skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think this is a great start. I love studies that (a) cite quality sources, but (b) leave you with more questions than answers. I know - we all love to have everything tidily rapped up in a five paragraph article but hey: new studies beget more new studies and those new studies hopefully will answer questions like:

* It says, "Because preparation methods can alter the nutrient content of foods (2), nutrient data were for the items in raw form." Would love to see this compared to the results after "common cooking and preparation methods"

* Can we compare this to serving size next?

* What are the nutrient densities of, say, beef? chicken? Pork? Rice? Noodles? etc (other staples of many diets)
> slow down on Rust news until it's a little closer to usable?

"Usable" is an ironic way to spell "hackable".

You mentioned the words "news" and "use". Does the H in HN still stand for something? Maybe HN stands for "HTTP News"?
The invasion of corporate news
Professional Transitions (or: the shutting down of Mozilla Labs)
About this:

"A lot of the witch trials contained accusations about late night activities, which given that a lot of it was obviously fraudulent"

The rationale behind the accusations was 100% fraudulent (consorting with the devil) so 100% of the accusations were fraudulent under any modern understanding of due process.

There might be some crazies out there who really do believe that the Devil exists and that people consort with him, but I assume most folks on Hacker News are part of the modern world and reject supernatural explanations for events.

Possibly apocryphal, but I recall in The Crucible (1952), by Arthur Miller, one accusation is that a woman peed on the edge of a farmers field, and that peeing was a signal to the Devil, and a few months later the farmer's crop was destroyed by flood. This is not an accusation that would survive in a modern court room.
Not to mention the issues with reference counting in general. Having to make sure you don't have (even indirect) circular references means you have to explicitly think about ownership anyway.
What does your 'American dream' have to do with net neutrality? It's not about America, it is about ISPs amassing power all over the world.
Here's an article with more details.

http://www.dailytech.com/Appalling+Negligence+DecadeOld+Wind...

Looks like they were still using Windows XP embedded instead of moving to Windows 7 embedded.
This is an important issue as well
I agree with most of these, but as others have noted, the comments about JS are out of date.

I'd like to nominate as an honorable mention "giant popover that tries to get you to subscribe to the newsletter/install the app before you've even seen the site.", because that's not happening with me. Ever.
I agree that we as a species can probably survive nearly anything.

Derailing, I think it's also pretty reasonable to worry about events that will only wipe out 99.9% of humanity. Statistically, I'm probably dead in such a case. Probably everyone I know is dead. My back-of-the-envelope calculation says that I probably can't expect more than a fifth cousin to survive if 99.9% of people are dead. I don't even know any of my fifth cousins.
> Was there ever an argument beyond 'information wants to be free' to this?

I can think of four: 1) The information is vital to government and to justice, both personally (if you are party to or have a stake in the case) and as a public affairs issue; its availability should not be restricted in any way, and especially not restricted to those who can afford to pay. 2) In principle, access to the courts should not discriminate based on any factor, especially wealth. 3) The information is a product of taxpayer-funded activities and therefore should be public and free. 4) 8 cents/page for downloaded data is ridiculous; what if HN charged us 8 cents/page?

Does anyone know what Swartz' actual arguments were?
It is not just about the US:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Directive
I think replacing one soft-drink with another similar won't solve many things.

Unless there's a specific component in Coke that increases Uric Acid (the cause of gout)
shared_ptr doesn't fix this, as soon as you access the string via any standard type (char* or string_view) you can copy that type around freely, disconnected from the shared_ptr. Hence, you can drop all the shared_ptrs and leave the string view dangling.
#1 for me: anchor text containing the word 'here'. Bonus points for 'click here'
As I understand it from Crockford's retelling and what I've read on the web and heard in podcasts, Sun was concerned that LiveScript could be seen as a competitor to Java if both were present in the browser. Netscape wanted Java but wasn't willing to kill off their scripting language, so they agreed to name it JavaScript to make it sound like the two are related (and JS being "merely" a scripting language, people would still prefer Java for "real" programs).

Apparently LiveScript was also originally planned to be more Lisp-like but then they went with C-like syntax because that was more popular at the time (see Java). And the entire language was cobbled together in a ridiculously short time frame (something like a couple of weeks?) and intended to be "beginner friendly", which is where a lot of the language's quirks come from.

Considering the original JS already contained the syntax Crockford would eventually define as JSON, you could say they managed to create not one but two languages at once. Say what you will about JS being a good language or not, but you have to respect that achievement.

Considering JS only became ECMAScript because Netscape was scared of incompatible copycats, you could argue JS as it is today wouldn't exist without Microsoft, too. Strange world, eh?
I'd deeply religious - and I concur.

