skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I had the 1000 TX as a kid. It had a 286 chip, but was still an XT-class system. The one I had originally had a hard drive (hardcard format, of course) and color monitor, but both of those parts failed after a while. By the time I got it to hack around on, it had an amber monochrome monitor harvested from an older computer (a Sanyo of some sort that I barely remember), and was floppy only. Since the computer was already a hand-me-down with mismatched parts, I was free to mess with it as I pleased. In addition to trying various hardware combinations, I also learned to program on that machine using ZBASIC.

The one I recently bought on eBay is also a TX. It came complete with a 20 MB hardcard, Smartwatch clock chip, color monitor, under-monitor power station, dot matrix printer, print buffer, joysticks, and original software and manuals. Everything works perfectly (well, I haven't tried the printer yet).

Edit: Here's a picture of my "new" system running Monkey Island: http://imgur.com/zlWs3hK
If the value of Aereo's service was the technology, then couldn't they have stayed in business by paying licensing fees on the content? Ultimately, that's what the legal disagreement was over--the fees, not the technology.
Why I Don't Use CoffeeScript (2011)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
To my recollection, every new tab was added to a list after the last tab in the window.
Too bad they aren't TTF. I've noticed only some Android phones can manage to render OTF. I've had trouble with meteocons being reliable specifically, which I see used here.
Exactly.

That entire model is outdated anyway. Everything is converging on the internet: voice calls (WiFi calling, Skype, etc), IM (WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger), video (YouTube, Netflix, Hulu), radio (Shoutcast, podcasts, etc), books (Kindle, Apple, Nook), etc.

And people want Netflix to step backwards into a "you'll get the content we give you" mode that everyone hated? Having TV schedules is a deficit of traditional broadcasting, not a perk, as even if you like being spoon-fed programming that could trivially be re-created via on-demand (e.g. smart-queues, your playlist(s), curated playlists (e.g. your favourite celebrity's choices), etc).

Plus the infrastructure waste (duplication?) and all for what gain? It would be more useful to take all that money and invest in making the Netflix apps on smart TVs able to stream continuously like a TV "channel." Then do what Google Play Music has gone and add curated "channels" of content (although it is music in this example, not video).
My, don't you think you're special, going straight to Swordmaster-level insults. :-)

Better to start with, "I won't take your insolence sitting down!"
It was/is because LCDs have fixed resolutions.
High DPI displays was a niche, with CRTs you could satisfy that niche without sacrificing the mainstream audience since you didn't have to force people to run any specific resolution.

The reason for why high DPI was a niche was because of one thing, and one thing only: software. You had to have good eyesight and seek a large screen real estate to even be able to make use of it.

Software didn't scale well. We had small laptop screens with 1920x1200 in the early 2000s. It barely cost more than lower resolution displays (back then you typically had three different resolutions to choose from for every laptop (then came apple)). It was real apparent even back then that high-DPI wasn't costly at all, it just wasn't mainstream enough for anyone to care.

Fast forward a decade and we have the exact same problem. Software can't scale shit. The only reason apple was first with high-dpi was because they controlled the software, and they took the easy way out. They just scaled everything up 4 times and look at that, exactly the same screen real estate with just higher DPI. Same thing with iPhone 4 - the only reason they increased the resolution so much was so that they wouldn't have to bother with scaling ("retina" was just an added bonus). Remember that niche that sought large screen real estate and that bought high-resolution CRTs in the 90's? Well, they are still waiting for a decent LCD...

As for HDMI, no, firstly HDMI was never intended for computers at all. But the hype in combination with small laptops forced it upon us anyway. But HDMI came much later anyway, the battle for high-resolution/high-DPI displays was already lost (because of software). The real technical hurdle was the OSD and scaling chips. Again, the reason for why apple was first with the 30" 2560x1600 display was because they were the first ones that could ditch both the OSD and all scaling from the monitor. It only had brightness adjustments (no OSD) and all of the scaling was done on the graphic card, that way you couldn't pair it with a regular PC - if you did you would have to use another monitor to be able to enter BIOS, install the OS, enter safe-mode, or game on any other resolution (which you pretty much had to). Of course, eventually most graphic cards could do so but apple were the first to be able to assume that the monitor would be paired with such a graphic card.

