skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes. That's what makes ethics hard.

According to alex, the "critical difference" is anonymity. On this dimension, the sympathetic figure and the big jerk do not differ. So if he is correct about anonymity, then they are indeed comparable. The point is to test whether he really believes his stated principle or whether it's merely a convenient justification to criticize big jerks that he dislikes.

If you think that's not right, that's fine. Then come up with your own principle separating Emil Michael's journalism proposal from Pando/Valleywag. I'll repeat this exercise - trying to come up with a sympathetic figure on the other side of your principle and see if you still support the conclusions.

That's how you test whether your ethical principles are really valid.
It's not painful, the problem is that the code you write now might change in a month. With the release of 1.0 (which is less than six months IIRC), they will stabilize the syntax (but will be adding more down the line). But the libraries will still be very much in flux.

The reason things have been changing so much is mainly to get a better language now, and not have to write a 2.0 that changes everything. When you look at rust code from six months ago, things have improved greatly, so it will hopefully be worth it.
Looks like Azure has been down more hours in the past week than AWS has been down all year.

https://cloudharmony.com/status-1week-for-azure

https://cloudharmony.com/status-1year-for-aws
what's tenure got to do with it? if tenured dinosaur faculty leave, that's a huge win for the budget.
My browser also offers me to accept any self-signed certificate, I can investigate it and then I can accept it and it won't ever bother me again, until the certificate changes.

The problem is that this is a huge hassle for incidental visitors. Whereas SSH does not have incidental visitors. Same goes for email, if it's your own server, you know the cert to be the real one, and you can accept it, you're not bothered again.
http://git-annex.branchable.com/not/

"git-annex is not a backup system."
Every time this happens, ask yourself... Are you outage-proof? Do you have a rational reason to believe that internally-managed infrastructure would never have a problem like this?
A $100 3D Printer from E-Waste
Release updates from the Google Chrome team
But very time I open my Air, I think "oh god what have they done".
> Lyft sounds like it's more for extraverts--to me, the idea of sitting in the front seat, fist-bumping the driver, and riding around in a car with a stupid pink mustache on it sounds horrifying in much the same way that going on a cruise ship or getting caught in a cheesy tourist trap sounds horrifying.

I've taken both Uber and Lyft dozens of times each over the last couple of years, and I really don't understand the sharp distinction that people seem to draw between their model of service. I get that their _marketing_ might differ (apparently Lyft was marketed as the smiley friendly Uber originally), but my experience has been literally identical: I sit in the seat I want to sit (I've never even thought about it..) and if I feel talkative, I talk to the driver and he/she always tends to talk back. If I don't feel talkative, Uber and Lyft drivers alike will leave me alone.

They are 100% interchangeable services: just remember that when you get a ride with either, you're consuming the actual service, not the advertising.
> Do you bother reading

Please don't make political arguments into personal quarrels on HN, even when someone doesn't bother reading. Political arguments are abrasive to begin with. Let's not add gratuitous abrasiveness.

This comment would be quite a good one without the first sentence.
You're conflating your Korean friends with the entire younger generation of South Korea. That's like saying all Americans supported the Iraq War because Bush was elected twice, or that all Russians support invading Ukraine.

Yes, the trend amongst the younger generation disfavors unification, but a sizable percentage of the younger generation still supports unification (49% of twenty-somethings in 2010 [1]).

Domestic sentiments inside South Korea are very complex (as is with any country). For example, some South Koreans strongly oppose the US military presence in the peninsula, while others greatly support it (and others simply don't care). Contemporary South Korean culture is very unique, and concepts of nationalism are very strong across the age demographics. But even the various forms of nationalism that exists is complex.

>>It seems like the rest of the world wants them to reunite, but they don't want to.

This simple statement is simply not true. Or at best, it's incomplete. Once again, the region's relationships are very complex, and the desires of the various actors don't necessarily indicate a want for unification. US-China relations, US-Japan relations, Japan-Korea relations, Korea-China relations, etc. all have its nuances that make Korean unification a tricky event. It's hard to say that any one actor truly "wants" unification when they're all looking out for their self-interest (China doesn't want any more US military and influence in the region, US wants stability and prioritizes de-nuclearization of the peninsula, Japan's strategies are conflicting within their own domestic ranks, etc.)

