skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I included this law in the discussion since it applies to digital services.

What you are missing is that unless encryption is used directly by the endpoints (not added by the provider) by definition (a) holds from your previous comment.

Skype is an example of a communications service (like TextSecure) that offered secure E2E communications but was stripped of that functionality.

Blackberry is an example of a company that has drowned because political pressure to backdoor communications was greater than the market incentive to provide real security.

Apple today stores electronic communication and service records, logs and artifacts from your phone encrypted in the cloud. But it will decrypt for law enforcement upon request. Are you suggesting they do this voluntarily or are they compelled to by law?

http://images.apple.com/privacy/docs/legal-process-guideline...

For the record I am a strong advocate of TextSecure/Silent Circle/others. To be a strong advocate, however, one must be a strong skeptic. So far I do not believe these two projects have been compromised ("CryptoCat" on the other hand...)

I do not believe that there are laws requiring all crypto implemented by every provider everywhere to be subverted. The laws that exist however do ensure that any encryption provided transparently are subverted. When E2E crypto becomes a problem (e.g. Skype) the intelligence community has other ways of dealing with it.

What this means for the surveillance state is that anything that becomes popular enough to represent a non-neglegible portion of traffic will be subverted. Mom and pop can't have secure communications. It's only us cipherpunks who get to have any short reprieve.
Your request may go through proxy servers that do not recognize these verbs. Or users of your API may be stuck with an outdated framework that simply doesn't allow them.

Keep things sane and stick to GET/POST/PUT/DELETE.
I feel like any online discussion forum without active moderation [to force comments to be on-topic] will inevitably have threads that stray off-topic. If a particular comment irks you, at least you have the downvote option.

I do think off-topic comments can still contribute valuable information and insight provided they're not unreasonably off-topic. Tangential conversations, as krapp mentioned... everyone is going to approach a topic from their own unique perspective.
Electoral voting system written in PHP. Sounds like a good idea.
Yes: “Tableau de bord” ;)
It is baffling to me how poorly apple, and their OS, has supported multiple monitors.

I heard anecdotes that it was passable on Mavericks, but prior to that there were all manner of basic usage problems.

It makes me think that there must be some kind of "apple way" resistance to multiple monitors ? Is it considered a "wrong" use-case ? Do people at apple not use multiple screens in their own work ? (how could they, with the issues that have plagued it since snow leopard...)

What's the deal ?
It's sort of funny for me how the systemd attitude towards portability is quite similar to that of the OpenBSD community, whose software (OpenSSH, OpenSMTPD, OpenBGPD...) generally runs on OpenBSD only and where porting is done by a separate team, but somehow the interwebs aren't full of rants calling the OpenBSD people jerks for not caring about non-OpenBSD platforms...
50% of snapchat users are under 18 [1]. which this video seems to clearly target (production style is fun, quirky, light hearted, even the actors are young). Yet they require a debit card and the use to be 18+. I guess they are hoping their young users stick with it for a few more years.

[1] http://www.statista.com/statistics/315398/snapchat-user-age-...
I disagree. The primary users of Snapchat aren't worried about security.
On CentOS it can be hard to stay current because yum tends to use older builds. I haven't found an ideal solution for all cases; what I do is build current versions from source, in `/opt/$program/$version/`.

I also use static linking when possible; this helps enable the binary to be copyable to other similar servers. I also use Docker and/or Ansible and/or scripted installs when possible.

This overall approach does mean being committed to updating dependencies and rebuilding, which is especially important for security updates e.g. shellshock. It also means specifying environment paths so you get the versions you want, rather than the default CentOS yum versions. YMMV.
On-chain transactions are much slower which is a different kind of risk.
> The relationship of religion to spiritual experience is along the lines of the relationship between space themed fiction like Star Trek to actual space flight.

