skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They are totally different. The way Music/Movies work usually it's "don't f-ing share this, you need permission".

The GPL is "we require that you share and provide freedoms to others"

In other words, copyright is usually used to block people from being good sharing neighbors. GPL requires sharing. Not sharing is wrong. So, copyright for music is against the natural tendency to be a good neighbor and people rightly blame the copyright restrictions for being awful. GPL violations means you are both infringing copyright and being a bad citizen, bad neighbor.
As I understand Flocker creates ZFS snapshots which are replicated between the nodes. Is this happening continuously and to all nodes? It's not really clear from the post.
I have to disagree with this. At my current job I deal with a lot of Mac malware/adware, and fully removing it is complicated process. After clearing the applications folder and removing browser extensions, you have to check a lot of folders, and you kind of have to know what you're looking for. In /Library/ for example, you have to check Application Support, Extensions, Frameworks, LaunchAgents, LaunchDaemons, PreferencePanes, and StartupItems. I like OSX, but it definitely needs a MalwareBytes equivalent.
Microsoft really should consider making something like Ninite (https://ninite.com) a native component of Windows 10.

It skips all the garbage and installs the application.
Code review is really useful. People should listen to reviews of their code, even if they're arguable, for the sake of team harmony and having a system of checks and balances.

But a "code snob" is not necessarily correct just because he is a snob and sounds confident. There is sometimes a calibration problem where someone is trying hard to enforce practices which are actually wrong, or argues vehemently against things which are normal and okay. This is actively counterproductive and it would be better just to have less enforcement.

One way to check for this calibration would be to ask whether the snob is advocating something that will obviously benefit people beyond the snob objectively, e.g. fewer broken builds or adhering to a widely used standard style. A useful reviewer isn't just pushing his own agenda.
API for mobile money systems across Africa
I think they forgot the part where they explained why they did it that doesn't use doublespeak.
I've purchased a Pebble and, more recently, a Moto 360. I love the idea of smart watches but I feel like they need to be as passive as possible for the best user experience. So far the Apple Watch looks like it needs a lot of interaction to do different things. I'm excited to see a real demo of the interface to see if that's really the case.

However I won't be buying anymore smart watches from anyone until at least another generation or two; the Moto 360 and even the Pebble are just so thick and the constant amount of charging the 360 needs makes it difficult to go through a full day just using it to keep track of the damn time.
>> Having them gets you a seat at the power table

What? A death sentence, you mean, only by trying to have them.
With the exception of industrial and enterprise software, which remains a significant chunk.

The problem with the Linux desktop is that the people developing it are completely out of touch with how the average user thinks, and they assume that introducing another opaque monolith daemon to handle an entire subsystem is the only thing stopping all those Windows users from flocking to Fedora in an instant. The result is that they alienate the people who actually care.

Ironically enough, the examples you list (Google and Canonical) are ones that operate outside the general sphere of influence of the desktop developer scene. Canonical in particular is reviled as all hell by the Red Hat subculture.
Freescale isn't Chinese.
In the author's example it's about internal consistency, a bunch of other similar items are already singletons.

Better a consistent-but-suboptimal architecture than a random grab bag of varying quality.
In you're interested, we also announced beta versions of Swarm and Compose today:

http://blog.docker.com/2015/02/scaling-docker-with-swarm/

http://blog.docker.com/2015/02/announcing-docker-compose/

And a sneak preview of how these tools can work together:

http://blog.docker.com/2015/02/orchestrating-docker-with-mac...
Apple knows that their computers are a favorite amongst developers. No way would they do that.

Apple already made their move and it was a nice compromise called Gatekeeper.
I'm not too familiar with all of this (perhaps I'm even misinterpreting it), but I think they do realize that it would be problematic to throw population trajectories and interest rates into the same pot. I think the motivation is rather to find reasons why things do not behave completely unpredictable at larger scales and I cannot think of good reasons against efforts to find more and more general descriptions of that.
Spending does note equate to success. Samsung Series 9 laptops are built as well or better than any Macbook. And Samsung is well-respected.

The bottom line is Apple is very, VERY good at marketing their platform, and much of that marketing stems from the massive fan base they have.

Calling it build quality and trust assumes we consumers are very smart buyers. That's establishing apps not in evidence.
My previous company is actually in the process of switching from Oracle to MySQL. That said doing so is of nightmarish proportions because they have 10-15 years of legacy behind them of building their own ORM, using a modern one and just raw Oracle-SQL (no ANSI joins there!) to either replace, rewrite or drop.
True. Sorry to misread the parent post.
How to Prevent Duplicate Event Processing at Scale
Because it's lots of work and you get nothing really in return.

What you want is code that you can commit back into your reposority but what you get is some code that is quickly hacked together and you don't even want to look at.
It depends a lot on your mentality toward writing code. I find matching the long/short-termness of engineering practice to the overall mentality of the organization results in the least friction.

