skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, that's just silly. If you allow proprietary use of your code (Microsoft can compile it into a binary and ship it with Windows without source) how can you possibly have a fit over it being used in GPL-ed code.

What I would do is help myself to their patch, if it's worthwhile and backport it to the BSD-licensed version.

The code is my copyright, and the patch is a derived work of something of mine; therefore I own it and it falls under my license.

Not to mention that if you take someone's BSD program, and just slap a GPL on it, it doesn't actually hold. Once the users are aware that it's actually a re-labeled BSD program from another author, they can just go with that license.
Destined to succeed might make better english.
India officially shut its Telegram service 2 years ago [0]. I was nostalgic and used the last day to send a few telegrams to my family and dear ones [1,2].

[0] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/1018046...

[1] http://i.imgur.com/7GDi8oN.jpg

[2] http://i.imgur.com/OmAhXoB.jpg
Science is built on layers and layers of dull data collection (like this one). But yah, a no-duh result that doesn't come through is fun.
The Journey to Microservices Part 1: Top Gotchas
The leakapocalypse is rather blown-up - I don't think you could observe it unintentionally. Besides, `thread::scoped` is something no other mainstream-imperative language tries to offer - parallelism with essentially no risk of race conditions.
Especially since rollover is built in.
we require contributors to the GNU project to (...) assign the copyright to us.

Nope: "When the developers of a program make it a GNU package, they can decide either to give the copyright to the FSF so it can enforce the GPL for the package, or else to keep the copyright as well as the responsibility for enforcing the GPL."

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.en.html
That's true, but it's also (sometimes) liberating. In extremely flexible languages, you can find yourself burning lots of time finding the most "elegant" way to express simple concepts, like "how am I going to write this SQL column to this series of DIVs".

Not coincidentally, Golang sucks at this problem.

But there is something about writing in Golang that makes it easier to dive into meatier code. For instance: I've written programmable assemblers in Ruby and in Golang. With Ruby, I kept refining the assembler until the DSL looked identical to normal X86 assembly (I even hooked the bracket operators to make them behave like dereferences). With Golang, I quickly moved past the assembler into an IR and a compiler.
I admire Richard Stallman and believe that his efforts are among the most important contributions to practical ethics in the last 50 years...yet [and we knew there had to be one] the issue I have with the GNU license is that it is a license. It's use relies on all the same implicit threat of state sanctioned violence and its infrastructure as its closed proprietary opposites. The GNU license is meaningless without modern intellectual property focused trade agreements to provide teeth when there is a violation.

The GNU license is inherently litigious. That's the nature of licensing. Alternative licenses are also de jure, but some are de facto non-litigious by virtue of permissiveness. The primary contract for a GNU license is legal and the social contract is secondary...I'm not giving back when I am coerced by the threat of legal sanction into the act. Gifts don't come with strings attached, and it is reasonable for someone to hold the ethical belief that true giving means placing creative works in the public domain.

Which is to say that GNU lies on a spectrum and reflects some noble ethical values and not others. Among those ethical values GNU does not reflect are many that deem an intellectual property infrastructure backed by state sanctioned violence on behalf of wealth [e.g. music downloader prosecutions] worse than actions which GNU's copyleft prohibits.
Teach him about SOA and MVC, I hear 12year olds go nuts for that stuff.
It may have more GC issues, or maybe it probably has more GC issues.
boot time is one reason. another reason is integration with the aws ecosystem of services - it's not just ec2 these days.
When I choose MIT over GPL I'm usually trying to make my work as easy for others to adopt as possible. I want some of the software I wrote to become a commodity. The MIT seems a clearer path to commoditized software than the GPL.

Is that a reasonable line of thinking?
Native. Want
The Real Lesson of the Stanford Prison Experiment
If you care about Javascript at all, this is a definite insta-buy.

Axel is one of those rare people who combine a truly deep knowledge about tech stuff with the ability to speak and write about it in a way that's accessible and at the right level of abstraction.
That wasn't what I was replying to. aaggarwal was asking how easy it was to move to it. I was saying that it's easy. If you find it too primitive, well, that's a fair opinion, but it's still easy to move to. I think it's hyperbole to claim that you can't work in it.
I agree. I've had Secret clearances at two different companies (aerospace/defence contractors). One of my lessons is that anyone who gets a clearance draws a lot of people into the process with them. It's a bad and creepy side effect, and even though this mostly involved college friends getting grilled by Federal Agents, I wouldn't do it again.

In fact, I'll go so far as to say that "clearances" are a symptom of the pathology of the security state. Lots and lots of highly cleared people have gone wrong (Pollard, Ames, Hansen, I'm sure there's more), so the process isn't really all that helpful. For a corporation, having "cleared" employees does two things:

1. It raises a huge barrier to entry for competitors. A smaller company just can't afford the specialized record keeping and record keepers, so only lumbering dinosaurs have cleared employees.

