skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If she wrote what you did, then she might have a point. (My understanding of English really is that an argument can mean debate as well, or maybe confusingly, the debate consists of arguments.) If you're talking about people who have power over another, that's a different situation. But then, that wouldn't exactly fit with majority of "vim vs. emacs" type discussions I have ever had, even online, so the argument (see :-)) breaks down.

In cases where you are arguing with peers, I think people back off in debates in cases where their own argument is not very strong. If I tell someone strong in Java, say, let's do it this way, and he (loudly) says "no way", without explanation, I may think, "OK, this guy knows Java really well, I respect his authority on the matter, then probably my idea is not very good". And I may decide to drop it, not worry about it, and do more useful things. If I think I have a strong argument, I may pursue it and let him explain his reasoning. This is actually not submitting to authority, it's respecting it. If I think he doesn't know Java, I would always pursue. It may be sometimes wrong to do it, but it's also very efficient most of the time, not to have endless debates with people who know what they are doing. That's why it's always a call, and if you want to be really professional, you should not be afraid to pursue a good argument, regardless of what the other party is doing. (And if you work for a boss/authority who doesn't recognize it, I suggest change of job.)

I work for American company, and I can tell you, American act far more "professionally" than Czechs, and sometimes it is indeed really nice. Czechs are also a bit more honest - if they feel something is wrong, they will tell you straight. So trust me, what she describes has not much to do with competitivness.
Thanks - I somehow managed not to look at that (saw it now after Twitter feedback). I can't edit my earlier comments so I'll just amend here instead: There are open source lawyers who consider simple permissive licenses such as Modified BSD and MIT to have an implicit patent grant. The first public discussion I found on this after a quick search is at http://lwn.net/Articles/389016/ - would love to see more and earlier.

If you the licensee also consider Modified BSD to have an implicit patent grant then the React patent grant is much worse for you than if it hadn't existed.

Guess I'm less less-informed now.
> I don't think depression is especially hard to detect/diagnose.

Diagnosis is easy, it's accurate diagnosis which is hard.

I mean, how do you even start to figure out the false-positive/false-negative error rates of our current techniques, let alone know that they are "pretty good"? This is especially worrisome when you consider how the very definition of "depression" is slippery and subjective with an additional cloud of minor variations.

That's exactly why objective and measurable tests should be pursued: They offer us tools to start figuring out how much of our confidence for a yes/no diagnosis is misplaced, and whether we might be muddying the waters by lumping disparate conditions together.
From an avid FB user who spent three hours a day to someone who has his account deactivated for more than a month, that is how much convinced i am that FB is nothing but utter garbage and i just had enough with it.
> Does this make his opinion on Facebook or privacy or freedom any more correct or valid? No.

And whose opinions are correct on the topic? Who should we listen to then?

Opinions are opionions and we can all evaluate them. Hopefully we can evaluate them objectively regardless who came up with them.

> he obviously fails to understand the entire point behind many of these companies.

He doesn't huh. Ok, if it is so obvious, can you list the things he doesn't understand.

> it's because it leads to a better working social network.

Granted, pretty much every single loss of privacy rule (or law) has been under the guise of "oh but this is good for you actually".

> _viable_ company that wants to provide a service that a consumer other than Stallman himself will use will "infringe" on those two idiotic requirements.

Really? Ok let's see, I launch my editor, I type in some code, then save it and compile. I just got a service provided to me by the authors of those programs and it might seem idiotic, but I value that service and value that I ran free software and didn't have to send my name to anyone to register that I did that.
There are many source online that refute the "nothing to hide" argument, and they can go into quite some details. Suffice it to say, you have a right to privacy. If you wish for something to stay private (for example, to protect yourself from harm) you have that right. Whilst in most free societies it's seldom required, there may come a time when tyranny takes over. If you've already given up your right to privacy, you'll find few protections left. History has many example of tyrants that, given the data mining capabilities of today, would have probably caused even more harm and suffering.
All I have to say is that uthash and company was a lifesaver in my must-be-written-in-C compiler course. It really, really simplified things. Of course it can't just be bolted on, you need to write your code with some crazy macros.

http://troydhanson.github.io/uthash/
> Don't join a site where the goal is to publicly connect
> with people you know.

That's all well and good until your child's school starts requiring you to do so to sign up for parent-teacher conferences, say.

