skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
These are not the rules the FCC has adopted; these are sections of Title II that could be applied to ISPs if classified as Title II Common Carriers. Keep in mind that DSL was considered Title II until it was reclassified in 2005. It's not like broadband was never regulated under Title II. It used to be, we tried things without it and things went to shit, so we're trying it again.

I like this one:

47 U.S.C. Section 202

(a) It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

This one is pretty good, too:

47 U.S.C. Section 208

(a) Any person, any body politic or municipal organization, or State commission, complaining of anything done or omitted to be done by any common carrier subject to this Act, in contravention of the provisions thereof, may apply to said Commission by petition which shall briefly state the facts, whereupon a statement of the complaint thus made shall be forwarded by the Commission to such common carrier, who shall be called upon to satisfy the complaint or to answer the same in writing within a reasonable time to be specified by the Commission. If such common carrier within the time specified shall make reparation for the injury alleged to have been caused, the common carrier shall be relieved of liability to the complainant only for the particular violation of law thus complained of. If such carrier or carriers shall not satisfy the complaint within the time specified or there shall appear to be any reasonable ground for investigating said complaint, it shall be the duty of the Commission to investigate the matters complained of in such manner and by such means as it shall deem proper. No complaint shall at any time be dismissed because of the absence of direct damage to the complainant.

This one is pretty great:

47 U.S.C. Section 251

(a) GENERAL DUTY OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS.--Each
telecommunications carrier has the duty--
(1) to interconnect directly or indirectly with the facilities and
equipment of other telecommunications carriers; and
(2) not to install network features, functions, or capabilities that do
not comply with the guidelines and standards established pursuant to
section 255 or 256.

255 is with regard to the use of telephones by those with disabilities, so it will very likely undergo forbearance.

256 is fairly long, so I won't reproduce it here. The title is pretty important though: "Coordination for interconnectivity." The full text is available here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/256
-- Konqueror
\
-- Safari
\
-- Chrome, Chromium, Opera 15+

If you want to go further Firefox's lineage is interesting but it's parent browsers are all dead.
It seems that you agree with me that funding is not NASA's primary problem (I think I am actually more optimistic about NASA's competence). The point I disagree with is "Technology is more expensive". Technology has gotten dramatically cheaper (though I agree that current projects are more difficult). We have better materials, better manufacturing techniques, better computers and all of it more affordable than it was in the 1960's. Look at what SpaceX was able to do; in their first 10 years their total expenditures was only $1 billion, a small fraction of what it would have cost half a century ago.
No, that competitors should be allowed to use the last mile to provide service. See:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_local_exchange_car...
"every minute you spend sitting shaves several years off your life"

Wow, I could be hundreds of years old if I never sit down...
FWIW, I've had much more success with HubSpot's Singularity than Marathon/Chronos. (I use Marathon to bootstrap Singularity as the "init system", because it had HA before Singularity, but that's the extent of its interaction with my system.)
History of Machine Learning, W. Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Yann LeCun
The event's probably going to be all about the watch and none about the rest.
"This thread has turned into an astro-turfing campaign for the anti-NN advocates"

It's disingenuous to call an opposing opinion "astro-turfing" in an attempt to discredit them. There are 700 total rules to the regulation. We haven't been able to see one of them. This doesn't concern you in any way?

"and a necessary thing seeing how there's virtually no competition in broadband access for most people in the US."

Tell me how more regulation will lead to more competition and a better Internet for the consumer.

"I'm finding it hard to believe that the regular HN crowd has suddenly turned virulently anti Title II. This definitely smells like a coordinated campaign to spread FUD."

Most people were afraid to talk about it because the HN community typically down votes everyone to hell that has opposing opinions.

I gave up awhile back because nobody would listen, but I'm not giving up today.

"This definitely smells like a coordinated campaign to spread FUD."

It seems you won't even listen to the opposition and are trying to discredit anyone that is against this government regulation as "FUD". It sounds like you are the astro-turfing one.

What happened to open and honest discussions?
user:	covzzire
created:	19 minutes ago
Fortunately, radio is covered under Section III of the telecommunications act and not Section II, which is limited to common carriers (of which radio, television, and cable television obviously are not).
And I am not buying a Mac to try out Safari.
> the new engine began as a fork of MSHTML.dll but has
> since diverged very quickly

Curiously, this means that Spartan will still be able to trace its lineage back to 1992's NCSA Mosiac (in contrast to Mozilla's Servo, which is a greenfield project). I expect that it will be fascinating to compare the two projects as each matures.
Unbundling means that one of several companies can provide service over the line that the "utility" installed. E.g. you could buy Cablevision service over Comcast's network.

