skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"What happened to open and honest discussions?"

I just went through your recent comment history and it's pretty clear you're interested in no such thing. You've been blindly repeating Fox News style prepared talking points without regards to actual information presented to you. As an example this was explained to you in another subthread below:

"Regulatory orders aren't generally published before being approved by the initiating authority (preliminary notices that are subject to revision before being approved are published when those are approved by the authority, as was the case with the NPRM on this issue published last year. The final decision based on the NPRM and public comment received since the NPRM, is what was voted on today, which will then be published.
This is the processed followed by basically every regulatory body for virtually every regulatory action in the US government (sometimes there isn't an advanced notice like the NPRM, however.)" by dragonwriter

As just one more examples out of dozens more, here's what tzs explained to you in another thread yesterday:

---

> The FCC has a 332 page plan to regulate the Internet (which the public does not have a chance to even look over before it is passed)

No, the FCC does not have a 332 page plan to regulate the internet. Tom Wheeler has a plan, although it is much much shorter to 332. The 300+ pages is for a document that includes his plan, a long explanation of the reasons and the authorities for each part, and a long look at the large number of comments that were received after last years FCC plan.
The FCC will have a plan if the Commissioners vote in a couple day to make adopt Wheeler's plan, at which point it will then be available for public comment so that we can all see it and comment. After that, the FCC decides to adopt it or not.

---

Seeing your ad-nauseam repetition of the same talking points while utterly disregarding cogent responses to them, it's a pretty safe bet that your opinions and desire for "open and honest discussion" carries as much weight as those of party hacks screaming at each other on cable news.
Not to mention that companies like Comcast have their foot in the online entertainment content game, and could very easily use paid prioritization to get an unfair advantage over competing services.
I don't know if this list is useful for "learning to code", but I have been at this for the past 20 years and I'm still learning to code!

These are my own silent confessions. YMMV.

1. Condition yourself to be sharply aware and mindful whenever you're "copying and pasting". It's a big code smell. Stop, think and ask if you can refactor sensibly into reusable functions, views, models etc.

2. Be ruthless with naming conventions. If a table, function, API name doesn't sound like what it is supposed to be doing or used for, change it before it's too late. You'll be very sorry if you let this type of procrastination pass as it will confuse you later or worse may have cascading effect on poor naming conventions because one object was named incorrectly at the start.

3. If you find your own code difficult to enhance and modify the next time you visit it, spend the time immediately to refactor. Next time it's easier to continue. Avoiding this will result in two things:

3.1 You'll subconsciously develop a strong aversion to visiting the piece of code again (often resulting in all sorts of compensating hacks. Unhealthy holy cows can emerge.)

3.2 You'll doom your successor for sure.

4. Don't write programs with no runtime configuration capabilities.

5. Don't write programs with more than 2 runtime configuration options. If your program needs more than 2, ship - then add as enhancement.

6. Condition yourself to always think of loading resources as late as possible and release as early as possible. Make this an OCD type of habit. It pays off.

7. Finally, don't be intimidated by the experts in the field. Don't ever strive to be better than or compare yourself competitively with anyone else. The experience is for yourself. Your programs are your own works, and your curiosity, creativity and insight should drive your passion to improve daily.

(The last point applies to bodybuilding to, I suppose.)
> Maybe he doesn't want to risk his Karma on this one.

If someone values conserving worthless internet points over having a conversation, they deserve the downvotes they get.

> Are you suggesting it's some kind of conspiracy?

Given the number of brand new accounts spitting ISP talking points, yes.
That ch5 pdf is from the book I mentioned, I didn't know Mr. Tropashko made it available for free, great! (We have conversed briefly in 2006 when I was designing the menu tree system for Drupal 6 and he sent me the draft of that chapter.)
Stick around and be a productive member of the community and I'll happily engage you in debate. But I don't see much point debating with < 1 hour old accounts spitting ISP talking points -- so far it's most likely you're just an astroturfing corporate shill. I can't prove it of course, I'm just playing the odds.
Every major source of my income over the past ten years has started as a side project. Not a single one came out of a deliberate effort to build something big but began as a mere experiment for the fun of it.
There was an error in the LMS software. I have fixed the videos by re-uploading everything.
I'm not the GP, but I've helped others by sending them market rate stats etc, and talked about negotiations generally (e.g: ALWAYS negotiate an offer).

Jealousy is real, it will impact your day to day relationships with people.
Nah, it won't mean a thing. Microsoft still has almost 60% of the desktop browser market share.

http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qpri...

Unfortunately, they have no mobile market share, and this is where most people will be browsing the web.

http://9to5mac.com/2015/02/24/ios-android-duopoly-marketshar...
> Nobody is against NN.

