skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree, but let me submit this you:

The music that spoke to me was what you would call "college radio" in the mid-80s and "alternative" in the late 80s and early 90s. But if you think about it that was a small niche market and not the mainstream until Nirvana broke through circa 1991. And even then that was a short lived revolution which gave way to the Spice Girls and Britney Spears.

But before you get too nostalgic the realty of that era is that most of the music that people listened to was light weight pop music. That was really the era of "adult easy listening" and hair metal bands, and yet we think of the music that holds up like say REM or something that pushed the limits.
You can't full-text search across dockets, but why would you?

Also, why would you full-text search across the entire internet? That would be absurd! /s
There are innumerable benefits to the widespread instantaneous access to information we enjoy today, and it's absurd that our access to information should be fettered when it comes to public government records.
Simple - just don't learn anything for the next 30 years!
Glad to see they're catching up to WeChat (Tencent) in China, who's been doing similar functionality for a while now (messaging brands).
Societies do not collapse. They're merely abandoned.
I like how much heat this topic on the hacker news. I wonder if its extra touchy given how much "hacker" culture overall developed with online advertising - the big tech successes often depending on sweet sweet ad money. Everybody likes react, hadoop, chrome, mozilla etc, but the truth is that a huge proportion of development on the web was due to ads. And this feels ugly to people. Hackers like to believe their beautiful meritocracy was independent of the advertising bureaucracy. The privileges of the tech elite were made by ads, but now that we're all here in this beautiful (and fully deserved) technological enlightenment, we think we're somehow above it.
I'll be at my 57. I would love to build a vintage home in the far south of India and maintain the agricultural lands that I own. I would love to do anything myself without anyone's help. And I don't want to be a coder by that time but I would love to teach others by that time. I would have explored at least 50 countries by that time and also might have finished my second book.
Historically, software was free - it was a value-add thrown in to support sales of hardware or developed by universities and licensed to the public. Microsoft was the one who convinced consumers that they oughtta pay for their software, and then Netscape convinced them that they shouldn't.

Anyway, the way to get consumers to shell out for software is to solve a problem that they'd previously been spending money on. Netflix gets away with charging because the alternative was Blockbuster, which was even more expensive. Spotify and Rdio get away with charging because the alternative was buying CDs, which was even more expensive. Uber and Lyft get away with charging because the alternative was taxis or buying a car, which are even more expensive. Solve a problem like rent, taxes, gas, better jobs, Internet, etc. and you'll have a bunch of people happily shelling out money.
The newspaper used to cost $1 (each! every day!) and it was full of ads. Probably about as much percentage of area as a typical news site today.

There must be a balance between "no payment" and "no ads" - the optimum profit doesn't necessarily happen at one of the extremes. Do you think you'd choose a higher priced subscription if it offered no ads?
Is there anyone arguing that adblockers are immoral other than somebody on Twitter? In the US, the legal issue has been settled. Fox tried suing Dish Networks over their commercial-skipping feature. Fox lost.[1]

The main problem with ad blockers is that they're not very good technically. They're usually regular expression based and need too much information about the exact format of ad code, so they need constant updating. Some have deliberate holes. AdBlock Plus sells "block bypassing" to "good" advertisers. Ghostery blocks tracking but then does tracking itself. (If you use Ghostery, go to its preferences and opt out of "Ghostrank".) BlockSite became adware.

There's no money in the ad blocking business. Last year, the AdBlock Plus guy was trying to make money by selling hoodies. An automatic ad blocker with machine learning to adapt to new ads would be a nice open source project. You won't make any money, but you'll get lots of publicity.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Broadcasting_Co._v._Dish_N...
I'm not certain it's possible (for me) to care less what other parties think of ad blockers. Or any other set of software, for that matter.
It's actually mostly the former. Not sure about movie theatres but for example printed newspaper costs are usually not even covered by the price of the newspaper. The ads is where the money is.
Your point has been made several times on this topic but can someone cite some study about how poor people are more "susceptible" to the ill effects of advertising and how everything that is being advertised is obviously "bullshit"?

If anything, advertising is what allows poor people to have the same access to content/information without having to pay real wages in return for access.

What types of online ads that you see do you consider bullshit?
Thankfully, progress is not purely monotonic towards ads. In the old days, you either watched TV shows on air with commercials (except on HBO) or... waited for the entire season to come out on DVD or something. Or pirated them, once that became technically feasible. Now, Netflix, iTunes, and friends will sell you most shows ad-free, and this has become my only method of watching TV since it is such a better experience.

Even on the Internet, remember the good old days of popup ads and blinking banner ads (that you couldn't easily scroll out of view)? I don't know what sites everyone else visits, but I don't use an ad blocker simply because most of the sites I visit either have no ads (like this one) or have few and unobtrusive enough ads that I can easily ignore them. (I don't care about tracking.) A notable exception is YouTube, where the obnoxious video ads caused me to start ad blocking recently.