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/27/south-north-kor...
Nope. Paul refused to support the bill because of the provisions for the continuance of the Patriot Act into 2017. He's been quite consistent on this, and it really doesn't have anything to do with Senate majorities. I applaud his stand.
>they're still designing/making new Soyuz rockets/spacecraft.

that is exactly the point :) They are also still designing/making new "Zhiguli"("Lada") cars ("cars made of turnip" http://vdownload.eu/watch/856185-top-gear-lada-kalina.html ) Beside modest improvements to existing tech, Russia hasn't been able to produce new modern tech in 30 years. They sell oil (with most of the complex drilling in the last 20 years done by western companies with Russia completely missing shale/fracking technology) and buy PCs.
For those unfamiliar with parallel construction (like I was) an intro:

Using thermal imaging to scan neighborhoods for the lights used to grow marijuana is considered a "search" by the courts and police have a warrant to do this. Let's say the police ignore this and go around secretly scanning cities without a warrant. They find out that John is growing weed in his basement, but they can't arrest him because this evidence is inadmissible. They follow John for a while and see that he interacts with Pete. Pete has a warrant out on him based on some unpaid parking tickets. So the cops arrest Pete, find weed, and get him to finger John as the source. Now the cops can get a warrant, search John's house, and "oh hey look there's all this marijuana growing here!"

This evidence is normally inadmissible as it was derived from an illegal search. It's very difficult to catch unless the police stupidly submit it to the court (as in the OP). Not using this tactic requires a high-degree of morality and/or oversight of police officers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
For my education: why the title change? Originally submitted with the article's actual title, which I thought was the rule.
Disclaimer: I'm hosting my own 'friends and family' XMPP server, XMPP clients are the only mobile IM apps I use. In the shelf next to me I have an outdated 'Programming Jabber' book. I want XMPP to be the solution.

If I compare the XMPP feature set with what people around me are doing with WhatsApp though..

- Without optional features (stream resumption?) you have flaky connections/lose messages, even today

- people tend to use WhatsApp etc to send inline media, be it pictures or videos. How would you do that with XMPP, without controlling the client (I run pidgin. Might be on bitlbee?).

- Having more than one device? Tablet and phone? You probably now want carbons (works reasonably well with some rough edges, but some clients don't support them) and likely would like to see your message history on both clients (-> a shared archive).

If the last point, security issues notwithstanding, makes sense/seems plausible, XMPP doesn't seem to offer a decent solution right now. MAM [1] seems to be the answer, but is experimental and .. well - there's no support for it yet.

Yes, I would love to see a world in which XMPP succeeds. But right now it's not practical as far as I can tell.

1: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html
The FastCo blog article, the one what derides the uselessly thin font, is published in an unreadably thin set of fonts.
4. Add a 'team' option

Great game!
The Roboroach - Smart bug
There you go again, with the dishonesty.

Seriously, what is wrong with you? Everyone on this thread can see that I did not say "anonymously publishing true information is unethical." That's your idea, not mine. Please don't put words I didn't say in my mouth.

What I did say is that nothing the Uber exec was talking about could be construed as journalism - even if he hired journalists to do it - and that, accordingly, what he was describing could not be considered "fair play" (which was, in essence, how you framed it).
>JS the language of the future? Why?
because it's pervasive.
market matters, not developers.
Gradle, please
Not just the South, but China too. North Korean refugees are already a concern for China.[1] If the economy or the government collapses in North Korea, it's not hard to imagine chaos spilling over in to both countries.

[1] http://blogs.piie.com/nk/?p=13422
Am I the only one alarmed by the general inability of websites to protect sensitive information? There isn't almost a day without a major service leaking passwords or personal details. If we don't get a LOT better at this there will be some major reaction sooner or later, either legislative or in term of public behaviour. Like the government establishing a system of licenses to have the right to handle personal data, or with regular costly audit. But we can't continue at the current pace.
As a South Korean, I find it hard to completely agree with the above statement. It is true that the desire for unification is not as strong as they were.. say.. 30 years ago. As you have pointed out, the younger generation in particular, have no experience of a unified korean peninsula and are not as eager for a unified Korea. But to say that Koreans "don't want" a unified Korea while the "the world wants them to unite" is a gross misrepresentation.

Just for the sake of correctness, a quick google search will reveal that a significant proportion (often majority) of the Korean population still feel that reunification should take place (as an example, according to Asan Institute this figure was at 63.5% as of April 2014). I hasten to add however that the younger generations (those that are below 40) are significantly less eager. Another thing to realise is that majority of Koreans do NOT consider North Koreans as an enemy. In fact (quoting again from the figures released by Asan Institute), 77.6% of the Korean population had either positive (43.8%) or neutral (23.8%) stance towards North Korea.

The road to Korean unification is a difficult one for sure. I cannot disagree with the comment that some of the issues regarding Korean unification lie with the South Korean attitude towards North Korea. But, as many have mentioned, there are other powers at work here too. Chinese and US interests (as well as that of Russia and Japan to a lesser extent) are major stumbling blocks that neither South Korean nor the North Korean governments can ignore.

Being a South Korean, it is my single greatest dream to see a unified Korea. It is painful to see that there are those from my own country that do not feel the same way. It is even more painful to see how powerless we are to shape our own country's destiny. Throughout history, Korea (unified or not) has often been used as a political pawn by its stronger neighbours. I hope, and pray, that things turn out somewhat differently and that both Koreas can unify peacefully to end this status quo.
"why is Perl so fast?"