Lots of people in this debate have come out specifically against net neutrality.

> The problem here is that the FCC is detonating a nuclear bomb to try to put out a house fire.

That's the argument that a lot of people who were publicly anti-neutrality until the last few months have suddenly swung around to, sure.
I really hope that's not what we've come to.
Just spent the last month filming, editing, and making this class — So excited that it's going live! If anyone has questions, I helped make this class, so feel free to ask me any questions.
All that demonstrates is that interlink between the ISP and other transit providers isn't saturated. By using a VPN you change the routing of your request, you don't just mask the endpoint. A VPN'd request that gets carried over a saturated interlink would suck just as much as a non-VPN'd request.
The Corporate Bullshit Generator
The industry is already highly regulated, and there's a difference between thinking an industry should be unregulated and thinking that not all conceivable regulations are good for an industry.
To try WebKit you don't need to. It builds a very basic browser, either GTK+ or Qt based.
The way I know that eropple knows what he's talking about is that I've been reading his comments for years, and so have a sense of his competence, interest, and manner of thinking.

They reason I suspect you don't is that you've turned up with a brand new account and an apparent partisan interest. If you would like not to be suspected like that, you could, as I and eropple have, connect you account to your full identity rather than concealing it while lashing out at others.
This is interesting, as before now, I considered most claims of gluten sensitivity (that weren't specifically related to Celiac disease) to be part of a health fad. This study would seem to contradict that.

Are these P numbers actually a large effect, though? This doesn't seem to have freely available full text.
> There are 700 total rules to the regulation. We haven't been able to see one of them.

The FCC published the proposal in May. You've had 9 months to comment on it.
Ask HN: Non-programmer wants to build a startup. Learn to code?
how many of you learned to code to build a startup(or would like to)? Does it make sense at all?
> It is a fact that they did not work to get mainline Linux support for their SoCs.

Though it is possible. I got mainline Linux running on an A10.
> Are you suggesting it's some kind of conspiracy?

Despite the Tumblr feminist movement, I don't think most people are in favor of this sort of regulation, and there isn't sufficient monetary motivation that I can see for such regulation to happen.

However, I do agree that this kind of regulation would also be bad. But again: we can cross that bridge when (if?) we come to it.
Building a Desktop REPL
Rather not: http://forum.odroid.com/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=9639
I bought one assuming the openness status was better, but https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/ looks better, sadly.
It's not the job of the government to make companies less shitty, it's their job to protect the free market so OTHER companies can reduce the shittiness of e.g. comcast. This is just the first step.

I'd also like to point out that splitting up Ma Bell hardly solved the problem.
GRPC: A high performance, open source, general RPC framework
Then be prepared to change the rules that _all_ independent regulatory bodies with a voting commission operate under. Because this is SOP.
I think that eventually what's happening with TV and radio will happen with other types of media. I almost never watch TV ads anymore. I get more and more content through iTunes, Netflix, HBO, etc. where there are no ads. I TiVo anything I want to watch from the networks (even live events) and skip the ads. For radio, I use Podcasts, iTunes Radio and Pandora, and I pay to not have ads. I use AdBlock on the web, but mostly use sites that either don't have ads, or I pay to get rid of them when I'm able.

I'm sure free content with ads will exist forever, but I suspect people will find more and more paid options and start using them as ads get more and more intrusive.
Assuming you mix it hot, how does that effect the Soylent? Does anything break down and lose nutritional value?
Gun – Self-hosted Firebase
Just like pretty much every other company. Very few have protectable IP.
Ahh, they're big, so they must know better than us. You're not actually making any salient points, other than appealing to authority and big bank accounts (sounds a little like the Republicans). In fact you haven't made a salient point anti NN in this entire thread other than to complain about people questioning people's motives.

And then there's this. I'm not sure what it's meant to mean.

Although, I have seen the cost of some Cisco networking devices. I know exactly what they stand to gain from a tiered Internet (Hint: Billions in sales to telcos looking to shape their traffic based on contracts).
You could even set your servers to TAI and adjust for leap seconds in your app, so that you don't have to worry about timestamps going backwards during leap seconds.
Why couldn't we just get congress to pass a law stating that ISP's cannot throttle one type of content in favor of another? Why this heavy handed approach?
Docker Compose 1.1.0
That had more to do with the fact that Windows depends on the Trident than the other way around. Stuff like the help files used mshtml.dll.
The BBC's between a rock and a hard place, and attacked from all quarters: conservatives hate it because it's bloated and full of left wingers. Left wingers hate it because it's supposedly the voice of the establishment. It's done itself no favours by competing on ratings and pop culture, and it is definitely losing its position as lighthouse of Britishness. Despite everything, it's scary that one of the most successful public broadcasters in the world may see its funding gutted out.
I sooooo wish someone would do this study and include in it a survey of gut flora through out the tests.
You're technically correct. The best kind of correct!
Ask HN: Anyone have a Co-founder Memorandum of Understanding laying around?
Did a quick search but could not find anything useful just yet...
If you are not a serious interlocutor, then there is no point in explaining anything to you. It's like trying to get to know a bot. And getting off in the 101 stuff for the zillionth time is a distraction from having a more interesting and substantive discussion.

