skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I get aggravated at seeing these comments too, but I'm not surprised why they don't use the 'formalized' routes for sharing. Tagging someone in the comments is the path of least resistance, and people have acclimated to it—and at this point, it's hard to change because the incentive to change would be to keep a comments section clean, which people don't really care about.

I'd argue that, failing convincing people that it's annoying to do so or changing to the UI to lead people to the "share" function instead, the solution is to filter these kinds of comments out programmatically, showing them only to the sender and recipient(s).
I don't really understand the authors frustration. What's wrong with mentioning a friend in a comment or post so they'll see it?
As this comment's uncle pointed out, you can probably find a "fill in the blank" DMCA notice somewhere on the net.

If that doesn't work, many lawyers give free consultations (AFAIK), and there's probably someone willing to take the case in exchange for X% of the settlement.
I've seen passwords and other sensitive config data committed to public repos in GitHub. I wouldn't even be slightly surprised by people keeping sensitive IP or trade secrets there, on the assumption that if it's a private repo, it must be safe.
Punishments of hell
I can't think of an instance where I've been annoyed that a friend has mentioned me in a comment. I'd prefer that to explicit sharing via some other mechanism anyway if they want to involve me in the discussion.
Wtf was the "checking your browser" message?
Minky Comfort
I think the argument for using libraries is almost always one of solving for "adequate" performance, not best-case. If you want a library you can actually reuse, you're designing it so that it will work in many situations, and when it doesn't, the design should also support copy-pasting some of the code and reworking it to fit the application. Playing "guess the optimization" adds configuration bulk which can negate the ability of the library to actually specialize in this way.

There are specialties, of course, where the point of the library is to be a non-trivial, high-performance implementation. Those are designed towards a specific domain, though.
In my opinion, it buries the actual discussion on the post in question under a stream of name-mentions.

Imagine if people on HN didn't email an article link to someone, but just @mentioned their name as a comment. With a ranking system like HN's, established comments would rise, but there would still be a ton of crud making it harder to, say, see new comments.
Why not just let components subscribe to specific events?

In our framework, it's mostly event based, so if some data changes, events are fired and then things happen based on subscriptions. Just wondering what advantages are offered here over that setup.
Tangentially related: The SEC case against Aleksandr Milrud [0], who recruited overseas traders who used keyboards with hot-key macros (or specially designed gaming keyboards with extra keys with a similar effect, the complaint isn't clear about this) to effectively implement a spoofing/layering strategy.

Matt Levine thoughtfully compares[1] this to the practice of gold farmers in China vs. using bots.

0. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2015/comp-pr2015-4....

1. http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-01-13/spoofers-tr...
Wrangling Zookeeper
> I'm curious to know what the actual data structure is.

This tweet from Rich provides the missing puzzle pieces:

"The log is not a btree - used for durability, not query. Separate indexes combine memory with batch-updated storage."
https://twitter.com/richhickey/status/420910382538948608

Restating in my own words:

The transaction log is essentially just a stream of asserts and retracts with metadata. That's used for durability first and echoed to clients/peers and the indexing engine. The indexing engine asynchronously batch updates indexes (which probably are b-trees, but have no need to be streaming append-only style in this context). The peers query a joined dataset of the latest consistent indexes plus the set of unindexed transactions.

> As append-only B tree is persistent.

You're right, it can be. However, the popular append-only b-tree systems (such as CouchDB) are actually append-only B+-tree systems. That "+" means the leaves of the tree are intrusively linked together, and so are not persistent. You can not "fork" such trees cheaply.

> losing information is a specific feature that was added to git

http://blog.datomic.com/2013/05/excision.html
As mentioned elsewhere in the comments, this person has a keen interest in making people believe that spoofing should be legal. Trusting what this person is saying should be extremely hard through the taste of all that salt.
> The Windows 7-style Start Menu is modal too in the sense that you can't interact with the desktop at the same time you are interacting with the Start Menu.