Concrete example: if you're building a system to last 5-10 years, act like it. Spend time getting the architecture, the variable names, and the module structure correct. But realize not everything must be built to last. I read somewhere else on HN that some groups inside of Google plan a piece of code to handle 10x growth in traffic/storage/resource use before it's thrown out outright and rewritten -- so don't overdesign.

Maybe the real lesson is to invest in sufficiently good modularity that it's easy to throw things out without too much pain. Nothing lasts forever.
Another issue I have with ORMs is different projects end up with different views of the same database.

Why don't you use a foreign key to that table? We don't have that table... Yes we do, it's not because you haven't defined it in your project that it doesn't exist!

And... every project ends up with their own version of the "versioned schema", so to rebuild the DB, you need to aggregate all the liquidbase/flyway files from all the projects and run them all.

When I wear my sysadmin/pseudo DBA hat, ORMs are one of my more prominent pain.
I'm glad to see that Microsoft is finally ripping out all the weird legacy modes -- IE11 essentially ships with 6 different rendering engines! [1]

* IE5 (quirks mode)

* IE7 (compatibility view)

* IE8, IE9, and IE10 (available from the x-ua-compatible meta tag)

* IE11's actual rendering engine

As an aside, the hilariously long user-agent string is perhaps the best evidence that string-based browser detection is something that web devs should avoid at all costs. It manages to include "Safari", "Chrome", "AppleWebKit", "KHTML", "Mozilla", and "Gecko".

[1] https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn321432.aspx
But it was true; many years ago it was prevailing wisdom that Mac's were just virus and spyware free.

I'd like to think most technical people realized that Mac was simply not popular enough to be targeted. But most users were simply under the impression their choice of OS was magically protected. From article: "Since it is actually Unix under the hood, OS X has some native protection against the worst types of viruses." Hey look, it's got Unix, I'm totally safe.
I feel like the "A new Web rendering engine is born" section covers quite honestly why they have chosen to fork IE. It seems, to me, to be pretty frank and doesn't contain much "doublespeak."

PS - This was originally a reply to a comment which got removed.
New gTLD Auction Results
Facebook cannot 'come after you' for using React if you have not accused them of patent infringement.

They can 'come after you' iff you have accused them of that, and you are using their software in such a way that a parent of theirs is violated.

It's pretty straightforward:

- Facebook has released some open source software. In the case of React, it's under the BSD license.

- You can use this software however you want, in accordance with the license.

- In addition to granting you a license to use the software, Facebook has granted you a license to any patents they own that cover the software.

- There is no enumeration or claim that any patents do cover the software.

- Your license to use any hypothetical patent that does cover the software will be revoked if you make a claim—legal or otherwise—that Facebook has infringed any patent.

- At that point, you will no longer have a license to use any patent that covers the software.

- If you are subsequently using the software in a way that infringes one of their patents, Facebook would legitimately be able to claim patent infringement.
When I lived in Beijing several years ago, I interviewed a guy for a software development position. He worked for a network equipment provider (not Huawei). When I asked him about his work, he told me that his company based their router software on the same leaked version of Cisco's router OS that Huawei had used several years prior (IIRC, there was a court case over this, and Huaiwei switched to their own software).

Based on my experience, the Chinese now have the breadth, depth, confidence, and money to develop complex software on their own, so I expect to see less of this in the future.

As per this article, the Chinese can make a fair point to the US government that so long as Huawei is barred from the US, then there's nothing to discuss about telecom infrastructure equipment.

But I hope and wish the US and other Western governments will press for more media openness in China with the goal of ultimately getting China to tear down their system of censorship and the Great Firewall. Because, ultimately, I believe it hurts modern China more than it helps.
What's with the exclamation point?

Anyway, Apple is using sapphire for everything except the low end: https://www.apple.com/watch/gallery/
I'd love to see Apple take a stand and revoke their certificate. Usually I strongly support developer freedom / openness, but these apps are straight-up malware. Having a decline option somewhere doesn't matter if essentially all users who accept do so unintentionally.
Fights between paradigms is never fun. Especially as that seems to imply there will be fights between evangalists.
Oh cool.
I've read articles fairly recently that seems to pitch Boston as the Silicon Valley of the East Coast or trying to compete with Silicon Valley for startups/talent.
Do you have thoughts about that, I'd like to hear them.
That's a really damning Yahoo screenshot and it matches my experience pretty well. Yahoo is not an acceptable search platform and I'm really confused about why Mozilla thinks otherwise.
> Then there are those that insist on highly flexible and overly engineered solutions. Yes, they got it to work. No, they aren't doing any favors to anyone that was wanting to pick up the code and make changes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner-platform_effect
Same here haha
I run the flash blocker extension in Chrome. So I expect, the next extension I'll be running is a <video> tag blocker with an option to enable on demand. (edit: known as "click to play" mode)
To expand on this comment, common issues may include...