And given that you're apparently mainly here to throw shade on people discussing this in ways you don't approve of, I have no reason to think you're a serious participant who's actually after a useful discussion.
I haven't thought about it enough, but I suspect it's more of a problem on the VPN side; IP addresses were never intended to be private or sensitive. My suspicion is that this is another case of NAT being the reason we can't have nice things.
> I wouldn't sign a contract without reading it (and having the person on the other side telling me all of the reasons why I should), and neither should you. But apparently, the general population (and many here) will.

You were told this was wrong yesterday, and I know you saw that because you responded.

Why are you still repeating it?

Once again, we will all have plenty of time to read these regulations before they are enacted.

Here is how this works, and how it has worked for well over 50 years, as required by the Administrative Procedure Act, at most or all agencies, not just the FCC.

1. Someone at the agency decides to propose rules.

2. They circulate those rules within the agency for discussion, and they may modify them based on that discussion.

3. When they feel that the rules are ready for consideration as an official proposal, they bring them to a vote among before the Commissioners. (Well, for the FCC it is the Commissioners. I have not idea what the corresponding group at, say, the FAA, is called. It would be cool if they were the Aviators, but it is probably something lame).

4. If the rules pass this vote, the agency then publishes them in the Federal Register as a "Notice of Proposed Rule Making" (NPRM). A public commentary period, normally 60 days, begins.

5. People then comment on the rules. They comment on other people's comments.

6. If there are a lot of comments, the agency might extend the commentary period.

7. When the commentary period ends, the agency considers the comments, and decides if it is going to go ahead and enact the rules, or start over, or not regulate at all at this time.

We just finished step #3 and #4 is starting. The published proposal has to include the objections raised by the Commissioners who voted against them, with responses to those objections by those who supported the proposal, so there will be a short delay before publication and the start of the comment period.
In DannyBee's original post, he says that the key words there are "for anyone that makes any claim (including by filing any lawsuit, assertion or other action)", and that by including the words for "assertion or other action", it encompasses claims outside of a court of law. A post on Hacker News or a tweet on Twitter is an assertion, and so would fall under this. Otherwise why include that language?

IANAL, but he is, and this is his area of expertise (IIRC he runs the open-source program for Google).
>There's a group of parents who try to cure their children's autism by making them drink diluted chlorine bleach and giving them enemas of the same stuff.

That's a crime. Full stop. Those parents should be charged to the fullest extent of the law.

>They get their advice from a couple who make money from the sale of books, supplements and services related to this horribly misguided and abusive practice. Would it be wrong to try to silence the perpetrators?

YES IT WOULD! (I wish I could make this larger, bold, blinking, and shouting.) Writing that one should do something stupid and dangerous is not a crime, otherwise half of the clickbait articles on the web would result in jail time for the posters.

Thoughts, in and of themselves, don't MAKE people do anything. The person hearing them always has a choice.

Now if you want to make it illegal to SELL their supplies because they're a risk to public health then go right ahead. A restriction on commerce is not a restriction on speech. We criminalize representing oneself as a doctor if you're not. What you're not allowed to do is shut someone up if you don't like what they're saying.
I just finished hiring interns for this year and I heard that the good interns were taken back around November.

You could send out resumes in March for a 2016 internship.
> Even Eric Schmidt told Obama it was a bad idea.

If you are referring to Google's concerns voiced after early outlines of the Title II approach, they objected to something that was discussed earlier as part of the approach -- identifying a "service" provided to edge providers by ISPs distinct from that provided to retail customers, and classifying that newly-identified service under Title II -- because it might create a basis for ISP to edge provider charges.

This provision, from subsequent outlines provided, is not part of the final package, which only addresses retail broadband service as a Title II service and addresses ISP to edge provider relations in terms of the impact they have on retail customers.
If people in the past have written bad js which worked in IE, Microsoft aren't now going to break that code. They don't consider saying "tough luck" to businesses with code which works for them today acceptable.
Alex Blumberg with Tim Ferriss on How to Make an iTunes Chart Topping Podcast
Apple Event Slated for March 9: Here Comes the Apple Watch
Are you saying you leave your kids home alone while going out because you are afraid of car accidents?
And the claims are identical, it's only the wording that differs. Compare it to pink and blue toothbrushes.
I hope those 9,000 sites include github. IE hangs when confronted with a github display of a PR that has more than 1000 lines of diff's.
Facebook now supports 3D embeds via Sketchfab
The other major one that garners complaints is the regulations surrounding rate and fee setting. But the FCC has already stated that those would be under forbearance.

