skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
VCs don't do first stage funding, almost never. What you're saying is not at all how it works in SV. The early stage investment typically comes from private angel investors who previously got rich from startups themselves, and invest their own money.

1st stage investment sources are absolutely needed. It's not optional just because it's not easy to accomplish. Trying to compensate in some other way that ignores early funding is total nonsense. There's no valid substitute. There's no way around it that doesn't hurt entrepreneurs.
Is there a benefit to this over Homebrew or Macports or am I missing the use case?
Germany Wants to Introduce Data Retention. We Say: Hands Off of Our Data
>So you're OK with throwing away a perfectly fine and proven internet protocol which has survived for several decades, on a vague notion you have that "it's probably not that cache-friendly anyway".

HTTPS is not throwing away HTTP. It just protects it with TLS.

>Increased attack-vector size. But indeed: so what?

I think you meant 'decreased'. By not being able to modify the payloads or steal cookies, attackers are only left with the TLS protocol to try to mess with, which is a much smaller attack vector than being able to tweak HTTP headers and so-on.
Curious, what could you have against REST, and is it only the JSON incarnation?
Thieves using a power amplifier to break into cars with remote keyless systems
Vaastu Yantra to attract Abundance
(...) jobless builders presented her with a gift: a life-size sculpture of a
hand with a raised middle digit. She keeps the artifact prominently
displayed on a coffee table at her office in the European Commission.

Got to love the Danes :)
In some situation Netcom (TeliaSonera) does not charge your datacap if you use Spotify bundled with the plan.
No it's is exactly REST.

Section 5.2.2 of Fielding's thesis specifically says how per-user authenticated cannot be cached in a shared cache because they may vary per request. There are other cases mentioned too.
It still fails to address many of the worst problems of criminalisation of drugs, namely the level of other crime associated with production and distribution, and the sale of contaminated products.

The biggest risk from heroin, for example, is contamination and varying strength, not the drug itself. E.g. street heroin is often mixed with all kinds of other drugs or stuff like brick dust. Clean medicinal heroin is a quite safe drug (safe enough to be used for e.g. post-op pain relief as an alternative to morphine in some cases in the UK, for example - if you are ever prescribed "diamorphine", that's heroin).

Decriminalisation of possession is basically a halfway step where politicians don't have to admit to how horribly criminalisation have failed, but can instead "sell" the change as caring about the addicts. But if they really cared about the addicts they wouldn't keep leaving them in a position where they're injecting drugs contaminated by brick dust and where they are still left dealing with criminals for their supply.
If an astronaut is murdered in the ISS, where does the killer stand trial?
> In addition to your time here arguing to make sure socially dominant groups get their already-familiar opinions heard yet more.

You seem to have fallen into your own trap. You've assumed that I belong to a particular social group (wrongly, as it happens, but that's irrelevant), and consequently dismissed my argumentation out of hand, without effectively countering it.

And regarding your historical arguments, they rely on a somewhat naïve view of the process of history, as driven by exceptional individuals such as civil rights campaigners, rather than by large-scale currents. It would be just as easy to argue that such movements as enfranchisement and feminism succeeded when they did (after failing so many times in the past) because the social and ideological climate was ripe for change. Which would mean that social action movements are a lot less relevant than you would like to believe.

You're in the domain of irrationality. You "know" you're right, and I should just shut up because I'm affiliated to the "wrong" social group, while your own group can shout down and bully into submission everybody else. You're taking democracy for granted, and undermining the very system that is giving you the freedom to express yourself. Do you think that the slavers of the past thought that they were wrong? No; they "knew" they were right, and it was "obvious" that the white man was superior. Beware of the obvious; common sense is not your friend.
Sorry; but this is just ignorant. If you request a carrot cake recipe but receive a modified recipe that uses arsenic instead of carrots.. Without https, this kind of thing can easily happen. You think you are downloading poison control instructions but instead the instructions are modified; causing death or injury. HTTPS is not for "sensitive" data but for the integrity of all data. Imagine going to a voter registration page in Africa; you show up at the address and it's an ambush by anti-democracy militants because they were able to hijack the information on the official website.

