skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I met my fiancé in a bar at a meetup for a dating network in 2011 while I was living in London - ironically we weren't members, but had both been dragged along by friends. Before that I had extensively tried OkCupid, I went on a fair few dates, but to be honest most of the people I met were weirdos... I also tried some of the early location based apps, but even in central London people were few and far between.

The problem with sites like OkCupid is people are desperately looking for someone who they have that deep connection with. As your profile gives out so much information, you really dig into the personality of a potential match to see whether they check all the boxes - and in almost all cases they won't. Rather than risking going on a date, they just skip past and wonder how many cats they should buy. If I came across my fiancé on a dating site, I would of no doubt thought "meh", but here we are nearly 4 years later living together in another continent.

I think Tinder has a lot more potential. Rather than chatting for weeks before meeting someone, you can be a lot more spontaneous by just matching then meeting up for a date. It's a lot more akin to hitting it off with someone out of the blue, than with a dating site where you feel like you know half there is to know about the person before you even meet. I'd much rather meet someone on a Tinder-like service than a dating site.

As I understand Tinder is still very casual sex focussed, but as it gets more popular I hope it will turn into a more PG-friendly community. Most people are very materialistic and just want to be with someone who is attractive. This is what Tinder focuses on, so maybe it isn't necessarily the app for this.
Solutions that pull the TCP stack out of the kernel perform so much better because they're bypassing all the internal bureaucracy that the kernel otherwise performs to make it as easy as possible for userspace applications to use the network without stepping on other applications' toes.

The kernel socket API is designed so that programs have to do as little thinking as possible to get their own personal slice of the shared and noisy network. It provides an easy abstraction, and that requires the kernel do a lot of messy stuff for you:

- When you're using TCP sockets, the kernel makes copies of everything your application writes and holds it in a buffer until its receipt is acknowledged, just in case it needs to resend it when the other side doesn't acknowledge it. If the socket's buffer fills up, your application blocks on I/O until some space is freed.

- It holds ports open in a lingering state long after they're closed just in case it needs to re-transmit the last bytes. This can be disabled, but it's on by default.

- It takes care of all the congestion control for you, but it's tuned for the general case, and as a result there are a lot of edge cases which perform very badly for the problem they're trying to solve. Redis is probably one such edge case.

Of course, all of this is fine and desirable for general applications, but it ends up being problematic if you're trying to solve a problem where performance is the chief concern.

It's tempting to say the problem is that kernel has to do way too much to provide that easy abstraction, but really the problem is that the kernel provides no way around it. You pretty much have the option of using their cushy stream abstraction at the cost of performance, or you use a userspace TCP stack on raw sockets, which requires running as root and disabling TCP in the kernel (otherwise the kernel stomps all over your TCP negotiations[1]).

There are some other transport layer protocols (SCTP, DCCP, etc.), as well as application layer protocols built on UDP, that remove some of the abstractions TCP provides and as a result require less in-kernel bureaucracy, but those solutions don't seem to be very popular or well-supported.

It would be nice if the kernel would provide some lower level system calls that could be selectively used to move parts of TCP into the application (e.g., retaining copies of data in case of re-transmission). Alas, I don't think there's much push for that, because a) it's hard, and b) the current situation is fine for 99% of network applications.

[1] http://jvns.ca/blog/2014/08/12/what-happens-if-you-write-a-t...
Not that I am aware of. Even the EFF prism break only lists one webhost and that webhost is invite only and you have to use their SSL keys (no thank you!). There is also riseup but again it is invite only.

It's a major issue because according to law, they have to be able to take down illegal content, but to protect themselves most hosts will simply take down anything even close to it. Where this gets dangerous is regarding non-court ordered claims of illegality, such as DMCA takedowns, claims of libel, hate-speech, etc.

I wish I had a better answer for you. I have though about trying to host via countries like Switzerland, but I don't want to have to use another countries host just to have free speech.

Honestly I'm getting to the point that paying for my own colocation of a server I control and is locked up would be the best way to go. Still have similar issues with the colo companies refusing to host certain content, but you have to pick your battles.

The other alternative would be to get business level service so you can host via your home ISP. If you try to do it with your consumer service they can find it and tell you that hosting content is not part of the agreement.
I too am not sure I buy the argument. While Danish has a institution 'controlling' the language, Danish is far more irregular than English is. This is also hindered by Danish having 18 basic vowels (most of any European language), although it has 9 (+4 from English) letters to describe the vowels. But even so, they overlap.

Despite Danish's inconsistencies, problems and - some might say - generally awfulness (which I personally like!), Denmark has a 99% literacy rate.[0]

[0] http://country-facts.findthedata.com/q/66/2395/What-is-the-l... (Although, those data are from 2003.)
If it is personal, where do you host?
> What are they supposed to do if they want to implement features which are not supported by Firefox?

