skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Disastrously Weird: Dropboxers Standoff with Mission Locals Over Soccer Field
Is this the version that doesn't use 100% of your memory with more than three tabs open?
> Whilst the handshake and data security mechanisms are
> arguably well designed the persistence mechanism isn’t in
> any sense stealthy. This particular rootkit would be
> easily detectible using tools as Tripwire and Rootkit
> Hunter.

Say the persistence mechanism wasn't there. How would you go about detecting this rootkit?
This is what some developers do, but as you say, it limits what you can add. A new discrete feature, yes. A replacement feature, not really. And it means you need to support the unpaid code path forever.
Certainly in the UK there's a big difference in public perception between different levels of tax avoidance. Someone who reduces their tax burden to about 30% - fair enough. The same person who reduces their tax burden to 1%? They're taking the piss.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_the_piss (first sentence: unreasonable).
I would like to point out that cave art far predates any substantial 'text' we might have. Even if just as a shape to form a glyph, images are by far the most powerful method of human communication—no language is at all necessary. Language can add power, but at such a cost (learning a language takes years).
Ha, we definitely get that that's a dealbreaker for a lot of people. Most top dating sites are populated by a ton of fake profiles, so while logging in with Facebook isn't ideal, it helps us as a small startup to prevent spammers. We don't post to members' walls / we basically just ask for birthdate and photos.
The CDC is a government organization. It's part of HHS.
What third-party libraries do you use for iOS development?
Not exactly the best sample. But it does give some evidence that people are still using firefox.
https://www.paddle.com/sell for the developer solution.

FD: I work at Paddle, and would be happy to answer any questions. It's exactly these types of headaches we're trying to solve for developers.
Seems a little weird to me, honestly. I mean, we started curating our own dating on the web to get away from this type of haphazard matchmaking, didn't we? This seems a bit like reinventing the horse and carriage. And anyway, since when was flirting with people online work?!

It's also a little insulting to not even be the one selecting your date. I know we get set up by our friends now and then, but they are our friends, not some random service on the Internet. This service has not built trust, and its results seem to me fundamentally dubious.
I haven't look into i18n-js library in details, but this is what I can spot so far:

* the message format in i18n-js seems to be compatible with ICU message syntax, the industry standard used in other programming languages and the one used by formatJS as well. we will have to check if they really implemented all the specs, which makes the messages more advanced, e.g.:

```
Cart: {itemCount, plural,
=0 {no items}
one {one item}
other {# items}
}
```

including the fact that itemCount from `other` option will be formatted as a number, saying "1,030" in EN, vs "1 030" in FR.

* i18n-js is a js library, which means you have to do the formatting in your js code, then passing the formatted data into the template engine where you have the placeholders for them, while FormatJS focuses more on the high-level declarative form that you can use in your templates directly, which makes things simpler, if you use handlebars, you could do: {{formatMessage "Cart" itemCount=numItems}} right in your template.
Here are some of my favorites - what others do you like?
Unless this is changed, you can only do that by going through Apple support and asking for a refund. Google Play has a mechanism for it, which makes it considerably more convenient.

I'd personally give priority to upgrade pricing and trials, but I'd still like to see Google Play's approach implemented by Apple here.
Nasty SSL 3.0 vuln to be revealed soon
That may work in some cases but for QA reasons alone it gets unsustainable really quickly. Let's say you have your base app then "Upgrades" A, B, C.

* What if the user buy's C but not A and B?

* Does B/C rely on anything in A or C rely on anything in B

* For every upgrade the dev needs to test all the possible combinations of upgrades bought by the user

* Positioning for new UI added by A/B/C dependant on what other upgrades have been purchased

You might be able to solve most of these with requiring A for B and B for C but even then you still need to test your app: Base+A, Base+A+B, Base+A+B+C......
The problem with the App Store isn't that Apple is making too much money from developers (they're not making more money than anyone else who retails products for you). The problem is that the App Store doesn't support stuff developers need, like upgrades, migration from previous licensing schemes, free trials (vs. in-app purchases of functionality). This was very much a Steve-ism (let's keep things simple for customers) but they need to treat developers as customers too.
25 women in robotics you need to know about (2014)
Then I should make a fake facebook so I can make a fake profile? One more layer of indirection doesn't necessarily add more security.
http://www.diffbot.com/ offers this service as an API
If you're building iOS apps, you have no excuse to not test betas frequently.

iOS8 integrates with TestFlight, so even nontechnical users can easily try your beta apps. It takes seconds to send out beta releases to testers and there is no manual review process. "Normal" app release cycles are once-per-month, but that's incredibly slow for beta testing. I send a new beta release every 2 days and get immediate feedback.
Which diet will help you lose the most weight?
Apparently care varies greatly by country. In Wisconsin about three months ago my mother in law was jerked around for about two weeks in the hospital before they would take it out. Multiple MRIs and endless apparently pointless tests. In her opinion they were making too much money off her, to be interested in curing her permanently by just taking it out. She's fine now.
I suspect that if they sold in GSM phone volumes they could price them cheaper.