The 1990s bullshit opinion that HTTPS is somehow only for 'sensitive' data is very destructive to a safe Internet.
i would add subtasks. they are so important, especially delegating the subtasks to the right persons within your team or company.
"Deutsche Bank uses for 2-step authentication to the e-banking you feel like in a shite 60s spy movie"

I agree 200%. Germans love that and it's DB after all, I assume other banks have something more modern (other banks in Europe use electronic tokens)
Surely such an argument is true for any network communication. My (admittedly vague) understanding of such monitoring is that it happens at the TCP/IP level. Therefore, should we outlaw all 'insecure' TCP/IP communication?

I can see good arguments for _encouraging_ HTTPS where necessary but not the blanket prohibition of HTTP.
I have Free and I have SFR and I can't tell the difference except the SFR bill is far higher. With Free I don't pay much so my expectations are curtailed (outages, useless CSR, occassional slow speeds). With SFR I pay more, expect more, and get far less.

FFS, I just received a bill from the hussier about a service SFR never provided, billed me for, and I've been arguing with the useless CSRs for over a year now.

The old mobile cartel in France used to have the best speeds but now they are more interested in paying their investors instead of delivering what their clients have paid for.
Using Grunt for S3 deployment / sync
I'm pretty sure a DPI-based filtering can be purchased as an off-the-self service.

And that's one of the core reasons I dislike HTTPS everywhere. It will lead to organizations like schools installing their own root certificates to MITM traffic, lessening the security of those things where encryption is the most important, like online banking.
good point! thanks
And additionally signature verification provides far better security than HTTPS on its own because a compromised mirror cannot compromise the signature.
Plenty of vendors are ready to sell turnkey censorware to them. It's already a thing.
JMapper Framework
Depends on which efficiencies are important. Aren't you taking about sun etc. -> biomass? Whereas biomass -> ethanol appears to be a lot more important, and starting from simpler sugars and starch is a lot easier than cellulose, wherever the latter comes from. That also has a lot to do with the upfront capital costs you decry.
A16z: the phone is the platform. messaging is the medium
This makes sense for me to broadcast via 4G/3G. Because transmission via internet gives you access to awesome big data. And you're able to track your listener in more detail.

Radio broadcast will never be able to compete with Facebook and Google without big data in the future.
I don't think anyone was trying to tell you how to build your core application network or your home LAN. SSL Everywhere is about critical connections subject to interception.
I really like your very human approach to things.

Do you have any theories on why companies end up doing the opposite of what you've laid out and end up wasting time chasing purple squirrels?

I mean, the obvious answer is risk aversion, but I think there might be more to it than that.

I'd also be curious if you do anything to reach out to under-represented groups who may not even bother sending in a resume to begin with but could still be great talent.
I see people practically laughing at the suit's 30 kg limit.

Well, I gotta say that carrying 30 kgs back and forth all day long is actually pretty damn tiring, and the long term benefits of this first generation suit are obvious - better health and the worker is less tired at the end of the day, which is not to be discounted - less depression, more time for your hobbies, and hitting the gym becomes a pleasure again instead of just another tiring necessity (because if you don't exercise regularly you increase the risk of injuring your knees or back at work).

Plus, this is good for developing more advanced versions, like the mentioned gen2 that would lift 100kg, which is nothing to scoff at.

But I'll still say that remote controlled or automated robots would be better suited for this kind of work than humans.
DNSSEC is meant to solve the integrity issue. Now, whether you feel it actually does the job is another matter.

Personally, I use it on three domains, one which was done for testing purposes, and the other two because there are DNS records I would like to keep secure from manipulation. It'd be nice if TLSA/DANE was more widely supported, if only to be an additional bar against certificate forgery, but unfortunately it's not.