If you look at actual definitions of the word 'religion' used by academics who study religion, there is actually a pretty tight relationship. E.g.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM-yinhpOgQ
but duplicity is a backup program. btsync isn't.
I'm personally a big fan of "reduce transparency" - it solves this problem, makes things faster in general, and (IMHO) looks nicer.
Appreciate the attribution to TruthCoin[1]. Was Auger implemented in consultation with the TruthCoin author? Curious to know his thoughts.

EDIT: According to the Auger whitepaper[2], Paul Sztorc provided feedback.

[1] http://www.augur.net/code/

[2] https://github.com/tensorjack/Augur/blob/master/augur.pdf?ra...
Most do, only the Haven explicitly positions themselves as anti-key, but Yale offers a keyless experience and it is possible to go completely keyless with both Lockitron and August as well.
People are already using Venmo. Nobody is going to switch to Snapcash or Clinkle.
because they lack hardware implementation?

I think vp8 doesn't have too many hardware implementation either. h264's situation is better though.
This about the impedance mismatch between building everything from source and using distro package management. Mixing and matching is painful, as package managers correlate a lot of package metadata in order to provide smooth integration and interdependencies of multiple packages.

Building everything from source "by hand" quickly runs into scaling problems, and admins start to roll their own "package databases" in order to cope. Fully-baked package management becomes the solution. The problem here is that distro packages are not the latest development snapshots (for good reasons, most often and presumably). Still, there are times where newer-than-distro-repo software is required.

The author's Pandoc case may be one of those, but I doubt it. RHEL (and CentOS) packages should never (by definition) include showstopper bugs. It's more likely that bugfixes have been backported to the older, stable version. Still, it's possible that the author is correct, and the official package does not meet requirements or is otherwise unusable.

In that case, the best path forward is to build or reuse an updated package, rather than installing from development sources "by hand", e.g. `make install`. It's likely that someone else has already had this problem and has built an updated package, which you could then install, but let's assume not.

Now we're into the wonderful world of package building. We can avoid some of the author's pain here, but mostly there is a tradeoff for having to learn and deal with the packaging pipeline. The upshot is that package building may be scripted and synched with development sources, and you are keeping the metadata inside the packaging system where it belongs and can be managed (think: future updates).
Why don't you suggest some good changes? The issues page on github seems quite active and quick to fix stuff.
Those numbers seem fairly comparable to CD's to me.

Let's run some numbers. After subtracting manufacturing, shipping & retailer cuts, a label makes about $3-5 from a record, and sends about $1 of that to the artist. So for the sake of argument, let's say you need to sell a thousand CDs to make the same revenue as a million Spotify streams. Given ~10 tracks per album, that means that the crossover point is 100 album plays. IOW, if I play an album on Spotify more than 100 times, I give the recording company more money than I would if I bought the CD.

That seems like totally fair pricing. I have no idea how many times the average CD is listened to but I bet it's above 100. The median would be below 100, but the mean above. The albums that are listened to 10's of thousands of times would really skew the average.
He's not talking about a framework, he's talking about web application firewalls that only support the default verbs. It's quite common and has nothing to do with which framework you use.
Ah, I see. Great e-mail template!
Yep. Look what happens every time a bitcoin bank folds. Everyone who had coins in that bank rather than in their own wallet suddenly loses every coin they have.
Some of this seems wrong.

> In most cases your order will get routed to a 3rd party liquidity provider,

This is only true if you are a regular person, ie using IB to buy in your rrsp or ira account. Almost exclusively, anyone who is a professional will go direct to market( DMA). They will never go through Citadel or some other liquidity provider.

> Often, these guys will pay the broker for order flow

Not often, always. They always pay for this, there are no freebies:)

> a firm who agrees to buy at the bid and sell at the ask and do so quickly.

If you can find someone who will guarentee that they will fill my buy orders at the bid and sell orders at the ask, please let me know and I'll give them all my flow:)

> Competition between these firms goes a long way towards guaranteeing the NBBO price that your broker is obligated to provide.

