skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I want to voice my support for keeping the driving use case "experiments".

I'm coming from the perspective of a software engineer here. To a software engineer, a "program" is a collection of stateless routines and behavior. Data is external and separate, the same program should be able to process a wide range of data. "Reproducibility", as much as that matters, is having a tested system that responds in a predictable and reliable way to inputs, and data is one such input.

When I first worked extensively with a scientist on an experiment, I was shocked how much common wisdom from computer science was turned on its head. One is expected to load up a Matlab workspace with data and code all in the same file? Scripts irreversibly mutate data, and often run exactly once? How could one possibly keep track of such an environment? How does one fix bugs in a series of commands typed into an interactive prompt? Reproducibility to a scientist is a log of actions that could be repeated by another human, but the environments used often just dropped such things on the floor, to be caught only by the most diligent researcher with an unusually well-kept notebook.

I think there is definitely a happy medium somewhere. Reproducibility as a scientist understands it; interactivity in a way that makes sense to a scientist writing a one-off script. Program state stored easily so that the scientist doesn't feel lost every time they restart their environment, as I imagine they must do when editing python scripts in vim as a software engineer might. But all this in a world where scripts can be maintained and versioned and fixed without their hair catching fire.
I don't understand what problem is being solved here. Is this just an overly convoluted way to describe load balancing?
Is this signaling as simple as having a .com ?

Or are there other considerations such as SEO uniqueness, easy-to-pronounce (especially critical for enterprise software), length of url.

Is kuickkoder.com a better domain than quickcoder.io ?
> 100% of the top 20 YC companies by valuation have the .com of their name. 94% of the top 50 do. But only 66% of companies in the current batch have the .com of their name.

That's not a straight comparison. A better stat would be, what percentage of the top 20 YC companies had the .com while they were in the active YC batch?
So $12 billion to save 1.2 million jobs and $34.9 billion in annual tax revenue? Seems like a no brainer.
"According to a study by the Center for Automotive Research the GM bailout saved 1.2 million jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in tax revenue.[91]"
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/12/09/governme...
Electrical nerve stimulation can improve peripheral nerve function
Hm, she doesn't seem grumpy but you sure do.
Not in the slightest. I still have no idea what this has to do with experiments.
Just build with --without-java
Very cool! This makes sense to me. Specialization and trade.
I think the conclusion is self-evident to any avid reader of literature. I can't think of a single good author who abuses exclamation marks. And that's because someone who abuses exclamation marks in this way is a pretty poor writer by definition.
> Why?

Because I care about soundness.

And especially soundness for combinations of under-specified semantic models, because eDSLs are useful exactly when the semantic models at hand aren't 30-60 years old with mature implementations.

> imperative backend, generic functional backend, generic typing engine (which easily include various Hindley-Milner implementations as well as simple type propagation forms), generic lazy functional... which can be mixed together in any proportion.

That's just so totally not true. There are a ridiculous number of ways to combine these things in ways that totally kill type soundness, confluence, etc.

The reason you didn't have a hard time combining them is because they are 1) really truly extraordinarily well-understood and well-defined languages; 2) we've known exactly how to combine these things for a really long time; and 3) you knew a priori the reasonable interaction points.

None of these three assumptions are true for most of the eDSLs engineers might want to write down in general.

In general, a framework that lets you get unsound bullcrap from two perfectly sound things isn't a solution to the (e)DSL problem.
Yeah, but by the time Moose came, Perl was already an old neckbeard thing in the eyes of the public.
I have no idea what Pollen does. The homepage really doesn't explain anything, and even after skimming the tutorials and the quick tour I still don't know.

