skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I guess I've always just heard "X Government Propaganda" as an idiomatic phrase used specifically to refer to things Government X tries to get its own citizens to believe on a long-term generational basis, turning it into "common wisdom." Whereas usually foreign-targeted propaganda is designed as part of a discrete operation to achieve some ephemeral goal, and it's the operation that has lasting relevance, not the propaganda itself (which is pretty quickly dispelled as soon as the next generation of foreigners grows up not having been touched by it.)

Or, to put it another way, domestic propaganda is strategic and continuous (and therefore easily observed, by meeting a citizen of the country who "grew up with the propaganda"); foreign-targeted propaganda is tactical and one-off, and won't usually leak out of whatever domain it was focused on (government, military, investors, entrepreneurs, etc.)
Show HN: Apache Spark on Raspberry PI 2
how can I help you
Additionally, you can open the Help menu for any app by pressing Cmd-?, and the search box there will find any menu item for you.
Seems so 3 points yes!
Why do you believe that giving the state these powers helps reduce the risk of terrorism? Can you point to an attack that has been prevented by information gained through torture?

Obviously since the number of deaths caused by terrorism thus far is tiny, for terrorism to justify these actions that you agree would otherwise be unconscionable, the only conclusion you could make is that the security apparatus must be supremely effective, and have thwarted thousands of otherwise successful attacks against the US alone.

Am I correct in following that train of thought? Do you believe that a significant number of deaths have been prevented, say a number close to those killed by ATV's* in the US each year?

What is the evidence for these thwarted attacks?

* www.atvsafety.gov/stats.html
I don't see how a disorder[0] is intertwined with privacy. Are you referring to medical history?

[0] Just in case someone thinks I'm making this up: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder
A small group of SQL Azure engineers want to have a short chat with our peers at startup companies who are building cloud solutions using databases other than SQL. We want to learn about the challenges real people have with cloud databases.
If you are not currently using Azure SQL DB that is OK, we would still like to hear from you. We would greatly appreciate your answers to the one minute survey below to know if you are interested in influencing our technology roadmap. Based on the provided information we might schedule a phone call or fly you to Microsoft's HQ (all expenses covered) for further feedback.
Please post to HN if you discover one wing growing out of your back. Let us help you before it's too late. When my min-maxing ways [1] are put into motion and I've worked out how to rip the very moon from the sky and drop it on your erratically-floating head for the low, low cost of 0MP (which, fortunately, will have no other side effects than to cause you precisely 9999 points of damage), it'll be too late for you to decide that you could have just settled for a cup of hot chocolate, enjoy curled up in a blanket sitting next to a roaring fire.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9652105
The classic example is Navier–Stokes equations of viscous fluid flow. True story, one of my college professors handed out a homework assignment that no one could solve. Far as I could tell the boundary conditions described journal bearing that wasn't stable. Such things exist.

I think other very hard to deal with are equations where the solution diverges exponentially due to small changes in boundary conditions. Orbital mechanics is like that.

Not sure but I can see a situation where the set of equations that describe the solution form a series that never converges to a regular pattern. (irrational series? as irrational numbers but with equations) I think quantum mechanics is like that (Don't quote me)
A few years ago, I was almost forcibly prevented from leaving a Hawaiian burger joint in Nagano by a waitress who was concerned that I'd accidentally left some money on the table. I tried to explain that it was a tip, but they were quite unhappy to let us leave until we'd taken a couple of little candy canes - it was Christmas - from the display in their window...

Tipping is not a thing in Japan, generally. I've read that it can be considered faintly insulting, given the service culture - you're implying the recipient wouldn't have done their job properly unless you gave them extra money.
One of my pet peeves is that developers rarely understand the costs of traversing boundaries well enough to even think about them.

You won't do distributed services well if you don't understand that each step removed from in-process, in-cache carries with it a severe cost-multiplier for communicating state.

E.g. most developers (rightly) assume that function/method calls are usually quite cheap, but we don't tend to be good at thinking about cache effects. So we lose the first big factor of performance by e.g. chasing pointers around.

Then people tend to (wrongly) assume that if function calls are cheap, this extends to system calls. Another multiplier, as people e.g. does tons of small read()'s instead of larger reads into in-process user-space buffers.

But I see people go further, and assume that database queries or http requests are cheap, often helped by having them hidden behind ORMs and various APIs that obscures how often they're making these queries even if they're logically aware they're calling them.

The end result is that often these applications get written with the assumption that a function call is a function call is a function call, without thought to whether or not that function call is just a handful of machine instructions, or will trash the cache, or traverses a process boundary of hundreds of cycles before anything gets executed, or executes a remote API that may take millions of cycles to return.

And then something is "slow" and the developer in question often have only a very vague idea what is likely to be slow, and stumbles around trying to measure various parts of it without thinking about the bigger picture of what information traverses what boundaries how frequently.

