skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Pro-tip: anything you put on any service can and probably will at some point scroll past the eyes of a random sysadmin who's debugging why the database keeps crashing under load.

Most people are worried about "disclosure" - which is something Uber violated for a PR stunt at a party recently - i.e. we're usually okay wandering past the window naked, because we assume it's extraordinarily unlikely that someone will be pointing a camera at it right then, or that it wouldn't be more embarrassing for them to try and yell "hey that person is naked in the window I saw them!"

Conversely, we wouldn't be happy if someone did take photos, then uploaded them to the web, and showed them to all our friends etc.

In a practical sense, this is how people act. It's how you have to act - it would be practically neurotic to act any other way.
Keys on paper? If you're going to go through that kind of trouble, at least use golden metal plates, Book of Mormon-style.
>in actuality NFL players live longer ... then the average male

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/2013/01/29/nfl-player...

The NFL seems to disagree. Do you have a citation to back up your claim?
How have they made that clear exactly? By condemning the actions of the tiny number of people being abusive? The tiny number of people who have nothing to do with "gamergate" in the first place? Do you seriously not have any moral qualms about lying about millions of people and claiming they target and intimidate people? If you are going to make claims like that, you need to back it up with evidence. You can't just claim one sick person's actions are the fault of some other group of people.
Disclaimer: I heavily contribute to Homebrew.

Homebrew actually merged in 4 unique bash patches in 6 days after Shellshock broke as well, and forced all users to recompile to ensure that hole was closed on our end. The author of this article would have probably been best checking both MacPorts and Homebrew, and potentially Fink as well.
If he advertises his services as "Learn to fly over the border in just 3 quick training sessions" and then continues teaching somebody after seeing them plotting courses around border patrol on a map, yes.
I can't say I've heard of one, but I'm guessing these problems would be posted by businesses that are mid-development?
I use this for invoices in my homegrown invoicing system. I also have a script for generating PDF & HTML versions of my resume from the source data, and the PDF version goes through LaTeX. If you're using Ruby, prawn is a nice solution also, but my favorite is going via LaTeX.
Snail victory is somehow the most satisfying.
It's great that you're interested in promoting journalistic integrity, and not in attacking women. Why, then, don't you start a movement that can credibly claim to support those goals, instead of rallying behind one that was created to attack one woman for completely made-up crimes against journalism?

I would love to see someone do this. Corruption in games journalism is a real problem. But it's not a problem that I've ever actually seen a #GamerGate fan attempt to address except when they were spinning it to attack Zoe Quinn or her supporters.
$3k -- close to the amount of cash a middle class family might keep as cash savings in a house. $800k.

A single act vs 15+ a year.

Don't be daft.
https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/blob/master/Library/For...
It's interesting, because I hear this kind of line all the time, that we need to e.g. "learn to do work we don't like because sometimes in (high-school, college, work) we have required work that is essential, regardless of whether we like it or not."

For some reason it never occurred to me to ask the obvious question "why would we think that just making them do it is the right training for this?". It just seems intellectually lazy to say that "you have to learn" to do something, but the 'learning' is just the demand that you do it. It may be optimal for some things, but it seems very unlikely to be the correct, final answer.

Thanks for this insight.
Ok, but why are you asking me about it? I don't control everyone on HN. I can't downvote anyone yet, this is a new account.
Internet anonymity died when the net went mainstream. Most of us have public profiles which are explicitly linked to your real life identities.

Where we've lagged is deciding how we deal with pseudo-anonymous harassment. This has probably been an issue longer then the net though: stop and think for a moment just how utterly ridiculous it is that people can call you on your telephone, but don't have to disclose the phone number they dial from (i.e. so you can't just block them trivially).

I somewhat suspect communications policy of the future needs to, at the very least, enforce the idea that big providers have to take some steps to allow easy selective filtering of contacts.
No, if I see $800k stuffed in a secret compartment, becoming suspicious is reasonable. His actions after that moment are the key thing that make his role conspiratorial rather than just negligent.
Yeah, that banner is bullshit - as far as I can see it is completely ignored by the majority of people supporting gamergate.

The linked thread on reddit is full of people complaining about "SJW" - social justice warriors. These are equated with feminists and are widely condemned by GamerGaters.

Attacks on women in gaming dominate the headlines on the linked subreddit[1], and it's pretty clear that problems they have "biased and corrupt" all revolve around the reporting of women in gaming.

Perhaps there is a problem with biased and corrupt game reporting. I wouldn't know, but as far as I can see #gamergate is just using it as an excuse for misogynistic behaviour.

[1] http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/
Does OpenBSD ship zsh by default, out of interest?
>>I sold a boat once to a guy for $3k.