If the features they want to use are not available in standards-compliant web-browsers they should not be released on a public facing production website.

I thought that was blindingly obvious, but the Chrome-effect is evidently taking quite a hold.
They won't stalk you, if you check the opt-out field.
According to your link, Firefox has 0.7% market share in mobile, which is the relevant metric to this post.
Firefox for Android supports extensions, and Phony provides this.
I'd say that's not so much because of whether it's easy or hard to learn or not, but because the vast majority of media (mostly movies and TV, but nowadays also the internet) is in English, often subtitled. Some countries dub it (like Germany), so the level of English there is often lower.

It's amount of exposure, clear and simple. Replace English TV with Spanish or Finnish or maybe Korean and you'd probably have the same effect. That said though, English is relatively close to western-European languages; similar origins and influences, so the barrier to learn English in addition to a western European language is lower than learning Russian or Korean and, arguably, Spanish or Italian.
> Already my own experiments suggest that LLVM is a superior compiler, by every metric I know of

Except that it isn't copyleft, which is one of the most important metrics to Stallman, FSF et al, and is why they're unlikely to stop defending it.
Review of “Penetration Testing with Perl”
Biological analogies are too often misleading and confusing when talking about deep learning[1]. We currently have very little knowledge of the way the brain works and most analogies are only wild assumptions. The ones contained in this article are blunt and based on strictly nothing but the author's feelings. Please read with care.

[1]: http://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/artificial-intelligence/ma...
ryjof.com

100% pronounceable.
Though of course it will be an opt-in field that's pre-checked and surrounded by opaque verbiage.
Major security alert as 40,000 MongoDB databases left unsecured on the internet
That approach is what got us XHTML 2.0 and a "lost decade" for web technology. The things Google adopts (vp8, dart, spdy) are things it releases and publishes as open standards, and therefore significantly more standard and open than e.g. javascript, or even the <img> tag, were when first introduced.
I like this one (http://www.atariarchives.org/bca/) -- it's basically several Oregon Trail-like games, but explains both the historical context and simulation models used in each game.
You get there if you click links. It's not only this incident, Google often "accidentally" block other browsers for a day or two and then claims it was an "accident". Chrome seems to be immune to such accidents, though.
Nutshell, an app to create a shareable cinematic story
I wonder if that would be an effective way to protect an unattended robot. If it quakes and whimpers when people touch it, or yelps and scrambles away when attacked, would people leave it alone? Obviously it wouldn't stop someone determined to cause harm, but it might get the desired response from someone who wants to look with their hands or mess with it for fun.
I think the auto-update, crash reporting and usage tracking code as well as the codecs are open source, they're just not compiled in by default in chromium builds.
Tinderbox: Full Tinder solution built on Tinder App API (using machine learning)
Sciatica TRATAMENTE NATURISTE
Training the deaf to hear through their tongue
Google owns Boston Dynamics
So a coalition of plastic surgeons buys Tinder, et voila
"For Google services you obviously use Chrome"
What makes you say that? It is like saying that for going to work you need a red car, but for going to the shop you need a blue car. It's insanity. It is how internet and the web were supposed to not be. It is what shitty companies like Google try to push for the greater glory of their profit margins. It is /very/ bad for customers in the mid- to long term. It is what we should put serious effort into to kill off.
For browsing, I use Firefox, and Firefox only.
If it does not work in Firefox, it is /broken/ and I walk away within less than a second. I might return in a few months to see if the particular site has already been repaired.
Making your own tool suck/break/be-difficult when license-compatible patches are submitted to improve the program seems counter productive for everyone.
As I understand things based on the OP it seems however your documentation promotes the insecure way of setting up mongodb. It's even true that mongodb doesn't even ask to create db credentials during the installation,something it should do by default.
The Play Store (LOL) claims there's about 50M-100M users. It's up to you whether that counts as "nobody" or not.
Sequence: Automated Analyzer for Reducing Log Messages to Patterns
Google Online Check for Safer Internet Day
I suppose this way they can control access to the store of users coming from AOSP devices. Firefox is available in 3rd party app stores, Chrome isn't. So AOSP users who are not aware of other browsers (=average non-techies) can simply not browse the Play Store.
It is not clear that RMS is driven by ego. He's motivated by a very clear goal to keep free software free. Free as in freedom free. As for ESR, well, yup, that's an ego that is sufficient in size to have a gravitational pull. http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2000082800620OPCYKN
Not just that, you need it to be unambiguous. So "gitmy" (one that's mentioned below) is pretty dodgy, because it might sound too much like "getmy".
Nice to see some classic maillist arguing instead of those hipster medium.com articles or posts full of memes/gif/clipart to make a point
Does OSS always have to end up as an sass to make profit?