(1) Availability (Something fails eventually), both in terms of monitoring (Find out) and failover (How to resolve when this happens?)

(2) Security (Who had access to which key when? Are they still at the company? Where's the audit trail? Third-party managed security credentials ... can you say side-channel?)

(3) Legal jurisdiction (Are we allowed to put x in y location? Do we want government x using law y to potentially perform action z?)

(4) Latency (Site x on provider y is experiencing a DDoS)

(5) Heterogeneous management (What happens if something auto-managed gets manually-managed for awhile? Do things break?)

(6) Resource lead time and failure impact (What happens when the hardware you just wanted to spin up from the endless cloud supply isn't available?)

(7) Actual performance characteristics (Usually every provider offers only a specific selection of environments and offers weak to no SLAs/guarantees on real world performance.)

... and so on. A lot of these are sort of cloud restatements of the RFC1925[1] fundamental truths of networking. Also, this is all docker-specific, so it hinges on people wanting to build their infrastructure on a self-described insecure and immature platform and tie their whole management paradigm to it.

FWIW, I am still working on an OS and virtualization platform agnostic alternative devops process management tool[2] and am trying to get my company to agree to open source it. It can easily wrap docker, having far broader scope, and was designed to be future-proofed... it is thus potentially useful for embedded dev, the BSDs, real hardware, clusters, etc. It takes a very different paradigm to docker, abstracting cloud providers, services and platforms separately, and allowing the former to figure out how to connect and manage the other two internally... with standardized interfaces for major operations and notifications.

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1925.txt

[2] cims ... read on from http://stani.sh/walter/pfcts/ via 'original post'
London's poor fetish: commodifying working class culture
Push events, NAT TCP connection timeouts, and device sleep
Venmo security: It’s not as strong as the company wants you to think
I just started learning Docker the other day and was curious as to how I could use it to deploy to Digital Ocean, then I saw this! Great timing :)
> When you hear the words "Yup, we do Agile, but we have our own take on it," run away, because it's going to suck hard.

Agile means doing it your own way. It means customizing what works for the team and the particular tasks.

Scrum is a fixed methodology with a rulebook.

(A lot of time "Agile" gets used to mean "Scrum" but the two aren't the same, or even the same kind of thing, though the Scrum Book is an often not-unreasonable starting point for an agile organization.)
8 SEO Basics to Grow Your Small Business
In my recent round of looking for work, the first thing I've asked the recruiter is what the pay range for the job is, and almost all of them have given it.
- "The Money Masters" by Bill Still, which is about the history of the Federal Reserve.

- "America: Freedom to Fascism", which goes into the history of the IRS and the Federal Reserve.

These were just incredible, detailed films.
5 Reasons You Should Care About Your Digital Privacy
Regarding (1), with significance testing the burden of supplying assumptions is not placed on the reader. The assumptions are implicitly built into the NHST rather than explicitly built into the prior.

As for each study becoming a meta-study, that's silly. This is indeed the chewbacca defense. Rather, each empirical study provides Bayes factors which the reader can then use to update their posteriors.

Regarding (2), obviously not every number is a measurement. In Bayesian stats, numbers representing probabilities are quite explicitly opinions. They are meaningful on a ratio scale, and are even asymptotically known to be correct. But they aren't measurements.

(They are correct if your priors are absolutely continuous w.r.t. reality. If you hold a religious belief so strong that evidence can't change it ("100% certainty"), that's not an absolutely continuous prior.)
Amid Corruption probe Cuomo deletes emails
That sounds fine in principle, but please don't tell me the future is jffs2!
"Synergize" also was not a bullshit word.
I believe that the solution could be to try to find collaboration in a liquid organization like ttps://assembly.com. I think that it's a good model exchanging labour ( instead of funding ) for shares. I haven't joined any of these projects yet for two reasons:
I am not excited by the one already available and was focused until 1 month ago on my new app for iPhone which unluckily is not going well from a sales perspective even if the little feedback from users is positive.
Good luck with your venture.
Okay, but those ad hominem attacks won't stop some people from training their machines better than implementations of these algorithms can manage the complexities between data kinds and data object noise.
​Docker Machine, Swarm, Compose: Now the orchestration tools roll out
It costs a total of about three dollars for all rounds of infant immunization in those parts of the world, that's not going to get much food. Also then the people don't get sick and health care costs are lower, so the rest of the money can go farther for things like food and education.
> Is there a department of Russia that you trust?

