gozo

"Did they implement defenses against common web vulnerabilities like SQL injection?"

Prepared statements has been available with PDO since 2005. It might very well have had bugs, but that isn't uncommon.

I agree though I would add that much of this is because android "won" linux on embedded. Today it (unfortunately IMO) seems far more likely that a hobby ecosystem is going to trickle down from android than the other way around.

It's called a "dark pattern" these days. JustFab is a prominent example and has been discussed on HN.

While I don't agree with all their decisions I think it safe to say that the only reason stack exchange has really good answers to overly moderate in the first place is because they don't allow subjective discussions. If they did, the knowledgeable people would quickly leave since their answers couldn't and wouldn't be correctly valued by those with less knowledge.

"Guess what, you start shit, people react, you make enemies."

Since you are now essentially making threats I can no longer in good faith continue this discussion.

"You called me ignorant directly and you started it"

I didn't call you ignorant, so much as your argument that involved currency and north korea. But I realize it's a fine line and should have used a different word. Not that you are taking the high road here either.

"The topic was a sarcastic example about piracy and theft in terms of supply, demand and value. It was not at all about copyright law."

How is piracy and "theft" not about copyright law? If you're not breaking copyright law it's not piracy.

"Possibly based on discourse but not based on reality and therefore off topic"

I obviously don't think so. My kind of arguments are the ones being discussed at conferences, in books, documentaries and papers.

"What dream world do you live in where you think this is all that happens with piracy? Many people also copy things that they would have bought in the first place."

There's a reason I used the word "theoretically". Still a 14 year old is seldom going to buy a $4000 program and companies sometimes recognizes these scenarios. Microsoft did in China for instance.

"Who cares? Increasing supply is a part of reality, and that is what I'm talking about."

I don't see how increasing supply in general is relevant. If I seed some flowers I'm increasing the supply of flowers, but few people would see that as a negative thing. If there were no copyright, like in (to some extent) fashion or cooking, copying would be part of reality and there would be little point to compare it to copying currency.

A fashion designer can't design a collection and enjoy exclusivity. A couple of months (if not weeks) later the fast-fashion store are going to have copies. They can't dictate the terms of a sale anymore than a musician that gets copied can.

So the fashion industry have worked out their own added value in forms of heritage, luxury and exclusivity. Just like people who sell open source add value with trust, support and consulting. And people who sell games add value with multiplayer, statistics and achievements.

Less copyright means more labor not less. More performances, more innovation, more consulting. If that's a good thing and when it's not is of course a discussion in itself.

Chefs are compensated for their time (unless maybe you're the head chef), but they are also not compensated for their intellectual property, which is the point. Maybe a better example is copying a dress (if you imagine outsourced manufacturing).

"How exactly is a software developer/musician/artist supposed to be compensated for their time/labor without copyright and the ability to determine the terms of the sale?"

There are plenty of creative people who sell their time, just like chefs. Of course plenty of companies today don't even sell software, but essentially services.

"There is significant up-front time and expense involved with any type of creative work"

Yes, but this is to some extent a different issue than copyright itself. I'm not even arguing for the removal of copyright (I'm personally for stronger authors rights with drastic reduction in terms), just that copyright is mainly rights to artistic, rather than utilitarian or scientific, things i.e. doesn't have a whole lot to do with labor.

This should be even more apparent today with cloud distribution, where software can't be resold.

You clearly don't have much experience with debating copyright instead your trying to shoehorn in your argument where they don't make sense.

"You copy a product you devalue the product by increasing supply"

A digital product already has infinite supply. The question isn't if copying affects supply, but if it affects demand. If someone copy something they would never have bought the economic damage to the author is theoretically zero. Copyright doesn't even deal with "increasing supply" as a intrinsic thing. If you spend year creating recipes for a restaurant that become successful and someone opens a restaurant next door serving the same things (and thereby increasing supply) the original restaurant has little to no copyright claim. The same is true in other fields. Even universal human rights doesn't deal with intellectual property in this way. There's simply little basis for this view.

"When you pirate music you harm only the creator of the music"

That you "only harm the creator" is objectively false, since even if you prescribe to great harm being done by piracy it's not only the creator, but the rightsholder that gets hurt.

"What does a typical weak, cowardly human tell himself when he commits a crime?"

It's when you don't have good arguments nor is well read you have to resort to this type of name calling.

"Yours is the lazy rebuttable without foundation in reality"

My arguments are absolutely based in the current discourse.

"Sales of digital goods, like any other sale, are about me trading a portion of my time/labor for someone else's time/labor."

No it's not. If anything, that is a ridiculous opinion. It has no basis is society, law or discourse. There's little relation between labor and copyright. A more apt analogy is something like land rights. But that is still not talking about the real issue. Chefs puts significant amount of labor into their creations, they are not covered by copyright.

"Right now only the united states is allowed to copy dollar bills"

Usually anyone can copy currency as long as you clearly indicate that it is a copy.

"The united states government needs to get with the times. Digital distribution is the wave of the future. Why should the united states be the sole entity allowed to print dollar bills?"

Not a unreasonable question if you equate "print dollar bills" with issuing currency, which is what they actually do.

