skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I see a lot of drive-by slanders on Hacker News, but this takes the cake, and I'm not letting it stand.

You went through an anonymous internet forum looking for dirt, and the worst you could come up with are things like everyone has given it 5 stars and benefits could be better? That's evidence for the opposite of what you say. Anonymous employees at a sweatshop would dish out stronger sauce than that. Something tells me they might not all give their employer perfect scores, either.

So I got curious and followed your link. The site has three reviews of FarmLogs. Here are their titles:

One of the best engineering jobs I have had in my career!

An Exciting and Fulfilling Job

Mission-driven culture, fun work environment, lots of autonomy, cool technology

Wow. How did you manage to pull dark insinuations out of that?

It turns out you did it by doctoring quotes. Where one reviewer suggested that "benefits could be slightly better", you took out slightly. Where an "Advice to Management" section said "promote more work-life balance", you turned that into "doesn't promote more work-life balance". The same reviewer's advice said "Make sure that you seek out feedback". You stuck a doesn't onto that as well, and then added "passive management", a phrase that appears nowhere in any review.

You then referred to your doctored version as "the core gist". But the core gist is just what you eliminated. Find me a founder of any fast-growing startup whose heart wouldn't swell with pride to see their anonymous employees, despite all the inevitable growing pains, talk about their company that positively.
> going to the telecom company with a sweeping warrant

Would it be a sweeping warrant? If they are only targeting 1 person/phone, then it sounds like a very specific warrant. Plus, the phone companies wouldn't give them all the data ("the whole haystack"), the phone companies would only give them the specific data to that person.
Anyone who is tempted to believe that "we were just doing our jobs" should be a reasonable moral dodge should keep in mind that "I was just doing my job" is EXACTLY IDENTICAL to saying "I just did it for money."
I cannot find any more info about it, either at that link or at her blog. Am I missing something?
Summary Judgement for Jewel V. NSA and Shubert V Obama [pdf]
> the principle of universal jurisdiction is a basis under which to assert jurisdiction, so its use is an acknowledgement of the need to establish jurisdiction, rather than support for the claim that jurisdiction is unnecessary for such a trial.

Ah. I stand corrected.
in practice, a slice will get ordered by up to five people and then extend the meal up to twenty minutes.

If you were selling time on that table it would be more like $10 for twenty minutes. Hence the problem. No one is arguing that the markup is huge, its that it comes at a cost.

on the other hand, an appetizer does not extend the meal and has a similar margin.
And his freely available book on Amazon "Europe after the Minotaur: Greece and the Future of the Global Economy" [1]

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Europe-after-Minotaur-Greece-Economy-e...
I think you you guys have formally proven some of this correct? What did you use? Was a proof-assistant like Coq or a model checker or similar? And what properties have been proven correct (so we know what to avoid wasting time on :)?
And to generalize:

There are 2^n possible end states to partition into n outcomes. So there must be at least 1 outcome given by at most 2^n/n end states. If n is not a power of 2, then 2^n is not divisible by n, so there must be one outcome with strictly fewer than 2^n/n states, call it m. However that outcome can only be reached mn input states. Since m < 2^n/n, we have that mn < 2^n. That means there are input states which cannot reach the given outcome. So for any possible strategy the jailer can choose the outcome with fewest possible end states, and then an input state that cannot reach that end state making it impossible for the second prisoner to reach that outcome.
I have no experience using Active Directory. Is this common practice? I would personally not even classify this as a bug; it seems like common sense that running code downloaded from an unauthenticated connection is bad. How is this different from saying there are critical security bugs in http/ftp, since the same type of attack is possible (but well known)?
Oh come now. I never said the KLWCC was relevant. Or even legitimate for that matter. Certainly one could have figured that out from my post, which I admit to having a bit of fun with. I mean, who tries someone for war crimes and then sentences them to having their name put on a naughty list?
Forbes Website Used to Hack Readers
I think the Iceland example is instructive. They told everyone who was not their citizens to piss off, had pain for a year or two, and are now fine.
> a situation where coffee would be banned, we would in all likeliness see a rise in coffee smuggling, a drop in quality of coffee, and coffee addicts would face problem due to the illegality of the stuff

More likely if caffeine were banned. If coffee were banned, those with a dependence (which is most likely on caffeine, not coffee) would substitute other sources. Like tea. Or soda.

(People might smuggle coffee if it were banned, the way they smuggle Cuban cigars into the US, but as a prohibited luxury rather than an item of dependence that there was no legal means to fulfill.)
Tips for Hardware Entrepreneurs and Startups
Here's a similar puzzle that can be used as a fun bar trick:

Given a standard deck of 52 cards, a third party chooses any five from the deck and hands them to your accomplice. Your accomplice chooses four of the five and gives them to you, with which you identify the fifth card. What's the strategy?