2. It means that the corporation can say, just like my kids, "I didn't do it!" as an excuse. An employee goes bad? The corporation didn't do it, because the Defense Investigative Security Clearance Organization cleared that traitor. It's yet another excuse to not have a relationship with employees, just like drug tests. Managers can just fill out forms, they don't have to know or like or have meaningful conversations with employees.
Yes, and in fact rms himself has made that decision in the past.
Ask HN: best places to work remotely ?
>I can write and sell books advising you to treat your cancer with organic kale and meditation.

Actually, you're legally required to note that your book is not medical advice by a qualified doctor.
Incognito mode does the job for me. Have you tried?
Do you have any questions for us? – A collaborative, compilation repo
Are you sure that's correct, from a legal perspective?

If I release an MIT project, someone makes a GPL fork with a significant new feature, wouldn't pulling that feature back into my project make my project GPL?
Complex speech is very often evil, confusing and totally unnecessary. Especially when employed by the officials.

These folks got a point: http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/
I find it incredibly primitive, well past the point of "stupid code is impossible to misunderstand" and into "stupid code because the language demands it."

Since the parent mentioned C and Java. What are you missing in Go compared to Java besides generics? What are you missing in Go compared to C besides manual memory management?

To me, Go seems to have about the same amount of expressiveness as C and Java. The difference being that it's safer than C and more UNIXy/less OO than Java.

To this end I think Go is a regression for the open source community, because what I see as veneration of stump-dumb languages makes it harder, not easier, to be smart about problems.

A lot of open source UNIX software was written in C. To me it seems that if C was acceptable, Go is acceptable (if the application can live with a GC and slightly lower performance). And as the article argues, it lowers the bar for contribution, because it restricts overengineering.
The problem with the GPL is that it presupposes its own supremacy and refuses to work with other free licenses. Two prime examples are MPL and CDDL (which was based on the MPL). Both of which GNU regards as free software licenses, but says to not use them because they don't bow to the FSF.

The binary in memory linking clause is the most harmful thing to ever happen to free software. It destroys collaboration and restricts user freedom. It causes partisanship and infighting within our communities and prevents good ideas, the best ideas, from being freely shared (breaking both freedoms 2 & 3!). GNU has declared war on other licenses for far less than that.

Can we all admit that the in memory linking clause makes GPL non-free software? We'd all be better off to realize it.
How would we know if this happens? Any trials for espionage at that level are bound to have a lot of evidence under seal.
Thanks, lot of good advice and takeaways - I think the low abstraction and drag/drop is a good teaser, also some of it is in Danish, that will help the initial learning curve being small.
That's the LGPL, right?
Making a website compliant is like manufacturing your product with twice the precision necessary - for no reason whatsoever. But it's fun - if you're a masochist.
What a good expression. Did the author originate it?
This is a very light article with not too much information. Go already succeeded simply because Google uses it. This means all of the problems they need to solve in Go has decent support (net/http etc.) and you can just use in your own projects, and this also means that the out of the box performance is decent. These are good enough reasons to use Go. If you are talking about language features I don't think that Go is that amazing. Supporting CSP is a big win though.
I think the cause would be better served if RMS would stop calling it "free" software and stop with the speech/beer analogy. As hilarious as the wordplay may be, most people simply don't get it.

The other irony is that GPL is not even free (as in speech) either, it imposes rather strict conditions.
No, they're flexible here.. they charge as much as they can from a client. So, from some they charge $80/h as you say, but some of them pay just $45/h.
Toptal's lowest rate for companies is $40/h
Which jobs can’t be done by robots?
all of your points totally undermine the benefits of centralization and computerization. perhaps that is the point and that there are some things that should just not be digitized or made "easy to do," but security people also recognize that security is often not the end goal. creating a usable system where the reward outweighs the risk is the goal. if the reward, despite this risk/vulnerability, is still very high, then we'll probably keep doing it.

your points are what you would want to do if you wanted to make an ideally secure system, but nobody wants only an ideally secure system...
Ask HN: What do you think about “like” and “um”?
Many of us have a habit of using filler words in speech, for example "like" and "um". We can discipline ourselves out of this habit at the opportunity cost of thinking about something else. In what circumstances is it worthwhile to expend this effort to avoid negative signaling?
OP here.

You don't list "random people" of any kind.

You list relatives, roommates, long term relationships, places you've lived, schools you've attended, and jobs you've had and then people who can confirm and validate those. Further - in regard to foreign nationals - you have to list and describe ongoing relationships and any foreign officials you've met.