Huh? If you define it that way then everything is modal because you can only ever interact with one window at a given time (one mouse, one keyboard, etc.)
Depends on what you define as "Order". "Most popular to least popular" is no less an order than "1...500"
I agree. I switch between using a bodum or my aeropress. The convenience and taste of an aeropress is hard to top.

http://www.aeropress.ca/
as markbao says this is the fastest way to share the link.

This is also the way to share things on Instagram, so if you're used to it, it feels normal to use it on Facebook as well.
What does "configured" entail that it takes you more than 45 minutes to get Windows up and running? The Windows 8 install is less than 15 minutes start to finish even from a USB dvd drive. Your options are: select the drive, put in a license key if you have it, pick a username and password. Windows 10 is faster still.

If you're talking about changing settings or installing apps after the fact, that can all be slipstreamed.

In Linux-land, you can do all of the above as well with kickstart/derivatives.
The random selection (group of monkey) works well during the periods of economic upheaval, when smallcap and microcap do well, and doesn't do as much during the economic downturn.

Random selection tends to bias towards smallcap/microcap, as the sheer quantity of those companies is higher.
Darwin might have a few thoughts about the long-term economic uniqueness of such companies in a world of "fast followers".
Cloudflare's way of blocking malicious clients.
It's worth watching the trailer for "Who Killed Captain Alex?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BymeLkZ7GqM

(By a weird coincidence, my coworker's cousin actually has a part in the movie.)
You've got it right. If this is enough of an issue for enough people to make it worthwhile, programmatically filtering out those comments from the general view should be straightforward, and a hell of a lot easier than convincing everyone to behave differently.
>He had to pay, on average, $7 and some change to buy the mugs back from people. By contrast, he had to sell the mug for about $3 and change to get them to buy when they did not already own it. Kahneman’s conclusion was that people put a higher price on loss than they do gain.

That's a weird conclusion. Let's say I value the mug at $5. Obviously I'm not going to sell it for $5, because the transaction itself is an effort, so I would lose! The opposite for buying, obviously I'm not going to buy a mug for $5 if I think it's worth exactly $5.

The price a rational person is willing to accept for a thing he owns must always be higher than what he values it at.

In a general case, probability of gain is obviously worth less than the same probability of loss, because you need bigger relative return to make up for the loss.
The point is that people are told that the risk of death is the same in both cases, and either way, they're deciding between the same chance of loss of life, or certain loss of money, but they respond differently depending on how it is phrased - whether they would be losing or gaining the money in exchange for taking (or not taking) the risk.

What I see as the inequivalence is that in the first case, they're gaining a cure either way (if it doesn't kill them). (Although it doesn't say what would be cured - I wonder whether most people assumed a terminal illness vs. some minor ailment?) But in the second scenario, they're not gaining anything but the money. So it becomes a 99.9% chance of curing something that you want to cure (possibly terminal) vs a 0.1% chance of dying for nothing but money when you weren't even sick.

I wonder if death isn't the biggest skew though. When pharmaceuticals are mentioned, I think of weight loss, impotence, and cosmetics industries. It would be interesting to see the outcome of replicating the experiment for each of those compared to actual industry profits of each. If a group of people pay more to try to be attractive than they do to delay death, would their experimental responses to risk match the observed facts of their actual behavior? Are most people acting irrationally (in the Economics sense)? And if so, what would that tell us about the risk studies?
Blackduck should offer an inline git-commit code scrubbing proxy.
Facebook should offer an option to hide comments with nothing but a @nametag in them.
Sounds like someone that is not getting at-ed
Physicists Made a Mobius Strip from Dualing Beams of Light
It is too obvious to have been overlooked (Windows Phone for example has this from very early).
Could it be to do with that somebody has it patented and Apple doesn't want to license that?
Quite often these kind of simple ideas are not implemented due to IP issues.
So weird. I've been reading Kurt Munger's reviews for years and now to see one of his articles on HN. Strange crossing of paths.
I personally believe that Jantelagen are a shield against the kind of corrupt sociopathy that's developing in the United States which is causing income inequality, awful social services, higher taxes (with no return), and persistent wars. It's been my secret belief that having these kinds of core values ingrained in your society will somewhat keep that kind of awful behavior from expressing itself. It's not just a Danish thing, but a Scandinavian thing (my experience having been with the Swedes). Jantelagen should be celebrated.
Pc game downloads
This doesn't really answer any missing piece. The contention is precisely what is used for query. Specifically, "how long before a write/assert is able to be queried?" Otherwise, it might as well not have happened. Right?