There's all sorts of stuff being done via Facebook that really shouldn't be totally public but is because some _one_ person has decided to put it all out there, violating the privacy of all the other people involved.

Yes, this happened before Facebook. The difference is that Facebook actively tries to get people to do such things.
This is awesome. I'm investing in Waterloo, Ontario and I've built my own spreadsheets to help me make good investment decisions. This blows it out of the water. I'm glad you made this product.
Can I just say how goddamned responsible that is. Thank you.
Web Development as a career – the realities
Does this make his opinion on Facebook or privacy or freedom any more correct or valid? No.

Respect for Stallman's opinions derives not from his code, but from his consistency in adhering to his (extreme) principles and correctly seeing how those principles are affected by new developments in technology.

He's right about DRM because DRM, not because Emacs. Time will show what else he's right about. Living like Stallman does may not be practical, but that doesn't make him wrong.
I like: https://stallman.org/common/stallman.css
Right and wrong are subjective terms, plus perceptions of those terms will change.
But what kind of case could the bank possibly have against his employer of all people? I would think that any sane judge would dismiss that case as completely ridiculous pretty quickly. His employer is just as much at fault for being spineless and not sticking up for their employee who did nothing wrong as the bank is for harassing him.
> if you talk about your friends in Facebook, you're ratting on them

This statement reveals the paranoid perspective behind this publication.

While there are many valid reasons why some people may not want to use Facebook, I think it's as interesting to wonder reasons why people would be so opposed to everyone using it.

I think had Stallman been less weird, he may feel differently about Facebook. For someone like him, any personal details visible to others is likely to result in harm to him.

When you don't fit, everything hurts, and it's easy to feel like all those institutions are evil. But that's just you Richard. For most people, Facebook isn't much of a threat.
Sorry I'm on mobile so I can give one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Read
If everybody read important books by people they disagreed with, we would all be better of.
>I honestly don't understand why people value Stallman's opinions on these matters so highly.

I consider the Snowden revelations a cast iron validation of his so-called paranoia. He was in a small minority back then, and the revelations proved him right. That counts for a lot.

>Just like I wouldn't listen to Usain Bolt

Who should we listen to then? You?
Is it running on IL2CPP Unity? Noticed that it is after Feb 1st and a new game.

Great looking game and near perfection on gameplay, idea, brand, art, assets, ui, icon etc. Flawless victory.
Phone number verification? I have an iPhone, which doesn't ever let apps read text messages, which actually would be nice sometimes when my banking app would like to verify it's running on my phone, as opposed to somebody else's phone.
This Machine Builds Obscure Molecules from Scratch in Hours
"According to our Add-on Dev Relations Lead (jorgev), since the tracking in blocksite is "opt in", it doesn't actually violate any of the AMO policies."

I know, but it says something about the Mozilla Foundation that they let that through.
For me the correct position is to recognise that the law isn't fixed and absolute, but dynamic (as interpreted through the courts) and evolving.

Without privacy (or with pervasive surveillance), we might never have achieved the critical mass required to overturn historical legislation regarding blasphemy, homosexuality, drug use, etc.

In other words, privacy provides the necessary sand-box for the evolution of law.
That is no wonder, because the Germans seem to be extremist with this. We have had similar problems in Finland: my local water utility had to flush some clean water straight to the sewage system, because people started saving water and sewage lines started to clog up.

You can get around this problem partially by designing the sewage system to deal with this (handles better a larger portion of solid matter in the wastewater, includes pipelines for flushing fresh water through it).

Still, too much frugality is not a good thing. We nowadays use washing machines and dishwashers that are built to German specification.

The washing program is a compromise of water amount, temperature, duration, and mechanical wear during the wash. We now have machines where the water amount and temperature are prioritized. Thus the washing program takes a long time, and it puts a lot of mechanical wear to clothes.

This is OK for Germany, where water is somewhat scarce. You have one city pulling its water from the Rhine, purifying it, using it, and putting the managed wastewater back to the Rhine, then the next city a few kilometres downstream does the same, and then the next. The purification is an expensive process.

