skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Baby it was just the most truthful answer I could tell you. I mean, I'm sorry, I should have been more careful in my statement. I acknowledge that. But I must stress, that I did not wittingly make out and fondle. What I did was not, in any way, targeted at our relationship. My eyes were closed, and I was merely doing my duty to feel up our enemies. There is just no other technical way to go about it. And I resent the implication of wrongdoing in the unfair way you questioned me about the situation.

Now, you know I love you. I would never do anything behind your back. That's why all of your friends were fully briefed on this encounter. And they all agreed that it was necessary and appropriate. Well, almost everyone. I vow to bring the perpetrator who leaked the photo to justice! And so in light of this, we can have an important debate about who else I deny I have slept with, who else you have proof I sleep with and what other sexual acts I must do with them in order to safeguard our relationship.

But let's not forget what's important. We need to work together to build a framework for a process where I continue to see others I'm attracted to, particularly the Russian and Chinese ones, in a way that respects privacy, by preventing you from finding out, but with proper oversight that is transparent, accountable, and consistent with my unwavering support for monogamy. After all, the security of our relationship depends on it.
We should see lots more of these if people embrace eventual consistency instead of "slow" ACID transactions. And interestingly, the more larger scale a system, the more likely that globally consistent operations are too expensive to enable in general, and developers will overlook cases where they must implement some locking or double checking.
Web Summit and Paddy Cosgrave, I'm looking at you here. This is their mode of operation exactly. They fooled me out of 1000 euro and packed me in like sardines with a bunch of other poor fools. It's a bad memory of a huge, overcrowded, scammy event where the only winner was the organizers. And their formula seems to be working which is the most depressing part.
Not necessarily.

Stupidity can arise out of having the wrong model for solving a problem. Say, the theory of humors or of spirits rather than a germ theory of disease. You can collect all sorts of information _consistent with your model_ and still end up no better than, or even worse off, than you were before. E.g., determining that you've got to bleed a patient to death.

You lack the appropriate model to solve the problem.

In the case of wilful ignorance, and as illustrated in the examples of continental drift and Mars cananls, or today, global warming, requires not only having the wrong model, but in rejecting the correct model.

Related, I particularly like his definition of genius.
Nice, balanced article on an emotional topic.

I think most people would agree that the video should come into evidence if someone ends up dead. Also, most people would agree that videos should not all be released publicly. But there are a lot of difficult situations between those two extremes.

Even if the rules about releasing footage are quite restricted, I think body cameras will influence the behavior of police. Not always for the better necessarily, but I think they will reduce the number of fatal police shootings.
Go cons a piece of cake onto your mouth!
95% of the code I work on is D.

D fits lots of purposes (more than C++), but I'm only going to talk about scripting.

The minimalistic approach for the C++ standard library makes C++ inappropriate to replace, for example, Bash scripts. In C++, you can't do any operation on the file system (erase a directory, get file size, list files, create pipes, ..) in a portable way. You can't create processes in a portable way.

The D standard library (aka Phobos) doesn't suffer these limitations. Which means you can write very high-level code using only a few (readable) lines.
By adding a shebang "#!/usr/bin/env rdmd" at the beginning of your D programs, you can execute them without prior explicit compilation, like: ./myProgram.d

I've been porting all my Bash scripts to D. The code runs incredibly faster, and now I can have structs again!
Startup attempting to use drones to plant 36,000 trees a day
Maybe check out Axis, they are a very well established (15 years) provider of cheap web surveillance cameras. They may have slightly better security due to this. I know some of their earlier firmware vulns were called out.
Link to startup - http://www.biocarbonengineering.com/

To the Mods. Not sure if this has been posted before. And not sure if link to startup would be better. Please switch link if that would be better. Thanks :)
Pied Piper's Hiring
Building ownCloud 8 on CentOS 7
I really haven't found any glaring bugs yet. At least on desktop. On server, you should really just stick to LTS -- rarely is your system's value add how fresh your libc is.
You are making a lot of assumptions about architecture. Not everything is back by a simple sql database. Some sites utilize event stores and read only data stores to provide data access/storage. Other sites have other unique architectures that make this specific issue a lot harder to mitigate than a simple unique constraint.
On Firefox 37.0.2:

The buffer passed to decodeAudioData contains invalid content which cannot be decoded successfully.
EncodingError: The given encoding is not supported.

And nothing plays when pressing any button. :(
I wonder if this could evolve into a more general web-browser... given that there's several(!) available for the C64 already, like this one: https://www.c64-wiki.de/index.php/Singular_Browser (German)
Your complaints are interesting (I'm the speaker). That talk was a gross oversimplification in many ways as I've pointed out. Note that the core talk was 35 minutes and no, there's no way that I could give it as fair of a coverage as I would like. Your example of the Magna Carta, however, strengthens my core point (IMHO): nobody thought to end the system and try something new, they were trying to stop the king from acting arbitrarily. For the Peasant's Revolt, the people primarily sought an end to serfdom and the abuse they suffered thereby, but in no way considered that a different system might be better (which is what I kept getting to throughout the talk).

