skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
All languages have a culture associated to them. It's hard to dissociate the culture from the language. Even English, which is used in different cultures, has local optimizations when it is used daily.

Latin is bound to an ancient culture (and a religious one).

Even Klingon and Quenya are bound to the universes and cultures created by their authors & fan bases.

But I don't see any culture associated with Esperanto. I'm wondering if things might be different if its proponents started associating with a niche culture (be it business) and then expand out to encompass things from everyday life. I don't know what the answer is…
I think we have some strange ideas about how and why studying languages are "useful". Most Americans are monolingual English speakers, and almost by definition can't study a language that's more "useful" than English.

There are large cognitive benefits to bi- and multilingualism, but for these it doesn't actually matter what language you speak: a heritage or minority language is as good as anything else.

But the classroom model of the United States isn't actually designed to make people multilingual; if anything, it's the opposite. The default language policy of the United States is mostly to shift people to English monolingualism, no matter their circumstances, heritage, or language rights.
They could get more backers if DRM-free release (for everyone) was a simple part of the base goal.

I have to say, prove it. My theory is that most people don't care about DRM the same way you do, and that more people like owning something than want to make it widely accessible, based on the abundant evidence already available about their willingness to buy exclusive rewards. What do you base your assertion about the potential number of backers upon?

This sounds sick. I don't care for exclusivity, I care for art.

That's nice of you, but it's a fact that we live in a consumer society and one of the most common sales tools is to exploit the law of supply and demand by creating artificial scarcity - even by limiting the numbers of Kickstarter rewards designed to get people to donate before someone else. You can effectively solicit a higher donation level by restricting the availability of the perk, and I find it hard to blame people for exploiting a business strategy that is known to work.

In all seriousness, how much do you care for art? What $ amount would you be prepared to donate or put at risk by investing? I'm not asking this to win an argument, I'm genuinely curious about the economic value you attach to your ideological position. Would you be influenced by some combination, eg for $x you become a patron of the DRM-free copy but you also get a special T-shirt or other item that's not available to others, and if so to what degree?

And actually such kind of attitude in the project would make it feel repealing for me.

You've gotta sell what people want to buy. If you say you're going to be making the top-of-the-line quality product available as widely as possible later, then many people will reasonably ask why they should bother giving you money now. I don't think that people in the aggregate are as generous as you may be as an individual. Now, if you're quite wealthy and in a position make very generous donations that could balance out beautifully, but the basic business model of Kickstarter and similar sites is about raising lots of small donations from a crowd rather than targeting a smallish number of more substantial donors.

That's all besides the fact that Youtube doesn't have DRM.

Yeah but YouTube video quality is shit. Of course it's good by historical standards but then TVs used to be much less capable than today. Many people do not find the quality satisfactory for leisure viewing. If you watch the same video on YouTube and Vimeo (eg many people upload camera tests to both websites) you can see a substantail difference on Vimeo, and mp4 quality would be better again. I don't like watching YouTube on a television, in general. Admittedly this is more of a short-term problem, and it will all be 'good enough' soon enough, just as Netflix streaming was mediocre in quality for the first year or two but now looks fine most of the time (at least on a HDTV).
> OpenSMTPD

Isn't it a SMTP server? If so that's just one of many parts of an email server.
Could you expand on your last para please - it seems to promise there is a solution to software security already available ...

E-language seems a bit out dated from the intro I can find,
What's an IO offload engine?
What do you means about unified model (capability based / distributed implies E-language again?)

Is this using strong data types to base security capabilities on? And how does hardware for in here

I ask for interest as your comments here and on Schneier imply a lot of knowledge under the surface and am run in to catch up
they tie you up with wikis, bug trackers, pull
requests and a lot of other things around just
git hosting that are difficult to transplant to
another service.

Are you saying that some people say GitHub should be avoided for GNU projects because it's too useful?
lets say I have $50k saved. I can buy a bar of gold and bury it in my backyard - producing exactly nothing for anybody.