It'd be good if DNS servers other than Knot had decent native support for signing, but they don't in general.
I Built a Super Simple Conference System for Startups
LeanCall.io was built with a focus on small teams, startups and small business. You can dial in and leave it on all day and talk to remote team members if you like, or just conduct regular conference calls. Marketing speak aside, we have extra capacity on a high quality bridge/switch that we use for our other products and I wanted to spin up something else. The app is supported by the same team maintaining our other products with 4.5 million registered users, 2+ million monthly uniques, multiple sites and a total of 8 years in business so it's not a fly by night sort of thing.

First: Signup is insanely simple, just an email. We send you your dial-in info and an email you can forward to people so they can connect too.

Second: No annoying hold music.

Third: Login gets you a few more free features like presentation mode and leader (host) mode.

Fourth: It is just meant to be super simple.
> HTTPS-nazis
> vague possibly-maybe security-related theoretical issues seems asinine

This is basically gaslighting. Network security is real and people really need it. Please refrain from shaming people for talking about the things they need.
One use case I can think of is if you want to use the same packaged versions between the developer machine (OSX) and your deployment environment (Linux). It not 100% the same but it could help uncover issues before they are deployed. And you don't get the overhead of visualization.
Is it really that hard to forecast the amount of power residential PV generates? I'm pretty sure you could build a model that is pretty good just based on weather data, but failing that why not just put a single small PV panel on each (plant, substation, power pole... choose your level of granularity) and have it report back the amount of solar energy in that location? That should get you a very good idea of the amount of power coming in.
The benefit of ubiquitous encryption outweighs this small list of minor drawbacks a million times over.

Even if you could convince me that it's ok to send some traffic in the clear, that wouldn't make any difference. You're just going to have to suck it up, for the benefit of the web and humanity in general.
Let's quote from section 5.2.2:

"All REST interactions are stateless. That is, each request contains all of the information necessary for a connector to understand the request, independent of any requests that may have preceded it. This restriction accomplishes four functions: 1) it removes any need for the connectors to retain application state between requests, thus reducing consumption of physical resources and improving scalability; 2) it allows interactions to be processed in parallel without requiring that the processing mechanism understand the interaction semantics; 3) it allows an intermediary to view and understand a request in isolation, which may be necessary when services are dynamically rearranged; and, 4) it forces all of the information that might factor into the reusability of a cached response to be present in each request."

When the paper was written, the per-user requests were supposed to be an exception, a minority case.

HTTPS will effectively make everything opaque and "per-user", and hence everything I quoted above which refers to intermediaries will no longer matter.

Restrictions in 5.1.3 ("Stateless"), 5.1.4 ("Cache"), 5.1.5 ("Uniform interface") and 5.1.6 ("Layered") would no longer apply either. All intermediaries will see is encrypted data, so shared data and functionality as explained can no longer be moved to an intermediary.

BTW, parent, way to selectively refer to a phrase in Fielding's paper while missing the point of 99% of the rest of it.
+1
And the premise that some commenter on HN should even enter into an argument about which of YOUR data is sensitive is destructive. It's your security. You should decide what imperils it.
A more realistic situation could be a malicious attacker intercepting the cat picture and replacing it with an image containing something that could land the viewer in jail for having any trace of it on his computer (child pornography), and then sending an anonymous tip to law enforcement...
If you use this, you might as well take the opportunity to stand up every 20 minutes.
Would like to see multiple screen support too..
Funnily, 2005 was the time when people were misunderstanding JavaScript. I still have nightmares from all those animated snowflakes and rainbows following my mouse cursor, or date calculators embedded on every other page for no reason except to show off...
France has passed a bill to legalize Edward Snowden-style whistleblowing
I work in an insurance company and I approve this message.
As an Australian living in the UK I had always assumed that all countries had a day of remembrance for the sacrifices, futility and horrors of war.

I was quite surprised when a German colleague saw the wearing of red poppies around November 11 as unusual and something he could not grok.
True, but I wouldn't say 4% is a meaningful market share, so fuck Safari. It's the new Internet Explorer.