Based on my experience, the debate about Global Warming is is mostly polemical.

In my opinion, a debate about measurable natural phenomena should be scientific - where a single verifiable fact trumps all previous consensus and conjecture.
It's because of the nutrients they pick, which they then use an unjustified weighting trick to make sure that only foods with high levels of Vitamin C, Riboflavins, and/or B6 meet the grade. This methodology then rules out onions, garlic, and a few others, finding that (by using these weightings), they are without sufficient nutritional merit.
I used https://www.ssl2buy.com/ in the past few months and it worked well.
Chinese Mafia and Apple iPhone 6 lines
Yep. If you read closely, he's not taking an extreme position at all (he actually reaffirms CC and AGW), but he knows that this opinion wouldn't get him any recognition (or $$) on its own so he loaded it up with a linkbaity, unrepresentative title and hook that are guaranteed to get him attention by virtue of being politically "useful." He's trying to get the best of both worlds:

* Maintain standing in the scientific community by presenting a very reasonable, even understated argument that is impossible to refute

* Win political glory, perhaps even funding, by deliberately making himself easy to "misrepresent"

We have to figure out a way to punish people for this kind of bait-and-switch.
Sad not to see watermelon or mango in that list of powerhouses.
You are narrowly interpreting 'position of trust', ISPs are not only in a position of trust (we give them ALL of our data to look at), they are because of their trusted position subject to all kinds of directives historically more associated with post offices and telephone companies. They carry our data. As such we trust them very much.

The full quote of what TBL said was this:

"We need rules," said Berners-Lee. "If businesses are to move here and start here rather than start in Europe or Brazil or Australia — they're going to look around and make sure, 'Oh, does the power stay up?' And they'll look for other things. 'Is the Internet open?' Will they have to effectively bribe their ISPs to start a new service? That's what it looks like from the outside. It's bribery."

In other words, if you need to pay the gate-keeper for equal access to the subscribers then that's bribery because the common-carrier principle holds that no priority should be given to other people's packets over yours ('without discrimination') and VV. Allowing such differentiation could for instance cripple any voice-over-ip offering that was not sanctioned via deep packet inspection.

That's what this is about, not about a narrow definition of bribery, not every word is to be taken literally but in this case it is close enough that I don't think you can pretend that you did not understand the slight metaphorical component and simply acknowledge that a gatekeeper that needs payment where none should be due is tantamount to having to bribe someone.

Uber does not enter into it.
This is the fourth time the essay has been linked to in as many days.
StartSSL also requires you to send a copy of your passport out of country (to Israel). Fine; they need to verify identity.

They retain the records for seven years though. Why preserve the documents at all after validation is complete for non-EV certs? Seems like it creates an unreasonable liability given that data breaches happen. They will also not say how the records are secured. When I inquired, they simply said "We obviously can't provide any technical details about our security measures, but the documents are secure." While I can understand the need to maintain operational security, disclosing whether documents are stored encrypted or not should not violate this security.

The lack of openness, combined with the charge for cert re-issuance made me look elsewhere. When the heartbleed vulnerability hit and I had to regenerate certs, I was very happy to have chosen a different CA.
Pursuit of dark matter progresses at AMS
It's not even 'what' may be transmitted but 'how'.

I could let you transmit all your 'skype' packets but at 10 seconds delay. You wouldn't have a leg to stand on wrt to eventual deliver or what was delivered.
Tech will soon let us bring back some extinct species
This is pretty much what AdWords does.
Unity3d gets around this by calling their adaptation UnityScript.
Why are you learning to code? To find a job as a programmer? Because you think it will help you at your current job? Because you are looking for a new challenge? Do you have something in mind that requires coding?

If you don't know anything about programming, I would recommend you "learn python the hard way" ( http://learnpythonthehardway.org/ ) to get yourself familiar with Python, a programming language popular and easy to learn, and then start whatever you are interested in.

One more thing, why are you mentioning that you're a woman? I believe tech is a field where it shouldn't matter (I would matter more that you are a woman if you were asking, say, how to use a body building machine).
I wondered about that. I would prefer it if we all started calling it JS (as many do), and pretended it stood for -- the language. Though I suppose we'd keep having to say "the language formerly known as JavaScript" in many contexts.

I also like the JS logo and its variations. I'm assuming Oracle could lay no claim to that . . .
The strongest reason, to my mind, is that we have a common law system, so the public can't fully and accurately comply with the law without access to the court records upon which the common law rulings are based.
Why would they? Privacy means nothing to the non-existent.
Being able to sell software has precious little to do with the actual product but everything with marketing. So my crap software might (on the outside) look even better!