Or I can buy solar panels for the elementary school down the street and have them pay me 90% of their prior electric bill. The elementary school has a lower electric bill every month and I have a steady income stream and no one does any work.
2) Because Bitbucket gives me a free academic plan.

So does Github
If he really did attempt to order a hit on someone, that changes the game a little. Now we're no longer talking about just drugs.

But I agree that it's absolutely insane if the charges are just drug-related -- rapists get far less time than many drug dealers.
Ah, okay, but that would imply that GitTorrent doesn't make any use of the swarming capability which makes BitTorrent special.

Not using swarming brings back all of the old problems of NAT traversal, asymmetric upload/download bandwidth, throttling, censorship etc.
It doesn't hurt that Meteor is basically a chat app out of the box. Just hook up the accounts component to the DDP component and voila.
Fuck the war on drugs
Ulbricht was also convicted of hiring a hitman.

edit: this is something that vice news [0] reported that is apparently wrong.

> But despite these setbacks, Ulbricht was ultimately convicted in February on a raft of charges, including drug trafficking, computer hacking, money laundering, and hiring assassins to take out members of Silk Road.

[0]: https://news.vice.com/article/ross-ulbricht-convicted-master...
10 things not to do at work
As far as I can tell, he wasn't actually convicted of anything like that.
The disconnect that Nintendo of America has done a very poor job of marketing is that you don't need to be bored in public to play a 3DS. Sure, it could be a nice thing to have if you lived in the city and spent 30 minutes or more a day in public transportation, but among adult users (at least in America, where public transportation is uncommon outside of a few major cities), they're much more likely to play it while unwinding at home, while their SO is watching TV or surfing the web on a lazy sunday, while they're on the can, etc. Yet people, even those that love games, don't always realize this, and say things like "I already have a smartphone" or "I don't want to be seen "gaming" in public."

The closest functional analogue to a portable game console is not a smartphone, but a tablet. And while it's very fun to browse the web or watch videos on the couch with a tablet, even the best tablet games are no where near as engaging as the average portable console game.

Nintendo of Japan did a series of commercials to demonstrate this, showing Japanese celebrities relaxing at home, curled up on their couches, playing 3DS by themselves while thinking out loud to the audience. Another featuring the branding of a big pop star, and I'm sure there's many more that I never saw. AFAIK, Nintendo of America hasn't tried to market the 3DS to adults at all, and it's really not doing justice to the cross-generational appeal of many of their products.
Do we actually have any proof of that or is it just something that the media is feeding us?
> But prosecutors, in their memo, argued that praising Silk Road for “harm reduction measures” was “akin to applauding a heroin dealer for handing out a clean needle with every dime bag: The point is that he has no business dealing drugs in the first place.”

Lovely.
I'll be more bold than panglott... we can't "give up" teaching modern foreign languages, because we already don't teach modern foreign languages.

I took four years of high school French, and got decent grades. I recently started reviewing and learning more through flashcards in Anki. On the one hand, the fours years of "study" put enough French in my head that I'm making progress this way... on the other hand, as I continue making what is frankly a great deal more progress with the spaced-repitition than I ever made in school I still can't help but notice I still can not fluently read much of anything, let alone speak or hear it.

Now, as it is common on the Internet to confuse saying something is true with advocating for that fact, let me say that A: I still think learning a language is a good idea, I just don't think what we have now can actually be called "learning a language" and B: if we were ever allowed to change The Holy Curriculum [1], there's probably more effective ways to teach a foreign language. I can't help but notice that my Anki-based studies are wildly more effective than what I tried to do in school. (They're also still inadequate on their own so far. No contradiction there... my schooling was even more inadequate, you see.) Four years of a properly-researched and developed language program, with proper software support, might have produced someone at least capable of using the language at the end.

