Live data from Hacker News

GitHub repository for Sedgewick's Algorithms is taken down

github.com

191–194 of 194 posts

Re: GitHub repository for Sedgewick's Algorithms is taken down

#191
post #12

Not totally unrelated: Pearson is a piece of trash company. They sell very overpriced textbooks and always use DRM in online copies. They lobby for standardized tests in states and get them mandated. Students are put through them. And guess who provides the certificate required by teachers to evaluate those exam copies? Yes, Pearson. And they make a ton of money. Please watch this talk for more context (even if you d…

> They lobby for standardized tests in states and get them mandated. Students are put through them. This is totally false. State standardized test is the natural consequence of state public education accountability system. There must be a comparable measure across all the public schools in the state as the foundation for accountability measurements. And all (>95%) the students must be tested for equity reasons. No ma…

The problem is in recent years it has taken on something else...

Standardized tests can be a window in the performance and health of the overall system, or over a group of students, but it is not reasonably determinate of the knowledge level of an individual student. Which is how they are often used

In the beginning it was used to judge the performance of a teacher or school, today is it used to judge the performance of the student something it is not really equipped for.

This is similar to BMI, BMI is useful as a health metric on a population of people, but is not very useful as a metric on the health of an individual

Re: GitHub repository for Sedgewick's Algorithms is taken down

#192
post #119
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the technical nature of the work, developers who can't jive with GitHub's policies can throw up a GitLab/Gitea server in an hour and evade censorship. And of course, as we learned with youtube-dl, the issue isn't the code/commits (since everyone gets that with a git clone), it's the issues and PR history. Any public file host has to deal with the DMCA, and (for now, barring any evil brought on by Microsoft), I'…

Should we perhaps invent a standard convention for keeping issues and PR history along with the usual source code in the repo itself?

There is git-bug [0]. Haven't had the time to evaluate it yet, so no idea how useful it is.

[0] https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

Re: GitHub repository for Sedgewick's Algorithms is taken down

#193
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we perhaps invent a standard convention for keeping issues and PR history along with the usual source code in the repo itself?

There is git-bug [0]. Haven't had the time to evaluate it yet, so no idea how useful it is. [0] https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

Indeed, from a quick glance this looks like what I had in mind. Thanks!

Now, how can we make it popular?

Re: GitHub repository for Sedgewick's Algorithms is taken down

#194
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone “swears under the penalty of perjury” something that is inaccurate, and the legal system does make it simple to apply that penalty, there’s something wrong with the legal system.

Regardless of the actual form of the notice (so long as it is not deficient), under the DMCA the only part for which is actually treated as under penalty of perjury is the claim of the person giving notice being or representing the copyright owner or exclusive licensee of the the work identified (notably, the claim that the particular content to be taken down is infringing is not under penalty of perjury.) While I do…

Not quite. The counter-notice also includes that language, "I swear under penalty of perjury that the notice-giver is wrong". So there's no penalty for lying in the notice, but the same can't be said for the victim of the notice. What's more, you _can't_ counter-notice that your use of copyrighted material is protected by fair use - that has to be found in court, so hopefully you've got deep pockets.

DMCA is an awful law.

Post reply on HN