Not always there are some technical oriented products where the originators set up shop as a consultancy and offer expertise in the technology. The Dojo Toolkit is a good example of such an arrangement. Where you can hire Site-Pen to develop web applications with the technology the founders created. It is probably a less lucrative model but it is another way that revenue is generated around the OSS model.

As for the OP's question about success, I am pretty sure the founders of Pentaho are doing pretty well. Maybe not Google well, but I would assume that they are fairly wealthy individuals now. Granted they have played down their OSS roots on their site, but they still do offer the community edition.
Yeah. What's especially painful is RMS is basically saying "Hey folks, I want to block this until I can research the issue." And then his research is "I don't know anuything about this, can anybody tell me what LLDB is?"

My guess is (based on his past statements) that he doesn't browse the web, or browses it through emacs sending mail to him (really!) and doesn't use search so he can't really find out what LLDB is.

Do you really want to be beholden to a person who blocks software integration (into a unified debugger interface) and then can't even do reearch to justify that?
I am reminded of a different creature: Rat Thing from Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash.
Let's Chat – open source, self-hosted chat for small teams
So this was a discussion in /r/linux last week about LLVM and GCC et al, so I'm just reposting my statements on why a world where GCC is irrelevant is bad:

It takes little effort on Apples or Googles or Microsofts part to take advantage of an LLVM dominated world to close off their own changes to it and try to force developers to use their own proprietary LLVM distributions on their own operating systems. It stops every other company in the future from taking advantage of all the great LLVM tech to implement their own CPUs in terms of LLVM IR, so they never need to publish their ISA and they can lock down their platform with a blob LLVM of their own. The only thing stopping any of that from happening is GCC being a still competitive alternative.

If LLVM came to dominate the compiler scene to such a degree that GCC were irrelevant, it opens the flood gates to any major company forking LLVM into a proprietary paid for compiler that they require on their OS to profit from. It lets you do anything from what Apple is already doing with Swift, where you create a programming language with a proprietary compiler, or you could go from the other end and implement a proprietary translation unit so that you never need to publish your ISA (something Nvidia never does) but that allows all the LLVM compilers to target it.

Right now, nobody can close off their LLVM contributions because a hobbled and fractured LLVM ecosystem is one that cannot overcome GCC. In the same way Apple and Google had to cooperate on webkit until it was so dominate they were in a position to fork and do their own things with it once Gecko was rendered effectively irrelevant, but the difference is that webkit was LGPL and Clang is its own permissive license - they still cannot directly modify the free software parts without redistribution, so it is harder to make a proprietary webkit, but Apple surely has succeeded since they have their own proprietary patchset on top of trunk webkit nowadays.
That's true, but my recommendation to newer programmers is still learn to practice radical DRY first, then as the final polish, learn when to back off (i.e., "the rule of three"). Far, far more programmers do not understand DRY, and accidentally avoid over-sharing by virtue of simply having bad coding practices in general and rewriting everything every time than overdo DRY.

Someday I ought to write up a post about this sort of thing on my blog. I think part of our eternal warfare about coding practices (though by no means all of it) comes from the fact that there are different practices that should be followed by someone with two years of experience than someone with ten. For instance, I think test-driven development is great... for a new programmer. It is something that you will outgrow eventually. But in the meantime, TDD will teach you good design much more quickly than you would have learned any other way, and in the meantime, you'll produce better code than you would have otherwise just blundering around in the traditional manner. And for myself at coming up fast on 20 years of experience, I don't do "TDD" but I still do a lot of automated testing (and the damned code keeps surprising me, and punishing me whenever I think this time for sure I can skip the tests...).

So too here with DRY; you may someday outgrow it, but you'll learn better design and programming skills in the meantime, and in the end I still think you'll find the optimum point is closer to DRY than farther from it. I think that's because beyond the surface gloss of DRY from a perspective of simply "not repeating code" you come to understand how a bit of code can embody a concept, and what DRY is really trying to teach you to avoid is having a concept live in two places, rather than raw code repetition, and that idea will stick with you until the end of your career. But to get to that level of understanding, practice radical DRY until you understand.
>DNS is not broken, it is working as intended - just differently from the past.

Yeah, but the rewrite is buggy as rewrites often are. If it worked as intended, I doubt so many people would have so many problems.
> The real solution is to make frailty and death voluntary.
> If this achievement seems ridiculous, remember how many
> technologies were once placed in the same category of improbability.

I agree. This is a solvable problem. More serious effort needs to be made to slow and reverse aging, rather than this resigned march to death that your downvoters exhibit. The human potential that is lost to aging is staggering.

