12 etc)

"where an accelerator tries to force a company to make a decision about a funding offer before the company has a chance to finish talking to other accelerators."

The risk here is that sounds like sour grapes.

"after we make you an offer, we’ll give you until the beginning of our program to decide (though most companies accept quickly, because you can’t start having office hours with us and participating in other ways until you accept). We ask companies to be transparent with us about needing more time--we won't rescind our offer. It’s usually about 45 days from interview to the start of the batch."

- We use "soft" deadlines. You don't get access to important resources until you say yes. And yes look we have 45 days from interview to the start of the batch (there's that pesky calendar coming into play)

"We encourage all other accelerators to join us on this. It should be an easy yes. Exploding offers are the wrong thing for founders, and an accelerator that does the wrong thing for founders will not last long."

- We're the pre-eminent accelerator and other accelerators should play by the same rules as that way we'll stay the pre-eminent accelerator!

"And founders should think very hard about joining an accelerator that puts forth a short-fuse offer."

Once again makes me feel like they're losing out to this tactic and it's hurting. And a bit of FUD?

Are you creating startups that have to go out and compete in a very competitive world? Seems like insulating them from making important business decisions is a little counter intuitive.

Again, I'm sure Sam's motives are pure. This is a little tin can ear to me and whiny.
Thanks. Yeah, there are a couple of glitches in there. The ships bounce off the edge of the screen, and smaller ships run from bigger ones -- combined, that makes them crawl along the sides. Looping around is a good idea, or I'm wondering if there could be some kind of log scale to distance the further out from the centre the ships get. I did a variation a while back with a star in the middle that could be tweaked for that (click to add a ship). Mind you, the gravity from the star pretty much takes care of that problem.

http://codepen.io/simonswain/full/cKejC/
For production embedded systems I wholeheartedly agree with you. But for educational platforms, especially those aimed at complete beginners, the trade-off for accessibility could be well worth the excess power consumption.
MesosCon – Running YARN Alongside Mesos [video]