This is unrelated to service "bundles".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_loop_unbundling
> Up until very recently, everyone considered Title II the "nuclear option."

As far back as the 90s, when Mosaic was still the most advanced browser out there, I was noting that Title II common carrier rules for ISPs were the best choice to balance free speech needs -- to prevent ISPs and Backbone providers from censoring the content they carry -- and protect ISPs from liability for their users' communications.

It's only taken two decades for the industry to realize the same.
You have to have a Facebook account to access Facebook content. I can read Twitter content without an account.
This "we haven't even seen the rules yet" line is really just a meaningless talking point promoted by NN opponents.

In the world of government regulation, is is absolutely the norm for regulations to be voted on before being made public. But that does not mean the process is not transparent: the Commission has been conducting an open proceeding for months (years, really) where they have explained their proposals to the pubic, and allowed anyone in the country to submit comments. The commissioners and their staff then look over the comments they have received, draft an order that responds to the important points raised in the comments, vote on it, and then make it public as a binding rule. Perhaps this is counterintuitive to some, and maybe it's not the best way to make rules. But there is nothing at all abnormal about it -- this is simply the process that we call "notice-and-comment rulemaking" which Congress enshrined in law almost 100 years ago when it passed the Administrative Procedures Act. Anyone who tells you that this is weird, or that the Commission is trying to pull a fast one by waiting to publish the rules, is either misinformed or intentionally trying to mislead you.

As for the meeting itself: of course it's theater. The real policy work doesn't happen in the meeting, it happens in the formal notice and comment proceeding that has been happening on paper for many many months. The meeting is primarily a political opportunity.
What about that Windows version of Safari?
How to Build an Android Wear Watch Face with Real-Time Weather Data
Clojure's Sequence Abstraction
Seems to happen to most New Technology-hobbies.
People aren't worried about the main gist. People are scared of the fine details that they categorically refused to release before voting.
I believe that you can return it within 2 weeks with no questions asked.
>> But apparently, the general population (and many here) will.

Sadly, yes. I recently purchased a home and was shocked at the logical inconsistency in the contract and the inability of ANYONE at the mortgage company to explain some of the clauses. And I often broken links in terms of service that sites make you accept. It's quite sad. What's the point of any of it?
And he's deleted it now, so maybe he didn't even know.
But he did take the criticism - he recused himself. That's the topic of the OP.
Disagree with that since New York is filled with finance and financial tech companies too. Clearly, they're doing something right there and not in Silicon Valley.

It is more likely to be an SV power thing where the nerds finally get to talk to women and only see them as objects.

Women have always been in finance (not limited to Wall St.) as even though trading is glamorous but commercial/retail banking employs a very large number of developers for boring CRUD jobs, as customer service personnel, backoffice and middle-back-office type work.

So women being treated better in the finance sector is more not less likely.
My CTO wrote custom PostgreSQL functions to generate all the JSON that our API returns. First time I saw it, I said "Holy crap, that query is two pages long. You could just tell Rails to serialize the object in 3 lines of code." He replied "I know. That's how we did it at first. But generating the JSON directly in postgres is about 700x faster."

Eventually we even moved a very complex scoring algorithm from an overnight Hadoop Java process, into Postgres as a compiled extension in C. We used to spend all night calculating those scoring results and caching them in an enormous table. But with the Postgres+C solution, we could calculate and store it in realtime by having Postgres do the hard part.
The person commenting on his pull request was not being a snob.
He was making sure there was architectural coherence across the board.

This is actually the essence of the article. When people criticize things in our code that we see as "trivial", it's EASY to mistakenly ascribe that to snobbery or being a jerk.
The entire point of this article is that we should look for the value that our peer is trying to add by pointing out inconsistencies or better ways of doing things.

Some of the best pull request comments for me have been the ones that made me say, "Dammit! .... you're right." Many of those PR comments have been replaced by impersonal linting tests that do the same, but the net result is still that I feel proud of what I write.
Statistical analysis cheat sheet
I know this is this is the narrative they are trying to promote but I remove code from my projects all the time but don't feel it makes it a different project.
I think you are on the right track

If you are google with billions in the bank, what does it matter to you if Comcast wants to charge you a little bit more? The real effect is that entrenched powers get further entrenched because of less access to alternatives.

Lets say Comcast wanted to charge search providers 500million dollars. Thats not a lot of money from Googles search engine profits. But how much is 500 million of Bings budget? Yahoos? DuckDuckGo? I would be surprised if every search provider was willing and able to pay fees like this.
As another brand new account, I could see why you'd say that. But in practice, our understanding of what people say is rooted in who they are.