___once___, you did it once. Also, $3k < $800k+ cash from some shady folks. Also a boat is way more innocent than secret storage in cars requiring a digital incantation to open.

I agree that the punishment is unreasonably harsh. I would have given him a week in jail & 2 months community service as a wakeup call because he seems like a good man who wouldn't do it again. I'd also make it clear to him that a harsher judge could have put him away for years but I was giving him a break because I trusted him. But let's be real here: There's no way whatsoever Anaya didn't know what was up.
Because #gamergate is a name that was created to attack one woman based on completely spurious claims.

If you really care about corruption in games journalism (and I do) then it makes no sense to continue rallying behind this banner that was tainted from the start.
I think the original was intentional. If C refuses to let you cast from a non-pointer to a pointer, then it is in fact enforcing some (small) degree of type-safety.
A user could be any business with a software-fixable problem they would be willing to pay for. I don't think the size or stage of the business has to qualify them.
I've been using speedata-publisher[1] and pdf-writer[2] with good results.

[1] https://github.com/speedata/publisher

[2] https://github.com/galkahana/PDF-Writer

Some other options I've played with:

- https://github.com/signintech/gopdf

- https://github.com/mstamy2/PyPDF2

- http://www.jagpdf.org/
The proposed scheme would carry substantial expense compared to a single key. If Apple (for example) hosts the escrow keys, then who pays that cost? Who has the right incentives to build a very costly but more secure system?

I'm not saying it wouldn't be a good use of money, but it might make it difficult to build support for the idea. A cheaper solution which preserves much of the security would be to use cryptographic key-sharing rather than physical sharding. The escrow keys would still be created uniquely on a per-device basis, but now Apple, the FBI, and the Justice Department must each provide a fragment of the key. Perhaps the system could be designed to release keys only when provided with a valid warrant requesting a specific key... but this would probably require warrants to be better digitized.
It's disturbing to see so many people insist that the NFL doesn't "deserve" to be a non-profit, because they don't give enough to charity.

The NFL shouldn't qualify as a non-profit because they promote only NFL football, not football in general. It's qualified as a trade association, but it shouldn't be, as it's clearly a for-profit corporation managing a brand.
There's a strain of activists which like to operate to by rallying a crowd to shout down their opposition, rather then negotiating policy or changing minds.

It works well on college campuses and the internet when targeted at individuals. It doesn't work against anything else.

The type of articles which try to group and target blame at "gamers" are exactly this type of thinking: they're written on the assumption that "gamers" is a small group that can be shamed into going away. It's telling that they're written with the usual "can't get laid" smarm which fundamentally fails to understand modern demographics, and has a lot to answer for about how exactly one wants to help guide and shape a generation moving into adolescence who'll be wrestling with understanding a lot of these types of issues.

Conversely, they're not entirely wrong in this assumption if you consider the actual demographic audience either: the group of people who know or care about the blogs and personalities involved is tiny if you're not in it. It is not mainstream news. No one outside of the relevant forum communities knew or cared.
Medieval Desktops
> Why else would someone be able to make such incredible amounts of money to throw a ball around?

To be fair, there are lots of sports with crazy high salaries. And some of those (baseball, soccer) have hardly any violence at all in comparison to football, hockey, and maybe even basketball.

I can relate to the author though, I played five different sports throughout high school and football was just plain different. It definitely felt like battle when you went out there, fighting for your school/city against the 'enemy'.

Depends on the culture at your school/city though I suppose
Probably because they only decided that "integrity in game journalism" was a worthy cause when they decided that a woman paid for a review with sex.
This is no different than fringe radical feminists attacking people on the internet, I dont have a link but there was an incident of a grown woman doxing a 13 year old kid.

If that doesnt make all feminists bad then this shouldnt make all gamers bad at least apply consistent logic and standards.
You can't just claim one sick person's actions are the fault of some other group of people.

Actually I can. That group of people acts as an enabling environment, making the behaviour seem less extreme to those associated in that group.

Do you seriously not have any moral qualms about lying about millions of people and claiming they target and intimidate people?

I don't see these "millions of people" actively working to make sure the person making those threats is found and brought to justice. Instead, I see lots of them going "yeah, that bad, but the other side did...." or "hey look, she was logged onto 8chan. She probably did it herself" or at best "We shouldn't say too much until we know who did it".

I'll condemn that behaviour all day (behind the safety of my throwaway account)
> Password managers are banned from high security applications, because their not secure.

Based on what? I've seen absolutely no evidence that good password managers (1Passoword and its ilk) are insecure.
sigh, Every time I hear this argument, I imagine a kid being given a big bag of candy, and asked to share and share alike in school. Feeling cheated out on eating it all, the kid cries about how repressed they are from not be able to decide who should be denied a taste.

If you want to eat it all, buy your own candy. Until then, be happy about the gift you have been given and enjoy sharing.
Thanks for posting that info.