[1]: A phrase I am settling in on to indicate my contempt for the idea that we need to deeply reform education, but we must do so under the constraint that nobody is ever allowed to remove, add, reorder, or change anything we do, ever.
Gross miscarriage of justice. People have a right to buy drugs.

Every single government actor involved in this case is far more guilty than Ross and, frankly, they are the ones that deserve prison.

Yes, Ross should have realized you can't massively break the law and get away with it. He made a big mistake.

But the mistake he made was assuming that other people were more benevolent than they really are.

This young man viewed the world with a child-like, rosy-eyed perspective, and for that, he gets crushed by the boot of government brutality.

Disclaimer: I have no involvement with any dark nets or online drug trade.

edit: I don't know if he hired hitmen and if he did, I suspect it was in his own defense.
Why? Are there any technical reasons or is it just the nerd-within wich pushes into the "less popular" choice?
The point is that many students continue learning that language past that one year. It's much better to give students practical skills in a living language.
That seems way too harsh to me. I have strong opinions on the US War on Drugs and it's failure to meaningful deal with drug use/abuse in the USA. And I feel even worse about how it's spilling out into the rest of the world as we go "global" with everything.

I can't say I know every detail of the case but I don't recall anyone getting killed or even hurt by Mr. Ulbricht so in my mind the punishment does not fit the crime. IMHO the death penalty should be off the table completely (go Nebraska!) and life in prison reserved for only violent offenders. You can argue that he enabled people to harm themselves but I think that's stretching it. If people want to take drugs, even take too much drugs their going to get it somewhere. If drugs were legal and treatment of abuse the focus instead of punishment Silk Road wouldn't have existed in the first place.
The amount of ego in this comment is astounding
No, he wasn't. He was never even charged with that; the story of one attempt to hire a hitman was admitted into the trial as evidence that he was running the Silk Road and knew what he was doing, but that was never one of the actual charges against him.
Not quite: the peer generates the pack and tells you its hash, and then you query the network for anyone who has that hash (them, for starters), and perform a swarming download of it. So git clones of popular repositories would usually swarm.
I agree with the article, and the stated reasons, but a little nitpick:

"And Github's business model is exactly what SourceForge's was."

I don't think that's actually true, is it? Githubs business model is based on enterprise customers, which to my knowledge, SourceForge wasn't. Not that that diminishes the point.
Sounds like you have something in mind.
All you have to do now, is:

1. Expand on your idea with some examples.
2. Show how this can be done without breaking existing Go code
3. Showing where the performance hits are - runtime? compile time? binary size? memory?
4. Show how this plays along with Go's implementation of interfaces, as well as other already-generic types, such as channels and maps.

If you can do all that, realistically, then I don't see why it wouldn't be taken seriously?

Heck, if you can provide even an example implementation (talk is increasingly cheap) I bet you'll get lots of people on-board!

You seem, like many others, to think that Go core team members don't want "generics". All they have ever said is - "we don't want bad generics". That's all.

Anyone can say "I don't know what exactly Go generics are, how they look like, how they perform, how they change the syntax, all I know is - I want them". Like I said, talk is cheap.
Life without parole seems excessive. I think they're trying to make an example out of him due to how hard it is to detect and prosecute this type of crime.
For example, a GET request to a URL from a to-one relationship link could return: [...]
If the above relationship is empty, then a GET request to the same URL would return: [...]
A GET request to a URL from a to-many relationship link could return: [...]

In each of these cases, the "data" attribute can hold three different data types. An array, null, or a single object.

But then, data doesn't even have to be present (and indeed, MUST NOT be) if errors is present. So now we have four different data types. [], null, {}, or undefined.

If this is supposed to be a standard, why not standardize your data property? An array works as a data type for each of these (normal, empty, only one item) and you can then always require a data field in the response instead of "only data or errors may be returned"? The most important part of building an API standard isn't the standard itself, it's anticipating the tooling you use to parse it.