What does this even mean, even without someone buying your flow you are still guaranteed to get the NBBO price, RegNMS says this is the law. Let me be clear, 3rd party brokers have no part in guaranteeing you get the NBBO price. The law says if your order can trade at the NBBO, it must.
I don't think so. You're assuming that BTC are somehow equally distributed :-) IMHO they are not ;-)
I don't think people who desire this separation are the target audience of this update. It seems to be a pretty solid business move for both parties. Snapchat has a feature that is (at least in my experience) commonly used between friends just like their app is, and Square continues to build it's user base and trust as a mobile payment system. Win-win.

I've been using square cash for a while and I've been quite pleased with it. Now, assuming I can use square cash to send money to people with Snapcash, it'll be even easier to convince others to adopt this payment method, making it even more useful.
> If they want in, they'll get in, and there's nothing* you can do about it.

Yeah, but you don't have to make it _easy_ for them, like using closed-source software that's capitalizing on the name recognition of "BitTorrent" to pretend to be open.

(I expect that even if you lived in McLean, Virginia and never locked your doors, if you were writing open-source software, nobody would make you put a backdoor in. The intelligence agencies have shown a great bias towards doing things that people won't notice.)

Also, even assuming you can't keep the NSA and FBI out if they really care (which I somewhat agree with), it's definitely worth it to keep everyone else out. Like BitTorrent the company, or anyone MITMing any of those HTTP URLs.
> A lesson to future compiler makers: if you want your compiler to be really fast use OCaml, not Java!

Another option the author could have explored is js_of_ocaml. It compiles OCaml bytecode to JavaScript. It works quite well in my (somewhat limited) experience.
Congratulations! You are now closer to being Enlightened.

You now have a closer understanding pf the hundreds of thousands of man-hours that distribution maintainers spend doing this every single day just to give you a working application. Keep in mind of course that all of which you performed will not replicate properly, because it doesn't use a spec file, doesn't record its build deps, run deps, permissions, has no uninstall or upgrade, doesn't use standard paths, probably skips a whole bunch of correct procedure and bug fixes, uses some real-time dynamic package managing/installing thingie, yadda yadda....

It's not that software development procedures are broken; actually, they're really, really well defined for most of the Open Source world. It's just that most humans have no clue how much work goes into giving them some 'basic' products. Kind of like how most people have no idea how much of a multinational effort goes into producing a bottle of Coke.

Could said tool be written with no dependencies? Sure. But that would be a total nightmare in and of itself. At the end of the day, code reuse and layers of abstraction are useful... as long as they're designed and used properly.
RailsBricks now works on Windows too
Before Facebook was open to everybody, it was "cool" when you got your college email early and could sign up for Facebook.
Sure, but then you need to implement both ways to express the same thing, and then deal with the infinite arguments it will spawn between proponents of each camp.
I can't actually get the article on my iPhone. I keep getting spammed or redirected to another ad page or to download an app.
Even with their money?
Why your code doesn't scale
JavaScript Inheritance: Or, Why Classes Are Unnecessary
Underage nudity and quick cash sending? What could possibly go wrong?
+1 for Distraction, and indeed most of BruceS's works. Incredible, visionary stuff.

"Heavy Weather" is probably the book of his that's most similar to Distraction - also very very good.
Interesting read! Do you have any thoughts on the qKey system from the Dutch startup Ubiqu? http://www.ubiqu.nl/
Even signed automatic security updates, where the vendor runs the update server, still allow the vendor to inject targeted attacks in your binary.

There are ways to mitigate this, but not well given the design constraints of closed-source software.
Even if the users of snapchat were particularly concerned with the security of this feature, they alleviated that concern in the post by stating that all of the financial security will be handled by Square which is building it's reputation of security in mobile payments.
What text on that excerpt leads you to believe this was forced?
Hi, Apache developer here, kinda a request for feedback on how we can improve the situation:

How would people feel about automatic key rotation that required time synchronization across a cluster?

Eg, on all your webservers, you have something like this:

SSLSessionTicketKeyFile /var/lib/apache2/session-ticket.key
SSLSessionTicketRotation 1hour

Internally apache would calculate `HMAC(1hour-time, $key)`, and use that for the current hour (and allow the previous hour) for session ticket signing?