That and the fact that Dual-Link-DVI was quite rare (hardly surprising since there were no monitors on the market that used it).

Oh and people, I hope you (not parent, but lots of others) didn't run 1280x1024 on your 4:3 CRTs. The only 5:4 monitors that existed were 17" and 19" LCDs. You should have used 1600x1200 or 1280x900, that is, if you didn't want to stretch everything.
We are actually hoping to have packages shipping from the official OS repositories, so you won't even have to get the package from us. (If anyone wants to help with this aspect, please get in touch.)
Likewise. I've done some heavy modification ontop of django-mptt to support limiting tree depth when querying, calculating total children, querying siblings, etc...

https://gist.github.com/jhgg/32a379e34c8a56303295
I really like this and I am excited by the sponsor list. The self-signed cert notification in browsers is becoming more obnoxious every year.
Does this kill the business model for normal CAs, or is there something worth going to another CA for?

Also, how trivial/hard will it be for a state agent to generate its own certificate-signing traffic and use the Let's Encrypt CA to sign arbitrary domains of their choosing?
Eh, that depends on if the value is the software, or in the delivered service. Can go either way. I am very confident that , e.g., some Company I once dealt with could open source nearly everything with AGPL3 or other far-out license, and it would make piss-all difference to their bottom line, because they sell satisfaction of customer desire, and getting to that place is a very hard road in their business.

Not all companies have that model though.
App offers travel recommendations based on time of the year
I'll recommend using dnsmasq plus some local resolver configuration to set up your own host-local magic domain, eliminating the need for reliance on a third-party magic domain.

Pow[1] by the Basecamp folks provides a nicely packaged version of dnsmasq tooling for Rack & Rails apps. See also, the guard-pow and powder gems which make using Pow even nicer.

For other cases (and the DIYers among us) Thomas Sutton wrote up instructions for setting up dnsmasq[2] on OS X for app development. IIRC, the dnsmasq setup should be identical on other *nix flavors. Your local resolver configuration may vary, but this guide will get you pointed the right direction. I highly recommend reading [2] even just as a guide to understand/demystify what Pow does under the hood.

The dnsmasq setup can also be used for tools like Dokku[3], a Heroku-style service you can run in (e.g.) a local VM.

[1] http://pow.cx/

[2] http://passingcuriosity.com/2013/dnsmasq-dev-osx/

[3] https://github.com/progrium/dokku
It's not completely wrong, the article is not talking about a compacted spacial dimension, it's talking about a large, unfolded fourth spacial dimension.
Uh, news stories are based on accounts. Are you saying every news story should start "I wasn't there, but a reliable source told me'?

Because that would get tiresome very quickly.
Right. The Internet needs a few "tough nuts" like that. BGP and DNS servers are good places to start because they're 1) in wide use, 2) important, 3) usually standalone, 4) not too big, and 5) attack vectors.

Next up should be a Kerberos server, which is a central security controller for high security networks. A major vulnerability in Microsoft's Kerberos server was announced three days ago:

(https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/current-activity/2014/11/18/Mic...)

"The Microsoft Windows Kerberos KDC fails to properly check for valid signatures in the Privilege Attribute Certificate (PAC) included with the Kerberos ticket request. A domain user may forge the information contained in the PAC to request higher user privileges than should be allowed. Since the KDC does not verify the signature correctly, it will award the user the requested privileges, effectively making the user a domain administrator and allowing complete compromise of the entire domain."

Yes, there's an exploit. Applying the patch isn't enough, either.