If somebody wants to write a book making a formal, evidence backed argument on something, I'm less concerned with who they are. But when somebody jumps into a discussion with a few sentences, asking who they are and what their motivations are is much more reasonable. Especially on a topic where, as with this one, billions of dollars are on the line.

There are now plenty of people whose whole job is to argue a party line that may have no relation to the truth or to what the speaker believes. There's literally no point in having a serious discussion with, say, a tobacco company PR rep, because they are paid to mislead people forever, to never be convinced, and to distort the dialog as long as possible. With somebody like that, treating them like an honest interlocutor is not only a waste of time, but I believe it actively harms the discussion.
I don't even think it's HN users. There's a bunch of zero-day accounts in here parroting anti-NN talking points.
Well, considering we change the clocks to "spring forward" 2 a.m on March 8, all signs point to some kind of watch being released. The Swiss must be shaking in their boots while frantically clicking through the Android SDK. ;)
Right. We have zero issues with water availability in the world. I guess those billions being poured into desalination, water recycling and alternatives are all, forgive the pun, money down the drain?

And you're absolutely right - we have zero need for alternative energy sources (although on that, it's kinda true - I've no particular issue with nuclear fission per se, though we need to figure out something better in regards to storage, and nuclear fusion is something that merits a huge deal of research into commercial viability).
JQuery loadScroll – dynamically load images while scrolling
user:	travie7273
created:	27 minutes ago
Citation? IE shipped on Mac until Safari was released.
Given the accusation that this thread is full of astroturfing, the account karma and age of posters seem like very relevant information.
> We haven't been able to see one of them

How is that different from the other FCC policies? It's only the opposition echo chamber repeating the "secret Obama plan to control the Internet" spin.
If you'll notice, the lines of attack closely mirror the anti-Obamacare lines.

"700 regulations and no one has even read it!" is very close to the "No one — not one single member of Congress — has read the bill" Michael Steel was using in 2009.
I've used PEGs to create a compiler, and it results in clear, readable code, easy to maintain. Because the parser structure it's cleaner, it feels natural to write the parser manually with PEGs. The key is to handle parse-fail with exceptions.
Instead of having a syntax-file and a generated parser, the code is clear enough to act as low-level documentation.
see: https://github.com/luciotato/LiteScript
This argument is the essence of ad hominem. First, that disagreement is unreasonable. Second, that those who disagree have ulterior motives.
On Facebook people interacting with the content by liking and commenting will increase the content's reach by showing it to more people.
> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/proceeding/view?name=14-28.

There it is! I found the docket number but didn't know the right website to find the filings. Thanks for the link. 99 pages tho.
No long-term future for BBC licence fee say MPs
Not for nothing, but:

user:	CzechsMix
created:	11 days ago
karma:	0

People wouldn't be going "hmm, there's a lot of green names and they're all conveniently anti-NN" if there weren't. Like, y'know...you, yourself, elsewhere in this thread.
And all of the web-tech companies who support Net Neutrality rely utterly on other peoples' wires to deliver content to their users. They have a huge interest in regulating telcos into "dumb pipes." There's huge monetary incentives on both sides of this debate.
42 AI civilizations are fighting it out inside Civ 5
> because they want to be able to charge a premium for some sites

Elaborate on this plan.

> and give preferential routing to some kinds of traffic.

This is generally how the internet works. When you say "kinds" you mean surgery in action data vs. netflix data. Or when you say "kinds" do you mean netflix data vs. ISP movie provider data. That is the same kind of data.

You need to be a little more clear.

The internet gives preferential routing to certain kinds of data by design.

* A bunch of new accounts arguing the opposite as well.
It's not. Things need to change.
"Broadcast" and "hook up a server" are in no way similar under the relevant laws and regulations.

Radio broadcast is licensed because of the general problem of limited spectrum. The Internet's point-to-point nature has no such problem.

Meanwhile, the FCC already regulates all electrical devices -- including servers, your PC, and even light bulbs -- to prevent interference.

So, bad news, your fear came true -- in 1934.
This is awesome information, thank you!

Other than censorship, do you foresee any major gotchas in the upcoming regulations?
This is known for years, unbelievable how many people still exploit this for page clicks.
Unfortunately the Net Neutrality 'debate' was another lose-lose situation for the United States. What we wanted wasn't for the big telecom duopoly to be forced to either run their business as a tiered service or as a regulated utility. What we wanted was for the US Government to exercise its Anti-Trust capabilities and bust the universally hated Comcast and Time Warner into a bunch of small companies, and set "Goldilocks" regulation so that it's easy for small and new ISPs to compete on both price and service. Additional laws preventing corporations from discriminating by content, protocol, or customer may also have been nice, but would have been that extra nice something.