You can only tell good quality software from bad quality software by auditing the code, not by observing the software from a users perspective (unless it refuses even to perform the basics).
Jolla will launch its Sailfish smartphone in India on September 23
No love for Gandi?
Not mentioned: using a large font size so each line contains only five words. For example, webpagesthatsuck.com does this.
Snippets is a good term for it.
2 of my 4 team mates got accepted. One can't make it. Can we still use his slot for another team mate?
The Brain Nebula – A writing experiment
Fundamentally, I think you are both right...

The complaint is that the current system of document storage is not good enough to balance private review and public disclosure. Restriction should not be withholding. It is like eating a pizza pie before it cools.

Burning the roof your your mouth sucks... Quality of information is as important as availability. This is a job for a lever.
Because this blocks the very human needs for error-checking and maintaining awareness of context.

It's not like you're going to type that in. You're going to copy and paste it from somewhere. So it's just as good to use

http://releases.ubuntu.com/14.04.1/ubuntu-14.04.1-server-amd...

as

hash://b4ed952f6693c42133f73936abcf86b8

In either case, your computer can do whatever it takes to get the file. With a useful URL, you'll have a reasonable notion about what's coming down and whether it matches your intentions.

Without that, the very natural question is, "Did I get the thing I wanted?" For example, it would be easy to paste the wrong hash code.

There are other benefits, like real-time binding. A hash is going to point to a particular sequence of bits. But you may not want a particular file, but rather the best current mapping from an idea to a file. E.g., if Ubuntu discovers a an issue with their released ISO, they can make a new one and replace what gets served up by the URL.
1. I use Namecheap, generally their resold Comodo offerings. No complaints.

2. No. An EV cert is nice little warm fuzzies, but the absence of it doesn't really tell me anything useful that would dissuade me from making a purchase.
Observing the software from a user's perspective is all that counts, though. Marketing is important, yes, but if you're in a niche where quality counts more because bugs cost your users money, then people will sit up and take notice, eventually.
Why should there be that? You're talking about an enormous, complicated system. What's the use case that justifies the effort?
If it pleases living people to think that they will have a right to privacy after they die, or to force other people to not pry into their dead relatives secrets, living people could easily craft a right to privacy for the deceased.
I hope one of these companies takes the troll to the very end and gets their money back from the scum bags (excuse me attorneys) at the head of the troll. That will stop this very quickly and completely. Then this embarrassing history of patenting software can come to its logical end.

If any piece of software should've/could've been patented it was the original OS. And, Bell Labs took care of that when they gave Unix to the public domain. Ditto for the original BIOS. When IBM didn't bother to defend it that option was over too.
Swedish voter uses JavaScript code as write-in candidate
Those are some terrifying numbers...
That's your opinion and doesn't answer the question at all.

At least for health records, you do have privacy after you die, apparently for 50 years: http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/covereden...
Some industries have decided that software really does matter, and go to greater lengths to make sure it works.

It'd be annoying if Things for iOS crashed and lost all of my data. It'd be horrifying if flight control software crashed and all aboard a plane were killed. It stands to reason that some software is and should be held to higher standards than other software. It probably doesn't make sense that all software should be held to the same high standard, as it is extremely time- and resource-consuming to ship avionics software. Do folks really want to dish out a few $thousand for a copy of Things for iOS?

And some companies do already take responsibility for open source software. In aerospace development, we routinely use GNU software that has been thoroughly inspected and certified as good by companies that accept many thousands of dollars to stand behind it. (Of course, if we were to upgrade from their GNU Foo 2.1.0 to the FSF's copy of GNU Foo 2.2.0, then all bets are off.)
> ... the inside of the can is painted too — with a complex chemical called a comestible polymeric coating that prevents any of the aluminum getting into the soda.

I though this was very interesting, so I did a little digging... There is remarkably little information on these 'comestible polymeric coatings', but I was able to find (see below) a reason as to why that is. Apparently these coatings are propriety to the manufacturer and there are competing companies who are constantly in a race to find the best coating.

It's supremely interesting the fact that drinking a can of coke is almost a magic trick right in front of your eyes. It'd be like someone holding a lighter straight to a piece of paper and everyone being baffled as to why it isn't lighting on fire. Yet when someone drinks a coke no one bats an eye as to how it isn't mixing with the metal salts and eating straight through the aluminum can.