But we don't have that; we have a pipe from a lake that contains already-drinkable water in abundance, and it needs just a bit of cleansing of solid matters before delivering to consumer pipes, and it is better than in Germany. Then, after using this water, the wastewater needs to be managed, regardless of where the clean water came from

But now the bottom line is, we save water that we wouldn't need to save, then we flush sewage pipes with fresh water, and when I put my clothes to my Miele, I wait for two hours to wash the cotton program, and wear out the clothes too soon because the washing machine rubs and whirls them half-dry.
Which Mac OS version comes with BSD diff?
Hmm, hadn't heard of that one before.
This is great. After seeing this in use at React.js Conf I was wondering who would step forward to take this on.
Windows 8 runs really well on older hardware. My friend used it to revive a lot of old laptops.
Inexperienced developers would benefit most from reading this, but its also harder for them to put any of it into practice ... in your first job you're usually just scrambling around day to day trying to get a handle on the work, and also to fit into the workplace culture.
We are using Spark in production at a very large enterprise. One thing that has really helped us is Spark Job Server from Ooyala. I love the way you can share SparkContexts and just track what is happening:

http://engineering.ooyala.com/blog/open-sourcing-our-spark-j...
I think, that if you look a bit closer, you'll be able to discern exactly why Stallman's 'BS' is deemed more acceptable than Watson's 'BS'.
> We call them "useds" rather than "users" because Facebook is using them, not vice versa.

This line summarizes it all up.
C'mon Ted, you knew what he meant, there's no reason to be that snarky.

For anyone who does not know, __david__ is most likely referring to the GNU coreutils and GNU diffutils, which do indeed credit Richard Stallman in the AUTHOR section, not any BSD, AT&T or other versions of those utilities.
OpenBSD, so, uh, not a Mac. But you asked to try it. :)
Thanks @itschaffey it would be great to see how you guys would change it to make it fit to your own needs and make it work even better!
> To most people, "if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" sounds reasonable.

I know it's impossible, but I really recommend people who have that opinion to watch the TED talk by journalist Glenn Greenwald.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcSlowAhvUk
I'm with you. Seems like FUD here with this post, there are a few decent ideas about privacy but its a social network and used for connecting to people. Maybe they can relax the real name policy some more but I have plenty of friends that don't use their actual real/legal name and never had a problem.

There are effective privacy controls in place now and things like being served ads is such a silly issue to complain about... it's a business that needs to make money, how else is that supposed to happen?

What is the overall point at the end of this? Basically we should all just be anonymous forever? Facebook is just a decade old, society/culture is still catching up and we really don't need all this doom/gloom every time. And yea, I didn't know who this guy was until this post.
His opinions(!) provide an useful reference point, especially since I can trust that they are on one extreme end of the spectrum. I certainly don't agree with all of them, but they make me think about where I make concessions and where I maybe missed that. I rather read an opinion and decide "no, I won't go that far/that is ok for me" instead of being told "all is fine".
This is probably due to that elderly people tend to be more wealthy, so they can afford a more expensive car. And hybrids are often nice.
Thanks, excellent comments on that thread. Not sure why the URL wasn't detected as a dupe.
We've come to talk about the Von Neumann architecture, but the information contained in his report on the EDVAC was largely lifted from the work of John Mauchly and Presper Eckert. Von Neumann's contribution was the relatively pedestrian task of translating their findings into mathematical language. He inappropriately put it into the public domain without attribution simultaneously diminishing their place in history while unjustly cementing his. Not to mention, he destroyed their chances of earning a patent. It's a real shame that we tend to gloss over this nowadays for expedience's sake.
Is psychological pricing (3 cents below the dollar) necessary? Does it make a material difference to sales?
Arguably I am collaborating just fine.

I agree with the whiteboard part of your comment, but don't feel that I stated something to the opposite effect in my original comment?
There will always be times when the moral and just thing to do is to break the law. Without privacy, you are not free to break those laws.

If you're happy living under a police state in meek compliance then you have nothing to hide. If you'd turn over Anne Frank to the authorities in a heartbeat then you have nothing to hide.

If you ever plan on doing the right thing by disobeying the authorities, at any point in the future, then you need privacy now. Later might be too late.
GraphX actually graduated from Alpha in Spark 1.2.

We have a few important improvements and changes to GraphX planned for 1.4, including Java API, and possibly a Python API.
>4chan has provided and continues to provide a raw visage of how people behave given total anonymity.