Going further, you want fast queries on recent data. At this point, structures that build updateable indexes as fast as possible are going to be preferred. And you are likely looking at some form of b-tree for this. (Not necessarily, true. But likely.)

Excision is neat, but not necessarily the same thing. In git, if I do a shallow copy, I do not know that it was shallow. It literally gives me wrong information on who authored parts of code at this point.

And again, the point there is that it is a pragmatic feature, not necessarily a technical/ideal one.
Scientists abandon highly publicized claim about cosmic find
There's a big difference between invention and innovation. Both are important, but we do less and less of the former. The idea of a mouse before PARC must have seemed a little crazy, whereas the idea of the iPhone before 2008 seems a little inevitable.

Alan Kay's recent talk "The Future Doesn't Have To Be Incremental" goes over this yin and yang of the two 'i' words of our industry with authority. Worth a watch.
The thing is, on Facebook if you post something it may or may not appear in a friend's stream. If you know of a specific person who would benefit from seeing something, at-ing that person makes sure that they see it. Maybe Facebook should add a new field to signal that someone would be interested or hide @mentions of other people in comments, but you can't really blame the user for this.
I think you can make an argument that spoofing should be legal (if for no other reason than for how hard it is to enforce). But if you are going to do that, you need to also require uniquely identifying information on the orders in the book as well. This way the market itself can accurately assign a value to the likelihood of being able to actually trade with a counterparty.

If an order comes from an entity with a reputation and history of yanking the order before anyone is able to trade with it, then the other participants in the market can accurately price based on that information.

But the current status quo of letting orders be anonymous and not punishing spoofing regularly provides a real moral hazard for traders that would otherwise prefer to actually trade the volumes they say they want to.
The bigger crime is that there's a perfectly good permalink for every FB post, but nobody seems to use it to reference content, when @-ing a friend is easier, quicker, and supported on every client.
You're obviously poking fun, but for anyone who hasn't looked into it, roasting beans is surprisingly easy. I use an air popcorn popper ($20 at your favorite supermarket) and buy green (unroasted) beans for ~$6/pound, or ~1/4 the cost of comparable roasted beans. And they're guaranteed fresh!
101 Things Done by Indian IT Professional (NRI) in USA
Free UX and UI Books
This seems like a great time to post the phenomenal Everything is a Remix [1]. Part one discusses movies, part two film, and part three discusses interfaces for computers, with special emphasis on Xerox PARC, Apple, and the Mac.

1. http://everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/
Despite agreeing it's annoying, I'm going to push back.

This is how innovation happens. Retweets, the "@name" sytanx and hashtags all came from people molding the existing system to fit their needs... and Twitter/FB eventually just built them in. This paradigm is proof to Twitter/FB that this needs to be built in. Twitter has recently added the ability to DM tweets; I bet FB is doing something similar.
I don't use FB, but I do use twitter (and slack plays into this also as I use it with friends) but you (the subscriber) always control the channel and the attention you give it. Kill your inbound channel, once that's done people will give up using it as a communication mechanism to get an idea to you.
We have more pressing issues to address, like people using hashtags out loud, in real life. Let's tackle that one first.
I can't speak for myself, but I've done quite a few one-off MVPs for people who stopped being entrepreneurs.

The most common reason is that they weren't willing to sacrifice the time/money involved in starting up, and then they quit. They typically had high-paying corporate jobs and weren't willing to give up the income.