Solution (In Rot-13, http://rot13.com/index.php):

N fvzcyr beqrevat bs sbhe pneqf qbrfa'g jbex, fvapr 4! bayl nssbeqf lbh 24 pbzovangvbaf (cyhf gur sbhe lbh unir).

Jvgu svir pneqf naq bayl sbhe fhvgf, lbh xabj bar bs gur fhvgf zvtug or qhcyvpngrq. Lbh pna hfr gur svefg pneq gb fhccyl bayl fhvg vasbezngvba, ohg gur erznvavat guerr pneqf bayl nssbeq 6 pbzovangvbaf (cyhf 1-4 vs lbh unccra gb qenj pneqf zngpuvat gur gnetrg'f fhvg).

Gur frperg vf gb pubbfr juvpu bs gur gjb pneqf gb unaq bire. Jvgu 13 pneqf va rnpu fhvg, gur znkvzhz qvfgnapr orgjrra nal gjb pneqf (nyybjvat sbe jenc nebhaq) vf 6. Ol nterrvat gb nyjnlf unaq bire gur fznyyre/ynetre bs gur gjb pneqf va gur fnzr fhvg nf lbhe fhvg vqragvsvre, lbh pna hfr gur erznvavat guerr gb vaqvpngr gur qvfgnapr hc/qbja sebz gung pneq.

Sbe rknzcyr, tvira:
3,5 Pyhof, 8 Fcnqrf, 10 Qvnzbaqf, X Urnegf

Qhcyvpngr fhvg vf pyhof, fb jr'yy unaq bire gur fznyyre bs gur gjb (3 Pyhof). Gur qvfgnapr orgjrra 3 naq 5 vf 2, fb jr unaq bire gur gur erznvavat guerr va gur frpbaq ybjrfg beqrevat bs gur pneqf (v.r., 132: 8 Fcnqrf, X Urnegf, 10 Qvnzbaqf).
How will AAP install 15 lakh CCTV cameras in Delhi?
> Is it optimism or cynicism to call that "recovering well"?

Probably a bit of both. Depending on when you look at the data from, it's a definite improvement from their peak unemployment rate of 26.94%.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/spain-unemployed-pers...

Long and short of it though, the economy is growing, though very slowly. Economic growth, even small amounts, quarter over quarter, is much more cause for optimism than economic decline, which was the course it had been on up til 2013 Q1.
It bothers me when people post statistics out of context. If the unemployment rate was 48% and now it's 24% that's an amazingly successful policy to cut unemployment by half. If it was 12% and now it's 24% clearly something is wrong if unemployment doubles. Honest question, what is going through your mind when you post a statistic like that with absolutely context? How, to you, does this prove a point one way or the other?
Reasons for why you should have a dog Agree or Disagree?
> Some drug use causes horrible harm, as I know very well, but the overwhelming majority of people who use prohibited drugs do it because they get something good out of it — a fun night out dancing, the ability to meet a deadline, the chance of a good night’s sleep, or insights into parts of their brain they couldn’t get to on their own.

Just because 90% of drug users aren't being harmed, doesn't mean it's necessarily helping. If the mongoose is taking drugs to avoid facing reality, it is simply helping him avoid the problem at hand: his mate is dead. Ideally the mongoose should face the problem, and solve the problem (get a new mate and move on). As for other uses, most stimulant drugs provide false signaling. And this false signaling doesn't really have any positive effects apart from the false signaling (dopamine release) itself. And so what is left is for the false signaling to really cause harm to the 10% of vulnerable people who become addicted, creating an downward spiral of false signaling.

I also don't accept the argument that we should accept our own defects. Humans are genetically susceptible to cancer, depression, but that doesn't mean we should accept them and not fight it. Those are ailments that are easily seen as harmful though, unlike the false signaling of substance use.

That being said, most of what I said apply only to stimulant drugs like cocaine, ecstacy, meth, and not to marijuana or LSD.
@briholt, thanks for noticing that. We really appreciate you telling us about it. We have noted it and our designer is looking into it.
I don't think you read the article very carefully. Specifically, what I am claiming about (shared-state) threaded code which is not true of "any re-entrant code" is the fact that you cannot tell whether threaded code is re-entrant or not without a comprehensive, combinatorial whole-program analysis. It's not feasible to know what you might be re-entrant with, because you might be re-entrant with anything. With preemptive threads you really just can't do it at all, but with green threads you have to follow every call stack all the way to the bottom, because nothing else about it the bottom of the stack tells you whether you're going to context switch or not. When you get back a Deferred (or a Promise or a Future or a thunk or whatever), then the stack-inspection can be shallow; O(1) on the depth of your stack instead of O((stack_depth) * (function_length)).
Guía de Buenas Prácticas de Seguridad para su Smartphone
It's worth pointing out that he says,

"And importantly, they started out doing something that any two programmers (with domain expertise in their market) could have done."

and the key part of that is the "domain expertise in their market."