"The only way a domain compromise can be remediated with a high level of certainty is a complete rebuild of the domain. An attacker with administrative privilege on a domain controller can make a nearly unbounded number of changes to the system that can allow the attacker to persist their access long after the update has been installed."
I think its a cool idea, I am just thinking about how to prevent from getting taken advantage of. Couldn't the project owner up his earning package as the business gets successful which in turn decreases profit that would be paid out?

(Thanks for the 689 coins just now!)
I've had the same experience.

I think that's why B2B is so popular: people are willing to spend money to increase their corporation's value, when spending more than a latte's worth on personal software often is agonizing.
How about just leaving the leaves on the ground, because everyone hates leaf blowers, and blowing them around is pretty pointless due to this thing called wind. Never understood why apartment complexes don't just use bagging lawn mowers to basically cut their work in half and piss people off less.
https://github.com/ozten/TLD.js/issues/8
Yikes, this post made me realize how I've never seen a chord graph that I liked or coherently communicated data. Is there anything they're actually useful for?
There won't be any sort of requirement to allow our tools to run automatically. But the existing track record of expiring certs suggest that some people are having trouble remembering to do the renewals manually, so it may be useful to have a tool that does it automatically for people who want that.
Thanks for that information.

I am using Arch at the moment but I spent the last 45 minutes trying to fix a network problem which involved fighting with journalctl to see what was actually happening.

Void linux looks like a great alternative.
Show HN: Gigster- Hire a contract developer in 5 minutes
That is correct. Let's look at the simplest form of sound mixing:

/* A */ sample = (sample_a >> 1) + (sample_b >> 1); //lowers volume of A and B by 50%
/* B */ sample = max(-32768, min(+32767, sample_a + sample_b)); //prone to clamping

Obviously, the algorithms will become fancier (to mix better, to support multiple bit depths and frequency rates, to avoid popping if one stream runs out of samples, etc), but it's still an incredibly basic and perfectly safe bit of code to run.

Playing this up as a bogeyman for not being in user-space is FUD, especially when video card drivers also run in kernel space, and are literally thousands upon thousands of times more complex and error-prone. And now the big push is to have kernel mode setting for video cards (even FreeBSD is doing this), which I believe to be a terrible direction to go in.

I have never in my entire life seen a system crash due to audio mixing, but I've personally experienced plenty of video card drivers causing kernel page faults.

If people were even remotely serious about the protection of kernel space (and I certainly wish they were), Minix would be more than a footnote in history. Neither Linux nor the BSDs make serious efforts at microkernel designs. Not even passive attempts to run non-critical device drivers under ring 1. Personally, I'm really rooting for Minix 3 and hope that it takes off more now that it's gained binary compatibility with NetBSD.
Show HN: SocioLotto v1.1 – Your chance to be heard by all
If you have any advice for improvements, please share. I'll add your username to the app's About page!
He obviously was aware of the licenses he was using, as he listed them in the post...
An excellent way of looking at it.

Hy is essentially a self-evaluating macro that spits out Python AST.

So you can use map, filter, and friends just as easily on Hy code as you can elements in a list or tuple.

In the end you get Python AST. We generate all of the boiler plate instead of writing it out.

You also do "have" macros in a very obtuse way in Python. You have eval, compile, and the ast module. You can write code, in Python, to modify or generate Python code. It's just tedious and cumbersome in a language where the code is not also data.
Hmm. Wouldn't the EU separating the search engine from the rest of Google be a death sentence for the rest of Google?
I'd point out to anyone bringing up Apex seals as a potential problem: You must not be familiar with using a conventional mini 2 stroke. Chainsaws, leaf blowers, etc require exceptional levels of maintenance and aren't exactly known to run well. Most of them are either running too rich or lean at any given point, and therefore are either building up carbon, or burning themselves out.

Not to say there aren't some good ones, but small 2 strokes that this engine aims to replace are not exactly paragons of reliability.

Also, most small 2 strokes have abysmal emissions due to running too rich/lean all the time, having badly made carburetors, poor tolerances, no catalytic convertors, low thermal mass, etc.