This not "I was standing next to this guy at Starbucks" and closer to "I lived with, worked with, or dated with this person for X months."
Those who are stuck with it still - they surely care. The rest - not really.
The writing in this article is very difficult to understand.

>"At a restaurant with friends, a delicate choreography will have one person carefully select a few choice morsels from the common bowl and place them on a neighbor’s plate. It is a small, perfect gesture."

A "perfect gesture"? What does that even mean?

And this paragraph:

>"Take, for instance, the Beijing tradition of man zǒu. Man means “slowly” and zǒu means “walk,” or colloquially “walk slowly.” Man zǒu is the tender goodbye offered from every small shopkeeper I have visited in Beijing. It is usually spoken in a quiet voice, and somehow sounds so much more sincere than “Have a nice day.” Sometimes I will make the trip to my neighborhood laundry with a single shirt for cleaning, just as an excuse to hear the “man zǒu” when I leave the shop."

What is "man zǒu"? A spoken farewell? If so what is the significance of saying "walk slowly"?
Good point. When Apple announced the iPad, I thought they should reuse the iBook name.
"... stupid reasons."

Do you think developers assume you will not notice or will not care?

In my experience, most if not all of this software uses DNS for the attempted dial outs. Running my own DNS makes blocking easy.
No, rms actually support moving from the LGPL to BSD, to achieve the maximum possible reach of the software: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast-dev/2001-February/00...
The Lightning network solves the wrong problem. The whole idea behind the lightning network is to reduce the growth of the blockchain. The blockchain growing is not going to be a factor that effects the operation of the network.

Instead I'd rather see people try to fix the problem of it being expensive to spend bitcoin sourced from many small inputs. This is a problem that the lightning network does not address.

So if the lightning network does get build, we'll all be able to use microtransaction channels which will slow the growth of the blockchain, but will still cost $20 in fees to send $100 worth of bitcoin sent in tiny UTXOs.
I would be perfectly fine if everyone declare their work public domain. Free software licenses was an reaction to people who stopped putting their work in public domain and started to deliberately obstruct people from doing changes, running them, and distributing. Some people think you have to restrict those things in order to make a
successful company, and until that changes, I doubt we will return to the time where everyone declared the work public domain.
Well, and what are obstacles for you to charge 3-figure per hour? I'm as well from eastern Europe, and as you mention, it is possible to live with $xx/hr rate (if the work is enough), but do we only want to live month-to-month or maybe we also want to buy some new apartment? build a private house, and another country-side house? $xx/hr is just not enough.
> With Ruby, I kept refining the assembler until the DSL looked identical to normal X86 assembly (I even hooked the bracket operators to make them behave like dereferences). With Golang, I quickly moved past the assembler into an IR and a compiler.

That is a great way to compare languages. Incidentally, that's the same way I feel about Scala vs Python.
I agree that the number of possible solutions is often smaller than in other languages. But there are still often multiple ways which are considered idiomatic Go (in the sense that they are all widely used). E.g. if you build some iterable type, you could provide iteration via:

1. Go channels: send every value over a channel.

2. Callbacks: provide an iteration function which takes a callback function.

3. Closures: let a closure return the next value when called.

4. Iterators: create a separate iterator type with e.g. HasNext()/Next() methods.

In this respect C was much simpler, because only (2) and (4) were really possible (and sometimes indexing).
The JVM is a piece of software that rivals the kernel in complexity with for the most part redundant functionality (i.e. memory management, monitoring the running program, etc.). It does have the benefit of being uniform across platforms, but if you're dealing with a single OS, then the extra weight and deployment complexity isn't worth it - you're better off learning your operating system and its tools.
That captures it for me, imagine a Python that squeezed to the essential bits of Java and left you with Go. It helped that Java, Python, and C++ were the core languages at Google where Go was developed so you had to have something that could bring that community along.

For me personally Rust is more my style, but I agree with the original author that the structural aspects of Go program construction will benefit large communities greatly. It is something I had not really considered seriously before.
cPanel's best feature: obliterates your machine.
A point that doesn't often get brought up in this discussion is that $0 software was virtually nonexistent at the time of the founding of the free software movement. In the internet's infancy, when software was still delivered on physical media, it made little sense to give software away for free because the shipping and material costs would drive the cost to the user significantly above $0.

Not that there wasn't ever software given away for free. There was source code published in magazines for the user to type in and compile for themselves, and there were friendly neighbors who would give you a program that they wrote for free. Even in the earliest years of the internet, people were sending their programs for free over the network.

But in a way, free-as-in-speech software predates free-as-in-beer software.
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9708211
Humans are social beings and need to feel the closeness to other human beings. This does not mean, that Lisa Simpson is lonely - of course the exact level of closeness you need differs from human being to human being and she has parents after all. But more statistically speaking I would say that being alone does make you lonely, even though the reading German philosophers as a child part appeals to the exceptionalism of the other commenters.
Wow, yet another insightful comment! many thanks.