I would also point out that matrix management switches corporate hierarchies from trees to graphs: it doesn't change its fundamental nature of command and control. It's an attempt to tinker with how things are done and frankly, it's about as revolutionary as having car doors open backwards instead of forwards (and in my experience with matrix management, it's just as stupid of an idea).

As for Sears, thank you for that link. Yes, there are definitely going to be cases of companies trying and failing. How does that invalidate the point?

As for your other comments, I'm not going to belabor them, but there's a rich, rich background of people comparing modern corporations to feudalism: https://www.google.fr/webhp?q=corporations%20feudalism#safe=...

Or you can read this interesting one by the former chief economist of Valve Software: http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/economics/why-valve-or-what-d... (if that face looks familiar, it's because he's now the finance minister of Greece).

Again, 35 minutes to give an simplification of the problem and I know there's tons I left out (including co-ops) and there's absolutely no way I could cover it all and still get to the point of that talk.
Is there good reason for the videos to be public record? Why not have our judicial system decide/review police video on a case-by-case basis, rather than having them be public records?

A defendant should be innocent until proven guilty -- and those videos apply just as well. Is the police video for or against you? The court should decide.

If the video is "missing", a outside authority should investigate and weight should be given to the possibility that evidence was tampered with by the police. The public should demand this just as we have body-cameras.
HTML is my API
I was impressed by the way this article introduced the relevant issues without getting caught up in trying to give simple solutions.

Because body cams will capture footage of victims and associates and bystanders, as well as perpetrators and officers, there's an inherent tension between protecting the privacy of everyone in a video and allowing those in the video to see the captured footage of themselves. Every "simple" solution I can think of (including all of the ones described in the article), I can easily envision scenarios where that proposed solution would seem to be inappropriate.

I suspect the way we handle police body cam videos will be a point of contentious debate for another decade or more.
Wow!

I remember going through this ordeal (of taking a decision) a couple of weeks back with Collision Conference. They'd shortlisted us for the conference at Las Vegas and wanted us to pay a sum to attend it.

Here's what I'd tweeted then, at the time:

https://twitter.com/marvindanig/status/579039796238139392

After reading this post I feel happy that we decided not to attend the event. Apparently, it saved us some embarrassment and precious dollars!
I'm pretty sure it's not just "sufficiently large x" but rather as x approaches infinity. The properties as you approach infinity are completely different, and counterintuitive, to simply a very very large number.
Java is easy to read at the "micro" level, i.e. the bodies of methods usually don't contain much code; but I think that is precisely what makes it hard to understand at the macro/system level, because that small amount of code depends on a much larger amount throughout the rest of the system, spread across multiple files in different deeply-nested directories. That's when you have to start following chains of method calls, object creations, and class hierarchies.
"With so much more data at stake, and attacks so frequent, cryptographers say the need for encryption is greater than ever."

The NSA has discouraged the study of this branch of mathematics for decades. This is not a problem the people created; it is a problem the NSA created, and the NSA should solve the underlying problem before whining about this.

You don't water your garden -> no flowers
> I have no desire to lose my job, but I am most concerned that being fired would place future job prospects in jeopardy.

We all fear that, but usually, being fired is never an issue with getting a new job.

> According to my colleagues, I'm very competent at my position, but this supervisor has been angry with me since I pointed out to him a few months ago that he may have violated firm policy in a severe way.

If he did severely violate firm policy, point it out to whomsoever is on top of her. They should be grateful for the violation report, and that should help keep your job.
A lot of police work takes place in public areas, where there is no expectation of privacy and anyone is able to take pictures and video.

There doesn't seem to be any reason not to make all footage from public areas generally available.
"to install extensions". This is satire, right?
Introducing Ubuntu Snappy
So, it is not actually a criminal offense for law enforcement to violate the 4th amendment in collecting evidence. All that happens is that in pre-trial, a defense counsel can file a motion to suppress that evidence based on the exclusionary rule[1]. If the judge decides that the evidence was collected illegally, it is thrown out and cannot be presented to the jury. Less than 90% of cases go before a jury, but a knowledgable and zealous attorney can get evidence thrown out (or "c'mon, you know that will never fly with Judge Saris"d out) before a plea deal. This is the only way we have that warrants be sought, that they be validly[2] issued and that they be followed.--the threat that a criminal will "Get off on a technicality", either because the DA doesn't think she can prosecute, or because the evidence gets thrown out in pre-trial, or because an appeals/SCOTUS decision throws out the case.