Maybe this is the perfect opportunity for you to make something like this at something you consider a more reasonable price and make a fortune?

This reminds of those clients who think "You should be able to knock this out quickly." If they are so knowledgeable that they know how long something should take, why don't they just "knock it out in a couple of days" themselves?
only desktop Safari doesn't, for some reason. iOS does.
I'd like to see them donate to the EFF
The entire point of Arrow's theorem, as I see it, is that criteria which apply to an individual's preferences do not apply to an aggregate of many individual's preferences. Since aggregating the preferences of many individuals is ostensibly the point of any election, it's extremely relevant to point out this rather unfortunate and counterintuitive fact.

IIA is an extremely reasonable quality of an individual's preferences. Although you could probably construct pathological cases where it might sort of make sense for an individual to swap his preference of X and Y when Z is introduced, I contend that it would be exceedingly rare. Showing that IIA is impossible to guarantee (at the same time as other criteria) in an aggregate of preferences is a pretty big deal.

Arrow's theorem does not say or logically imply that, if there is a cyclical Smith set, the voting system shouldn't acknowledge that and pick someone within that loop.
It hasn't done that in years. I have ~20 tabs open and about 500 MB of memory used. For comparison chrome uses the same amount of memory at about 10 tabs open.
Haven't verified your claim but according to the linked bug, one has to wonder, what the Mozilla folks have not understand what "no cookies" and DNT means.

Oh, and Google should _really_ provide their Safebrowsing API without a cookie, too. Youtube-nocookie.com works fine too....
Note: I'm no security expert, just sharing what I discover.

You can scan an existing host for SSLv3 with "nmap --script ssl-enum-ciphers -p 443 <host>" (via https://twitter.com/kramse/status/522067567960399872).

SSLv3 is afaik only needed for IE 6 support (per https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Transport_Layer_Protection_C...).
GamerGate: 'Press must tackle misogyny,' says developer
> 1. They will provide different UI across different desktop browsers/OS's, etc. The theory was that the browser can decide what the datepicker should look like. The practice is that half of them are ugly or lack the UI you want and you can't do much to fix that.

In theory they'd be more consistent across the platform, just like text and select boxes; I'm not seeing the problem. You're site doesn't need to have it's style imposed on every single control.

> 2. What the UI looks like is still in flux and will likely remain in flux. This means that not only do you have to test/support all the currently provided UI, but you also have to be ready for unexpected changes in the future.

Why do you care what the UI looks like? As long as the API is stable.

> 3. Specifically because you cannot change what the (fairly complex) UI looks like, you cannot make it match your theme. This can be a huge pain.

I count this as a plus, honestly.

> 4. There are better JS-based datepickers out there for the desktop.

Ugh. The less we rely on javascript for basic functionality the better.

You're js, highly themed date picker probably isn't very accessible and probably doesn't function like the rest of the system does either.

The more we can leverage the User Agent, the more we should. It's easier on developers. It's more accessible. It's more consistent across the user's platform.
OkCupid has fake profiles but it's not THAT bad (maybe Tinder has spam problems, or so I've heard, but they're spammed because they are at scale). Nothing a reverse-image search on Google can't usually solve.
In CLIM, a graphical presentation is only a representation of an underlying type. Types will have default representation (e.g., basic text like you would get from printf), but you can also override this using with-output-as-presentation (see p. IV-1.30 of [1]).

So, when outputting a number, you could display it in the output stream as a circle of radius N. Then, any input which wanted a number as argument (using "(accept 'integer ..)") would let you type a number or click on that circle.

This could be extended to shell command parser for richer input choices (rmdir can only accept directories, cat won't).
Existing utilities could support a "richly typed stream of objects" (graphical ls) or a wrapper or output processor could add it. The latter has the advantage that not all commands would need to be aware, and it could be multi-functional (could work on "ls|grep", "find", "tar tf" output--but you might need to specify type hints).

I think it would be handy to have all my recent files, directories, outputs handy in a list on the side
(with keyboard shortcuts too; I'm not a clicker..).

So in no way should your command history have to be compromised just because you have alternative input methods available.

[1] A Guided Tour of the Common Lisp Interface Manager,
http://3e8.org/pub/scheme/doc/lisp-pointers/v4i1/p17-rao.pdf
You could similarly argue we used the waterflow project management style for a very long time and it worked "well".
If the persistence mechanism wasn't there, you'd be able to detect it from the added files -- /bin/dh and ipt_ip_udp.so in your modules directory. Tools like tripwire work by hashing the files on your system so you can tell at a glance when one changes.
they are probably positioned to close to cooking surfaces, additionally the method of detecting smoke will also determine what kind of false alarms they generate
Working at a company appealing to non-tech people, with a "Sign up with Facebook" ability as well as "sign up with email", I can tell you most people just sign up with Facebook.