A lot of people have an "if you build it, they will come" attitude about any good idea, not just the ones that people are truly clamoring for.
Dshell was released on December 17th; last month. Press release from the US Army on Jan 28th (3 days ago...) would be a better, more official source than this blog.

http://www.army.mil/article/141734/Army_cyber_defenders_open...

The guy looks, imho, a bit like Tony Stark. That's pretty cool, the money quote is this one: "If soldiers eat it, wear it, touch it, fly it, ride it or ship it, we make it." Makers. Gotta love 'em. Funny timing, December 17th is 4 days after my patent pending in cryptography. Then, the press release was same day I offered a small amount for my company, publicly.

Media's taken a few days to catch up, or a few weeks, depending on your POV.
having an all male crew do not make it impervious to romantic interest.
I'm not even old (22), but hearing people say hashtags aloud makes me physically wince. It's like nails on chalkboard.
It's lonely.

I'm looking for a job so I can have coworkers.
movie intrests are extorting theie viewers, the movie stars are buying million dollar mansions and are still gready for more
I think it's more of a privacy issue than convenience issue. Perhaps the author would rather keep it private between him and his friend that he has a particular interest.
Subsidized? You can get inkjet printers for as low as free. Keurig machines cost $100 and up, for something equivalent to a $20 coffee brewer.
> Metroids are a constantly exploited species that are incapable of interplanetary travel, but they’re frequently treated within the Metroid series as some sort of galactic threat. This is bullshit.

I disagree. Metroids are presented as ready-made bundles of destruction, whom an enemy send across the interplanetary gulf to a target planet.

The risk is not their agency, but their use as weapons. Their lack of spaceflight is a bonus to those who might exploit them, making it easier to use them against only the desired targets.
WhatsApp free voice calling starts rolling out to users in India
Yes, there are traffic lights on the Internet. See a bunch of examples here:

http://money.cnn.com/gallery/technology/security/2013/05/01/...
I think maybe you're touching on the real issue. The user is expressing metadata as content because it is easier than the going through the interface. This will probably be the case in any short-lived activity.

The proper response is not to tell users to stop. The proper response is to advance how we interpret user behavior.
The other day I tried to snap photos from my webcam with my finger obstructing the objective. I looked at the files in binary and it was apparently always different (the image itself looked visually always the same though : full black).

I made a hash of an hundred files made this way and could not find any collision.

Could this be considered as a TRNG?
Word2Vec Is Based on an Approach from Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
SumoLogic is Splunk Jr.
We could do that here... More like a universe where you can tile a floor with pentagons.
I think you're right and it just demonstrates a lack of good intuitive UX around content sharing. Instagram is especially bad in this regard, popular posts are just polluted with @ mentions.
You might want to re-think the name. To avoid confusion with https://spring.io/
Analyse Asia #15: The Golden Gate from San Francisco to Singapore
Synopsis: We interview Vinnie Lauria (@vlauria), founding partner of Golden Gate Ventures in Singapore. We discuss how Vinnie moved from Silicon Valley to Singapore with his wife Kristine Lauria (our guest on episode 6), the Kauffman fellowship, the back stories behind the most interesting start-ups in Southeast Asia: RedMart, 99.co, Carousell, Bilna and Coda Payments where they have shifted the ground with follow-up investments from Sequoia, Softbank and other major players entering the region. We discuss the challenge in navigating Southeast Asia landscape from legal, infrastructure, payments to talent acquisition.
Who owns and licenses the IP and broadcasts?
Unused private key material shouldn't just by lying around. It's better to generate it just in time, when migrating key material is needed, and use an authoritative method to distribute known hosts (Krb5, cfg mgmt). OpenSSH supports sahfp DNS records (RFC4255), but DNS often lacks end-to-end integrity. So that leaves cfg mgmt and directories like LDAP & Krb5. (PS: if a box is compromised, don't just change host keys, rebuild it (patched) on a private network... It's too expensive and nearly impossible to prove a compromised box isn't still rooted, undoing bandaids and creating more work. (Find out cause if possible and rachet up defenses too.) The avg rootkits these days are crazy modular and far more devious than even 5 years ago.)