If you don't specify the TicketKeyFile, it would just randomly-regenerate a key every hour.

This is not perfect. It has issues. Like if your key is leaked when using a TicketKeyFile, calculating the session ticket secret for a given time is trivial.
Can't agree with your implication that 'real JS stuff' won't get done and 'JS people' won't get on board due to its 'focus on OOP'.

I've yet to see a large JS app written in a 'functional style'. Most large client-side apps I've come across are written in Backbone, Angular, Ember etc. which are all frameworks/libraries that embrace OOP.

You shouldn't mistake JavaScript's 'prototypal' nature for it being a non-OOP language. JavaScript and OOP are a very good fit.

> The people who will appreciate the trappings of OOP are more than likely the typical classically trained programmers, who will write 300 lines of Spider on the frontend of their Python hobby project, and not touch it again.

If you're really dismissing __all of OOP__ to that extent I feel like you are seriously misunderstanding OOP and I highly recommend you read/watch at least:

- POODR by Sandi Metz [1] - Explores OOP, SOLID principles, testing, more. The best book on OOP I've ever read. Ignore the fact the code examples are in Ruby (by that I mean, they're easy to understand).

- Refactoring by Martin Fowler [2] - The definitive refactoring book... which goes hand in hand with OOP.

- Boundaries (Talk) by Gary Bernhardt [4]. He talks about the 'functional core, imperative shell' pattern of software architecture that acknowledges the fact that some form of OOP/procedural/imperative programming is unavoidable. It's a great talk.

Outright dismissal of OOP really has no place in modern programming. Even if you get into functional languages like Clojure you'll find they're actually embracing a lot of OOP ideas [3], even though they pretend they're not into it :)

[1] http://www.poodr.com

[2] http://martinfowler.com/books/refactoring.html

[3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13cmHf_kt-Q

[4] https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/boundaries
But Venmo hasn't won. Outside the Valley, I don't know anyone who uses it. (although, mostly the same with SquareCash)
Why competitive people are often dumb and boring
But what about social financial software?

Don't get me wrong, I don't want my online banking in Snapchat. But sending money to friends is a very different action - it's inherently public, for one.
Have they fixed cifs slowness in Yosemite? That would be my only reason for upgrading. I actually use a vm Windows for browsing network shares on my Mac it's so bad..
I can't imagine any drug dealer would want to put their transactions into a bank account, at least if they sell anything more than casually.
I use a lot of different methods to send money to friends. Venmo is by far the easiest, but I still commonly have to ask people to sign up for Venmo.

Snapchat has tons of users. If this is just a new feature built-in, it's pretty easy to tell someone to link their debit card vs. signing up for Venmo and linking their bank account. Plus, the ability to send friends money w/ a picture attachment is kind of fun I guess.
In particular, I was experiencing the issue reported here: http://markmaunder.com/2014/11/13/os-x-10-10-yosemite-wifi-p...
A Tale of Two Shirts
Sometimes, the easiest thing is to just compile a binary elsewhere, and drop it into the system. Especially when you are dealing with CentOS (RHEL, Scientific Linux, ...).

"Linux"* is usually forward-compatible, meaning that a binary compiled with an old system will run on a newer one. Maybe you have to bring all your own libraries with you, and place them on LD_LIBRARY_PATH, but you can get it to work. I can't count the times I had to extract .so files from RPMs I found on the net. Feels a bit dirty, but surprisingly works.

Actually, at one point I compiled my own glibc (simultaneously with GCC), and then the full GTK stack. I played a bit with RPATH so the binaries looked for libraries at relative, not fixed paths. Then I could just drop the whole usr tree somewhere, source a script (setting a few variables) and I was able to run current software, including current versions of Skype, Firefox, and LibreOffice on my ancient OS at work. There are binaries for the latter two, there is no way I would compile those, too.

