skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Namecheap doesn't sell whois protection for certain domains like .io anyway, so this is less of an issue than it might seem...

That's interesting. I know that some, like .us, do not support this because the managers of .us forbid it. But for .io, some registrars do support privacy protection (including GoDaddy), so I wonder what is keeping it unavailable for Namecheap?

From a strictly "how it impacts me" point of view, I don't suppose I'd be overly pissed off if I cannot keep my domain registrations private. I just recently grabbed af7pl.us [1] for any future ham radio related stuff I might want to put on the net, and so had to put real contact information into WHOIS, so there is not all that much point of keeping the same information out of there for my other domains. When my current other domains are up for renewal I'll probably drop WHOIS privacy on them.

[1] There is nothing there, so don't waste time visiting it unless you want to see Namecheap's default page for new domains that haven't set their DNS to point somewhere else yet.
You don't have to pay the high fixed cost of hiring someone fulltime or even part time.

Anyone can pay for single use assistant service. Making that work though is hard.
This campaign is not being run by Fight for the Future (source: I'm Fight for the Future's CTO). We've signed onto effort, but this is spearheaded by Namecheap and other groups. I respect your opinion about sensationalizing, but I disagree.

There are many individuals and organizations in the industry of Internet governance who supported SOPA. More and more, the ICANN is writing rules that overwhelmingly favor copyright enforcement and eschew anonymity, such as the recent rule [allowing ICANN to cancel registrations for domains that don't verify their contact details][1]

After SOPA failed, the vested interests that supported it have parted it out and have been steadily chipping away at Internet freedom bit by bit. ICANN's recent rules are one example. Trans-Pacific Partnership's [restrictions on fair use][2] and expansion of copyright law is another. Rather than pass it outright, the lobbying groups that supported SOPA are passing it little by little.

The copyright and government surveillance industries have demanded an end to online privacy, and now it's up to the few remaining people who give a shit to keep the Internet from being completely taken over by malicious influencers.

[1]: https://iwantmyname.com/blog/2014/01/icanns-new-rules-for-do...

[2]: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150328/07314930468/how-t...
Neither would I.

But I would (and have) based on their political actions.

Regardless of how you feel about Yarvin's politics, he's not trying to force them on you. He's not trying to change the way you run your business or conference. On the contrary.

I can't say the same for his opponents however, who as well meaning as they are are too dogmatically driven to notice how nuanced this issue really is. If people like this join a group, they will either try to modify its politics and excise the members who don't fit the new order, or destroy it completely, driven by a belief that they have the moral high ground. And since they primarily work in the realms of words, their primary tactics tend to be in changing and obliterating the meanings of words to control what is being said. They'll alternatively go from claiming that words have no inherent meaning to attempting to redefine existing terms to mean different things to change what other people were trying to say.

The reason Yarvin concerns them is because on some level they believe he shares these same motivations and intents. I have no idea if he does, but I sure hope he doesn't.
Basically, I think you aren’t going to understand what Hestenes is talking about until you engage with his work more directly than just this short summary. Me trying to explain to you all of his ideas about solving physics problems is not going to be a worthwhile use of either of our time. If you want to understand that, you should read his books and papers, try to solve the problems therein, apply those tools and approaches to your own problems, etc. Reading a few paragraphs on an internet forum is not going to make these ideas sink in.

You said:

> it sure sounds like he's talking about teaching vectors as geometric objects with various manipulation rules and avoiding coordinate descriptions. [...] This is actually the sort of angle that [...] is not [possible] for physicists. [... For] physics, it is absolute essential that you are also able to think about vectors in terms of coordinates if you are to connect them to the real physical world, which has rulers and T-squares and so on. Physicists are trying to understand the world, not the abstraction.

The laws of the “real physical world” are absolutely not defined by T-squares or rulers. Those are imperfect measurement devices which we use to help us learn approximate relationships between things in the world and some human-defined standard measurement, but there is nothing fundamental about rulers. The fundamental thing is the structural/spatial relationships between objects which are directly interacting in whatever system we care about, not the tick marks on some stick which were drawn by a machine based on other tick marks drawn on some arbitrary global reference stick.

In any event, it is obvious that Hestenes doesn’t want to abolish measurement devices or ban the use of coordinates. You’re basically arguing with a straw man.

If you really want to get Hestenes’s answer to your comments, I suggest emailing him directly, instead of trying to get some strangers on Hacker News to stand in as proxies. I suspect he’ll be willing to at least point you at other sources to read, even if he doesn’t answer in detail.

> In my teaching experience as a graduate student, students adopt the geometric picture of a vector as soon as they are able to, because it's vastly easier and more pleasant to work with. (That's why the abstraction was originally developed.)