Our socioeconomic system very carefully prevents most students with farming domain expertise from ever getting near the Stanford CS Dept. It seems like most of the value add here is from the domain knowledge, not from the technology.
Whether alone (with user movement and precise clocking) or in a coordinated group effort, devices might begin to triangulate tower location and check this against historical and geographic data.

It would be a bit ironic, if/when triangulation begins to "work" "in the other direction".
"... This has become more of an issue with farmers over the past year, as they realize their data is a commodity just like what they raise--whether crops or livestock. ..."

What is stopping a local server/you own the data solution? Is it the cloud solution is the only one on offer or is it too hard to get the hardware/software to the gate?
Are you guys at least given the opportunity to work remotely?
> What we don't want is the operation silently substituting a site-specific image, without the knowledge of the end user, thereby breaking their build in a thousand invisible ways

But this is not preventable in any way but explicitly pulling an image with a signing key. Who knows what index.docker.io resolves to or is serving?
Another example of self-medication in the animal world is reindeer, which may travel many kilometers to eat fly agaric mushrooms: those red and white ones.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkCS9ePWuLU
> Think about bio-tech, energy, nanotech, lasers, (space) flight, AI, etc.

I'm not sure. I tend to assume the market is efficient and I found that far more often than not, the assumption proves correct. I don't know very much about most of the fields you mentioned, but think of space flight -- multiple space flight companies were founded around the same time as SpaceX (including John Carmack's now defunct space company, Virgin Galactic, Orbital Sciences, Blue Origin, Planetary Resources, and probably many others I'm missing).

I think that as a rule of thumb, the startup market is much more efficient than it originally seems, even in very deeply technical, capital intensive fields.
By the way, I've updated the main site with the non-themed iOS style. Also added a Mailbox demo.

I'll be putting up a comparison in the next week between Ionic/Reapp, but I think it will fare pretty well! Let me know what you think if you have time / see this.
Listening to panel discussion at Node Summit now, it was discussed by Scott Hammond that Node.js Foundation corporate membership costs $5k to $250k, vague on individual membership
Wow - the closest number on that list is "Total assessed (taxable) market value of Manhattan real estate for FY 2014-2015" at $914.8 billion. That's the kind of order of magnitude of Apple's worth - one New York borough, containing the world's most valuable real estate.

(Sorry, but can't resist adding: Given that it's worth 30% more than Apple, I guess that's why they call NYC the Big Apple...)
So, I'm not so sure that building a product that mandates both btrfs and Docker really counts as "decoupled".
Great concept and very well designed.
Anyone have an authoritative source for whether XMPP support will be kept? I've seen a lot of speculation floating around but can't find anything concrete.
I totally agree that users should be given the freedom to choose their own path. For example that's why we added pluggable backends for storage and sandboxing very early, before even shipping 1.0 :)

At the same time, I care a lot about design and usability - and good design requires constraints. So there is a fundamental tension between flexibility and usability. My approach to this problem is to put usability first, and improve flexibility over time. The rationale is simple: you can always make things more flexible over time - but once usability is broken, it's almost impossible to fix.

So, to apply this in the topic at hand:

* Usability first: no matter what, don't break the predictable meaning of image names.

* Flexibility over time, step 0: allow admins to block access to the Hub. Since the standard library is only hosted on the Hub, this blocks access to the standard library. Note that you are not at all required to use the Hub. You can refer to any other registry, today, simply by "docker pull URL".

* Flexibility over time, step 1: allow hosting the standard library outside the Hub. The standard library is actually community project, very similar to Homebrew. The fact that it can only be hosted on the Hub is a technical limitation. We should lift that limitation, so that even if you block access to the Hub, you can still access the standard library. This could be via a private mirror, community-controller mirrors, or perhaps a bittorrent transport :)

* Flexibility over time, step 2: allow complete control over which images are downloaded from where. This means completely separating the naming of images from their transport. This allows a sysadmin to compose an image storage and transport setup that fits their needs: S3 for this namespace, high-performance NFS filer for that, public bittorrent transport for this authorized subset of public images, Hub for the the QA department, etc. The key technical requirement here is to make image self-describing, and make cryptographic signature and verification mandatory.
Great point. I'm one of the founders of FarmLogs and I can tell you we started this company to help make farmers (like my family) more successful. We don't have ulterior motives with regard to using farmer data. We help them use it to be more profitable and that is all.

That said, it looks like we aren't doing a good enough job making it obvious in our ToS. That page has not been updated in a very long time. I am going to be sure to update it to more accurately reflect our values.
Ask HN: Do you pay for a commercial server OS (Solaris, RedHat..)? Why? Why not
As a solo founder, is it worth the time to apply if I don't already have a finished product and significant traction?