Its a bit unfortunate that there is no "culture" of using binaries when necessary on Linux. If people were more aware of the use cases and details, the experience would be a lot smoother. For example, creators of binaries could compile against older system libraries to get maximum compatibility. Or, you could have bundles of libraries (distribution-agnostic, and not installed in /usr) to run new apps on an old OS. Ironically, Windows has the distribution of third-party binaries figured out much better... although I do not envy Windows for the installation situation there, and in 90% of cases prefer the package managers of the Linux world.

(* And here, I mean Linux distributions, not just the kernel. So Linux+glibc+GNU+bash+X11+related stuff, but maybe a few of those are swapped out for alternatives. Just a reasonably GNU/Linux-Like Posixy System, but not Cygwin or OS X.)

(* * Which I was stuck with for reasons out of my control.)
I think Facebook + Paypal has huge advantages, so I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not.
Coffee pioneers at Pachamama launch Kickstarter for new roaster
Are those my only two choices? I might instead choose not to cave at all.
"The evolutionary history provides historical reasons for the systemic oppression of women, but it does not justify it."

You didn't even read what I wrote. I never justified the systemic oppression of women, nor argued that it happens because of evolution. What I said is that biologically women are more valuable than men. Most of the differences between the sexes follow from that.

"you have to convince others that you're worth their time"

Well maybe you are not worth my time. Good bye - remain happy in your ignorance (which you probably will, it's the great upside of ignorance).
Mechanical locks will always be more comfortable to me, I'm sure. But I think that has something to do with understanding how it works. I'm a mechanical security guy, I'm able to follow the general field of electromechanical security and have a sense of info/network/app security, but I'll probably never completely know how those things are keeping me safe.
They have some colour photos (taken with filters), they've already stated the colour of the surface (black or grey, it's really just not colourful).
....Because that's not possible today with current technology?

edit: I seriously don't understand how you immediately jump to that being the new functionality when sending payments today is as simple as logging into paypal or any numerous other payments sites.... Not to mention the age requirement of 18? This comment is just fear mongering.
What did he say about the type of person who can't hear anything negative about any drug without trying to turn it into a debate about prohibition? Are they just sort of intuitively good at psychopharmacology? If so, I'll get right on that recommendation.
Hi, I wrote that a few weeks ago, just a blog post appreciation of Wikidata, nothing original. Summary: http://www.wikidata.org launched 2 years ago, following various much older proposals for structured data in wikipedia. Will allow for more cross-language collaboration, better info availability in smaller languages, much more...check out the coolest/most impactful development in wiki-land.
Agreed. Most people I know use Chase QuickPay, of all things.
Why are some families are priced out now? It is historically new.

Why do you think this crack won't widen? Because wealth gap won't repair itself.
Is it just me or do the last iOS and OSX updates look really bad? I upgraded my iPhone to iOS 8 and somehow calls started dopping (even after 8.1 and resetting the entire device twice!). The Apple help desk actually asked me to install each app one-by-one to see if that finds a rogue app! Luckily, I was within a year of warranty and they replaced my iPhone.

I have not upgraded to OSX Yosemite yet. I am afraid that there will be a performance hit. Even the new iPhone 5S I got replaced faces some lags that weren't present in iOS 7.

What are your views about upgrading to Yosemite, esp. related to dev environments?

Edit: I have faced similar lags after updates on my iPad Air too. Hence, the dismay.
It is stunning.

Thinking about navigating in zero gravity became a lot easier for me when I realised that you can arbitrarily redefine “down” as whatever direction is convenient. Gravity assists and orbits, for example, are simply falling around a bend.
As a part of the Oil and Gas industry, I find this inexcusable. The industry is going to be a part of international energy picture for the long-term, and there are "environmentally responsible" ways to economically produce O&G. These corner cutting idiotic antics hurt the image of the whole industry, and are becoming more common. Sadly, with the size of the industry, the demand for the product, and the desire to keep the price low, its difficult to oversee every action.
I like to use the term 'flying robots' to make the distinction between a 'dumb' remote controlled vehicle (which RC hobbyist have for 30+ years) and intelligent machines which are capable of autonomous flights and executing complex missions.