If this adds an ability to add N keys, this could be useful for core boxes that you don't want to introduce cyclic dependencies upon other infrastructure (the cycles aren't always obvious).

Be aware that some boxes and services shouldn't depend on "ubiquitous" services like DHCP or DNS being alive, if you want your on-prem / datacenter network gear, BGP, security system, etc. to survive interruptions.
Yes, any task you have to read documenation for is, pretty much by definition, not a "just works" task. Of course, 'using' an operating system has so many aspects to it that your point is pretty nonsensical. In any case, we were talking about installing the OS, not using it.

That said, there are several OSes out there that have plenty of users who never read the docs for using it. Android, iOS, OSX, and Windows all have teeming masses of people who are able to use them adequately without reading documentation (just ask someone who's worked a support desk).
I like your idea of filtering the and converting to a notification. It feels like a kind of "command line" comment section. I wonder what else you could enable using this idea. @saved @favorties @hackernews?
Why Judges Tilt to the Right
Yes, ssh will remove keys that are not in the set that the server sends it. I've updated the blog post to mention this :)
Good idea. In fact, why doesn't it do that by default? Other than notifying the person, there is no reason for it to be there.
Its amazing how little we recognize that people value personal privacy and space. If you do something worth recognition expect to have every unrelated facet of your life poured over to the extent that it's available. I feel bad for anyone under 25 right now as they've been using services with only the thinnest veneer of privacy since they were teens. Should make politics a lot more interesting as there will be very few people that can pretend to have the squeaky clean profiles of current politician.
More fine-grained filtering and more options in general. For example, you can filter by country, or analyze NetFlow rather than pcaps.
Blogging and RSS feeds are still out there. Ask not why it seems like everyone is moving to Twitter, ask why your perception and tastes have shifted to perceive that as the primary channel?

When I look at this through the Clay Shirky "publish-then-filter" mindset, what I see is that we have a problem with our filters--whether those filters are RSS aggregators, search engines, follower lists, inboxes, subscription services, it doesn't matter. Look to the work of people like Paul Ford (@ftrain) and little hacks like SavePublishing.com.

Solving this filtering problem and creating a focus of attention--that's a huge opportunity. Not Uber huge, or monetarily huge, but huge as a public service to free up the mental capacity of a lot of talented people whose filters are very likely tuned by default to the commercial aggregators.
Get better friends maybe?

Who does this?
OP here. Personally, I came to believe that the expected payout of entrepreneurship is not anywhere near break even. Just like a roulette wheel is expected to pay out .97 for every dollar over that long haul (.03 house cut), accounting for all possible outcomes, including "jackpots", I started to feel like the expected payout of any given entrepreneurial effort wasnt worth the investment. Sure, some end up like Uber or Paypal. But the vast silent majority are failures.

There is some nonmonetary value in giving it a shot, I guess, but that value diminishes with each successive failure, even as the chance of success increases as a function of one's previous experience.

A friend and I were remarking recently that for all our entrepreneurial effort {10+ years each) and meeting with other entrepreneurs, we don't know anyone who has "made it". (A guy from my class in college sold a company for 170 mil, but I didn't know him before.) That's dozens or hundreds of people trying and zero successes.

In short, I think the odds are much longer than most are willing to believe, and that sapped my motivation to keep trying.
> Gates' previous actions didn't harm the quality of life for anyone

Disputable. Getting people to use pre-XP Windows, and also strong-arming the PC manufacturers into not bundling other operating systems such as BeOS, definitely count as harm to me.
I'm surprised someone has time to play with kids like this much less blog about it. Wish I had that much time.
Considering the secret obsessed world of the military, this seems like the ultimate proof that "cyber warfare" is worthless to them.