This looked relatively simple to assemble, and would therefore be pretty easy to disassembler. My guess is that if there were any seals that needed to be replaced, it would be a relatively trivial job compared to a standard small 2 stroke.

Source: have rebuild many chainsaws, weed whackers, and leaf blowers. Used to build go-karts.
I tend to agree. What about hard surfaces where leaves can cause slip hazard?
The development you're describing is the timeline of how this stuff trickled into inexpensive consumer hardware.

Expensive workstations already had big monitors and 1280x1024 resolutions in the 1980's.

Also, on a related tangent: prior to 1970, computers already ran with processor clocks over 30 Mhz, with 32 bit (or larger) words, and virtual memory. These things did not show up in the Intel 80368 and start to be supported in Windows 95. :)
It's around $50 a year for the domain, which is a cost I'm happy to eat as I'm using it myself.

But yes, if you're working on top secret projects or something that might leak sensitive data it's probably not a good idea to use this or any of these other services.
>I am not trying to say that the original story by Ben wasn't sensationalist, but it wasn't a fabricated lie either

Is it not a fabrication when you take something that was clearly a hypothetical statement and report it as if you overheard it at a strategy meeting? Both Ben and Sarah's stories represented that this wasn't a hypothetical, but rather a plan that would be carried out against Sarah and her children immediately.

IMO, that is a fabrication.
I have used this for a while and it works fine. I understand that it is not for every project, but you can set up quickly an app.

https://ngrok.com/
Touche.

I freed that one up.
> Ask any reputable startup attorney in Silicon Valley...

By "reputable startup attorney in Silicon Valley" I assume you mean a partner at any of the brand name full-service law firms that bill associates out at $400-500/hour for cookie-cutter work (like Delaware incorporation). My SO is a Biglaw attorney so I know how the game works.

You can easily find highly-experienced solo attorneys, many of whom have Biglaw backgrounds, or small firms run by experienced attorneys, who offer their services at hourly rates below the rate an inexperienced second year associate at a Palo Alto Biglaw firm is billed out at.

So I'll suggest a different question: ask any honest attorney whether it's net-efficient to retain a Biglaw firm before an individual has a real business.
Part of the purpose of my post was to paint a realistic picture of this process. I suspect much of what I ran into isn't an aberration. Creating a tarball and distributing it is a gross oversimplification of the process in many cases. And there's massive liability exposure in doing so.

So, the question then becomes how much more do I owe society? Am I obligated to spend 40 hours to clean up the code? Should I pay for a personal E&O policy on the off-chance I'm infringing on IP or unwittingly using someone's patented work? Should I continue running the corporation just to protect my personal interests?

And even if we managed to come to some agreement on all that, is it really the best way I could contribute to society? Would that 40 hours be better spent volunteering at a soup kitchen? Maybe spending the time programming for some non-profit that needs help?

The question seems simple at face value. The reasons for open sourcing dead software sound fantastic in an idealistic society. But the reality is far more complicated than the question suggests. And I don't think it's entirely fair to expect or demand this of people.
Many people draw a line between one time trust and continuous trust. If this thing can update the certs on my server whenever it likes, that's substantially more trust than permitting it to install a cert exactly once. If, for example, it has a bug that permits a malicious upstream to overwrite arbitrary files, the window of vulnerability expands from "the CA is pwned this instant" to "the CA will at any future time ever be pwned".
Yep, I was agreeing through the medium of sarcasm. The latest (11) version of Solaris is also XML-ifying all the things; it's starting (in terms of XML config manipulated from tools) to look a lot more like AIX than SunOS.
I'm thinking someone could spoof a DNS entry for the signing server and prove that they own any domain they want, is that prevented somehow?
Bit of a pony request, but square icons as well as round ones would also be a nice thing to have. I'll probably be using a couple of these on my new phone, though - thanks!
Do bagging lawn mowers collect leaves as well?
Lua is a language that is designed to be embedded, which is rare in this world, thus it lacks the arrogance that it has to do everything. This allows Lua to focus on specific things so it can excel in those areas like the scripting domain, and knows you can and should do the low level things in the host language (e.g. C).