Oh, and... while there are plenty of ads out there plaguing mobile devices, most good apps (at least on iOS) either don't have them or have an in-app purchase to disable them. Compare that to the websites the apps replace, and you can see a significant improvement.
The profit motive exists just as much in Sweden as in the US. Welfare acts as a safety net for individuals, not companies.
What if the brain could be replaced incrementally with synthetic neurons using some sort of nanotech? Is it the same mind when it's done? This is a variant of the old Ship of Theseus paradox[0].

Another question - can the "program" of the mind be stopped, then resumed?

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus
I was about to mention about this :)
What happens under the hood is almost irrelevant, because it's predictable and repeatable.
> I'm not a party to the contract between the advertiser and the content provider.
> ... an agreement between two other parties

It's irrelevant what the behind-the-scenes relations are. The party you are engaging is providing the webpage with all it's content; that some of it is outsourced doesn't matter. Using your rationale, you should also be blocking any work done by freelance journalists.

If a company outsources it's billing, does this now mean that you can ethically access their services for free? After all, if a different company is the one posting you the bill, "I didn't agree to anything with them", so you don't need to pay up. It doesn't work that way. If you've ever been chased by a debt collection agency, you'll know that argument is no defence.

Perhaps walk into a diner and have a big meal. Then refuse to pay because you don't have an existing contract with any of the point-of-sale EFT providers or the manufacturer of the cash register. Those are contracts that the diner has with other parties and you have not consented to a contract with them, so you are within your rights to ignore them.

> I somehow also chose to see a specific dude taking a specific dump.

If you know a street is extremely likely to have a dude take a dump, then yes, choosing to walk down that street is accepting that you're also going to see a dude taking a dump.

Regarding your edit, I really don't care. I just think that talking about blocking ads as some sort of morally pure action is nonsense. It's not. You're consuming the content without the full bundle that the content provider put together - if you want to see the article, you're expected to see the ads along with it. I'm not saying that you shouldn't block ads, I'm just saying that if you do, don't pretend like it's actually an ethical action. If you want to be ethical, then don't use the site at all.
It's a view generation library, not a DOM-diffing library. That's like asking how to rotate a subtree in an RB tree library.
I would be interested in taking a closer look, although I can't guarantee I'll have time to help decode. If you feel like it you can shoot me an email at the address in my profile! Thanks again.
In the US, all restaurants provide free water, voluntarily---it is not a law. It is a custom because we are not raging assholes. And if people are treated badly at a restaurant, they don't come back.

I have never not been able to get free water in a restaurant in the US. Usually they pour you some without even asking, if there is table service.

Only in Europe is there a perception that (a) businesspeople are raging assholes who (b) want to screw their customers even though doing so drives them away. So only in Europe are there actual laws forcing restaurants to give out water.

I'm not even kidding, here is a source:
https://www.restaurants.com/blog/are-restaurants-required-to...

You can easily find more sources if you just Google "Are US restaurants required to provide water."

So yeah, your point is completley incorrect.

Also, I am actually trying to intellectually engage with the issue, and it seems like you're just making a pithy comment, but maybe I'm just misreading your intention.
Also, am I the only person in this thread who actually works in ads? Ctrl + F did nothing to answer this question
By fluctuations, I meant this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation

Quantization, of course, is the existence limits to divisibility of matter and energy.

Sorry, I only have a first-year engineering knowledge of quantum mechanics. I could be oversimplifying.
I've created something similar but for Firefox: http://crashfirefox.com/

Have added new crash options for users with NoScript (even if you're blocking 302s - try right clicking).
I'm going to disagree, particularly for people with no programming background, as it's often incomplete and lacks exercises.

Some (not all) of the material that is there is good though.
Thanks, I missed that. That's good to know (and also good to hear).
Advertising for a loooot of products works based on CREATING demand that was not intrinsically there. Would we really know who Justin Bieber and what his mediocre music is if it wasn't for advertising? Who'd opt in to discover Kim Kardashian? It'd be status-suicide to admit you are looking for stupidity. But when it's spontaneously there, well then...

That's what TV advertising banging you over the head over and over again is meant to do. Sure you don't consciously go 'oh nice chicks X brand of beer' but when you're awkwardly standing at a bar, you'll recall that maybe if you get that X brand of beer, it'll be more like that party in the tv ad instead. This is of course not conscious.

If western society ceased creating unnecessary demand (apple watch anyone?), we'd live in a very different world. So yeah, not happening. They want to show you ads even if you hate it and they will, because you can't do anything about it. Ad blockers are allowed only because they largely hurt the folks without any power, the small timers.