It is fashionable to show how sophisticated and intelligent you are, to discount or even deride people who have the goal of extending human lifespan. That's too bad.
my email is ben@wwwh.com
> Probably more crass than sexist

Yes, crass. But it's not sexist.
For reference, this is being tracked by Mozilla's webcompat group in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1131601.
I had no idea what they were talking about, so after googling around: it's about Aurelius Titan, a graph database

http://thinkaurelius.github.io/titan/

which was recently acquired

http://venturebeat.com/2015/02/03/datastax-acquires-aurelius...
Already my own experiments suggest that LLVM is a superior compiler, by every metric I know of,

I know OpenMP/Clang, but as far as I know OpenMP is not upstreamed in clang yet, is it? If not, it's not superior yet in scientific computing :).

But it will happen soon. And at the very least, LLVM's approach has created a large ecosystem that gcc did not have.
The 2014 CSS Report: Examining how CSS is being used in the wild
I don't know why you would make this argument now. Stallman argued clearly in January why copyleft was more important to him than technical superiority. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-01/msg00247.html
Ruby String API use and misuse
I read a big caveat in the clause "So as long as I'm Emacs maintainer"

Then again I first became aware of this latest cycle when I think a message from him threatening a fork became a Hacker News topic (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8861360), followed by several others with a lot of discussion.
If clang/LLVM caught up in generated code performance to GCC then I must admit that is news to me.
That's the problem with networking, right? That the environments you are running in are so diverse that it's nearly impossible to test all the situations. I'm sure that the Apple testers didn't think it was buggy before they released it but a lot of people are having issues in real world situations where the old system worked fine.
Wow, this is just a really shitty thing to say. You genuinely think it's a left-wing feminism issue?

And that feminists would be perfectly happy with an app that discriminated on wallet thickness and status ...whilst also rallying against institutional created status?
It's not just that his knowledge is outdated, it's also that his philosophical principles will always take precedence over everything else, which includes sound and/or pragmatic technological decisions.

I'm not fond of esr in general but he's spot on with this post.
I don't see it as a wrong. Just a lot of programmers have a personality type that sees us planning and optimizing everything, making it into systems and disregarding rules of social interaction to some or greater extent. You need people like this to push the boundaries.
> are things it releases and publishes as open standards

Publishing working code (even as Open Source) and possibly a white paper does not make something a 'standard.' It may be 'open' but not a 'standard.'
This quarrel should be considered in context of the LLDB patch being submitted to gud.el.

For those who want to read it from the start: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg002...

What made it a mega-thread was when RMS weighed in: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-02/msg003...
No, Microsoft has not been recommending .local, as this document, circa Windows Server 2000, states:

> Identify your organization's DNS owner and determine what registered DNS names you have available on the network that will host Active Directory.

> If you do not have a registered domain name, you should register a name with an Internet DNS registration authority.

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb727085.aspx

>
Digital Detoxing with Enemas and an Ancient Healing System
This is exactly what TLA systems are designed to do. They called them signature strikes.
"The higher the rate, the closer you’ll get to the smoothness of the first image."

oops.
You can use Frameless for UI: http://stakes.github.io/Frameless/, or pin it to your homescreen.

I'd love to build something like this though to do it more fully.
Degrade gracefully?

BTW, for those playing at home, the Play Store website loads just fine if you claim to be running Firefox OS instead. If there actually are features the Play Store site uses that work in Firefox OS and not in Firefox for Android, I'm sure Mozilla would like to hear about them (probably via Bugzilla).
How to Choose the Form of an Infographic: It’s All About Context
I eagerly await a true fix to 10.10's issues with dropping wifi connections. Both Macbooks in my house running 10.10 drop the wifi connection at least 5x/day, often more. My other devices do not experience these drops, and these same machines were just fine on 10.9.

My opinion of Apple's software quality has decreased over the past few months.
This is a dangerous slope.

And I'm sad seeing many of the arguments here - a wild guess is that they've been made by people who weren't here (or have forgotten) the Microsoft/IE story.

Soon it will become: "Why would they invest resources? Firefox is a niche browser, the return on investment is not justified". After all, Firefox's market share is dwindling.

I really hope we're not slowly being boiled like the proverbial frog, by Google.
" auto-mounting of usb drives out of the box, that's because no sane programmer would want that by default."

I plug in usb sticks all the time and of course I expect them to automount on linux just like on the other OSs I use on a daily basis. (and I was very annoyed last week to discover that my linux machine did not auto-mount a sdcard, and I had better things to do than start troubleshooting it)
English is a foreign language for me and I think you're absolutely right. Every language has tough parts, but English is by far the easiest I've seen. Excusing the lack of proper education like that is just silly.
You can make your phone Google-free (as much as it's possible) with Cyanogenmod.
And yet it also completely disproves the argument of anyone claiming that Google is trying to make another ActiveX.

The idea that nobody can do anything cool on the web unless all browsers support it seems like a great way to encourage stagnation.
Safer Internet Day 2015