None of that matters if the evidence collected is never intended for criminal prosecutions. Either by the FBI or by the NSA.

At least one of Boston's federal judges serves on the FISA court and I have it on the word of Boston's clerk of court that the FISA court judges care deeply about doing a good job and being a check on executive overreach. I believe him. But that doesn't matter at all.

[1] Everyone should read http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1585 and actually look at this flowchart for the 4th amendment http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2256.

[2] Most warrant requests are granted, not because it is a rubber stamp, but because the conditions for warrant approval are predictable and judges don't like having their time wasted with dumb requests. It's not like the patent office.
Terrifying POV video shows avalanche hitting Mount Everest base camp [video]
It's a meaningless buzzword clickbait. You can't denigrate "list thinking" and provide a 10-point list as your response and expect to be taken seriously.

The actual point Lambert seems to be making is, "Recognize the existence of security dependencies between your assets." I wouldn't be terribly surprised to learn that there are a number of security professionals who fail to do this, but I'm not surprised to learn there are well-paid programmers who can't do FizzBuzz either. It's not a useful thing to point out unless most of your audience isn't already aware.
Collision Conf 'shortlists' every startup they come across.
There's actually a really interesting discussion on Quora, I think, about why they had something along the lines of a no-humor policy.

The problem isn't that people are humorless– it's that when you reward people for humor (often resulting in puns and pithy one liners), after a while, people start competing to be as funny as possible– and that's all that ever rises to the top. It crowds out more deliberate, thoughtful discussion.

I love humor and comedy myself, but it makes sense to me why a discussion forum might deliberately choose to discourage it.
FTA:

> One solution is to pick λ ∈ [-180°, 180°) as before and then set φ = cos^(-1)(2x - 1), where x is uniformly distributed and x ∈ [0, 1).

There is a fascinating fact hidden in the above sentence: if a point (x,y,z) is uniformly distributed on the surface of a sphere -- say, of radius 1, centered at (0,0,0) -- then each of x, y, and z is uniformly distributed over the interval [-1, 1].

Honestly, that's amazing.
Google Didn't Kill Glass, It's Just Making It Sexier
That definitely sounds like a very mild but treatable form of language disorder to me. It might be too mild to be of interest to language disorder clinicians, but maybe you could try 'treat' yourself by setting up a long-term plan of progressively 'harder'/longer reading materials. Check out for instance Pearson's Developmental English series [1]. Might seem arduous and pointless; but if it increases your ability to read long-form comfortably, it could make an enormous difference to your life.

[1] http://www.pearsonhighered.com/educator/course/Advanced-Read...
if its about 'a computer'..it can be as low as us$100..whats the problem? http://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-win-8.1.html?initiativ...
And you know, it's interesting to think about why that is, and how that helps anybody.

Have you ever gone onto a blogpost about procrastination and found the "I'll read this later" comment, and the "I'm here reading this instead of working" comment? Are those comments ever valuable?

It makes sense to downvote them to the bottom, so that people who go looking for them can find them, but the discussion is kept as fresh and relevant as possible.
Why Wordpress may not work for your project
haha, that's what I thought as well...just that it isn't April 1st..
I think there are two reasons I read. 1, i need to know something. This may be a pressing work concern, or just a genuine interest in something. A few weeks ago i read 40 pages on cocktail ice. 2, the author is really compelling. I've read quite a few novels that are just hard to put down.

I'd bet, you have no trouble with those cases. You may rifle through tech documentation till you read the paragraph or 10 that are relevant to your problem, but that part you can just breeze through. Because it matters I'd also bet there are a few books or stories you have no trouble with because the author has really drawn you in, and you care about what's happening, and it matters. If not, take a look at hemmingway or maybe chuck palahniuk. they both put a lot of effort into making short powerful stories. Survivor or invisible monsters might be worth a read.

Other stuff, well, my tolerance really depends on my level of curiosity. If i'm feeling particularly curious, i can read some pretty boring stuff, but not for a long time. Sometimes deep insights are hidden in boring words.

Anyway, you're not weird. People have different defaults. Most stuff i kind of grind through, and don't really soak up the full meaning. On the other hand, most writing is pretty bad, and isn't really worth that much effort. The vast majority of stuff is just rehashed restated rewritten copies of copies that contain enough essence of the original to give you a hint of that dopamine rush.
Startup Investment 101: Investment Rounds Explained
Sure, but you cannot override or ignore the default action: that of continuing execution.
Parent Post is a Moving The Goalposts Fallacy[1].

1. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts
Confirm: ES6 and the Harmony agenda influenced TypeScript. Where TS went its own way on things like open modules, MS has promised to track the Ecma standard versions ASAP.

In particular, TS classes were purely an extension to ES6's design, while ES6 was not frozen. There was not feedback the other way, at least not phrased in terms of TS -- the MS folks on TC39 had to make more generalized arguments for changing the draft ES6 spec.
As someone who has found several arbitrary account takeover bugs impacting >100M users, I can tell you this will give you job offers, but only in the low 6 figures.