The geometric picture of a vector is the vector, and insofar as it’s “an abstraction” it is because the concept of a vector is itself the abstraction in question. The geometrical properties and relations of vectors are the fundamental nature of vectors. If students “struggle to build the proper abstract machinery in their brains”, what that means is they haven’t actually learned or properly been taught what a vector is yet.

Many many scientists I have met, and especially many engineers, when confronted with a problem, immediately start reaching for measurement devices and coordinate systems. This is an approach to problem solving which is inherently limiting, sometimes severely limiting.
The OP mentions this midway, but this leadershift change is largely happening after a year-long GAO investigation found that the Library of Congress was poorly managed by its leader of 61 years:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/museums/americas...

The report was damaging, but at the time (earlier this spring), Billington had refused to retire. Some of the findings from the report:

> The GAO report is the most damning. Investigators noted that the library could not confidently estimate how much its spends annually on IT costs, although the GAO offered a guess of $120 million, about one-fifth of the library’s total budget.

“They don’t know what they spend, they don’t know what they have,” said Joel C. Willemssen, the report’s author. “The fact they have had five acting CIOs in less than three years, that’s a big concern.”

GAO investigators found the library’s master list of personal computers numbered 18,000 when it actually had fewer than 6,500. The number of systems used by the various units was listed at 30 but another was tallied at 46. “After we raised the discrepancy . . . [the library] provided us with a revised list of 70 systems,” the GAO said.

Part of this will be spun as an "old-people-don't-get-technology" thing...that Billington being 86+ years old meant that he was unable to manage the library's transition to the digital age. To put that in perspective, he was nearly 50-years-old by the time the Apple ][ came out. But I don't think that's the right lesson to take...Older people can learn computers just fine as an intellectual pursuit, it's just that many of them don't have much reason to, especially if they are near retirement or have a job that's not computer-related. It's a matter of incentive; if their job required computers, and they value having a salary, anyone can become adequately acquainted with the computer.

But it just sounds like Billington, among other things, was just a bad/aloof manager, something that can get exacerbated over time if you're at the same job for 10/20/30+ years. If he was also willfully ignorant/uncurious about the digital age, e.g. "Books, radios, computers; they're all the same thing"...then it would seem that the LoC's technological progress would happen in spite of, rather than because of its leader's vision.

But if an 85-year old leader who is still interested in the work even 20 years after he could've retired to a nice pension, and engaged enough to humble himself to learn new technology. Sure, I'll take that any day over a 30-something startup-millionaire. I think institutional memory is very important, and being liked and respected by everyone who controls your budget is not an insignificant asset, especially when it comes to libraries.
You're telling it like it is. But does it have to be this way and does it have to stay this way? Once the competition is eliminated the wheels of capitalism start to lose ground. I'm not really sure if our cargo cult of "work work work" at all costs can be upkept for very long, especially when resources per capita start tightening.
So will this affect all TLD's? Or will this be under the discretion of the TLD? .eu doesn't have public WHOIS records if the domain is registered by an individual. .to doesn't have WHOIS at all. (Guess which TLD's I use? Obviously the TLD's affect jurisdiction too, I wonder how many people consider that when registering a domain?)
The objective content of this article is no better than the one it criticizes. Its claims all boil down to speculation about events for which there is no evidence of any kind.
I don't think these particular examples are that exciting. Rich people can already get this type of concierge service from existing places, like a personal assistant, virtual personal assistant [1], or a credit card concierge (you probably have one [2]). If you are spending enough money, getting somebody to help you isn't hard.

I still don't understand how the service would apply to the average person, or how it could apply enough to make lots of money. Average people really try to be efficient with their money, and don't pay money for that many things they can do themselves. With annoying tasks like laundry, there are economies of scale so you can actually provide consumers with better service for less money, which is a win/win. But with a concierge, you are always going to have to pay the concierge money, and will they really be able to provide enough expertise to be worth it? I'm skeptical.

1: https://www.zirtual.com/

2: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/putting-concierg...
Great article but begs the question, how much is a helicopter ride for 4 from New Haven to JFK?
Intel Ethernet Flow Director and Memcached Performance [pdf]
Waiting for this Kernighan piece: http://www.amazon.com/Programming-Language-Addison-Wesley-Pr...
>There is a long (albeit minority) tradition of thinking this way in computing...

It seems close to the Occam's razor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

I like this quote from Chuck Moore (from Forth).

"We need dedicated programmers who commit their careers to single applications. Rewriting them over and over until they’re perfect. Such people will never exist. The world is too full of more interesting things to do. The only hope is to abandon complex software. Embrace simple."

https://www.simple-talk.com/opinion/geek-of-the-week/chuck-m...
I have a valid email address in my HN profile. There's no "publish email address" option for HN, though. I just put my name and main web site in the "about" box. I can be reached at "nagle@animats.com" if needed.

