jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Shoreditch, London. Full-time and onsite. (https://howareyou.com & http://cambridgehealthcare.com)

To all exceptional Ruby developers

We are behind howareyou.com https://howareyou.com/, an online
personal health record completely free to all NHS patients.

We are committed to building the best clinical API https://api.howareyou.com/,
highly available and secure. Our API is a collection of services
distributed across multiple infrastructures (including AWS).

The right candidate will be interested in:

- RESTful APIs - including the hypermedia component
- non-web Ruby services - we're big on EBI (Entity-Boundary-Interactor)
- non-Rails apps - we are slowly phasing out Rails
- client-side apps - our newest apps are all Angular.js talking to APIs
- Service Oriented Architecture
- hybrid infrastructure
- Redis and Riak - masterless clusters is where we're heading

You will be working alongside the best in their field from Google Campus,
less than 5 minutes walking distance from Old Street station.

For the best contractors, we are willing to pay £450 per day. All
candidates are encouraged to get in touch with us on jobs.hn@howareyou.com
I thought so at first, but :

> Earn rewards by opting into our privacy-respecting ads

That's not what I want. My problem is with ads, as a dumb consumption catalyser and weak revenue model, not with privacy-concerning ads.
To take another concrete example, PHP is extremely popular. It doesn't mean PHP-the-language is better than less popular alternatives, it means it's extremely easy to throw things together and deploy (mostly due to almost universal support on VPS). Nonetheless, PHP's history is an accumulation of appalling technical decisions and security holes.
There are a lot of guidelines around the use of deception in research. See section 8.07 of the American Psychological Association's Code of Conduct, for example: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/?item=11#807

In this case, I don't have access to the full text of the paper, but the "supplementary materials" are freely available, including the scripts that were used for the interviews and debriefing process. Some choice quotes:

"We predicted that in a significant proportion of participants, we could convince them that childhood events happened when in fact they did not. There is no reason for you to feel any more susceptible to such processes than anyone else (if applicable). This is a completely normal, common occurrence." ... "If at this point you would like to withdraw your data from the study, you are able to do so without penalty." ... "If you feel that you suffered any distress as a result of this study, please let us know as we can arrange to have a counsellor speak to you. No-one will have access to your identity or specific information you provided except for the study coders."

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/suppl/2015/01/14/095679761456...
>The media [..] been minimally interested in the leaks themselves

Here are two leading newspaper sites' special WikiLeaks section:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/world/statessecrets.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/wikileaks

There are quite a few more, in many languages. In my opinion it's the opposite of minimal interest.

The fact Assange's personal life are also reported makes sense. We can't claim he should be person of the year and at the same time expect no interest in his personal life.

I'm not sure I see the connection to Miller or Russert here. Is our understanding of the basic narrative (ie Manning obtaining the documents, passing them to Assange, disclosing it later to Lamo) likely to change if we have the full chat logs? Seems to me that rather than holding to some important truths, Wired are at best keeping some details they might hope to profit from later.

This is why Greenwald calling it "journalistic disgrace" comes off so hyperbolic. Rather than a reporter in search of truth, he comes off as a spoiled kid that learned to expect the world will provide him whatever he wants if he screams loud enough. As I wrote, the pundit for the Reddit generation.
People like to glorify Apple in every way possible and tout whatever advantages they have but the mistake they make is they don't care enough to understand Android as a platform and its Architecture. Because if they did they will understand that from an developer standpoint Android is absolute delight to develop on.

Think about this - when Android goes to tablets with Honeycomb, the same app binary will work with tablets and phones while automagically adjusting the UI to suit the available screen real estate. Now think how Apple did this with iPad.

Think about inter-app communication. Intents are another one of the great platform facilities. Your app can get things done at runtime without worrying about if there is an app installed to handle that intent - if there isn't one it will launch the Market app and suggest you to download the necessary app to handle that activity. The cloud Backup APIs and C2DM stuff is way ahead than what Apple has to offer today.

Then there are obviously the notifications. Ever heard any one complain about Apple's horrid notification system? Nope - they are all busy looking at UI animations :)

Not having to deal with memory management is added bonus.

There are a lot of things Android gets right. If they don't have as many rich animations as iOS it doesn't make a whole lot of difference to end users - having crappy notifications on other hand does affect end users negatively.