With the state of the media in the infosec industry, having your finding widely publicized doesn't mean much, either.
I've memorized a relevant XKCD just for this occasion, because it comes up so much: http://xkcd.com/1227/

> "Intellectual laziness and the hurry of the age have produced a craving for literary nips. The torbid brain... has grown too weak for sustained thought." – Israel Zangwill, The Bachelor's Club, 1891

I highly, highly recommend everybody read "The Information: How The Internet Gets Inside Us" by Adam Gopnik: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/02/14/the-information

It points out how this 'Why can't we X anymore", "in the past it was better", "the future will be amazing", "the future will be horrible", and "everything is kinda the same" perspectives have been repeated, remixed, rehashed over and over again.
Linux-running MIPS CPU available for free to universities – full Verilog code
The Information: How the Internet gets inside us. (2011)
I am an attorney, but this is not legal advice. Seek licensed counsel in your jurisdiction.

The law basically says that your employer can claim ownership over any work product you make while in their employ (i.e. in the workplace) or using their equipment. So cease immediately if you don't want to potentially forfeit your creation, and use solely your own equipment, outside the usual workplace, to develop it.
What if you were being raped in a park and policemen came to assist you.

Would you want that footage to be publicly available?

Likewise, would you want everyone who ever hated you to have access to that footage to use however they want? Once the cat's out of the bag...

Edit: Other fun situations:

1. You're attacked by someone and can't run, but have enough experience/training to subdue them; the cops show up later and the video doesn't show you being attacked, so you look like the aggressor.

2. You're attacked and can't defend yourself or fail to such an extent that people would look at the video and laugh at you.

3. You're on video doing something incredibly out of the norm for you, whatever the reason.

4. You're on video in a PLACE that you wish other people didn't know you frequented. A strip club, a gay bar, a church, a vegan grocery store, a pot dealer, etc.

5. You're on video doing something that your friends/family would react negatively to. Let's say you're a doctor and someone has a heart attack at Political Rally Green. You're up front and on camera for everyone else to see, including your family, who are all diehard Red supporters.
Why don't you speak with the recruiter or ask them to forward you contact information for an engineer there(or whatever it is you'd be doing)?
The questions you want to ask are literally exactly what the recruiter or another employee are there to answer for you.
Well, a couple things about it make me nervous, but CTFE and a not horribly broken compilation model might make it worth trying out next weekend...
The model in the video look more like an A-12 (earlier CIA version of the SR-71) to me. They flew with bare metal and black leading edges and were single seat.

The YF-12A looked different, the chines didn't extend all the way to the nose and had a ventral fin
For ecommerce site you may get better SSL Security solution at Comodo SSL Store at low cost with highest security....
Just checkout this - https://comodosslstore.com/
Hope you will get better solution here..
Seems to be working fine on my Firefox (same version) on Windows.
That doesn't make any sense to me. Video of bystanders? So what? Shouldn't we be outraged about other public cameras as well that the police use to catch criminals then? Don't people who film the police also film "bystanders"?

I think at the very least if the videos are kept secret until judicial review, then the police officers should be forced to keep them on all the time during work hours. The videos should also be automatically uploaded somewhere where that police department can't control what happens to the videos.
Part of the problem is articles like this. There were perhaps five interesting sentences of content in that entire piece, and several hundred entirely redundant words and personal examples used only to set the tone.

If modern writers have such disrespect for their audience, is it any wonder some of that audience hasn't the attention span to stick with it?

Older, serious, and timeless literature requires deep concentration because the authors use their thousands of words to express deep pathos that can't be trivialised. It takes practice to commit oneself to a book like that for long enough to get into a flow wherein it can be understood and appreciated. It's _easier_ to read fluff because the dopamine hits quicker, but (for some people) it's worth the effort to read something more meaningful.

In some ways there's an analogy to coding; some books I can't read unless I've got the time to be isolated from distractions. Similarly, some coding problems I can't make progress unless I know I've got more than a half hour to pre-load my brain cache.

Given that I'm railing about redundant words, this seems an appropriate point to stop.
And again, recently:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9188011
Are you sure? If z is distributed over the surface of the sphere there is far less surface at the extremums -1 and 1. Doesn't z being uniform in the range (-1,1) lead to points being actually more densly concentrated near the poles? Or did I misunderstand what you meant?
Invest in a bottom tier machine. Apart from the healthy separation, it will teach you to value both computation and financial resources.

It's totally possible to code Erlang on a low-end netbook.

The cheap laptop I wrote early self-employed code on was under 20% the price of a cheap Mac and so badly made it was flexible.

The work I produced on it paid for the eventual upgrade.