The same concern applies to reliability tradeoffs as well as performance (e.g. lack of understanding of implications for high-availability for example).

I think a huge proportion of problems making effective use of distributed systems boils down to this. There are hard challenges, sure, but if you are aware that each step across a boundary carries a certain penalty, you're already well on the way to actually thinking about why you want to move something across a boundary, and think about whether or not you understand the tradeoff well enough, and to structure things to e.g. minimize the number of boundary traversals (once you think of system calls as "slow" you are much more likely to entertain the idea of the slight extra complexity of ensuring you read/write as much as possible in one go, for example).

Even just teaching younger developers to be aware of this, and how to actually measure and profile more, would help immensely, I think (one of my favourite things to show people is just very basic crude use of "strace"; suddenly it becomes very obvious to a lot of people that some of the things they do are immensely inefficient). Not because it would teach them to do distributed systems right, but because it would give them the tools to recognise much earlier when they're headed into territory they don't know well enough yet, instead of finding out after they've already painted themselves into a corner.
In college I was part of a club that had an elaborate election procedure for officers. I'm pretty sure it violates Arrow's Theorem, but it was also nonterminating!
Alas I do not know of a general site where information like this is curated. Cryptome sometimes posts similar information. Wikileaks, too. Following a variety of journalistic outfits with integrity (get to know the individual journalists - do not follow 'brands') helps (I do not feel comfortable sharing my personal list here). Reading reports from Washington Thinktanks, especially in the national defense arena is very helpful as they speak sometimes very plainly about the US strategic purposes of things that otherwise seem very odd. It's also really useful to have the patience to trawl through boring documents for key terminology and to use search engines to be your own poor man's investigative journalist.

There are people who spend 100% of their time focused on any particular country or issue you are interested in. Find professors of foreign policy or cultural studies and security advisors for the country or area. There are similarly task forces that try to provide insight into the whatever issue - many of these are public.

The short answer here is that no, there isn't any easy place. But the great thing is that, if you care enough about it, some reasonable representation of 'what's going on' is available to you.
The Project Takeover Blues 6 – Buying and Selling
While it is a stupid distinction, and one I wouldn;t personally use, it is objectively true Putin exerts a bit more control over Russia than Obama commands in the USA.
Firefox OS Gaming: Going  Going  Gone
Source: old timers, talking about Dayton's from 60 years ago.
I would agree with that assessment.
Ok, url changed from http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~norouzi/research/papers/multi_ind.... Also, cool work!
Its my understanding (someone feel free to correct me) that the cost of a local community college is still perfectly reasonable and you're still getting a decent education. I don't know what the difference is between those and Stanford from a quality of education standpoint but, anecdotally, one of the most brilliant programmers I've ever met went to the local community college.
Reminds me of this scene from Star Trek https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0qGXPDJ19c&feature=youtu.be... where the characters try to recreate their memories using the Holodeck. When I first saw it I thought that scene was ridiculously unrealistic -- but I suppose that's what I get for betting against technology.
Sourceforge was, for a long time, the definitive home for many, many popular open source projects. That they've cached in on this historical trust, and in some cases the fact that the thing they are "mirroring" actually was hosted there at some point, makes this worse.

For example, for years, I've used winscp.sf.net to get to WinSCP when I need it. As of now it redirects to what I believe is WinSCP's actual site, winscp.net. In the past, Sourceforge was the actual location to get the binary. If at some point they set up a "mirror" for WinSCP, there's a good chance that people visiting that haven't in a long time might just accept that if they get a download link at a sourceforge page, it's likely legit.

I can't say the same about any of the sites you listed.
That only works as long as the founder or somebody equally powerful is in charge. Everybody else is beholden to the board and thus the short-medium term impact on the share price.
Where is the call to action (where do you engage to get involved?)
I believe you mean Caitlyn Jenner.
I have no idea why you were downvoted—that was exactly my thought on reading the article as well. In her particular case, she's well-preserved while those around her have been reduced to skeletons, which suggests quite strongly that hers are a case of authentically corrupt relics.
As the other poster said, micro/mono is probably more of a company culture than technical issue. When a monolith gets so big that it takes large team to maintain it, it is probably time to start thinking about splitting. At that point it is close to impossible for any person on the team to reason about the entirety of the app, and it leads to very slow changes.

Something that is also often missed is what does micro mean? To some people it means a service to getDate() to others it is an authentication service. I've likened splitting off micro services like an amoeba splits. A pieces gets bigger off on it's own and eventually splits off. In that respect I agree with Fowler that micro services should be emergent.
Unrelated, but interesting custom: Koreans (possibly others of the Asian persuasion) generally will hand you change with both hands (possibly with a small bow), it's considered rude to hand cash with only one hand. No idea why.
> So basically the only reason why people use PayPal is because of international transfers

Huh?