I think that is a foregone conclusion. It shows how people can behave. But I think other behaviours are also possible.
It is a community so it will be joined by like minded individuals, creating a self-perpetuating culture.

Another anonymous community may create a different culture.
Privacy and freedom are different concepts, though. A world in which the government can monitor all of your phone calls, but it not allowed by law to stop them or prosecute you over their contents still preserves freedom very strongly, without any privacy (assuming the law constraining the government is enforceable, and extra judicial or spurious prosecutions are not a tool commonly available to the state). A world in which technology (or lack thereof) makes wiretapping impossible, gives a lot of privacy to people, but if you can still be arrested because of distributing a leaflet, it provides little freedom.

Thing is, even in a world where freedom of expression were inviolable (and it isn't quite this world, so in reality, privacy helps support freedom of expression), we'd still want privacy to be a human right. Animals don't behave the same when they know they are always being watched. Pervasive surveillance inhibits thought, breeds abuse and unnecessarily limits human behavior.

Also, in the end, we have the right to have things to hide. We have the right to say and do things we are ashamed of, or aren't sure are right, or we are not ready to defend under scrutiny of society at large. We have the right to share thoughts with others that we are not ready to defend from strangers, even if the law prevents such strangers from hurting us because our thoughts. Society needs to be able to discuss heresy, and revolution, and treason, because what for one generation is treason and heresy, for the next might be justice and freedom. But it also needs to be able to have some of those discussions in dark, private places, because a lot of great thoughts will only ever bloom in the dark. Even if mass surveillance worked (it doesn't), even if abuse could be curtailed (it can't), even if it gave us a world without crime (it won't), the price to pay would be a world where our thoughts are constrained by the fear of other's seeing them in their underdeveloped raw form.
Why? There are tons of online communities that mostly know each other by handles and still might profit from using facebook. Right now they stay entirely seperated unless everybody is OK with linking their "real" identity to their online one.

(If I wanted to contact you the ability to search for a real name would be completely useless to me. Being able to find someone called "baddox" might help. If that name then is linked to your real identity or not would be a different matter)
Article is from 2.5 years ago, during more recessionary economic times, and possibly meant to influence the 2012 election by the focus on economic pain - you might recall the BS 'Obamaphone' meme from that time.
Speaking from several years at a company pre- and post-merger, the software they want will always be scarce, because they want something customized just to themselves.

They might not get it, of course -- the money is an (often ineffective) stand-in for institutional/organizational change, AKA "throwing money at the problem."

It's simply easier to get people to spend gobs money than to change their comfortable short-term habits. (Evidence: Wasted gym memberships everywhere.)
Because IRC, ICQ, MSN, Lunarstorm, Instagram, all those PhpBB and vBulletin boards we all used to use (and still do) was never even "remotely usable"....

The only way facebook differs to most of them is that it markets itself to being a general social network, not one specifically about programming, horses, biking, photography or another specialized field. Finding your friends by alias was never a problem, it's just like asking someone for their phone number.
I decided not to use ~/.ssh/config because I wanted the program to be dynamic and record the sessions as I connect for the first time [https://raw.githubusercontent.com/guruparan18/conn/master/co...].

Same case with `scp`, I have bunch of production servers and I have to send/get files from production server all the time. This means, I have to come up with my own one-line command [https://raw.githubusercontent.com/guruparan18/go/master/go]

As I said earlier, to me, UNIX scripting is highly personal. The scripting reflects one's personality. That is why there is not always the right one. There are several way of doing.
The dust storms are not just in Beijing and neighbouring towns; it is a geological phenomenon which has been happening on a geological time-scale, over millions of years. All of the North China Plain, home to many many millions of people, is a result of silt land blowing from the dry Asian inland - Gobi Desert - and then being washed down by the Yellow River, forming an alluvial plain.

The dust storms are not nice, but they are not really man-made, although man's actions may have worsened them a little (and now man is trying to help out a little bit, although once again, what you can do about is quite small in scale).
You can actually die in Monkey Island 1. If you're patient enough.
thanks, installed.
"You do not get to decide what is wrong now, nor what may become wrong in the future. Unless you have a valid reason to invade my life, stay out."

In particular, please note: the concept of right or wrong is orthogonal to what may be legal or illegal. Both lines are constantly changing and re-evaluated by the society around us.