P.S. I know many people would suggest to find a cofounder, but that hasn't worked well for me. In my area there aren't many experienced programmers with an entrepreneurial spirit. The few people I have tried to start something with usually fall through due to not being able to keep up. I'd rather stop wasting my time with the hunt and start just building something by myself.
Until the killer robots come in the shape of flying multirotors driven by an AI.
But it doesn't matter how developers build software today. When RMS started, software developers used (largely) closed IDEs, operating systems, compilers, etc. His principles are an entirely separate matter and he has stated over and over and over again that he doesn't care if his principles are inconvenient or if adherence to his principles causes technology to advance at a slower rate or software to be less useful. So his knowledge of "modern" software development really doesn't matter.
So, I've got to ask...what do you actually get for that data? Like, what does your business actually use it for?

Are you folks doing sensor analysis or something, or eating logfiles, or what?
YMMV, but if I get tired of my own voice I find I'm usually doing something wrong. I re-wrote my first novel (http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Theorem-TJ-Radcliffe-ebook/dp/...) dozens of times, and likely read it over a hundred, and I could tell what passages needed work by how I reacted to it when re-reading. If it felt stale, if my eyes glazed over, if I wanted to skim ahead to find where something interesting happened, then the reader would likely to do the same.

One my first readers commented that she found the final version of the book vastly more readable than the earliest one she read, precisely because the voice was livelier and more varied. In the earlier draft she found it "sounded" too much like me all the time, and while my natural voice is not totally boring, too much of any one thing gets dull after a while. Readers invest a lot in our writing, and deserve to rewarded for it in as many ways as possible, from the ideas and characters we show them to the pleasure of the words flowing through their brain.

In non-fiction I've not found this to be such a big problem, although I'm looking less for artistic effect there and much more for clarity, although I don't think I've written anything over 100K words in non-fiction (plenty of things in the mid-10K range, though.)
A provisional patent is around $400 and lets you slap Patent Pending on the manual, which makes you look more serious, at least.
"my girlfriend back home ended up getting pregnant"
A cynical answer is: I bet the Greeks would take anyone they could get; because who the hell would want the job? It was either going to be someone from Goldman Sachs or a crazy person. Since the Greek people would probably tar and feather anyone sent by Goldman, it had to be a crazy person. I hope he does well. It's a lot easier to write papers and give talks than it is to assume a job like "Finance Minister of Greece in 2015".
>>> with open("using_python_to_profit") as f:
... first, *_, last = f.readlines()

Or more simply:

first, *_, last = f

Though I don't like how '_' can keep a potentially arbitrary amount of data in memory.

There's also a question of what to do when there is only one line in the file, or zero lines. The above raises a ValueError. An alternative solution, which uses None if there are no lines, and make first == last if there is one line, and which works with Python 2.6 and later, is:

with open("using_python_to_profit") as f:
first = last = next(f, None)
if first is not None:
for last in f:
pass

The test for 'first is not None' is because next(f) can raise a StopIteration, but if the file is written to again, next(f) will return the next line.

% touch empty.txt
% ls -l empty.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 dalke admin 0 Feb 11 01:34 empty.txt
% python
Python 3.3.0 (default, Mar 12 2013, 09:53:08)
[GCC 4.2.1 Compatible Apple Clang 3.1 (tags/Apple/clang-318.0.54)] on darwin
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> f = open("empty.txt")
>>> next(f)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
StopIteration
>>> ^Z
Suspended
% echo "Hello!" >> empty.txt
% fg
python

>>> next(f)
'Hello!\n'

Yes, according to the iterator specification, once an iterator raises a StopIteration exception, subsequent calls are always supposed to raise StopIteration. According to the documentation, file iterators are "broken". Quoting from https://docs.python.org/3.4/library/stdtypes.html :

Once an iterator’s __next__() method raises StopIteration, it must continue
to do so on subsequent calls. Implementations that do not obey this property
are deemed broken.

Sigh. Time to report that bug. Well, need to reproduce it with the most recent Python first.
I'd think so. Most companies that apply have neither a finished product or traction, and the application might just help you clear things up in your head.
* With Federally guaranteed profits
It's funny to watch the world very slowly reinvent Adobe Flex.
"... Moving the Node apps to run under plain Arch Linux systemd made the Pies noticeably more reliable and efficient. ..."

Docker is interesting to look at because if you have N IoT devices, deployment becomes the problem.
Yea, I feel you. I used to live in DC and had a few friend that worked for the patent office. Hearing the stories about how things work internally made me lose all faith in the patent system.
Did someone mention Tarsnap? :)
interesting, thanks for the link
My g/f is currently reading a lot of classics for the first time, and talking to her has reminded me of how little I have left of some of them after a decade or two (or three...) A good book is worth coming back to a few times at least, over the course of a long lifetime.