All big companies are interested in forcing ads on you, make no mistake about it.
Every cafe and restaurant in Australia is upfront about the cost of their service and food. I don't think that your example of tipping is a very good one because the rest of the world doesn't operate like that, it's a very American centric view.

I agree with the OP. The content creator was not upfront about wanting money and used adverts, and we are within our right to say no, I'm not lowering myself to watch this advert.

It's time we accept that adverts are not the solution.

In addition, is it just me or are most adverts just crap and garbage that lower the overall experience every time?
The same is true of every element on the page, from the menu system to the related articles box. Shall we have headers for every single element on a page?
50% would be a bit closer.
Almost like those two facts are connected somehow!
Joe Sullivan from Facebook Joins the Uber Team
"If a majority of users install ad blockers, society as a whole will suffer as content creators are squeezed out of the market."

Oh noes, you mean there won't be more Buzzfeed crap or their ilk?

If your art is good enough, people will find a way to pay you.

Beethoven, Newton, Einstein... their content is SUPREME. They would have done what they did regardless. They didn't need advertising, and neither should you.
Show HN: Taiwan Financial Institute SSL Status
I claim that part of it at least is a technical problem.

No, really. Compare user payment habits on desktops/websites versus mobile devices. Sure, there are the issues that users have become attuned to $1 apps, that many are incredibly reluctant to pony up even that, etc. etc. But at least some users pay $1, because it only requires a few taps and the purchase is associated with their existing $devicevendor account; good luck getting that to happen on the web, where not everyone has PayPal (to which the most common alternative is pulling out a physical wallet and filling in a long list of text boxes) and you need to make your own account system.

What would the web be like if micropayments had actually become a thing?
> Our welfare system is not yet currently capable of providing people with the basic necessities: food, shelter, clothing, clean water, healthcare, education, and equal access to opportunities.

Even if the welfare system was capable of giving these, people would want more. We can examine this by looking current people model. Their desire to earn more is not decreasing when they reach the minimum or optimum level of necessities.

I think the problem is life standards that emphasized to us by ads. The goal will be always higher than our necessities. Because, this is the only way to keep alive current economic system, balance of production and consumption.

So, I don't believe giving more to people solves anything. But I do believe, people's desire should be left to themselves by standing a position against all ads or things serve to this purpose.
However, the _SUB_contractor space is very open to competition. And once you get your foot in the door, the government has all sorts of incentives for "small businesses" who want to act as prime.

Understanding the contracting world begins at step one: understanding the bureaucracy. And due to "small business incentives", small businesses have legal advantages that no "big company" are ever given.

https://www.sba.gov/content/register-government-contracting

Not saying that it is easy, but seriously. SBA.gov should have been the _first_ link on that page. Navigate the bureaucracy, define your business as a small business, and start bidding on some subcontractor deals to get your foot in the door and build up a history.
If the company ships your order then I'd say the ethical onus is quite low on your part. This is a company that has made not one, but two errors that seem to reinforce each other. How could a reasonable person tell if the company intended to give away their products or not?
Many of the responses seem to misconstrue "value-based pricing" with "fixed-bid pricing".

If the project's fixed bid is approximately your actual estimate (hours estimated x price/hr), then definitely do not propose a fixed bid. There is a lot of risk and ambiguity in lowball fixed bids that will cost you in the end. We all know that engineering estimates underestimate ... and that clients will always add/revise. So, why are you putting all of the risk on yourself for exactly what you would normally estimate? These situations are where freelancers get in big trouble with fixed-bid contracts.

On the other hand, suppose that your work is a huge value-add to the client. Suppose the client cares mostly about high quality, wants a good reliable consultant, and wants you. In this case, you can price your fixed bid in line with the value it will bring to the client. Meaning that now the risk is negligible -- even if your estimates are off and the client revises things, you will still be happy with the outcome. Now that you can relax, you can spend more time on delivering quality work and even give freebies if everything is on track!

Let me emphasize -- the only successful fixed price bids I've seen are where you know that even if everything goes wrong a developer still is happy with the outcome. After all, in most real-world pricing situations, the cost of the risk is part of the price (e.g. shoplifting losses), so why not for software engineering too?
Because they might cheat or have someone else do it for them.

It's definitely happened before. When we caught the candidate and asked them why, they said, "I figured once I got in here I'd impress you with my personality even though I can't code."
Hah, that click was definitely my karma for today, ty.

But the reason I posted this is because it doesn't rely on Javascript to eat up memory- anyone can post a malformed/long link to a web forum and crash the thread/site for other Chrome users immediately, without clicking thru.
Does the Launchpad have an integrated XDS100 JTAG? A lot of TI's demo/proto boards have one of those integrated. On similar devices I've seen the JTAG show up in Linux as an ACM device.