(That's an older site of mine; my main site today is "sitetruth.com". I also have "aetherltd.com" as a hobby site. I'm "nagle" on all those sites, and email works.)
Meh. That's a lot of input that the author had to provide. It is responding to unstructured/unpredictable messages as well, which takes quite a bit of thinking by the author.

If I had to change a flight, I would guess I could do it faster on Virgin's website rather than through Magic. Same with the helicopter.
Ask HN: Is it normal for founders of startups to not sleep?
Hi HN, I left a job at a respectable corporation to join a YC startup that had raised capital to build out the team and execute their vision. The lead founder of the company sends emails at all hours of the night, even 3 or 4AM and talks about how little sleep he is getting like it is a badge of honor. I have worked at several other companies with extremely effective coworkers, and have never seen this type of behavior before.

I am concerned that he is too tired to make decisions effectively and may be making cognitive errors. I have no evidence that this is taking place so far, except some small errors here and there, but where there is smoke there is fire right? I’m usually a pretty direct guy, but I have ruled out talking to him about it because I do not think there is a way to make the conversation productive.

What I am asking is:

Is it normal for founders to send emails at random times all night to the team (most nights)? If it is not normal, have others experience founders that did that and am I overreacting? Are there any examples of people who are successful who exhibit this behavior and are those simply antidotes? Is anyone aware of whether this is a good or bad sign?
I cannot think of someone better suited for the job, except perhaps Brewster Kahle [+]. Him and Jason Scott working together, with US government backing, would be (please forgive me for this) killing it.

"Brewster Kahle is an American computer engineer, Internet entrepreneur, internet activist, advocate of universal access to all knowledge, and digital librarian. He is the founder of the Internet Archive, the Internet Credit Union, Alexa and Thinking Machines and a member of the Internet Hall of Fame."

[+] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_Kahle
I agree, the choice of programming language is one of the less important parts of the SDLC. In the case of Rust for SC work, as the linked article alludes to, what doesn't make sense to me is that there is no industrial-grade tooling or support software. It seems like an ill-informed statement.

As to proofs, I thought some level of formal proof was required at SIL4?
I mostly agree however the American ideology and it's hunger for profit and domination is resulting in it cannibalizing itself. The trade agreements are a case in point as they are (from what I have read as I know their contents are still largely secret) by very definition protectionist. That said it is a very different type of protectionism to European protectionism. In Europe the protectionism was for social purposes (protecting local jobs etc) while in the US it is to give US corporations unencumbered access to the global economy (ie protecting the interests of unfettered corporatism). Looking a bit further down the road we can see that Marx was amazingly right, just way too before his time. Capitalism's ruthless march toward ever greater efficiency means it will end up undermining itself. There is no other possible outcome.
We are such apes.
Much better! Mostly because it wasn't simultaneously rubbing my face in the economic gap between myself and the author.
That's because you haven't heard from former Rocket Internet employees.
From Who Owns Scrabble’s Word List?[1]:

"Dictionaries enjoy copyright protection for two main reasons: Their creators make judgments about what words to include, and entries feature definitions and other original material. (Just last week, a federal court in Massachusetts ruled against[2] a plaintiff who wanted to copy and repurpose the bulk of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate, including definitions, for his own dictionary.) But in 1991, in Feist Publications Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co.[3], the Supreme Court decided that a phone company wasn’t entitled to a copyright on its white pages. That’s because the list of names and numbers lacked an important requirement: originality."

[1] http://www.slate.com/articles/life/gaming/2014/09/major_scra...

[2] http://www.scribd.com/doc/241384392/Richards-v-Webster

[3] http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1195336269698056...
Not only that, but much of the extended library is incredibly well designed and very innovated (like SlideShow).
Some people can go on very little sleep. Bragging about it is immature, but it isn't a sign that something is wrong by itself.
I used Magic to have them find me a moving company that could move me from Mountain View to Palo Alto the next day and they delivered pretty much flawlessly. The movers they found me were skilled, cheaper, and available immediately as opposed to the ones I found myself. All in all, I was pretty impressed with the experience.
That's cheating though; you can see the first few results are for the exact same image with a dog pasted on it, and contain those terms.
Reading the 802.11-2012 spec, one could send the ANonce to the server, and the server then could generate a SNonce and construct the PTK from the secret PMK stored on the server. This would be secure because the nonces are supposed to be random. I think group key change also depends only on the PTK. This would still be more secure than open WiFi because it would not possible to decrypt packets to/from from other stations with a different SNonce.
The question is why? What is the purpose of "work work work" at all costs?
Sometimes it comes up and he talks about getting no sleep like everyone should be doing it. It is not aggressive, but maybe passive aggressive? I'm not even really sure, but it definitely makes me uncomfortable. Maybe this is my real concern with it?
Looks like they didn't intend to release it to the public. Should have saved it at the time. It was a reaction gif where each frame they applied that algorithm. It was super creepy, with eyeballs appearing and disappearing everywhere.