"Interior can coatings designed to prevent migration of metal salts into the contained product are called "comestible polymeric coatings". The coatings ars polymers typically used in coil coating. The exact nature of the coatings isn't available since most are proprietary to manufacturers who continuously look for better coatings."

source: http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=258261
That's why there's ECMAScript - the official name of the spec ... nothing new.
this is so true.. we already spend a lot more time fixing and tweaking code than actually creating.
Why are you reminding about this? Isn't it obvious, 6 years later, that entire Obama Administration is a charade?? Why would it be any different when it comes to petitions.whitehouse?

Don't mind the case of obvious abuse of power and long arm of the gov that destroyed the life of a young and basically innocent man.... here look at this one, nice and thoroughly answered:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/release-recipe-hon...
Monopolies aren't illegal. What's illegal is commercial behavior in furtherance of maintaining a monopoly. You probably don't have just one credible high-speed option because of anticompetitive actions on Comcast or AT&T's part.

(I'm prepared to be wrong about that last point; I'm in Chicago, where I do in fact have several high-speed options).
A lot of new laptops of today have touch screens displays, this trend will only grow in the future.
Effective immediately, the FOIA provides no protection at all to deceased individuals. However, HIPAA is precisely the opposite in that the records are immediately sealed and the right to open it passes with the rest of the estate. I should note, I am not a lawyer and you should not take this as legal advice.
> 70KB is hardly relevant today.

That mentality got us into this mess in the first place.
Most people hang their laundry somewhere in their back yards, not the front.
I think that offering a range of diffrent models of threwput and latancy can only be good for the internet as a hole.

What I am conserned with is this, I want to tell the ISP what packets should run with what characterisitcs. I am completly against the ISP making deep packet inspection and deciding the selfs what packets to drop or dely.

I think like in everything else, when you have a finite resources you need a market. Having every packet be the same and then just randomly drop them, is just bad for the internet as a hole. We need QoS we need to be able for some services to run with priority.

When I play video games or skype I dont wanne wait, if I torrent every episode from a podcast the latency does not intrest me so much.

So Im am PRO net neutrality in this sence, the ISP is not allowed to look into my packets and change there priority.
> The cultural commentary of how parts of the world are now moving at vastly different speeds to the point where we are almost seeing bona fide time-travel seems WAY more important to think about.

How was this article an example of that?
DMS Software – A system for handling large legacy code bases (2010)
True, but for a long time the only noteworthy "other user" was Microsoft and they kept calling it JScript for years even after they adopted the standard.

I'm not sure what exactly happened, but at some time after or during the lifetime of IE9 they stopped referring to their dialect of ECMAScript as "JScript" and began calling it "JavaScript". The most recent stuff I can find about JScript is about JScript.NET, which seems to be discontinued.

There's this issue filed on the Mozilla project back in 2000 that addresses this problem: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44841

As Google, Apple and Microsoft are openly using the JavaScript trademark (without marking it as a trademark) these days, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that it's okay to use the term "JavaScript" to refer to an ECMAScript implementation that is compatible with the original JavaScript language developed by Netscape. This would probably preclude Adobe's ActionScript and other "enhanced" flavours of ES (e.g. JSX? I've never seen Facebook refer to JSX as "JavaScript <something>" in a way that would imply JSX is simply JavaScript).
I am an early adopter, but the blank home page and blank blog are a little too early for my tastes.
RuJIT – Trace-based JIT Compiler for Ruby
Clé FACIL
Not just in Melbourne, but even here in the US that's a lot!

I just pulled up my monthly bill to confirm--my current bill reflects 33 days of service, and is for 3900 gallons. I live in Austin, TX in a single-family home that typically has 3-4 adults in it (me, my roommate, and an Airbnb that's booked out almost every day with 1-2 additional adults.) That 3900 gallon usage, or 118 gal/day, is for all of us combined. So it's quite doable in the US!

I think the biggest contributing factors are:

1) We don't water the lawn. Ever.

2) I've installed all extremely energy-efficient appliances, including new toilets, a washer and a dishwasher that use very little energy.

3) We don't take baths--only showers.

I never feel like I'm scrimping when it comes to water. In fact, if anything, I think we do way more laundry/dishes than the typical household thanks to having an Airbnb and wanting to keep everything clean for our guests.

My conclusion: Americans are going to have to give up on their green lawns, and prioritize energy efficiency in appliances, to get to this level. But it's really doable here in the US.
I can't help but wonder if the fate of Internet infrastructure will follow that of transport infrastructure (Build-operate-transfer : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build-operate-transfer)

Based off history, it seems that private ownership of common property is doomed to fail.
Well, I suspect one of the reasons why they can do that is because they're charging you $90 per month for a 2 Mb connection. I pay $27 per month here in the state for a 25/5 connection that routinely gets about 8/3.