"If the world was more like North Korea, the world would be a better place"

Is it really that much fun to make these sarcastic ignorant comparisons rather than discuss the real issues and maybe learn something?

"In no other areas of our economies do we allow such nonsense to go on"

Except food, fashion, boats, building etc. You can copy essentially any piece of clothing while " stealing the up-front investment of the producer".

Not really relevant since bills are protected as a result of laws regarding forgery and fraud, not copyright. It's a lazy rebuttal without foundation in discourse or law.

Stockholm is also dumping a large amount of contaminated snow in the water every winter.

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/images/103/1543144_1200_675.jpg

If you are flying in through HK get a china unicom hk cross border SIM. Somewhat expensive data but a life saver in those situations since there is no firewall.

History is being made wheter you like it or not.

"Who said that was the achievement?"

Anyone who understood what was being achieved. That doesn't mean that a single achieve or being first in itself is that meaningful, but it's still an achivement.

Just like anyone who understands mountaineering knows that climbing Everest isn't the greatest norvthe hardest achivement among tall mountains i.e. the eight-thousanders.

What complete drivel. How do you even figure that a masters degree would take "nearly a decade". A bachelor + master is five years in Sweden, before the Bologna process the equivalent was four years. If your don't keep up you aren't eligible for student loans or housing.

A random Systembolaget matches a speciality store in essentially any major city of the world in terms of selection and price, not to talk of the less major ones. I'll take that fairy tale over being able to buy the local cheap lager at the corner store any day.

Because amex has higher fees to compensate for thier more generous rewards program.

I'd like to think that a secure Internet is not too "perfect", but rather that an insecure one is broken and should be fixed.

You can be for the open Internet all you want. It's too late, that's the point. Our best chance has come and gone. People somehow still believe we have a say, we don't. Maybe we never had. I don't think this is like industrialization, were things got bad and then through much struggle got better. There's little to no indications that will happen. Partly because the open Internet was an anomaly. It's like how domains work isn't going to change, done is done. Many people wrongfully believed and believe that they have some sort of inherent influence over the Internet because it's "their thing". They don't. Maybe they should have, but they don't. The window for realistically doing something is gone, maybe some time ago. We have to live with what is now. Mostly with stories like these not even making the front page.

I'd like to end my rambling with a quote from, of all people, Winston Chuchill from before the second world war. "The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to its close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences."

My intention was not to "hijack" the top comment, but to post where it was relevant i.e. the thread talking about the event rather than among the questions themselves. I don't think pointing out room for improvement is irrelevant. I didn't expect my questions to be answered, especially since he had already left the thread, but used them as an example how the outcome wasn't optimal.

Edit: I, as you, removed a bunch of my comment. Not sure why I should bother.

Uhm. I don't want to sound ungrateful, but I was slightly disappointed by the result of this. They might want to change the format in the future to promote fewer longer answers. "You might try X Y Z visa" doesn't really use his expertise very much. We also didn't really get an answer to the most obvious questions like if you can actually attend YC legally or if a temporary worker in the US can also run a company. Still a good thing of course, but a bit more structure would go a long way.

We all know you de facto can't do YC without working on/for you company though. So is this legal or not as a tourists or business visitor?

Yes, defensive driving is about having higher margins. Which is where her comparison falls short. Because police often escalate the situation to get the upper hand on a perceived threat. Which is more like tactical driving, where you e.g. drive in a convoy at high speed to avoid getting stopped. If there is no real threat you have most likely made the situation worse.

While I like affordable things and development boards in particular, hardware price isn't that much of an issue anymore. Most people, especially programmers, are going to spend more in terms of labour cost even just getting this up and running. Actually doing something exciting takes from a fair to a huge amount of time, which you most likely won't be able to recuperate. At least not directly. Until someone has a next level value proposition that enables more things, I would suggest sticking to the boards you're already not using.

Not to nitpick, but it would have probably been far better for the ecosystem if the money was spread more evenly. Few at PayPal made it super big of course (not even the "leaders" in relative terms) but they where also quite young and hungry to do something else. I'm sure they are all going to try and pay it forward as best they can and funding opportunities will increase, but that doesn't necessarily create this dynamic diversified ecosystem that PayPal left behind.

This would roughly correspond with the traditional ideas of "class".

That's the thing though. The concept of social class in the US doesn't. So while I agree with you, there's nothing strange with the article.

"Social class in the United States is a controversial issue, having many competing definitions, models, and even disagreements over its very existence. Many Americans believe in a simple three-class model that includes the "rich", the "middle class", and the "poor". More complex models that have been proposed describe as many as a dozen class levels; while still others deny the very existence, in the European sense, of 'social class' in American society."

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

I don't really see how Go is, or should be, that limited as a factor of design (in contrast with something like Erlang). It's just that everyone in the ecosystem is focused on on the same things and when people with other use cases, that could benefit from the properties of the language, try to make themselves known it's all "works for me".

Edit: Thanks for proving my point everyone.

Edit2: To be slightly less snarky, despite the article I don't see any reason why Go couldn't be a fit for e.g. an oscilloscope which today is running a complete, often multi-core, linux system with 100k+ lines of code (with help from an ADC and FPGA etc. of course). If it wasn't for the fact that few people would undertake such an effort when that would be akin to swimming upstream against the ecosystem.