skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What a pleasure this interview was to read. And plain spoken, too.

Many here have complained that Derrida is hard to read, or worse, simply makes no sense. You may take a side in this, if you like. But I would encourage you to read some short piece of his instead. In so doing, and as the interview itself remarks on reading, you may make your own interpretation.

@mbrock has listed several items. To these, I add what my instructor for composition at Deep Springs (himself a student of Derrida) assigned us, "Declarations of Independence." It is but a nine page talk on the US Declaration of Independence. But within it, many of Derrida's persistent concerns on language and action come to light.

You can find it online, starting at page 5 in this PDF: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cole0384/academics/files/Derrida.PDF
Been working on a device with 128k of RAM and 256K flash (for program and file storage) this year. They ain't gone yet!
Because speaking the truth and being capable of changing it are different things?
> Google Docs downloads into your machine a JavaScript program which measures half a megabyte, in a compacted form that we could call Obfuscript because it has no comments and hardly any whitespace, and the method names are one letter long. The source code of a program is the preferred form for modifying it; the compacted code is not source code, and the real source code of this program is not available to the user.

I love Stallman and what he stands for, but this is a bit misleading. Shipping obfuscated source code is NOT the same thing as shipping some prepackaged binary. I can still dig through the Google Docs source and pull out anything I find valuable. No one is going to stop me. Furthermore, obfuscation of JavaScript is intended to reduce network load for Google. I mean, yes, obfuscation has a side-effect of "limiting interested parties," but to reiterate my point: it's not like Google is sending me PageRank as obfuscate C code each time I load their homepage.
"We promise SkyStrider 6 - no short rounds this time."
Thanks for the clarifications, I probably should have drawn clearer distinctions.
awesome thanks for the kind suggestions!
Can someone explain what the "evil" is this article seems to be talking about?
I agree with this, too. Personally, I would probably do the same. A day of breaking small part of site vs killing local file read seems like a good trade.
You say i wrote this to get the easy answer but I got yours which is a big help and really put things in perspective. I think if I just stopped reading reddit I'd be fine.

Thanks so much.
I agree with your skepticism of the idea that that dynamically typed languages are more expressive. It is not as if we are writing poetry here; we are actually trying to specify, with great accuracy, a virtual machine. Fortunately, we can state for sure that there is no fundamental difference between the capabilities of Turing-equivalence languages; if this were not the case, the arguments over expressiveness would be interminable.
DL4J Deep Learning for Java
AV Company
What criterion do you use for choosing an AV company or production company?
That might be true for someone who didn't speak much English and was very familiar with the Allied invasion of Normandy.
What do you consider wrong? It should be wrong to glorify killing people. This is what the article does, doesn't it? It's basically an enumeration of things that make this war plane awesome, written in a North Korea propaganda style. Come on, it even ends with a threat...
But the software is still proprietary. It's not just about the software doing nefarious things, but about giving the user freedom to modify and share the software.

JavaScript code is more of a trap because it runs without the user having to do anything! Just by visiting a website, an application is transparently downloaded and run on your computer. Most people don't even think of what is going on when they visit a web page in a modern web browser. System software needs to be explicitly installed by the user.

Try disabling JavaScript or using the Mozilla browser extension LibreJS and notice how much of the web breaks. That's the state of free software on the web. It's terrible.
This is excellent. I also recommend the Dante Project, hosted by Princeton University: http://etcweb.princeton.edu/dante/index.html
And as always, the main discussion has to digress to overstate how everybody in Nigeria is a Scammer, akin to say everybody in the United State is either a black thug or a white killing cop.
True, but that is a good argument on why they should also stay out of Cleveland and Detroit. Some places just aren't safe, or less safe, and no matter how careful you are you'll have a > 0% incidence rate, even barring all those who have previously been convicted of a crime (because there are always scummy people who haven't been caught yet). Uber, or whoever else enters a developing country, can definitely do things to make things "safer" than the local standard, and I'm all for that.
the real argument should be tax-free growth.

With dividends, you pay the tax immediately/that year.

With capital gains, you don't pay until you sell.

If one looks long-term enough, you could also sell when you are in a lower income tax bracket or the government has lowered capital gains for random political reasons.
This title "DIY Card Reader" is very misleading. The article is about making a punch card reader, not e.g. a smart card reader.
I was under the assumption people who did that had a special plug-in that would automatically do that. I picked the habit and do it by hand though.
There is a paper coming out soon from a Stanford researcher who has evaluated the success of Startup Chile. I don't know the details, but from what I heard the results have been very positive.
You are correct that they are usually taxed like capital gains (up to 23.8% currently), but stock buybacks allow deferment of these taxes, which is usually better. If you hold the stock until you die and don't reach estate tax levels, then the stock gets passed on essentially tax free, making stock buyback even better.
It's not about what the software can do to you, but about what you can do to the software (or, in this case, can't).
Get your website online today
>Shipping obfuscated source code is NOT the same thing as shipping some prepackaged binary.