Leaving the sites broken in Safari (and maybe adding a notice that explains why it's broken) also helps keeping it at 4%.
This is what happens when it stops raining in the UK [video]
Hey thanks for the reply. I don't work on mobile apps at all, so I really wasn't aware. It's definitely interesting to see your point of view,
I'm happy that the homeless in San Francisco have iPhones and MacBooks, but surely you must realise this sounds ridiculous to people outside of the Silicon Valley, right?

I invite you to here to Eastern Europe, to see homeless people who are alcoholics and drug addicts, usually without any mental function except for thinking about how to get high and drunk again. They shit and piss over themselves, mumble, and harass people. They refuse to go to a shelter because then they'd have to stop drinking.

So yeah, I will say all homeless people are drunks and drug addicts who choose not to fix their life, and telling me that I'm wrong while living in Silicon Valley drinking your starbucks latte just makes you seem stupid.
How is deprecating a protocol "sacrificing freedom"? Such hyperbole.
Feedback for my 1 year life and technology website?
The website is
www.theamigotips.com

Over a year ago, I met a stranger at the airport. She was very beautiful, and she changed my world.

No, we didn't get married, but she introduced me to her world of blogging (for those curious, it's www.ponytailjournal.com). Since meeting her, I've been working on my own website for about a year, with the dream of having hundreds of subscribers. 500 would be a nice start.

My blog's audience is college students / young adults. The goal is to make modern technology 'easy' for this audience who may find it too difficult. I also write 'life tips' that would have helped me back when I was their age (life tips).

...I am nowhere near that 500-subscriber milestone, despite getting hundreds of views every month.

I am also yet to receive any honest feedback. What am I missing? Can I get some honest feedback and advise please?

TLDR: Made website 1 year ago. Consistent articles. Absolutely no feedback received, ever, so your feedback plz lol
You get exactly the same with macports and brew: Very little patching and no virtualization.
New Law to Strip Social Security Numbers from Medicare Cards
Just how much cacheable content do you suppose lies in RESTful messages? I think you have significantly misunderstood the use case for REST. All that performance stuff you bring up applies to CDNs, but not API requests.

It doesn't seem to me like you grasp the real world. There is a bit of a disparity between how we handle static content vs. dynamic API calls, and you demonstrate a willingness to conflate them repeatedly in this thread. It's baffling.
Tuf Voyaging by G.R.R. Martin

Gray-Death-Trilogy by William H. Keith, Jr. (Subset of the Battletech Series)
I don't know if it's representative but nodejs is still at version 0.10.36 : https://github.com/joyent/pkgsrc/blob/trunk/lang/nodejs/Make...

This post was supposed to be a troll about them not packaging io.js (they don't).
The package definition is not the same or are you using brew and macports to install on Linux ?
Ask HN: Best Antivirus/Internetsecurity for Windows
I'd like to know what antivirus/internet security (i.e. Kaspersky, GDATA, Avira, etc.) is the safest today?

I was using the free version from Avira Antivirus but I'm not satisfied anymore and I'm thinking about switching to Kaspersky.

Is it safe to say, that Kaspersky is the safest solution or are there better Tools to protect my windows machine?

Thanks in advance for your answers.
> as long as we get rid of the SSL cert racket first.

"It is really a messed up situation to have to pay to not have your website marked as dangerous"
Pretty much just the cheapest set which they happen to have in the local discount hardware store. I have two sets, one from Bahco and a no-name one.
>I really like your very human approach to things.

Thanks! We genuinely go out of our way to ensure we treat people as people, not just another statistic to add to our machine.

>Do you have any theories on why companies end up doing the opposite of what you've laid out and end up wasting time chasing purple squirrels?

Laziness is a key reason. If their current process works then the motivation to improve it is relatively low. As for chasing purple squirrels, I honestly have no idea. I could spend the next few months searching for someone who, on paper at least, is a superstar but the fact is, in the meantime I could hire two or three mediocre people (that's not intended to be derogatory), who could do just as well and ultimately end up being better hires in the long run.

>I'd also be curious if you do anything to reach out to under-represented groups who may not even bother sending in a resume to begin with but could still be great talent.