By having only errors or data present on a response you immediately create two possible ways developers can create an interface for an API using this standard:

if (response.errors) { /* there was an error */ }

OR

if (response.data) { /* there were no errors */ }

But what if data is null?

if (response.hasOwnProperty(data)) { /* there were no errors */ }

The first method is clearly preferred, so why do we care what data looks like, anyway? Why not make it always an array? Things like this:

if (!response.data.length) { /* do a thing */ }

Would be unambiguous because response.data always exists as an array that will have a length of 0 or more.

tl;dr: I don't like some part of this standard. http://xkcd.com/927/
No, if you read the exact sentence you quoted, it should be avoided because those value-adds are lock-ins that are hard to move to a new service.
Actually not yet convicted of hiring a hitman. There is another trial for that.

Apparently his first attempt he hired an fbi agent, posing as a hit man and his second attempt seems to have been a con-job...

He tried though. Apparently the fbi agent sent fake photos as proof.

Article from Ars Comments.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-09/us-says-si...
> Murderers get less than that.

Or the same. Or more, in the form of the death penalty.
It's pretty funny that this hits HN the day after this did:

http://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/2015/05/27/what-heck-h...

> It’s almost as if Page walked right into that corner office and flipped the switch marked “Fiscal Responsibility” from the “on” to the “off” position. At that point, Page abandoned Google’s second core philosophy, “It’s best to do one thing really, really well,” and started doing just about everything.
There was lots of sleazy stuff going down on SR totally unrelated to drugs...stolen credit cards, weapons, etc.
He was not.

He was convicted of the following-

Distribution/Aiding and Abetting the Distribution of Narcotics

Distribution/Aiding and Abetting the Distribution of Narcotics by Means of the Internet

Conspiracy to Distribute Narcotics

Continuing Criminal Enterprise

Conspiracy to Commit or Aid and Abet Computer Hacking

Conspiracy to Traffic in Fraudulent Identity Documents

Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering

EDIT. Neat. -3 points for posting nothing but factual information. Cool. I'll leave you all to it, then.
> True, but you could do the same thing in any region of memory. The only thing that using "the stack" buys you is that there are a few special instructions to allocate / deallocate one machine word at a time (if you store the "top-of-heap" pointer in a specific register)

This is pretty much what a TLAB is in Hotspot JVM, except of course the pointer never moves backwards (once the TLAB is filled up, it retires, and then can get assigned to a different thread to start allocating from the beginning). Each allocation into the TLAB moves allocations further into the region -- there's never any reuse until the TLAB starts afresh.

The stack locality comes from the rest of the stack execution mechanics keeping this region very warm, and the majority of the read/write action to the stack is localized (apart from large stack allocations that may temporarily expand the region's use).
The prosecution sentencing memo rebuts this argument, pointing out that Ulbricht's attempts to procure murder for hire were explicit factual components of one of the charges he faced.

Ulbricht's argument to the effect that he wasn't properly charged with the murder-for-hire scheme was addressed in detail by the court:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1391...
The wiki is trivial to export (it's just https://github.com/gollum/gollum, and you can clone the git repo with your wiki data directly). Issues and PRs are less trivial, but there's nothing inherently difficult about writing an exporter. The lock-in mostly comes from the ecosystem of third-party tools that's gradually developing which either only support github or work poorly with other hosts.
Autocorrelation may also be a useful tool here - have you considered it at all?
> and that at least six deaths were attributable to drugs bought on the site. The government recommended a sentence “substantially above” the 20-year minimum.

Man, that is a bit of a mental stretch to blame drug ODs on the runner of a forum. He did not make the drugs, sell the drugs, or transfer the drugs, but the prosecutors faulted him in the OD of people who used those drugs?
What about using git notes (`man git-notes`) for tracking issues, comments, etc? They are stored as git objects (right?) and could be used for this task?
The cost of imprisoning someone as of 2010: 31,000 USD per years.[1]

Ross is 31 years old, so he may live for 40 years. That mean imprisoning this man will cost the US taxpayer 1.4 million USD in lifetime cost.