And even if they weren't, there is a clear process for companies to petition for forbearance on regulations which they find too burdensome.
The Affordable Healthcare Act was gigantic and created by morons, but by most metrics is improving the American healthcare system. The argument that the government can not act in a way that improves things, even if it is not the perfect solution, is contrary to fact.

EDIT: I treat down-votes in the absence of a counter-argument as up-votes.
When was the last time you heard a Republican politician on the national stage raise an issue that was not obviously directed at their base, or donors?

A comment that plainly stated a fact in a noninflammatory way?

Or proposed a course of action that was not designed to be punitive to some group, or alternately, designed to disproportionately benefit the powerful?

Republicans inhabit a carefully-crafted parallel reality that is at the breaking point of divergence from American and global first-world society.

Personally, I'll take them seriously when they change their methods and rhetoric, which is probably never.

Their current attitude and language indicates they are not interested in either my vote, or my problems.
How many times in the past did the FCC vote on internet or broadcast policies using the same process as this one resulting in regulations that protected special interests at the expense of consumers?
I get that a retina macbook air would be great, but the big selling point of the macbook air is its battery life, and I don't anticipate them sacrificing that.
It's for tiebreakers.
I certainly support any drive for code that is cleaner or more consistent, I just feel like for every good "code snob" there are a lot of "code snobs" that are basically just bikeshedding.

By that I mean that they don't know how to fix poorly structured code, suggest a better algorithm, or improve the interface... but they still want to feel and look useful, so they instead burn a lot of time finding relatively trivial things to change.
From 60,000 Readers to 1
> I just went through your recent comment history and it's pretty clear you're interested in no such thing. You've been blindly repeating Fox News style

> Seeing your ad-nauseam repetition of the same talking points

Attack the argument -- not the person.
It's not a "bill", it's FCC regulations, and this has already been explained in about 10 comments throughout this thread.

Are you a real user, or a paid astroturfer?
I was wondering why they were painting the Yerba Buena center yesterday. The railing and awning were yellow and I saw a bunch of painters out there painting everything gray. When I walked by today, almost everything was gray. I'm hoping for some retina macbook air, new macbook pro and of course the watch.
http://www.thesafemac.com/arg/
"we'll start seeing more back-end usage of .NET." Outside of startup world, it is already used everywhere.
"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"

As we all have seen in the past, the proposals they explain and the final rules that become law are usually different. We should be able to see these proposals.

"Perhaps this is counterintuitive to some"

This just illuminates why this process needs to be changed. "counterintuitive" is a nice way of describing our lack of freedom and the lack of transparency in choices that will directly effect all of our lives.
They would be better served long-term by overall growth in internet traffic. But large corporations beholden to the stock market don't want to have to explain to Wall Street that earnings are going to tank next quarter after some of their most lucrative customers went elsewhere in retaliation for their political stance.
Could someone explain for the ignorant what "rate setting" means in this context?

Does it refer to download/upload rates, or does it refer to $$ rates (between whom)?
Microsoft is going to use its muscle and position to make a truly competitive browser.

Isn't this the line with each and every release of IE? Why is this different? Each prior version of IE was proclaimed some revolution of some sort.

EDIT: Downvotes? Really? I see the front page is starting to get curiously Microsoft heavy again.

We've heard the "this time it's different" argument with IE7, IE8, IE9, IE10, and now IE11. Each time some shill would declare "finally! This changes everything! Microsoft has the resources and know-how to beat everyone" And the world moved on.
"Tell me how more regulation will lead to more competition and a better Internet for the consumer."

I would bet our internet bill will start to look like our phone bill with lots of little fees and taxes tacked on. One of them will probably be titled something like "Affordable Internet Access Tax".
Nothing is going to happen in the next couple of weeks.

There are going to be lawsuits galore that will hold up any significant changes to internet services for years.
"Because the patriarchy discourages women from feeling empowered to try new things." -from a feminist
So, to you, the leak is that the pentagon review thinks Snowden damaged the US's national security? That's not a leak.

The two members of congress had access to that report because of their position on the House Intelligence Committee. It was not leaked to them.

You've basically cited the same thing three times now, and it doesn't say what you think it apparently says. I understand you're deeply invested in this emotionally though. So I am done discussing this with you.
I don't think it's written from scratch. Why would it be? WPF and Windows Forms have some Windows specific stuff that would be irrelevant in a cross-platform version.