Yes, it is. Obfuscated source code, like a binary, is not the corresponding source code.

"The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities."

See: https://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
> Decisions can be made given a better understanding.

This might be the root of the problem. You have to accept that most of the time you need to make decisions with your _current_ understanding.

There are some situations where you will need to seek information in order to make a better decision. (Trust yourself, you will know the difference instinctively.)

In those cases gather only the information you need to do a good enough job.

Decide what is important to you and ignore the rest.

Also focus on people and friendhsips, sports even. The human mind isn't meant to work without involving the body at the same time.

(I dare you to check your iphone or think about your reading list while trying to surf a wave for example :-) )
Richard Stallman had a frustrating experience thirty years ago when he couldn't debug a software issue for lack of access to the source code. Since then he has used "evil" to mean anything that impedes programmers' ability to read source code with the original debugging symbols, regardless of whether those programmers are working on evil products.
This works, too. You can use a separate page that maps a minified JavaScript file to a license and the corresponding source code.
Yeah, Wiktionary calls the English loanword (without umlaut) /ˈuːbər/ and the German /ˈyːbɐ/. I think it's been a fairly ironic productive prefix in some people's informal English for a while, often hyphenated, like "uber-cool", "uber-interesting", ?"uber-dangerous". (Latin "super" is cognate with German über as well as Greek "ὑπέρ" (hyper)!)
Did you report it to Facebook, rather than sell it on the market? Yes? Then it was enough, by definition.

Honestly, resume uploads are unlikely to be worth much. The resume analysis software either. What information there is worth anything to an unreputable buyer?
Yeah, these two are the easiest to read of those I've found..
Heh, a lot of it is a generational thing. Back in the 90's, many if not most programmers would have passionately agreed with every word of this. Today, for younger programmers who take open-source for granted... it just seems like the incoherent ramblings of that old uncle who rants about Obama at every family gathering.

At any rate, where this is coming from would make a lot more sense if you'd come up in the 80's and 90's, and remembered what it was like before open-source gained a serious foothold.
The first modern celebrity was probably Lord Byron, decades earlier than Oscar Wilde.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Byron
Ill conceived association of Oscar Wilde's fame with Kim Kardashian's and others to promote a book.
The existence and use of non-Free software, the singular "evil" that the FSF exists to combat.
There's no way to rotate a clockwise screw that makes it a counter-clockwise screw. Try it.
Stallman's critiques of proprietary software are much more well-reasoned than "once I had trouble debugging an issue in a closed-source software project".
1 "We're sorry, Uber the car company does not take calls. Please email us or give up in frustration."
What's the rationale for creating Symbols?
So the first link is an exploration in learning how to extract more money from "women with families" using targeted offers, just by dropping an Excel spreadsheet onto a website.

Excellent work IBM.
Binky Rehab- Getting Your Baby Off the Pacifier
It's natural to think once you finish school you'll settle into a job doing what you learned in school, however, that's not always how it works. Sometimes you have to dabble a little, experience other things and then decide. For some, it's different. I have family members who graduated MIT and immediately went to work for a high profile tech company in his field of study. Me...took me quite a while to land my niche job. There's nothing wrong with what you're experiencing. Enjoy the experience!
I haven't seen the commit in question, but it seems like there's a balancing act here between gender neutrality and avoiding awkward phrasing. It's just an unfortunate fact of English that being gender neutral all the time leads to awkward prose. Sometimes readability wins.
[citation needed]

I have a hard time seeing that. Serious nasty hacks to retrofit new avionics systems into improbably obtuse spaces is par for the course. My wrists are totally destroyed from years of screwing and unscrewing retrofitted black boxes with a screwdriver at weird angles.

I don't know anything about the A-10 airframe, but I kinda suspect its an airframe structural issue. Your theory isn't impossible or unlikely, but got any documentation?
Sigh. I really wish that HN supported "+1 funny" moderation. :)
Theresa McCracken

http://www.cartoonstock.com/cartoonview.asp?catref=tmcn2784
Disable dangerous rake tasks in production
It's true for some. I would never ever buy or recommend a product with no listed price. It's a psychological thing - you always think they charge you more than others. For example, with Akamai, at two very large of their customers, one was getting charged $300/hour and the other - $600/hour.
Browsers don't implement CoffeeScript, TypeScript, etc either, but that hasn't hindered those projects.
The problem is: A lot of the 'native' libraries and even the open-source embedded RT OSs really suck.