So all put together I think there are lot many pleasant things to say about Android as a development platform. Purely from an "emotional" or "UI" angle it may not be terrific but from an getting work done fast standpoint it surely is a great platform that also happens to look decent enough not to make you puke ;)
You probably have chrome -- or some other popup blocker. I had to allow popups for Tazo.com for it to work.
I know people who would think that is good ... (Based on the fact that they think flash pages with intro animations are good, because they 'clearly take more work, and are so much more unique.').
I'm still waiting for Starbucks to answer my question: are the tazo berries fresh-picked?
What this links to appears to be one redesign of a boring medical test result, which was not done by or associated with Aza Raskin. Am I confused?
Regarding enterprise software, as a user you can say what you thin about the software, but how can you make claims about how things might be better? You could only make that sort of claim if you understood something about what it was like to write that software. As an amateur you know more than the average user, but I would ask you consider that you don't know all the constraints faced by the person writing the actual software

>Maybe I offended some people when I used the term "software game"

Yes, you did offend me. And I appreciate your clarification. My main point was that it's easy to criticize, but until you get your hands dirty, you won't really know what it's like to write software for a large user base. And it doesn't have to be commercial. If you're working of open source software with 100,000 users, your experience is as real as with commercial software.
First, you will find following up on the phone almost always increases conversions so that wouldn't be alarming to me. But just because that helps convert more I wouldn't say your self service model can't be successful.

When I hear the comment though that you have to help them use the service to be successful it screams to me either you have a fair to poor UI design/experience, the leads are unqualified or you are pushing to the wrong segment.

Don't get me wrong there are SaaS products that require some assistance, usually though those are tailored at the enterprise level and the fees reflect the account management aspects and user support. Maybe this is your product hence your idea for the change.

My point about the leads being unqualified or the wrong market segment is basically you are getting the wrong clients. For example, me signing up for a video editing service would be foolish and require a ton of support because it isn't something I do, so even terminology would be basically foreign to me. But someone else would get it immediately if that is what they do. Hence qualifying your clients and market is critical to success.
It's maybe a naive question, but from my point of view I don't understand why it's even a problem. Why is the Uber app so big ?
I can't believe I'm ASKING for a blog post.

Can you blog a bit of the career/cognitive/skill evolutionary history behind this? Did the cosmo stuff come out of this or something else?

Learned this in X level school, found out about Y, read about Y, learned this, got this job doing this, learned this from Z, got experience of AA... etc.

Of course, assuming this exists, and you exist. And blogs "exist".
Headlines sound like "The next Carrington event could fry anything with electronics!" But it's not true. The danger is that a CME can interact with the Earth's magnetic field to induce a large current in the Earth. Long conductors parallel to the Earth are going to experience an induced current due to coupling with the ground. This is what got the telegraph system in trouble in 1859. We had transcontinental lines and primitive protection. Household scale cables aren't long enough to see a problem.
Gah. I can't remember the book but it classifies the different levels of poverty. There were 4 levels.

I'm going from memory but level 1 was what you describe.

Level 2 is being able to meet your needs but all your time goes into meeting those needs.

Level 3 is having enough extra money to pay for things you don't need.

Level 4 was IIRC basically not having to work.

Most countries have a range of 1-3 or 2-3 or 3-4 or some distribution of that.

Anyway long story short, western countries mostly have 2-4 and don't know what 1 even looks like (on a lived experience level). They've seen pictures of it and there are people living in Level 1 in western countries, they just aren't as front and center. If you've lived near Level 1 you know what real poverty looks like. If you haven't you think that Level 2 is real poverty. Both need to be addressed, but I agree that Level 1 poverty is so much worse for people living there.
Proper armor of the period was not like what we see in films, it wasn't nearly so clumsy.

It's a bit silly, but check this short clip out it will open your eyes a bit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm11yAXeegg
This isn't the actual source code. As far as I know, only a small piece of the real worm's code ever got published, and that was in the Cornell Report, Cornell University's post mortem. This isn't the code in the Cornell Report.

Someone in 1989 or 1990 ran an ad in the back of "2600" magazine, selling the source code on paper. I bought a copy back then, I can remember the date because of the apartment I was in when I read the code. I think the "2600" version is the same as this one, but with someone different header comments.

I have a copy of this code from a tar archive with date of 1991-06-05 on it, so it's been floating around the Internet for almost 20 years at this point.
It could make a psychological difference by putting a shame/pride/credibility/game achievement effect in place. I'd put it in "feature requests" here and see what pg thinks--he is definitely interested in keeping the HN addiction in check for YC companies too.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=363

In terms of an easy implementation, it could be something users self-manage on the honor system, and perhaps a "ship" icon could link to the product if applicable.
Simple hack: 2 computers, one for work and one for the internet. Different workstations, preferably in different rooms.