Are Comcast and Time Warner going to be somehow less shitty now? Are they going to monitor our communications less? Are they going to provide better prices and better customer service? Are they going to cease fraudulently charging customers? No.

Of the two options the FCC chose the better one. But it's America's fatal flaw that all problems have two political solutions, neither of which address real issues or people's needs.
this sounds amazing! aside from the organics-only requirement (which makes sense to me), what other limitations are there on what you can make? or is everything basically open given a long enough search?
Why the fuck did anyone ever think vendor prefixes are a good idea? If you want to prefix, prefix with versions.

I should be able to type `-beta-mask-image: url()` and any browser that implements that version of the spec can pick it up. There's no good reason to have to type the same exact thing 3 times to target each browser engine.
> they paid Comcast some large fee to upgrade links to one or more transit providers

Do you have a link for that? I was unaware of any of that happening. It was my understanding that Netflix is engaging in paid peering directly with Comcast now (http://bgp.he.net/AS2906#_peers).

You're right that Netflix isn't technically buying transit from Comcast, but they replaced their transit purchased from Cogent with paid peering purchased from Comcast; the net effect is the same.

> It's hard to think of an explanation for these peering disputes between CDNs/transit providers and consumer ISPs that doesn't imply ISP hostage-taking.

I think that's exactly what's happening here, but it's done as a bargaining chip in the never-ending peering wars, rather than Comcast specifically engaging in rent-seeking from Netflix. The history of settlement-free peering is long and sordid, and last-mile providers have been at odds with the T1s for decades. Netflix massively amplified that dispute simply by virtue of the amount of bandwidth they consume.
We have put my daughter on a gluten free diet for reasons that aren't relevant to this article... the byproduct has resulted in a decrease in gluten in my own diet (pretty much extinction). I have always had intestinal issues and a while back was able to alleviate them considerably with the decrease in dairy.

I wouldn't say that I noticed a lessening of symptoms when we switched to gluten free diet BUT I did recently buy a bread machine and started making gluten based bread regularly (and eating a lot of it). Symptom wise I have felt much worse than ever before... no idea if there's a link... but it was interesting to note (had to rack my brain to figure out why I felt so bloated and crummy). Only real change was the consumption of more bread than usual.
Although I am similarly skeptical, this type of regulation would be next to impossible when considering the architecture of computer networks.
Google ups free song storage limit to 50,000 songs on Google Play
It's spelled filter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_%28higher-order_function...
Me too. I tried to get my body used to it for couple of day but couldn't deal with constant nausea and flatulence.
Where I work we keep on each other about nitpicky things, but when we do it, we declare it. You will frequently see "Nitpick: don't like the variable name. Maybe try <somethingLessCrappyThanWhatTheyWrote>"

And you know what? No one complains. If you don't want nitpicks, conform to the coding standard of the place of which you work. It is _their_ code after all.
What leads you to believe that it's a fairly simple change?
Branch Metrics Raises $15M to Scale Deep-Linking Technology
Optimizing for large scale production is indeed what most of the field works on. There have been many success stories: an anti-malarial drug through yeast (Artemisinin by Amyris+Sanofi), a plastic precursor through bacteria (1,4-BDO by Genomatica+DuPont), and more.

What they are missing is the whole spectrum of what could be made biologically. We will create microbes for the most valuable chemicals and then partner with existing optimization companies that have industrial fermenters running. Think beer fermentation, just instead of the alcohol yeast, you use our yeast.
> balance free speech needs -- to prevent ISPs and Backbone providers from censoring the content they carry

Unless it's not deemed "legal." And I'm not talking about torrenting.
Cocoapods Test Jam - campaign for untested iOS/OSX libraries
Booktrope (YC W15) Rethinks Book Publishing
AMLogic seems to be decent, though I haven't had to delve into it personally so I can't say for sure how complete their source releases are. See here, for instance: http://openlinux.amlogic.com:8000/download/ARM/
> Conservatives don't like it because it allows the FCC to do things like rate-setting, even if this administration chooses not to use that power. Liberals don't like the specter of FCC regulation of content.

This is a funny line of reasoning on the part of Conservatives. Reclassification under Title II is supposedly bad because it allows future Commissions to impose rate-setting requirements. But, in the absence of Title II reclassification today, a future Commission could still have imposed a rate-setting regime. How? They could have reclassified broadband under Title II! In other words, reclassification under Title II today doesn't allow future Commissions to do anything they couldn't have done before, if they wanted to, because in either case, the the Commission has the power to take both steps simultaneously.

I guess you could argue that it makes it easier politically to impose rate setting in the future. But I'm not sure this holds any water if the very thing that worries most critics of Title II reclassification is rate setting.