Lua is small, lightweight, fast, and elegant. It is one of the few languages that tries to remove features instead of add them. It likes to give you mechanisms to build more powerful features (like metamethods), instead of making the language bigger and more complicated and redundant. These mechanisms feed back into the notion that it is a terrific language for embedding, to allow you to make a Domain Specific Language for your specific needs.

Because the language is so small and clean, it is also the reason it is fast. Then something brilliant like LuaJIT gets created, and can realize the dream of outperforming optimized C code.

Also because the language is small and clean, it is a much easier language to secure and use in secure environments. Wikipedia uses it now for their multimedia scripting engine because it was small, fast, and easy to audit for security. Lua is also sandboxed/secure by default. It was also easy to modify for their specific needs (like embedding in PHP). And Verisign uses it for their high reliability transaction servers because they had the bold idea of using a foundation that was auditable for reliability instead of spending lots of money to build redundancy expecting the platform to constantly crash.

Lua's original popularity was in embedded devices because it is so small, it is one of the few languages you can get on a embedded device. It is also written in 100% clean/ANSI C (no platform #ifdefs needed) so it ports everywhere there is a C compiler (which is everywhere).

Lua caught on in video game development in the late 90s and became the dominant game scripting language in the industry. It is a great language to embed and interoperate with the C/C++ engines. The high performance stuff would still be done in C/C++, but the higher level content could now be done by artists as Lua is one of the cleanest and simplest languages to learn. And on the performance front, another thought exercise told to me recently was that Lua is about 100KB; that means it can now fit entirely within a modern desktop CPU's L2 cache which is a huge performance advantage.

If you want a kitchen sink language that has every library included from the start, there are languages better suited for that than Lua. But if you have specific needs like being embedded in a native app, or small footprints (memory constrained, CPU limited), and specific libraries you want to bind, or want security and sandboxing, Lua shines above all in this domain.
I take your point, I just don't think it's as shitty as you I guess. Obviously one, integrated solution would work best. But with music you only have half a dozen companies to deal with and you just have to sell their stuff. With TV you have hundreds of channels, different production companies, several revenue models, and huge variations in rights across the globe. Look at how long Apple has been supposedly working on a TV and even they can't make it work.
> Why do the ownership shares of a project never seem to add up to the total bounties for that project?

Open bounties represent new ownership potential. Transparency is important here - it is one reason why ownership is on the blockchain, this allows it to be verifiable outside of Assembly.

> It seems like many users are creating bounties for projects that they work on and then fulfilling those same bounties.

All new ownership in a product is earned through the same mechanism. This makes progress transparent and participation fair.

> Most projects also have a single user with over 90% of the ownership of a project. While that mirrors how many OSS projects are structured, it doesn't really favor the "collaborative" message of Assembly. Are you doing anything to adjust that, or is it something that is fine in your minds?

Active products rarely have owners with anything close to 90%. Some products may be skewed to an individual that's done a lion share of work initially, but there are many others that are more spread out or become so with time. Opposed to completely working alone, having others to bounce ideas or make other contributions that complement your skills is what Assembly community members find collaborative.

> If an OSS project gains traction, it generally becomes a PaaS solution with 3-5 major providers and many smaller providers. How in the world can Assembly hope to promise people revenue with that model?

It's challenging to compare Assembly products to traditional open source projects & libraries. The Assembly community is building real products, they just happen to have source code that is open source and participation is open, transparent, and collaborative. To clarify, Assembly does not promise a product will earn revenue...only that if any profit is generated, it will be distributed to the contributors. Assembly is already distributing proceeds from revenue producing products, some members are earning over $1000 a month for previous contributions. This aligns Assembly's success with our community.
Handcrafted Fraud and Extortion: Manual Account Hijacking in the Wild [pdf]