We don't have anything that says "we won't post to your wall" etc, but most people use it anyway.
I thank whatever powers are out there that I'm married, because when I see the time and effort my single friends sink into meeting people online, it certainly looks like work.
No, they changed it from 15 minutes to two hours.
That seems anecdotally accurate to me. It's not hard to find "spiritual sequel" Mac and iOS apps that do quite well as people switch to them from older apps that are lacking in development or aren't as "cool" anymore, such as Cyberduck -> Transmit, iSSH -> vSSH, BBEdit -> TextMate -> Sublime Text -> Atom, and so on.
Despite mostly distributing games, Steam also has a section for non-game applications though there aren't very many to choose from.

http://store.steampowered.com/tag/en/Software
I don't think so, at least not anytime soon. Every person I know says "I use IE to download Chrome."
Not to hate on a startup, but I've dated on OkCupid before, and while it's not foolproof, you can meet someone who seems perfect online and then you don't hit it off in person. Having limited matches is just a dealbreaker. Sure there's the idea of too many possibilities leading to the 'paradox of choice' or 'fear of missing out', but let's be honest, you really need to have a lot of options to meet someone who's right for you (unless you're really lucky). "Your matchmaker will send you a new match each week" -- a match, singular, is just not going to work for the majority of the population.
I totally understand where you're coming from. However, consider that there are more fake Facebook profiles on the Internet than fake online dating profiles. Facebook itself does not to any sort of identity verification, so the benefits of relying on it to filter spam are dubious.
Interesting... I work in computer vision and I use body measurements to identify people (as well as features). Its an awesome idea and wish I thought of it!

Best of luck!
This is one thing that the Microsoft Windows 8 app store does surprisingly well -- you can have full functionality trial periods. The only problem with the Windows 8 app store is... well, it's selling only Windows 8 "modern mode" apps.
I know Zuckerberg is rich from creating Facebook, but where did Chan find her stash of money? Or are they donating Mark's money but using both people names? Asking out of curiosity, not trying to make some dumb point.
An ideal implementation would allow you to customize the look with CSS.

You recommend using a JS-based datepicker, what would the difference be?

This would be faster and easier since you don't have to keep the JS-based one up to date.
> Seems like 32 was released just yesterday

Every six weeks, as it's been for like three years now...
They changed it to 2 hours last september.
Univate: Your University is your best Incubator
While having the ability to return an app is necessary (most non-App Store places have 30/60-day money back guarantees), it's not a replacement for trials.

For example, there might be 4-5 apps in the $30-50 range that I want to try. I'm not going to spend $150 and then having to request a refund for the rest - it simply won't happen.
PureScript and ClojureScript all have type systems better then the one in Dart. The simplest ways to get a type system is TypeScript. Not sure how I how it compares.
Univate very simply is an online innovation platform that encourages interdisciplinary collaboration and micro-feedback. We maintain the intimacy and privacy of the university setting and allow for people to build market viability, provide beta testing, and build exposure all through their university’s campus and alumni network.
We're still primarily in the first wave on online dating - where we've added a layer of technology to make something as important as finding dates easier. But as with any first wave of technology, there are tons of flaws, and on average it takes 7 hours on an online dating site to line up a date. The majority of online daters are dissatisfied with how long it takes to get a date, and the quality of dates they meet in person. Additionally, 90% of people lie in their online profiles, and most people are not very certain about who they're looking to date - much less who they're looking to date based on just browsing an online profile.

If you do want to select your date, there are tons of these 'first wave' online dating websites to do that. But we wanted to provide a different experience, and use matchmakers to make the overall experience better. In other industries, it is accepted that you need an expert to help out. You wouldn't have a friend perform heart surgery on you. But societally, there's a huge stigma against needing professional help to find dates, which is quite silly, when it's one of the top drivers of life in general and when statistically, no matter who you are, it's really, really hard to find people you connect with.

In terms of building trust, that's what our relaunch is all about. If you sign up, we'll send you a promo code for a free match, and we do much more than any other service to gain our users' trust - from monthly parties with everyone who works at the company, to live chat through our site, to personalized notes about why each match was selected (plus, of course, email support). Creating a great dating site that people trust is a really, really challenging feat, and not one achieved overnight, but we're working as hard as we can to get there.
As an independent Android developer, I have the same feelings towards Google Play.

There have been many things about Play that devs have repeatedly brought up, but Google does not take action. For example, iOS has "Promo Codes" but not Play.