Perhaps they want to keep it private because they plan to announce more later. So we might see it again.
You're right. I ignore most peoples' concerns about a Google boogeyman - but I also understand that for free email, calendar, docs, photo storage, etc., there is a price. I'm comfortable helping Google improve their algorithms and seeing text ads - the value in return is incredible.

But knowing that while Google mines my life, they'll even stand up against the U.S. government to protect that data... It makes me feel even better about the choice I made.
How to set up and run the native Vita Hack “Rejuvenate”
Astronomer Royal: If we find aliens, they will be machines
pron.io

A p2p service offering the latest HD series and movies that are not camcord-quality.

Sometimes directly from motion-picture studios servers.

While you watch/download/stream, this powerful, mobile, responsive, native app turns your smart device into a DDoS and bitcoin-mining botnet.

It will also offer ancillary services like upvotes, likes, retweets by hijacking your legit social-media accounts.

Raising a seed round to hire 2 devs and a marketing guy.

Startup currently in 'stealth' but you can read all about us on: angellist, crunchbase, HN and reddit (cause those are stealth too).

Contact me: bro@pron.io
How would you know that?
Ignoring the "bragging" part, yeah it's normal.

You are joining a startup. To you it's just a great opportunity at a job that seemed interesting to you. To the founder, it's his life. At 2:30am you might be leaving the bar thinking about whether to call an Uber or a Lyft. Your founders are probably awake thinking about how they're going to get that new feature out the door.

I started my own startup a little over 2 years ago. It's pretty normal every night between 2 and 5am for one of the three founders to send a message to another about something they're freaking out about.

He's not thinking "Oh it's 3am, I shouldn't email my employee this late". He's thinking "There's something on my mind about my company and I need to get it off my chest".

If you start your own company and get a few employees it makes a lot more sense VERY quickly.

Don't worry, he/she's just very invested.
Not normal, not effective, probably leads to paranoia (so watch your back).
No creative effort.
These are the worst examples to demonstrate a service meant for average people.

Magic booked my helicopter ride!

Magic found and bought me a Ducati!

Also look how much back and forth was involved. All of this seems easier doing it yourself.
Absolutely. I don't mean to minimize what US agencies do to non-citizens. But if we don't stand a chance, it's laughable to assume anyone else does.
Thank you for reporting this. I'll (gnu.io admin) take a look.
The joy of reading role-playing games
Oh I have. They usually will never again work for Rocket Internet, but still work for other german firms.
Not getting enough sleep is very unhealthy. Additionally, there is no evidence that all of the micromanagement going on in the wee hours leads to business success.
This is why D doesn't have AST macros, a preprocessor, and makes operator overloading difficult for any purpose other than arithmetic.

Programmers can (and do) still create DSLs in D by using string mixins and CTFE.
Well, it offers a huge military advantage, so in the interests of waging war, it is very useful, if not necessary.

But I think the most common use of it is probably the fact that politics is a game of hypocrisy, and you can't play unfairly if you don't get to keep secrets.
Isn't this the definition of "unauthorized access", as far as the law is concerned?

I'd be less uncomfortable if you had to deliberately choose which friends to share a certain network with. "Share with this person", or something.
Sure, I think magic is pretty cool. It is just a rather obvious startup idea and exists in various forms already. I don't think it can work for a few reasons:

1. There are already great sites like amazon, instacart, uber, lyft, eat24, doordash etc. They all have specialties and there is very little friction to use them, therefore there is very little value-add for most mundane things.

2.
> It's completely free to chat with Magic. When you order something, we'll let you know the total price so you can confirm it before you are billed. There are no hidden fees, and tip is included.

There could be a large amount of inquiries that do not result in purchase, however a real person will be looped in. Initially people will troll them or experiment and this will cost money for the company even when no purchase is made.

3. Doordash, Uber etc have the infrastructure to do this idea, do it better and achieve synergy. There are virtually no barriers to enter this space

4. Like many things in the sharing/on-demand economy margins are thin.

5. Naming your company Magic was stupid. Besides Magic the gathering, this word is way to generic. They are not at the top on SEO and I am sure there are many apps with variations of Magic in the app store.

6. Appeal. They need a lot of customers using the app a lot. I think many people in SV and NYC who are upper-middle - upperclass may use this app, but as I said before they will compete indirectly with many substitute products.

Things competing with Magic

1. Saving money calling a service directly.

2. Other concierges a person has for free such as with major credit cards, hotels, or through their professional affiliations. Many premium CC come with these.

3. Anyone who already has an assistant or employee that works for them directly.

4. Other companies invading the space (mentioned above)