I honestly have no idea if he's guilty of conspiracy to traffic narcotics.

What gets me is this incremental loss of rights that is occurring in the name of the War on Drugs.

Let's see where we are now...

1. It is illegal to sell certain drugs - OK seems reasonable (if you think they should be illegal)

2. It's illegal to have drug paraphernalia - umm that seems like a stretch; so legal stuff is now illegal if it's used to administer drugs (i.e. a pipe)?

3. It's illegal to create hidden compartments in cars - now that's just dumb

What is happening here is that the gov't can't really control drugs. Sure they lock up a few big dealers (and a lot of small-time users), but nothing changes! So what do they do? Cast a wider net! Let's start locking people up who are only marginally involved with the drug trade. What will happen? Nothing! Hundreds of tons of drugs will still make it across the border.
>the War on Drugs has resulted in a significant loss of individual rights.

Absolutely. Besides the outrageous sentence for someone who never personally participated in violence, and the injustice of prosecutorial discretion in a world with too many and too complex laws, the war on drugs has led to a presumption of guilt.

Look at the growth in civil asset forfeiture for an example. If the police stop you with large amounts of cash, they can seize it, and then force you to prove the source of the money. Or even the anti-money-laundering restrictions, where withdrawing more than $10,000 from the bank triggers notification to the government.

Things like this are why I'm so pro-cryptocurrency. I think Bitcoin and its ilk have some serious issues today, but I also feel that an open method of money transmission is necessary for a free society.
I run a reasonably successful service buying and selling Bitcoins for cash, an act which is completely legal where I live. I have absolutely no idea where my clients get their Bitcoins or what they use them for and there no way I could find out. It isn't inconceivable that some of these people are using the coins I sell to commit crimes or that the ones I buy are the proceeds of crime. I always fear I could be a victim of this kind of overzealous prosecution for running a legitimate business and it causes a chilling effect in my industry
>instead of rallying behind one that was created to attack one woman for completely made-up crimes against journalism?

I've seen this statement quite a lot, where exactly are people getting this idea from? #gamergate was started by Adam Baldwin, specifically to address corruption in games journalism and the collusion of media outlets in trying to silence discussion of it. The roots of it go back to /v/ having been convinced game journalism is corrupt for several years. See their musical tribute to games journalism from a year ago for an example (or the dewrito pope meme): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr7u1tWsGBk&list=PLAX8JHUJcF...

>But it's not a problem that I've ever actually seen a #GamerGate fan attempt to address

Have you ever looked? They have tons of information, they organize out in the open (it was on github until their repo was removed due to complaints), where everyone can see and contribute. #gamergate supporters have been harassed and threatened and Milo was even sent a syringe full of something unknown. Why do people paint such a dishonest picture of this whole thing?
It's the difference between driving people around and being a dedicated getaway driver. You might be a taxi driver all day and that's fine and legal, but if a reasonable person would know that they're helping criminals flee a heist, you can't just get away with pleading ignorance. Conspiring to commit a crime is a crime itself.
Buhu, so you bought something for its long term utility that most people by for its bragging rights.
Once again, I would like to recommend Tahoe-LAFS [0] (which anyone can install on their own on their servers or use the paid service from the creators of Tahoe-LAFS [1]). One can even store "shares" securely on Google Drive and Dropbox though it is a bit involved.

[0] http://tahoe-lafs.org/

[1] https://leastauthority.com/
20-year-old toy maker from Brooklyn owns his own Chinese factory
I think you might lack a little perspective here. Radical feminists attacking people is NOT the same as someone threatening to go to a persons house, rape and kill them, and then proving they know where the person lives.

"ps4fanboy". Hmm.
I used KeePass in the distant past. 1Password has terrific usability, especially in my current Apple-product-based computing setup.

For example, the day iOS 8 came out, 1Password had an extension so that Mobile Safari could fill in my passwords.
>Why would we want to design such a system, given that implementing a golden key would be a disaster? ... I think having a good escrow plan ready is better than having none and being forced to design one on the spot.

I disagree with this premise. I think it's dangerous to publicly and unashamedly discuss how to build a broken system like this, because it reduces the cost of performing that design in the future.

For example, if you run an online service, you should spend your time building a system that makes it impossible to spy on your users, not writing an internal procedure that describes how you would spy on your users if someone forced you to.

That said, I think the best argument against escrow for those who trust the FBI is that it will chill innovation and free speech, and push consumers and businesses to purchase from companies that don't do escrow (because they're outside the jurisdiction of whoever does it).
I love the approach that some perspectives consider this a problem waiting for a solution so we should at least try to be inventive and consider possibilities. The problem is everything about this is contingent upon perspective and there are too many to have a solution that captures all concerns. When your category is "Every Person In The World", or the not-so-tiny pool that is "Apple Customers", the only solution that fits all would be one that empowers the individual because it shifts off the burden of competing perspectives.