Another is not being able to migrate a paid app to IAP (In App Purchase) without pissing everyone off (the linkage is lost between what the customer already paid for and the new IAPs).

Not to mention the algorithmic jail you wind up in if you ever inadvertently get caught tripping some automated alarm in the googleplex.

I wish there was some strong alternative by now, whether Ubuntu Touch or Windows Phone. We need more options.
Unless you have open a bunch of tabs, like I typically do. With multiple tabs, Firefox is easily the best performer.

Chrome is the only app I have on my Macbook Air that pushes it into overheating, turning it into a lap-frying iron skillet.
I'd be delighted to use FF on iPad. I do a lot of leisure browsing/reading and I want to support FF on all my devices. Is their stand still the same i.e. We refuse to bring Firefox to iOS until Apple lets us use our web engine ?

http://venturebeat.com/2013/04/15/mozilla-ceo-we-refuse-to-b...
You can type 'about:memory' into the address bar and it will show you where all your memory is going.
The average user has an iTunes account and doesn't switch countries on a regular basis. For the average user, the mac app store is dead simple and easy to use.
> In theory they'd be more consistent across the platform, just like text and select boxes; I'm not seeing the problem. You're site doesn't need to have it's style imposed on every single control.

I agree about the in-theory part. In practice, it has not happened.

> Why do you care what the UI looks like? As long as the API is stable.

I don't. The designers do. And if one of the four major browsers looks like crap, the design doesn't get scrapped, but the datepicker does.

> Ugh. The less we rely on javascript for basic functionality the better.

Right. Then give me a validated input field where I can say "this is a date. Don't type in anything else" and the browser makes it work. Nobody has done that yet.

Basically, there is a difference between how things should work in theory and in the ideal world, and then there is the mess we deal with now and for the next 5-10 years. I'd rather have an imperfect solution that saves me developer time and gives the user a better experience, than a perfectly engineered solution where the only good thing is the API.
Software is a service industry, not a product industry. Expect to see more software in the style of http://chrome.blogspot.com/2014/09/adobe-joins-chromebook-pa... or http://aws.amazon.com/appstream/ or even http://www.playstation.com/en-us/explore/psnow in the future.

This developer is upset about the difficulty of securing a continuing revenue stream. This is exactly the problem addressed by streaming software to users instead of just giving it to them. What this developer really wants to do is _rent_ their program: when users stop paying, they stop having the software as well.
So far it's pretty limited selection and mostly focused on media creation or game development, though there a (very small) handful of other apps included.
I like the idea of making it easy on customers. I'd rather go through additional pain as a business/developer and make more money (better product) than have an ecosystem that is unfriendly for paying customer but nice for geeks like me. What I love as a consumer in my iPhone (compared to Android, etc.) is no upgrades -- annoying like hell. No messages about license changes (thanks God!).

Why you guys insist on making sure that your software is annoying to people who use it?! I don't get it. Where is Steve?!
Fairness is subjective. As such, it is not very meaningful to discuss "our fair share of taxes." Ideal communists will substitute "100% of profit" while ideal anarchists will substitute "0% of anything".

Most businesses prioritize their own market value, and subordinate all other motives, including apparent political posture, towards maximizing that one metric. Therefore, they only pay taxes to avoid the negative effects of not paying taxes, rather than out of any perceived moral obligations.

The companies are there because the optimization process that involves jurisdiction shopping determined that establishing a business presence in Ireland provided greater benefits than the other options. There can be only one "best" jurisdiction for any given business entity. Complaining that someone else's seems to be better for more entities than yours is just sour grapes.

If you can't compete on a tax cost basis, there are other ways to attract business: a zero-corruption bureaucracy, privacy or secrecy for principals, reduced reporting requirements, reduced time from initial filing to practice, ironclad and proactive intellectual property protections, strong infrastructure, rock-solid stable units of accounting, or any of dozens of other points that may provide business value that more than compensates for the tax burden.

So fairness is a red herring. It is the objective value that is provided in proportion to the taxes taken that determines whether taxes are "too high" for a business to bear.
This.

A manual tool that can still hold the same tolerances it did when it was new, in the hands of a skilled machinist, is worthless. Because a Haas machining center[1] can hold the same tolerances with an operator who has a 2 year certification degree.

So machine shops don't want (or need) the old manual tools, and yet they still work fine. Great way to build small arms on the cheap :-) If I ever retire to a ranch with space for a machine shop I'll collect these sorts of tools.

[1] http://haascnc.com/discover/hmc/
> making apps for Microsoft platforms.

They're both not great, so you would just be trading one set of problems for another. You might want to look at building web applications, which also has problems. There is no perfect platform. You just have to figure out which set of problems hurts your business the least.
I see anything that ties Go to a specific browser as a bad thing. Surely they should be browser agnostic if they want to encourage universal adoption of their language (or perhaps they don't really care about this)?