It's a lot harder to get up off your ass than to hit alt-tab.

Harness that laziness to your advantage.
Always worth reading what Jakob shares for free. I don't find him groundbreaking by any means, but I do find him (his work) to be a solid reference backed up by actual research.
> Netflix is on your computer

No it's not. Netflix doesn't support my computer, so I can't get it. I wish I could...in fact, I'd probably pay 10x the price they're charging for the service they offer. But since they don't support Ubuntu because of DRM issues, there is no Netflix on my computer.

Your Netflix example isn't appropriate here.
Sorry, but that is nothing like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Scroll through this list - http://twitter.com/#!/search/kill%20him, and tell me what you think should happen to all the ones that don't sound like a joke?
Click on your username, set "noprocrast" to yes, then you will find yourself often staring at the "Sorry you can't view this site" text but you will get more productive. You can even select how long you want to work between reading HN there. It really helps and I can't thank PG enough for this :)
It's definitely copied the good things about HN :)

Now we'll have to see if it can garner a community...
not everything is a product.
Eggs and baskets.
a mediocre .com beats a decent non.com
Are you able to observe/log the failed instances?

What percentage of the various pools were affected by the outage?

I'm more curious about the hourly rate.

If you have a pool of 30 instances and only 3 are accessible, are you still being charged for all 30 plus the additional 27 you need to bring up?
Hey HN, yesterday was fun. I was in the middle of making changes and pushing updates to one of my web apps running on Heroku when Amazon fell apart. I quickly grew bored not being able to push updates to Heroku, so I decided to brush up on my skills a bit and try my hand at a file-sharing app.

The idea came to me around 7am. I quickly snagged the domain name and got to work. After a few hours of designing, coding, building, I ended up with boxify.me. Not bad, considering I barely knew how to code a few months ago :D The app was finished yesterday, and it went live this morning now that issues with Amazon are clearing up.

Here's how it works: you click "start sharing" and a box is made with a randomly generated url. You can upload files to it (as many as you want, 25mb limit per file) and they appear in the box. You can send the link to others and they can upload/download files as well. You can also change the name of the box (and consequently, the URL).

I haven't seen any file-sharing websites that follow this concept. Most allow you to upload huge files and send a link to somebody - very short term, which is fine for most situations. But there are so many situations where it would be nice to just have a bunch of files than can be shared between people and accessed from any computer (one-off group projects come to mind). I guess the most similar thing I can think of is Dropbox, but boxify.me doesn't require signup, permissions, etc. So I guess you could say it falls somewhere between a standard file uploading site and Dropbox.

Oh, I also submitted it to Chrome Web Store. My first submission yet, and it wasn't even an conceptualized 24 hours ago!

What do you think?
Thanks! I am aware that you can rename the example box, and that's okay. The button on the home screen should still be able to find it :)

I thought about deleting, but it could get messy if somebody decides to delete all the files as there are no permissions/accounts etc. Maybe in the future, if I decide to build on this?
Just curious, how familiar are you with Paxos? I'm asking because failure detection is pretty much isomorphic with distributed consensus and generally considered hard. Ie. how do you differentiate between down and slow?
While I agree with the redefinition of 'kill' I couldn't disagree more about Facebook not having any flaws that might kill it. Facebook has two that I can see.

The first is that it is built from the ground up around a flat social network and that maps really poorly onto real social networks. Sure they can add things like groups to try and address this but it's baked into the DNA of the site and the way people think about the site. The blog post that accompanied the recent profile refresh really brought home how they do not understand this. Listing work projects and who you worked on them with on a friend-oriented service? Promoting parts of your life so more 'friends' can learn about them? Who on earth wants to do this stuff?

The second, which is part of the reason for the first (college social networks are relatively speaking flat) is that Facebook was built and initially populated by the Ivy League. It was the classy, exclusive social network. Now it's everybody's, there's like buttons on every site, every brand from downmarket crap to luxury. Every market has price differentiation, social networks will be no different, there is a huge opportunity for a more exclusive, more upmarket network and when those users bail on Facebook there's a real chance it'll cause a cascade.
The inability to adapt. And short sight.

This can kill any company.
And that, in a nutshell, is why I don't really want to buy an eReader. They just seem too restrictive.