And if you use a vendor's library you are very locked in: Let's say you use a TI chip for your prototype but then someone who knows stuff about designing hardware tells you that now it has to run on an Atmel processor because $profits... you will have to reimplement a lot of your stuff which costs (quite a huge amount) of time and might even require an entire rewrite..
Sadly, the desire to understand the 'real truth' requires significant time spent taking in data. Anyone who can promise meaning from a single point of view is lying.

Notes rock. I agree with 1, 2, 3, and 4.

I like tasks and reminders in any of a variety of systems. I send myself a lot of emails to process later.
Interactive map of rivers in the US styled by real-time rainfall
Very good point, I was unaware these were still in effect (haven't been a US tax payer in several years).
Absolutely not! Just because it doesn't jive with GPL doesn't mean JS obfuscation is no longer source. It's not like compiling a C program without debugger symbols. It's the same high-level JS language, it's just "harder to read." The point of saying it's "not source code" is just wrong.
I used emacs for about 10 years. I got to be pretty ok with it. On a lark I decided to try vim for a few weeks and see what it was like. About 2 weeks in I was already more productive in vim. I've never even considered switching back. I don't hate emacs, but emacs isn't for everyone. But vim isn't for everyone either. Use what you like.
I'd rather use a proprietary software running within an open sandbox I know and trust which asks me permissions for anything it does, rather than an open source software which can do whatever it wants anytime it wants.
Oh, much worse than I thought. How can they justify this price tag? Anyway, Nginx + LuaJIT (custom-build, Tengine, or OpenResty) beats both plain Nginx caching and Varnish. I was considering using Varnish in front of Nginx with PageSpeed, but given the direction they are taking, I'm sticking with Nginx although it's taking a similar dangerous direction recently.
Given that democracy is at its heart mob rule, in countries without a liberal democratic tradition the losers of elections tend to also lose their lives and privileges; it'd be insane to ever step down as president in many of these Third World states.

Rather than embracing democracy fetishism, what if we embraced liberty instead? Let the strongmen declare themselves Kings or Presidents-for-Life or whatever, but encourage them to actually foster liberty for their subjects, rather than trying to run an entire nation from a single desk.

Just a thought.
Practicality is not something Stallman cares about.
> Heh, a lot of it is a generational thing. Back in the 90's, many if not most programmers would have passionately agreed with every word of this. Today, for younger programmers who take open-source for granted... it just seems like the incoherent ramblings of that old uncle who rants about Obama at every family gathering.

I think that drastically overstates the support programmers as a class have ever had for the Stallman/FSF view that tools to combat the use of non-Free software are a moral imperative, though I do think that that extremist position of actively combating non-Free software did seem, if not a moral imperative, at least to be important instrumentally to the promotion of Free/open source software before the pragmatic case for open source was broadly accepted by much of the industry.
You could possibly offer referrals to other Bitcoin sites and charge a fee. Some sites offer Bitcoin wallets, others can predict the market market. I know of one Bitcoin site which has a 90% accuracy on prediction.

I'd say, safety of Bitcoin will become a big thing later on with quantum computing on the rise.

Checkout Meetup.com in you local area. I live in Seoul, it has regular meet ups about Bitcoin. If you attend this, you should be able to get some ideas.

Best of luck! I think I saw your post on Quora.
SJ issues aside, this is also a better comment because it doesn't start with something that makes me immediately think "This is of no value; How did it get past my spam filter?"
HN permits up-voting using straight HTML. It's annoying, because it reloads the entire page, but it does work.
I've noticed a lot of, relatively minor, inconsistencies since switching to flex-box. It definitely takes a while to adjust to them and iron them all out. At this point, now that it's working, I've mostly forgotten what the quirks were.

But I agree with the author, there was a lot of trial and error moments to get the layouts we wanted working across browsers, and even then there were some unexplainable quirks that we just couldn't figure out and had to back away from and take different approaches.

IE, as usual, seemed to have the biggest issues. I recall that one issue was it didn't behave consistently if you left out the flex-basis value. So instead of `flex: 1`, you would find that fully specifying `flex: 1 1 auto` would behave more consistently in certain situations.
> Absolutely not! Just because it doesn't jive with GPL doesn't mean JS obfuscation is no longer source.

It's not the source code, because its not the first code produced before any automated transformation. Its an intermediate form that happens to still remain text, and remain legal code in the same language as the source code.
I think you should read the article before commenting.
It was a single comment thread that was already highly downvoted/flagged by the time you commented.
I believe his commitment is to free software, not open source :)
My issue with answers of this sort is that they seem circular. If the concern is about the cult of shareholder value, answering with the dogma of shareholder value doesn't enlighten.