This doesn't take into account opportunity cost, expenses for trial, the cost of the drug war, and so on.

[1] http://www.thecrimereport.org/news/inside-criminal-justice/2...
Why do you deserve to get back the investment made on the education? Is 'deserving' an oracle, where you stick in some action and it arbitrarily assigns the conclusion of 'does' or 'doesn't'?
Pricing plans for small teams with many repos and because the pull request review sucks compared to Bitbucket.
It's interesting. On one hand, if a leader of a traditional drug distribution network landed a life in prison sentence, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. With Silkroad though, I'm actually convinced by the defendants argument: that it provided safer, more trustworthy drugs to users.

I've had friends who've died from purchasing bad drugs at raves from people who were looking to make money and run. In one situation it ended up being rat poison. The guy had other drugs in his system, and combined with the poison his body went into shock. With darknet markets and independent lab testing networks, this type of thing doesn't happen.

People are still going to use drugs. I'd rather law enforcement go after the guys who are selling rat poison at raves than the guys who are setting up safe distribution networks.
No I don't believe in any of that. I believe the only way to determine what someone should be paid is to keep offering money until someone you think is good enough takes the job, or it until it stops being worth offering the job at that level.

Anything else is artificial and causes more pain than good. And that's despite it being nobody's business how much I get paid or how much my company choses to pay me.
> Gross miscarriage of justice. People have a right to buy drugs.

Legally, they do not. If you have a problem with that, take it up with (relevant to the federal laws at issue here) the Congress.
There is a very distinctive culture to Esperanto: people who continue to hope for positive social transformation and international and intercultural harmony.

Esperantist and conlanger William Annis (on the Conlangery podcast) said something to the effect that, if you go to a Esperanto congress, you should start with the default assumption that everyone you meet is a gay vegetarian. [1]

I cannot speak to the truth of this myself ;)

[1] http://conlangery.com/2011/12/05/94/
Memories emerge intact from cryogenic resurrection machine
Wow, that's almost unbelievable and very sad. I mean, it's questionable whether he caused any actual harm.
"nobody seems to be addressing what the article is about"

Possibly because the page is unreachable (for me, at least).
try calling one a lobsterback and see what happens.

different groups have different insults. welcome to reality.
I don't see why people put so much work into GC before even bothering to do any work to avoid objects becoming garbage in the first place beyond simple escape analysis.
Human in chatbot mode: Interface study explores perceptions
Gaana.com Hacked – CyberNewsAlerts
Reminds me of the wearable computers in Vernor Vinge's novel Rainbow's End.
Fuck the drug dealers.
Yes, but that doesn't imply they're justifying a financial cost. It could be that they need to justify creating a new repo and figuring out how/where to host it.
His trailblazing has parallels to Sean Parker.

Of course, liberating music was hardly as valuable to society as removing the need for bloodbaths to distribute drugs. But what are you going to do.
> Third parties, both companies and FOSS types, are doing better at protecting Android than Google.

I'm working on a 3rd-party OSS project securing Android https://copperhead.co/android (/shameless self plug)

While Android is in pretty bad shape, I'd still give Google some credit, they have been slowly starting to improve their OS security in the last 2 years. But quite a few early design choices favouring performance over security, such as Zygote rendering ASLR ineffective, are lingering and holding back Android's security.

They are also using Linux kernels from 2012 or earlier (3.4) on almost all devices, although from what I've heard that is mostly the fault of vendors such as Qualcomm moving slowly.
Show HN: Glamour's “Boss Button”–brilliant marketing easter egg
Free and easy to use tips to boost Metabolism and lose weight quickly
As android user , if you cared about app permissions, all you needed to do was to install cyanogenmod.