Is not. We tested our own code in Perl for doing some text processing in our company.

The result was 89 times slower than our c code, which is not so slow compared with other options, but is slow.

We use a lot of c++ and python, but always for managing encapsulated low level code.

With anything that has to compute intensely, like audio, video or 3d work, the differences are way over 3000 times slower. That is: the computer working for a second or for an hour.

Java is not fast, it has never been. It is not its "forte". You could decide to use java or any high level languages based on its merits, but being fast is not one of them.

It is a good idea to learn assembly and disassembly with the debugger before using high level languages. It gives you the knowledge of what computers are really doing under the hood.
> I can audit it if I want to. Closed Source strips me of that option.

Closed source does not strip you of the ability to audit.

In the case of BitTorrent Sync you can use Wireshark to inspect the network traffic yourself. BitTorrent even goes so far as to purposefully use plaintext for the usage statistics it reports back so that someone could cross-verify with Wireshark.
Besides Wireshark there's all sorts of tools for instrumenting, debugging, or decompiling Sync that would also fall within the realm of auditing.

As other commenters have noted, it is not exactly trivial to verify that a binary for some open source software was produced by the same open source code you audited. This leaves you with having to compile from source everything – which seems only an order of magnitude or so less annoying than Wireshark-ing or IDA-ing everything.

Perhaps a better approach to handling the security concerns of open vs. closed source software would be to take a more active approach to locking down what we run. Lets operate with the working assumption that whatever we run is hostile instead of having blind trust in open source.
Lets use firewalls, containerization, selinux, etc. to essentially configure whitelists for what we allow of the software we run.

For someone that doesn't trust BitTorrent Sync because it's not open source consider locking it down. Use a firewall to only allow connections to known peers, isolate it from other processes, and restrict filesystem access. Trade some usability for security.

The kinds of things y'all are concerned about with BitTorrent Sync are the same things we should be just as concerned about for what we just apt-get'd; closed source vs. open source doesn't make a lick of difference in that respect.
Jolla Tablet
> They readily treat their drivers like second-class citizens

Sure, but that is pretty much par for the course for any low-education job anywhere in the world. Can't blame Uber for being like the rest.
Yes, isn't it. But we shouldn't be too surprised. The universe appears to me to profoundly self similar.
I am super keen to make a hardware product (I know only software), and started watching this with great anticipation. It would have been great to hear the story about their journey from 1995-2001. Thats would have been hugely valuable in itself. I am stuck at : How do I take my hardware idea, and make it real? How do I make a prototype (it requires an e-ink display) to know if someone will actually like it/use it? Since there are a number of HW startups on this page, thought I will ask my question. Specifically, I want to make a photo frame with an color e-ink display.

Edit: in a sense the journey from 1995-2001 was covered in the startup school video (linked in another comment), but that was mostly about the "company". He didn't cover the "How-to" of specifically how they did prototyping, manufacturing and development in the early days. 'how to start' this stuff is what I am interesting in.
> For example, the ability for marketers to easily place their Facebook conversion/retargeting pixels on the Teespring site, meant that affiliates now had the visibility needed to profitably spend their own money promoting Teespring campaigns via paid acquisition channels (mainly Facebook ads).

Out of pure curiosity, can someone decode this into non-marketer speak for me? Not trying to be rude, I just genuinely have no clue what it means (I'm a developer who knows nothing about marketing).
This story has been on the front page for 24 hours.
Apple Watch Sales and Earnings Projections
> Category theory is probably the epitome of what I'm talking about. Isn't it somewhat disturbing that what we can ground so much mathematics in something that so closely resembles a structure in the human mind?

No. First of all, it resembles a structure human minds can hold, not most structures human minds invent. It took work to get to category theory, thousands of years of it. Also, if the human mind didn't contain some small kernel of ability to accurately generalize from the real world, it wouldn't function as a living creature's mind, so we can trust, in the sense of a proof of existence, that evolution built us to reason correctly sometimes.
Please don't enforce it. The moment you have a "sufficiently large wordset" in English you'd already added a whole lot of words that are hard to spell not only for non-native speakers.

Why not try to generate semi random pronounceable passwords? There's a clear decrease in entropy but brute force cracking against all pronounceable strings less than 20 chars will still be hard. (Of course your definition of pronounceability might differ.)
Looking at a recently created map by cloudflare (http://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-universal-ssl/ http://cloudflare.github.io/sni-visualization/) it looks that a large portion of that seems to come from china.

A quick glance over EU countries reveals that more than 91% of potential users support SNI.