Also, incidentally, FTDI makes a line of USB-to-TTL converters that obviate the need for a separate USB-to-RS232 and RS232-to-TTL adapter chain:

http://www.ftdichip.com/Products/Cables/USBTTLSerial.htm

I think they might be a little more expensive than the MAX232+RS232 adapter, but if all you're looking for is to connect to a TTL serial port they work pretty well.
It's not that they are necessarily more susceptible, it's that they would be exposed to more of it, under this model.
Guangdong state gov to subsidize replacement robotics with $150B+ over 3 years
That's why I never knowingly view ads.
Early 80386 CPUs and their errata
How do the advertisers benefit from showing ads to people who can't afford their products anyway?
> Without argument, one of the most common used data model is JSON

JSON is a data representation, not a data model.
Public advertising certainly has a coercive feel to it. If ads were food then advertisers would be running around shoving food into people's mouths (mostly junk food, too). And yet we think nothing of feeding people information without their consent.

It's interesting to imagine a world where you have to explicitly agree to be exposed to information. I think I would rather like that world.
The Ringworm Irradiators
It is difficult to believe. Are there other confirmations that this is happening (besides the written material that is being quoted in the business press)?
> I'd love to know how it's tracking in that and if it looks like it will live on or be put on hold.

Project Ara received an extension:

"A notable exception to the rule is Google's Project Ara, the modular Android smartphone with interchangeable components, which was granted an extension on its two-year deadline because it's promising enough that they're actually testing it in Puerto Rico."

http://www.businessinsider.com/google-atap-killed-project-to...
Time to Quit
Some may not want to deal with the bandwidth required to keep an ad-blocking loop running at all times. They get a default penalty of having to suffer ads, without actively having signed on for it.
As soon as people are knifed that will make it back to review sites and the ad's rep and the firm behind it are over.

So no, scamming people is not perfect advertising even for the advertizer
The brain isn't a virtual machine!
checkout https://cooperpress.com/
There is a huge irony in that fact that AdBlock's function of keeping ads away from our content will eventually do the opposite. The alternative to ads alongside my content is ads inside my content.

Let's face it: paywalls don't work. The alternative on the horizon is native advertising. Buzzfeed is now famously refusing to host ads. Instead they sustain themselves by publishing content that subtly supports the agenda of any company with deep enough pockets to pay for it. A viewer's ability to distinguish between native ads and regular articles is small and quickly vanishing. If separate ads stop reaching people, the path to monetization remaining is to change your content to reflect someone else's agenda.

I keep AdBlock off by default because I prefer a world where creators can make a meaningful articles and a useful apps without caring about who they are supporting, and can, as the price tag, separately attach an ad.

I do see it as a moral issue. There are good people making content that's being sustained by ads. I am never going to remember to give them my modicum of support if I don't consider them innocent until proven guilty. It's worth the small annoyance. It's worth the 2 seconds it takes to turn it on for the problematic pages. Hell, you can even map it to a shortcut[1]. It sucks, but the alternative is positively bleak.

.

TL;DR: The bathroom may be dirty, but at least no one's taking a shit in my kitchen.

[1] https://adblockplus.org/en/faq_customization#shortcuts
It could be argued that prison labor is "cruel and unusual" by modern standards.
"Its not that we were forced out of our stone boxes in the canyon. We werent driven away by force. We just mysteriously left. It was like the waning of the moon....They were too limiting, somehow. They computed, but they just didn’t do enough for us." http://www.wired.com/2013/04/text-of-sxsw2013-closing-remark...
JS + html/css. Take a look at http://www.freecodecamp if you are looking for some good resources.
"Accessing the APIs to retrieve content through an entirely alternate program, unfortunately, has been deemed circumvention and the site would have a case against anyone who tried it."

Do you have a cite for that?
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver – Edward Snowden Interview
Assuming the creation of AI went smoothly, virtually all jobs would be obsolete due to AI, society has transitioned to basic income, and I'd be trying to wrap my head around the latest discovery from our AI friends.

It'll be like we are kids again, watching the AI's going about their grown up business.

Can't wait! :)
> Thankfully, progress is not purely monotonic towards ads

You bring up good points, but thinking about this particular line more, I wonder if it really is heading that way.

Anywhere you find exclusivity for content provides the opportunity to put in an ad. You can be as customer-hostile as you like and get away with it because there's nowhere else to go. I put up with the March Madness app because I have no alternative -- I must watch that content there.

So if we're headed towards many players of exclusive content, why wouldn't a Netflix or HBO pull the same cash grab once their subscriber growth goes flat? Hey, I probably would if I was in charge over there.

Another example just from today: I saw an ad before an Amazon Instant video. Granted, it was for an Amazon product, but Amazon built an ad system of some sort to deliver it. Curious they made that.
Registering. Thanks