The problem is compounded by the fact a golden key scenario only works with the current web services model we've become dependent upon. What happens when encryption is the default everywhere all the time and computation is performed by blind services or smart contracts mapped together over a trustless network a la bitcoin style? Everything about the experience could feel the same with the exception being control over your data is shifted from a third party to you.

One possible solution would be to establish computational governance. At least at that point you have a communal opt-in which gets you away from the problem of perspective. In the same way all motorists agree to a set of rules for a given area, you could be given access to use services if you agree to a set of policies. One such policy would be to have access to your data shared to a third party if a reasonable process is followed (a dumb example would be if a majority of your peers agree that you should be investigated). Probably another can of worms but at least then we're operating from a workable premise.
Browsing that subreddit, it seems to very effectively disprove your claims. Nobody is complaining about 'women', they are complaining about shitty people. You don't get a pass from being a shitty person just because of your gender.
Furthermore, #2 of the subreddit's rules: "Do not be a dick to anyone. Harass anybody, and you're out. We don't want your kind, here."

Social Justice Warriors are vilified because of their fanatical, hateful, exclusionary behavior. They are called 'warriors' and not 'advocates' for a reason.

If you can only see gamergate as an excuse for misogyny, then I'd say you're only looking for that, and ignoring anything else you find, because poor behavior like that is universally condemned within the movement.
twitter? rimshot
I use PrinceXML, which is a few hundred or a few thousand depending on what you need, instead of fifty thousand. Prince converts [html/xml + css] to PDF, and has the most complete CSS3 implementation I'm aware of by a green mile.

There's a free version you can experiment with, to find out.
>I don't see these "millions of people" actively working to make sure the person making those threats is found and brought to justice

Good! That is the police's job, not random internet mobs. Look how well internet vigilante justice has worked out every other time. What we do see is exactly what we should see: them condemning this garbage regardless of who it happens to. Oddly enough, we don't see the "journalist"/indie side condemning the #gamergate supporters being sent threats and even syringes full of mystery liquids.
…including comments from both of the game's creators, ~JoshDeBonis and ~nmikros!
Because you acknowledge the possibility, the question is now: Do you practice due diligence? It's easy to point the finger.
The core devs are sympathetic (what with Rust being self-hosted) and apparently incremental compilation is coming soon: https://github.com/rust-lang/meeting-minutes/blob/master/wee...

There is also a way to parallelize compilation, which might sometimes speed things up, it's just not enabled by default yet: http://discuss.rust-lang.org/t/default-settings-for-parallel...
I guess my opinion is that if someone is making hidden compartments to transport illegal drugs, I don't care, even if they knew that what they were being used for.

Even if I did support making certain drugs illegal, unless they are directly dealing in drugs, I don't consider their actions a crime.

If the cops want to get drugs off the streets, then they should stick to going after the people who actually handle the drugs. That won't happen, of course, because they are losing the War on Drugs. They need to stack things more in their favor.

And who in the end loses? Everyone, as our rights are eroded day in and day out.
I agree that the sentence is way too harsh. He's clearly being used as a warning to the rest of the hidden compartment makers. Also, this guy must have had particularly awful representation.

I guess I just don't think that disagreement with the sentence requires disagreement with the findings of fact or with his conviction.

The main reason I'm responding to a lot of comments is not to defend the drug war, but rather to combat an incorrect "slippery slope" argument that regularly comes up in HN discussions like this. Something like, "Person X was convicted of crime Y because of facts A, B, C, D, E and F." and then there's a number of comments that boil down to "They're saying that B is illegal! What's next?!?! I do B all the time! The government is out of control!"
Neither side of things is that simple. While people who openly support gamergate now focus on journalism and condemn misogynistic threats, a look at GG's origins (e.g. the #burgersandfries IRC logs, which as much as anything else started the whole thing[1]), reveals plenty to abhor - way more discussion of how to effectively character-assassinate Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian than of how to reform games journalism, anyway. If the "real message" of the movement is now completely removed from that, that's great, but I don't think the idea that misogynistic threats have no connection to the "real" gamergate stands up to scrutiny.

[1] http://puu.sh/boAEC/f072f259b6.txt
This is really sad. I'm not from the Mission but I used to play pickup here all the time. Never had any problems. I hope they all just shut up and played together.
I can't agree with his logic here :

"When you say, ‘I have nothing to hide,’ you’re saying, ‘I don’t care about this right.’"

How does he arrive at that conclusion? I have nothing to hide, but I still don't support the violation of these rights. Does he suggest that we instead support some other service or method under the illusion that we are immune from NSA spying?