If you mean any department within the Government, then no, there isn't.
If you mean "mass media", there are a couple that I trust (not unreservedly, though, but I consider them to have some standards of journalistic integrity):

http://www.novayagazeta.ru/

http://tvrain.ru/

Other than those there are pretty much no news outlets in Russia when it comes to Ukraine; the rest of the saner sources of information are blogs and opinion pieces.

> Can you correct me if I'm wrong about your agreeing that both covert and overt action have been and are taken in Ukraine and other states by the US to pursue policy objectives?

No, you're not wrong, of course they do.

> I think we differ about how okay that is - you'll say that it's legal or acceptable.

As I said, I think it's acceptable as long as it is legal. I don't mind the Russians meddling in Ukrainian politics (although I'd love them not to, but that's my personal preference) by lobbying, supporting NGOs and even propagandizing (provided it's not fighting wars against Ukraine).
could you explain the distinction between saying:

"Given the evidence, there is a >=5% probability of the null hypothesis being true"

and

"There is a >=5% probability that if the null hypothesis were true, that your data would be at least as extreme"

The only difference I see is how you avoided saying anything about the null hypothesis, but I don't see how you can avoid saying anything about it.

if the h0 were true, then the probability of the result is unlikely, how can you not conclude that h0 is unlikely? What step are you missing other than collecting a preponderance of evidence against it?

The article never enters into this distinction. It makes it clear that people misinterpret evidence against the null hypothesis as evidence of the alternative, which is a false dichotomy.

I am confused. I also have sympathy for Tloewald at this point.
This would require Microsoft to take a stand on behalf of the consumer
The usual argument for how nonGPL hurts sharing is that people write improvements to the open work that the original release cannot replicate, thus outperforming it. This causes people to use different (closed-source) works on different platforms, fragmenting the community and hurting sharing.
It's a legitimate concern, like having a spammy clickbait article.

The site infringes on Github's trademarks all over the place.

Can the site still get users' time and attention without stealing Github's branding?
With Decentralization, Where Is the Money?
I'd say I'm a halfer too, but a lot of physicists/philosophers say 1/3, and it really bothers me that I can't seem to sync up with world leaders.

source : http://rfcwalters.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-sleeping-beauty-p...
The norm seems to be: Conform to what's currently in the code.

Whether it's variable names, your brace style or indenting lengths, it doesn't matter if you think your way is the best, what matters is fitting in with the existing (shared) codebase so it's readable to everyone who has been working on it for the last 5 years.

Same is true for non-style things. If your project is 100K lines of 1998-era "C-with-classes" C++ code, your modern, templated, header-only, lambda-using work of art is going to cause more friction than it helps.
Survive the Leap to Hypergrowth with This Advice from Steve Blank
Oh. I think I was confused, arrows can be equal (extensionally so), but not the 'same'.
Where did the GPL-enforcing lawyer come from? How did the lawyer get paid? For the people who wanted monetary damages, did they ever actually get significant monetary damages, or were the money claims dropped in exchange for compliance in the settlement process?
Cool trivia piece I didn't know prior to this

> And then there were the unwitting firsts, like what may be the earliest known version of “This page left intentionally blank,” preserved in a 1513 edition of the Greek orators included in the show, along with instructions to the binder to remove the extra leaf.

“He printed the instructions in Latin and Greek,” Mr. Clemons said. “But of course bookbinders couldn’t read Latin or Greek.”
The last sentence is key: 'Perhaps a "code snob" is simply the term lazy programmers use to describe their more disciplined peers.'

If your colleagues really are your peers -- in that you trust each other, don't get pissed off when someone else makes a stupid comment, or when someone points out (hopefully politely) that you made a stupid comment -- then "code snob" is a joke term.

If you aren't lucky enough to have fallen into one of those high performance teams, then both types exist: the helpful code snob and the condescending one. The latter isn't help at all.
Results of the 2015 Soylent Eaters Survey
Buffer Managers, production code and alternative implementations
Is there anything wrong with the ones that already exist, which developers already cater to? What are they accomplishing here, exactly?
You should be investing more money in your career
Just because you have no financial sense doesn't mean nobody else does.
Replace "an" with "a", assuming "a" will sometimes be pronounced "ey".
What you need to be thinking about is how different models affect incentives.

With your subscription model there's no way for the participant to work around you, but with a per-transaction based commission you need to think about how the participants are going to avoid paying you a fee.

If your drone vendors rely upon you for future work you could use the threat of kicking them off the platform to encourage them to be honest with you, but you'd need still need some independent way to verify if the transaction happened off-platform without them telling you.

Another approach might be to build a service (i.e SaaS) on-top of your marketplace that both sides of the market think is worth the commission-fee (it doesn't have to be SaaS, it could also be a traditional business service like escrow, arbitration, etc.).
So logically.....if there is less supply for the senior positions and there is a problem filling them, why isn't pay increased for these positions?