My girlfriend and I occasionally share books (usually she borrows mine), but my understanding is that the books you "buy" are licensed only to a single device, and you can only share a book one time, and even then only if the publisher allows it.

I could be misunderstanding things, but it seems like if she wanted to borrow one of my books, she would probably need to borrow my Kindle to do it, and essentially borrow all of my books to read one.

Until things get sorted out, I think I'll pass on the eReaders.
The mechanism is that human brains are really, really bad at judging volume. A small glass full to the brim looks like it has more than a large glass that's half full. Bars often use a related trick, which is tall thin shot glasses - they look like they have more, even if they have less, compared to wider glasses.
Picasso was one of few artists to have their work be of value during their lifetime, wasn't he?
That said, I don't know why, with today's computing power, people don't make rainbow table chains longer (or shorter, it's been a while since I read the paper) to save on disk space.
I have this theory that anything build by a network effect, can be undone by a network effect. I agree that no company ever gets flat out killed - well, not if they have a billion in cash and not in just a year or two. However, I don't think comparing Facebook to Google in the unkillable sense is correct. Google is far more unkillable than Facebook, because:

A) You need to accumulate lots of data to even have a chance to beat Google. No algorithm you come up with will be competitive until you have a mound of data similar to theirs, and accumulating that data takes years.

B) My friends leaving Google has little impact on me. So, with a Facebook, you can pick off a city or social group, and snowball that. That's exactly what Facebook did to MySpace, and there's no analog in beating Google.

To beat Google, you need time, money, and it's a moving target. That's why the only serious contender is Bing. To beat Facebook, you need a better design, indomitable passion, and clever marketing. Really clever marketing.

What is keeping you on Facebook is just the fact that they have your list of friends and family. I'm not saying Facebook is easy to beat, and I believe over time, they have accumulated some of the defenses that Google has. However, a company built on a network effect can die by a network effect. Easy come, easy go.
You are correct, Django's hashes are stored as salt$digest, or maybe salt$function$digest nowadays. It wouldn't be very good if all your password hashes became invalid because you changed the secret key.
Sure, but should the pick gun fail, your locksmith (hopefully!) can do it the old-fashioned way, too. And pick guns take a lot more skill than people think, they still require a skilled operator to be effective.
"$12 or less" really is confusing. And there's no explanation? Why? Because it's free first 3 months or something like that?
starts from https://www.elance.com/myelance ?
My desktop runs Ubuntu. Why would I use this over Aptitude?

And, yes, I did read the stated benefits on the project page, but I don't have any of those problems. I'm genuinely curious what this would do for me if I were to download it.
Judged on its merits, it is one of PGs poorer essays. And if written by nearly anyone else would have not made the front page or any comments. That there has been discussion on it all has been charitable.

With higher quality content you will see higher quality discussion. I do hope the lack of charity has shown Paul that his thinking, as demonstrated by his writing, on this topic is muddled.
I apologize if this sounds dismissive, but I think you are still not quite looking at this from a Golang point of view. If you want to group all the Eval methods together for multiple types, please do! This ain't Java. You don't have to use one file per type, unless it makes sense to do that. As you said, Go gives you flexibility in method ordering.

Another thing to consider is extensibility, particularly if you're writing a library or plugin system or something like that. If you use an interface to declare "an expression is something that knows how to be evaluated, typechecked, and optimized", then someone using your code as a library could add another expression case without a lot of trouble, but they would have no (safe) way to add an operation.

So, there's a few ways to do this. One is to have your external module use an external function with a case switch, like you did. Another way is to create a new interface for your new operation. Then, your plugin library could create wrapper types for the basic types, and implement the new interface for them. Go makes wrapper types pretty easy to create through the anonymous struct member mechanism.

I think that making both dimensions extensible is a fundamentally hard problem: for example, if plugin 1 wanted to add a new case and plugin 2 wanted to add a new operation, who would be responsible for handling the new operation in the new case? So as a library author, you have to choose which dimension is fixed and which dimension is extensible, and sum types are the way to keep the list of cases fixed.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this doesn't seem that hard in Go. Plugin 1 can add a new type which implements whatever interfaces it wants to. Plugin 2 can add a new interface which other people can implement, or not, as they choose. Once you get away from the idea of type hierarchies, this stops being difficult.

I agree that there are some cool things in SML, OCaml, and other languages that Go doesn't have (like algebraic pattern matching and currying), but there are other things it does have which can be very helpful. Right tool for the job, and all that.
What is the point of a criminal background check?
What part of that article did you construe as rape/misogyny-apologism?