Does that make me the only one who uses PayPal solely because a bunch of people selling things online use PayPal and it's somewhat more convenient than having to fork over my credit card info every time I want to buy something?
Did you switch your Raft implementation & would you care to share your insights on the different implementations you guys have tried? (If there was a blog post on that, would appreciate the link).
Canada 0 in 2012 is weird.
I interpreted the "poor developer" part of the OP to be a statement of financial outlook, not from a development ability standpoint - especially when in the same line he mentions that he's "stuck getting paid 16/hr" at the moment.

But otherwise good advice!
It is incorrect that foreign propaganda is never sustained.

For example the United States government is currently engaged in a blanket of propaganda covering communications, social media and news outfit over the Middle East - they go so far as to create video games for the children there to play. The goal is a deradicalization of the Middle East - the vast majority of which now have turned against or are deeply suspicious of the United States (even NATO member Turkey).

How episodic propaganda operations are depends on the goal of the propaganda. Sometimes there is a specific ephemeral purpose (e.g. military deception), other times it is a short term goal (e.g. increase trust in gov't bonds) and other times it intends to be permanent or long lasting (e.g. America and Western culture is friendly to you and you would like to be a part of it).
I have been looking on airbnb and there seems to be some good options, however a lot of them are very expensive. There are some nice hacker houses. I messaged them and I am waiting to hear back from them.
A building is say 500 feet tall. The top moves say 2 feet.

In order for this to happen every 10 feet of the building doesn't shift sideways a certain amount. Every 10 feet of the building bends a certain amount. A VERY small amount. Tiny fractions of a degree.

So the bottom 10 feet of the building bends say 0.001 degrees. The bottom is flat, the top is tilted 0.001 degrees.

The next 10 feet bends an additional 0.001 degrees, but its base was already tilted 0.001 degrees so its top is tilted 0.002 degrees.

The next 10 feet bends an additional 0.001 degrees, but its base was already tilted 0.002 degrees so its top is tilted 0.003 degrees.

Repeat this 50 times (for 500 total feet) and you've got 0.050 degrees of tilt at the top which might be noticeable. Further, you have to add up displacements the whole way from the bottom to the top as well.

If you took a picture of the building sideways it would look like this: http://www.codecogs.com/users/23287/Cantilever-Beams-101.png
I had forgotten about couchsurfing,not sure my profile still works. I will give it a try. Thanks.
The thing with "foreign spying" is that most people I know do make a distinction between spying on foreign governments (were the biggest question is, should governments spy on close allies, and if so, how much?) and mass surveillance abroad.

Think about it this way, would you be mad if Russia FSB agents were constantly trying to get access to classified military networks of the US? Well no, that's part of their stated functions and one of the mildest at that. If those networks get hacked it is the U.S. fault! Same with the NSA hacking Russian govt networks (substitute countries as you will, it doesn't matter). But if it turned out that the FSB was intercepting every phone communication in the U.S. 100% of the time between random civilians (which btw might or might not be the case...), that would be a different situation. Mass surveillance is different from targeted espionage and is not any more righteous when you do it to civilians abroad than when you impose it on your own citizens.

Besides, there is the whole lot of evidence of decisions where the NSA intentionally weakened U.S. cyber-security in order to make sure it could spy on foreign civilians using those weaknesses. Making yourself more vulnerable to attack while pissing off as many people abroad as possible is the opposite of what you want your government to be doing, it would seem to me...
A common analog in the U.S. Is to place the tender across the till dividers until the change is counted out, to prevent just such a scenario.
This diagram is about services that run o a machine and vend data to other machines, not the libraries or frameworks (GWT, etc) that implement the services. This diagram is more "zoomed out"
> A small group of SQL Azure engineers want to have a short chat with our peers at startup companies who are building cloud solutions using databases other than SQL.

Does "other than SQL" here mean "databases that don't use SQL-the-language" or does it mean "databases other than Microsoft SQL Server". (And why does it say you are looking for people using databases other than SQL, and then say "If you are not currently using Azure SQL DB that is OK, we would still like to hear from you."? Presumably, whatever is meant by "other than SQL", it already means using something that isn't "Azure SQL DB".)
> Why would the body be preserved without the soul?

Because that soul and body formed a person who was more holy than most, and thus sanctified his (or in this case, her) body, which is thereby preserved from the corruption which normally afflicts corpses in a fallen world.