It might depend on your line of business but I think for some entities this might be a viable option
Do you run multi-region or maybe multi-provider setups? How do you migrate your instances from failed regions to healthy ones? How do you route users to the healthy regions? DNS? Do you think anycast could be an alternative?
Photographer Aram Pan Presents a Different Angle to North Korea
they are still well behind US pretty much anywhere where it matters. For example Russia still can't produce 5th generation fighter (PAK-FA isn't a 5th gen fighter, it has only body of it so far) - 20+ years after F-22 - so Russia couldn't be of help here even if they wanted, and thus China was forced to steal F-35 plans for their J-20. Beside the space which is still running on half-century old tech, and a few military pieces like new ICBM and some missiles, there is nothing else worth of tech transfer.
While the phrase "nothing is implicit" was used, there actually are so-called "implicit inputs" in Guix. :-P Each package uses a certain "build system" which can be e.g. "gnu" which has e.g. autotools and bash as "implicit inputs" so every package using that build system gets those dependencies.
It seems like a blast to me. But I'm inclined to think that a blast should have lasted longer. As far as I know, a meteor should bring white light over the sky, not yellow/orange.
I dislike being forced to change password without notice, I need some time to come up with a secure, typeable one. Change on next login just results in me reusing an old password or adding a "2" to the current one.
The author just chose to look at the externalities - few passengers choose an airport because of the number of runways. They make their selection based on various criteria, many of which the author captured in this article. The number of runways is just one of the factors that percolate upwards and result in a score for price, connectivity, local transport etc.
So did anyone receive a call "The cloud is down"? Or at least an e-mail?
> The rest of you live in a vacuum fortified by paychecks and social support.

It's all of us really. The enormous amount of money pumped into tech by the surveillance state reaches nearly every software company (and beyond). Your examples for worthwhile projects are Tor, freenet, and crypto. The surveillance state finds those projects useful too.

This problem is larger than what you're considering and blaming particular industries and spaces understates the amount of cash pumped into the world by governments.

And just because corn farmers have a subsidized crop that drives the processed food industry which give us cancer/diabetes doesn't mean those farmers shouldn't follow best practices unless we want another dust bowl. Likewise, I think it's great that UI programmers are more aware of security.

Also, we're not literally paying for the surveillance state. They're essentially stealing from the people by arbitrarily printing money which devalues our own. If taxes were raised commensurate with spending and debt, we'd certainly be making some more prudent decisions about how best to spend tax dollars.
I like this workflow diagram, by Scott Moehring, of the Getting Things Done framework:

http://gettingthingsdone.com/pdfs/gtd_workflow_advanced.pdf
Interesting. This seems to be more or less a C++ equivalent of DynASM (http://luajit.org/dynasm.html). Like DynASM, it lets you generate machine code at runtime. The library handles instruction encoding and linking of jump targets.

Like DynASM, it exposes the underlying architecture/instructions directly. It does not have an architecture-agnostic IR like LLVM.

It does do a little more than DynASM though. It provides (as an option) a higher-level interface that abstracts away ABI calling conventions and physical registers. It has a register allocator that assigns virtual registers to physical ones. It must also then be able to spill registers to the stack when necessary? It is interesting; I have not come across any assemblers that take this particular approach (native CPU instructions with virtual registers).

One thing that confused me about the title: the project exposes a C++ API, but it is not a JIT for compiling C++ programs themselves.
The KHTML developers?
Have you considered the possibility that I merely didn't completely understand everything you said? You mentioned ethics repeatedly in your post, so I thought your "critical difference" referred to ethics rather than merely the definition of journalism.

I thought the you said anonymity was the critical point making it unethical (given your reference to "journalistic ethics". Now it sounds like you merely meant that it doesn't fit some definition of journalism. Is that right?

So would a fair characterization of your beliefs would be that Michael's proposal would be ethical (much like the anonymous hypothetical woman I mentioned, or the real anonymous woman I linked to) but not journalism?

Or is it unethical for some reason that you didn't mention?
The problem with GTD, IMHO, is that it's the organizational equivalent of nuclear fusion. Yes, once it gets going it's self-sustaining and will provide you with clear benefits. But, in my experience, it takes a lot of work in the beginning to spin up GTD and keep it going until it gets to that self-sustaining state. I tried going with the GTD system for two weeks and it felt like I was constantly managing and updating all the various lists that it requires. I could never seem to get to the "promised land" where everything would stabilize and the system would become self-sustaining.

In the end, I just ended up reverting back to keeping a simple to-do list in a text file.
This can be used to justify any atrocity.
"According to alex, the "critical difference" is anonymity."

Again, what is with this twisting of people's words and misrepresenting what they said?

Just so you're clear, I wasn't differentiating ethical from unethical when I used the phrase "critical difference". I was distinguishing journalism from not journalism.

Big, big difference.
seems to work fine for me. 10.6