Loads. For example, we helped PyLadies London get started by providing them with a venue, covering their logistical costs and promoting them. We recently starting (financially) supporting Django Girls who are an incredible bunch of people and we often host codebar.io who provide introductory programming classes to under-represented groups. The fact is, we have to work really hard to make under-represented groups aware of the fact that we're not another meat processor and instead we're a diverse group of people who are trying to hire more good people.
> I think you meant 'decreased'.

It could have been a sideways glance at flaws in SSL/TLS that have rendered servers, data, or both compromised. Basically, a straw-man claim that plain text is actually more secure, since a flaw in the crypto stack could exist.
7 Things to Consider for a Successful Office
Get Your Ex Back, Keep A Lover Faithful, Marriage Proposal, Divorce, Resolve Marriage Problems, Breakup; watsapp +2347030759636, contact: quickrevengespell@yahoo.com
Exlover Spell
Fertlity Spell
Revenge Spells
Protection Spell
Gay Love Spells
Marriage/Love Spell
Money
African Witchcraft
Breakup Spells
Contact: quickrevengespell@yahoo. com
The main general benefit of pkgsrc is that it's cross-platform and, having been around since 1997, now runs on 22 different operating systems.

This means that rather than having to run Homebrew or MacPorts on OS X, rpm or apt on Linux, ports on FreeBSD, dports on DragonFly, cyg-apt on Cygwin, .. - you get the idea - you could instead just run pkgsrc across all of them, and only have to worry about one set of tools and only have to update one software repository. pkgsrc will happily run as an unprivileged user in your home directory if you just want to compliment the system package manager.

For OS X specifically, we provide this binary package repository to make it very easy for people to get started. pkgin has a very familiar interface for people used to other binary package managers, so after a couple of commands to install the tools you can start installing from 11,000+ binary packages quickly and easily.

For developers there is a lot that pkgsrc offers in terms of aiding portability, and due to the large number of supported platforms a lot of infrastructure to support them, but that is a whole topic by itself.

Reversing the question, I don't see that Homebrew or Macports have many benefits over pkgsrc, other than Homebrew is arguably easier to write new packages for (if you know ruby), and Macports has more packages. However I will be glad to admit I'm no expert on either of them, so if there are other advantages please tell me so we can take a look at improving feature parity.
I've used the following tools to protect several of my Windows machines from malware:

* http://www.linuxmint.com/

* https://www.freebsd.org/

;)
Paper microphone may help charge your cellphone
I WILL FOREVER BE GRATEFUL AND REMAIN LOYAL TO THIS GREAT ONLINE DEATH SPELL CASTER CALLED DR INSTANT DEATH. THIS GREAT MAN HAS INDEED PROVEN TO ME THAT ONLINE DEATH SPELL CASTING IS REAL. THIS GREAT HERBALIST HELPED ME CAST A DEATH SPELL ON MY WICKED EX AND IN JUST 48HOURS HE WAS TRULY CONFIRMED DEAD. ALL THANKS TO Dr.PayBack DEATH. YOU TOO CAN CONTACT Dr. PayBack DEATH ALSO VIA EMAIL, quickrevengespell@yahoo. com
My premise is that HTTPs-only and REST have opposing constraints.

You have not demonstrated any flaws in it, REST says communication is stateless and cacheable except for acknowledging some select minority cases when it's not the case.

Turning the minority cases into the only way of communication nullifies most of the benefits of REST, because the whole rationale of the paper is lost. I.e. intelligent shared processing and caching by intermediaries.

I'm taking no stance on what "the reality is". I'm taking no side about which side is more correct. I'm stating what both sides want, and finding it curious they don't see the contradiction.
Fast cross-platform cli-utility to watch file system changes for node
I think the big advantage of "REST" was being easy to use from the browser, but modern REST (with e.g. content negotiation and HTTP verbs) actually goes against that. I think strict, automatically-checked schemata for APIs are very valuable, so I'd prefer to use something like thrift or even WS-* rather than REST.
Proshow Gold 6 Serial and Crack Incl Free Download
My age is far greater than my contributions; I'm mainly here for the reading material.