In Orthodox thought, bodies and souls are of equal importance (rather than the Gnostic idea of the living soul animating an essentially dead body). An Orthodox thinker would say that we are our bodies (unlike many Western Christians), but not just our bodies (unlike a materialist).
An amusing anecdote which illustrates why independence of irrelevant alternatives is desirable:

After finishing dinner, Sidney Morgenbesser decides to order dessert.
The waitress tells him he has two choices: apple pie and blueberry pie.
Sidney orders the apple pie.
After a few minutes the waitress returns and says that they also have cherry pie at which point Morgenbesser says "In that case I'll have the blueberry pie."
In addition to the other recommendations, there's also Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies), which (for the time being) is the only option that's mostly immune to PayPal-style dickery (depending on how you manage your wallet and what methods you use to turn USD into Bitcoin and vice-versa; most formal American exchanges, for example, do have to collect quite a bit of information per relevant laws).

Unfortunately, cryptocurrencies have their own convenience issues.
I'm sure a nice guy like Putin is only putting up Snowden in Russia out of the kindness of his heart.
Historians have always considered artefacts more valuable the closer they are to the original event. This is because the more steps removed you are, the more bias and mistakes can creep in, like a game of telephone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source
Taking the monolith-first idea even further, what percentage of web apps would run just fine on SQLite, MySQL in embedded mode, or (for JVM-based projects) H2?
Ever Lacked Confidence Placing a Trade? The Solution…
Southwest fares drop below $100 round trip in 72-hour sale
The construction of the cipher doesn't solve the biggest problem with using these stream ciphers, re-use of the IV. Depending on your architecture it is very hard to guarantee that you'll never re-use an {IV, Key} pair.

Encrypting results in P xor S xor T xor A (where P is plaintext, S is Salsa, T is Twofish, A is AES (or rather, the key streams produced by each cipher)). If two different plaintexts were encrypted with the same IV and key pair then I can xor these two cipher texts together:

(P1 xor S xor T xor A) xor (P2 xor S xor T xor A) -> P1 xor P2

And I've now removed all of the crypto. AES-SIV aims to solve this problem, but is slower than something like AES-GCM because it needs to process the plaintext twice. Obviously, it is much faster than the scheme proposed here and removes the biggest implementation flaw in nonce-based stream ciphers.

Another pitfall here is that encryption == decryption (modulo the HMAC step) which means that if I have an encryption oracle that I can feed {IV, Key} that automatically becomes a decryption oracle. (The YubiHSM I believe was vulnerable to an attack like this, so they do happen in the real world)
Vagina Oks self-driving car trials on roads
On the increasingly minuscule chance that you're not just trolling (posterior probability!), it should be trivially obvious that what makes TV-smartness a "feature" but not stochastic microwave self-destruction is not some objective measure of usefulness, but rather the fact that only the former is marketed as beneficial with the reasonable expectation (on the part of the marketers) that some/many consumers will believe it.

If you truly don't understand this distinction, then this whole conversation (indeed, this entire posting/thread) is hopelessly beyond your comprehension.
Thanks. Then I really don't see the distinction that tzs is making between legal and illegal spying. It seems like nothing has changed yet, so when he refers to "illegal spying" what is he talking about.
I always find it interesting, that the US seems to be all about conservatives (republicans) and liberals (democrats).

In Germany it seems to be more of a conservatives (CDU) and socialists (SPD) "battle". Interestingly I had the feeling the liberals (FDP) are more on the side of the conservatives (most of the time in german history FDP and CDU worked together). So when I read about US politics it feels like they are only debating on details. Like socialism isn't even an option.
Yeah, but that takes the punch out of the theorem. It's saying, "hey, sometimes you have really screwy preferences, too bad."

Realistically, that kind of situation doesn't break a voting system. We can say "we don't care about that case -- just pick a random winner then", but it's no longer deterministic.

Is there a stronger version of the theorem that says there's no sane procedure even ignoring those cases?
The way I understand it, a replacement for Minimongo just for reading data needs two things:

1. A simple filtering/querying API (doesn't need to be as fancy as Mongo)
2. Change events on filtered views of data so that you can update the view
when new data comes from a subscription

If you also want Meteor Method-style optimistic UI, then you need:

1. Tracking of temporary changes from a specific method
2. Ability to roll back those changes when DDP tells you it's done

Having a mongo-specific syntax isn't crucial, I think.
Malte Schwarzkopf is the first author of the Omega paper:

http://eurosys2013.tudos.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/paper/S...

...so not entirely blind.
Did I read that headline right?
To steal someone else's metaphor, try thinking of Twitter as a river. If you try to bottle it up or consume it all you'll drown. If, on the other hand, you dip in for a swim as you please, you might find it all bit more manageable. As the rush of tweets flows by you, just check out some, then turn your phone off and carry on. When you load it again, don't feel you have to go back and "catch up" or give it the constant attention you mentioned.

YMMV, but I also think the emphasis on "conversations" is a bit misleading. Lots of people do have conversations on there, but I personally love it for breaking news, link-sharing, jokes, and photos. If your frame of reference is a forum with posts, or an article's comments, or a real-life conversation... you're going to have a bad time.