I get that economic theory can be a useful way to look at actual productive relations in the world. But it's just a theoretical model. If we find that following the theory leads us to behaviors that destroy the things economics was created to describe, we should stop to ask ourselves whether we could use a better theory.
For the record, I don't think you succeeded in not insulting anyone.
> Shipping obfuscated source code is NOT the same thing as shipping some prepackaged binary. I can still dig through the Google Docs source and pull out anything I find valuable.

If thats the case then you can make the case that any software is open source. After all you can run your favorite program through a debugger and get all the machine calls. And someone can dig through them and convert it to C. From a human pov, minification isn't all that different from compilation.
you could always use something like the mbed or arduino , and have the ability to change chips ,but if you want to access the full capabilities of chips ,you'll cant have portability ,because you lose something when abstracting.
You can use a disassembler to get source code out of your binary. If I distribute my binaries with corresponding assembly source (which I obtained from a disassembler), am I distributing my source code?
Some of the ARM MCU's are frankly amazing though. Aside from development complexity and tool licensing, they seem to sacrifice very little. Low power, low price, high performance, many features.

Atmel really isn't helping on that front with their pricing. A few years ago I discovered I could buy a Cortex M3 that ran 10x faster, had 10x the storage and twice the features/IO, and 32-bit, for 75% the cost of Atmel's offerings.
I am just trying to understand the difference. But why not consider Javascript extension of server side code. I don't think, anybody is stopping use of websites just because their back-end is not open source.

Is it because we own our desktop and we don't allow non-free code to execute on our machines? If not then it is just issue of proximity, your laptop vs distant data center. If it is more philosophical point that we should not use non-free software then using website running on closed source back-end is as much a problem as obfuscated Javascript.
1. Give up news. Not necessarily Hacker News, although it's an idea, but mainstream newspaper, television, radio etc. news. It's remarkably easy to cut out completely in one fell swoop and can make an enormous difference to your mental real estate. You won't miss it, you won't miss out (the big stuff will find its way to you regardless) and it can actually be an entertaining challenge to be religious about avoiding it in its ambient forms.

2. Beware the rabbit hole. Whenever considering following a tangential link or taking time out from work for some infotainment diversion, fully consider that it carries a risk, which you cannot necessarily assess or control, that it will end up taking you a long way down. Take that first step by all means but in full consideration of the expected (statistically speaking) cost of doing so.

3. Rename your "to read" list "sounded interesting". Come back to it if something on it ever bubbles up from your subconscious as being relevant to the task at hand. Maybe.

4. Meditate, walk, write. These three activities above all others seem most widely recommended as reaping huge rewards in this arena, with a daily dose of around 30 minutes being a typical prescription for each. This is not from any long term personal experience unfortunately, but there's a near certainty at the back of my mind that a regime of these three each day would be transformative for me. A couple of observations on these I can draw from personal experience; the first two activities can be combined; and on the writing, pen and paper is to be recommended, and committing to throw it out at the end of the session is a marvelous cure for writers block.
I would think what you call liberal democratic tradition is because most democracies are established as functioning republics.
Of all the things in the world to be concerned about, running non-GPL'd JavaScript in my browser is far enough down my list that writing this comment bumps me well over my lifetime quota for the issue.
zip archive isn't enough to find source code googling, or to view a source file in the browser to see how the code works or to copy-and-paste from it, or to use github's search feature to search the whole repo in my browser, or (if hosted on github) to press one button to fork the repo into my own github account as a convenient way of modifying it.

Those are all things i am likely to want to do with code published open source but as unsupported 'abandonware', use it as an example to look at and copy and paste from, instead of just using the product as is as without looking at the source.

In fact, the one thing I'd be less likely to want to do with abandonware -- actually install and use it, instead of just consulting it as an example -- is the one thing you haven't actually made that much more difficult by publishing only as an archive.
It's cool to hear that a Mission helped someone in a real tangible way.

But, as a counterpoint to the "beneficial" Mormon story, I would like suggest that my early experience in the organization was not very good (I left as soon as I was old enough to legally do so. I would have left at 13 had parents permitted.).

I am firmly convinced these types of organizations often induce strange mental problems of their own which are often far worse than the sins they are trying to cure.

Not to slam anyone's beliefs, just a counterpoint to "hey, this helped me!". It didn't help me, and it has very much unhelped a lot of people I have known. And I guess I really question whether this type of thing helps humanity as a whole.
For Stallman and the FSF, it's not (just) about the practical dangers of unknown software running about your machine; it's about the moral right to modify and reuse that software.
Stallman's commitment to..."open source"? Sir you better hide fast. He is coming for you!

On a serious note Stallman continuously points out that he does not support the open source movement and that free/libre software and open source software are two different concepts.
> It's not like compiling a C program without debugger symbols.

It definitely can be exactly isomorphic to just that via emscripten.