The two-man rule is a good idea - not fool-proof, but I suppose nothing really is.

And the story about the heavy device on nuclear subs; that's brilliant! Although I'm not sure a computational version would be a ciper that needs a lot of resources to decrypt, unless that is something that even people who have valid access need to expend resources for in order to access.

It really seems like ease of access is the enemy; that's a pretty fruitful take away.

I do hope you share your blog post about the Gozer Principal on HN when you're done, I look forward to reading that.
That comic reminds me on the aviary example in the Theaetetus.
First thing to pop in to my head after reading your comment is this Upton Sinclair quote: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

It's a bit like wishing slaughterhouse workers would start to consider the animal's feelings and spend more time thinking about them.

I hope so too, just like I hope I get to fly around in a UFO because that would be pretty cool. Not really expecting that to happen though.
Twitch's priorities aren't exactly spectacular, considering how they switched streaming backends in a way that moved them from 5-8 second latency to 30ish second latency (or more, sometimes stretching to minutes). They've improved it over time but that transition was pretty awful for any channel that interacts directly with chat.
Someone can't make a "GPL fork" of your MIT-licensed project. The new code they add can be GPL-licensed, but they cannot simply change the licensing of the existing code from MIT to GPL.

You are correct that pulling their GPL-licensed feature/additions into your code would require you to adhere to the GPL and re-license the code. The best you could do would be to ask the author of the changes to release them under the same license (MIT) as your original project so the changes could be incorporated without modifying the license.

For an example of this situation, see the link in btilly's post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9711716
HSL is bad for this use case that's why we use HSV.

The swatches at the bottom of this Wikipedia article show the difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSL_and_HSV

CIE* gets you more comparative, perceptive uniformity however when picking a color that's almost exactly what you don't care about.

Author would benefit from an art class and/or two hours reading the mind-numbing tech documentation around color theory.
So, here's one example of your stigmatising views and assumptions:

> I think that the school board is at fault for not inquiring why a person who works primarily with children is receiving psychiatric services.

You assume the school board didn't make any inquiry. For all you know they did. But more than that you assume that merely receiving psychiatric services is enough to need a check - regardless of displayed behaviour. You're saying "mental health problem == risky", when you have no evidence to support that. Feel free to provide something to support it.

> No, you should not be a teacher or in any profession dealing with children if you cannot behave properly,

Here you link poor behaviour to mental illness. Most poor behaviour has nothing to do with mental illness. Most people with a mental health problem live fairly normal lives.

You should probably stop using bullshit reasons to restrict the work that people can do, especially when those bullshit reasons are a result of ignorance.
I am personally excited about Redfin and Socrata. Redfin made is super easy for us to find and purchase a house. We went from knowing nothing and not having a realtor to closing on a house in 30 days. Socrata is working to open government data.
It was a big government mistake to ever irrigate the southwest in the first place. It distorted the economy, encouraging people to build unsustainable industries and communities in the middle of the desert. We laugh at middle eastern countries for trying to make agricultural industries in the desert (see: Salmon Fishing in the Yemen), but we're doing the same thing in California.

I'm sympathetic to the individual farmers, of course, but the solution is not to allow these unsustainable practices to continue. We should charge market rates for every drop of water, and let welfare take care of the farmers who can't profitably pay those rates. If our welfare isn't enough for them, then it's not enough for anyone else and we should increase it. Ironically, rural California keeps voting against that.
If it was, any proprietary work which are also derivative of the BSD work could then be "pulled" back BSD. People would get really upset if that happened.
Even when that name is more representative of what it actually accomplishes?

"Rights" is a misnomer. There are no "rights" being managed, it's all about restrictions. You don't add DRM to something to make it more open, you add DRM to make it more restricted.

The original name is some impressive marketing doublethink on the part of whoever coined the name, IMO.
Show HN: Bean Counter, a (non crypto) virtual currency platform
>TL;DR Golang was explicitly engineered to thrive in projects built by large groups of programmers with different skill levels, and there is no larger such group than the open source community.

I think this premise could not be more wrong. The open source community is not a project team, and open source project teams are very likely much more homogenous and stable than teams working on commercial software.

Yes there may be non core contributors, but if contributions are not up to standard, they are simply rejected. If that means slower progress an open source project can live with that. A commercial project can not, because it has deadlines.
From the description, I understand is something like the shopkeeper slowly walking behind you as you go out of the shop. Not sure if that's what is meant, but I've seen that in some shops in Argentina. It's like an unspoken goodbye? But here, depending on the kindness and general attitude of the shopkeeper, it can be seen as anything between polite and creepy.