Is it a static site generator? A blogging engine? Does it create PDFs? Epub? I have no idea.
Here you are:

Vm0wd2QyVkhVWGhUV0d4VFltdHdVRlp0ZUhkVU1WcDBaVWhrYWxKc1d
ucFhhMk0xWVVaS2MxZHVhRmRTZWtFeFdWY3hTMUl4WkhOWGJGcFhUVE
ZHTTFaclpEUlpWMUpJVm10V1UySklRbTlVVmxwM1ZWWmtWMVZyU214U
01EVjVWR3hhVjFWdFNrbFJiVGxWVm14YU0xbHFSbHBsUm1SMFVteGtU
bEpHV2paV2JUQXhWVEZSZUZkdVRsaGhlbXhoV1d0a2IxVXhjRmhsUjN
SWVVsUldXVmt3V2tOV01rVjNZMFpTVjFaV2NGTmFSRVpEVld4Q1ZVMU
VNRDA9

SCNR
No one is saying that there is no censorship or repression, but rather it works differently than most people think it does. Though I will concede that the paper is quite a few years out of date.

The point I was trying to make is that, a sweeping statement such as "Anything that is published in China, by definition is representative of the opinions of the Party.", simply isn't true.

It is not even true for the mainstream media, nevermind a work of fiction.
Not sure the domain name really
matters much now. Reasons:

(1) Do users really pay attention
to the extension, COM or anything else?

(2) IMHO, now users mostly just click
on links while paying little or
no attention to the actual URL
or domain name. Of course, the HTML
link element (tag) doesn't
have to expose anything
about the extension.

So, why do 1+ billion users know or
care about COM?

For PG's point about the most successful
YC companies use COM, that was then, when
COM didn't cost so much, not now.
I'm not sure.

I'd rather have a memorable name with a sub-par TLD, than I would have a confusing / hard to remember name with a .com.

Obviously, the ideal is memorable + .com, but most of those will cost 50-100k+, which is not feasible for seed-stage budget.

Sounds like a series A problem.
Please note that on OSX you have to manually add the Racket binaries to your path. If you use zsh and Racket v6.2 for instance you could add the following to your .zshrc: export PATH=$PATH:/Applications/Racket\ v6.2/bin
And another: Box launched as box.net, and spent about $1 million to buy box.com. [0]

For earlier companies, you can buy a lot of engineers, product, and marketing for $1 million.

[0] http://www.cnet.com/news/how-box-net-became-box-com-for-just...
Delve into Go: Creating a Debugger for Go [video]
Could you elaborate as to why this is a huge opportunity business wise?
It's the whole point of the linked article.

> The LESS it has to do with your category, the better.
.com is supreme

.com is love

.com is life

Surrender your soul unto VeriSign
Could you elaborate a bit about how you find TAP better than xUnit? I did some Perl testing years ago and mostly xUnit-style testing since then and it didn't strike me that xUnit was much worse than TAP. Genuine question since I'm very interested in the topic of testing.
To me I don't think it has anything to do with Scuba per se.

More like it's a simple and easy name that you can build your scuba tour business around.

In other words - pick a good and easy English name or two and go from there. Avoid hard to pronounce words or smash two words together to make up a new word that means nothing.

At least that's how I see it.
yes, didn't dropbox used to be trydropbox.com? And, tho non-YC, delicious.com was del.icio.us (or something). Successful companies can buy their domain.

But I agree with pg; a startup by any other name would succeed as sweet, so why not choose one you can get.
Do you seriously expect the PRC to publish pristine data on on arrests or executions related to anti-state speech or activities?
or tesla.com
Especially in the (possibly very lucrative market) of Deep Learning powered devices, like self-driving cars

nVidia has already demoed hardware on that area
I made the same mental mistake as you just did and which I now bet PG thought about and carefully dismissed. Correlation isn't causation, but the fact is the top 20 companies either started with or changed their name. Which is his thesis.
Is there a moral case for meat?
I don't think the conversation is misguided. The meaning of a word varies with context, and this neural network was not trained on, say, Hindustani classical or twelve-tone music.

The vagueness of "classical music" can be annoying sometimes, but in this case people approximately agree on a contextual definition. In the top comment, a precision is brought: "later than medieval and earlier than late-romantic in style", which encompasses almost all of the set used to train the neural network (and consequently, the style that the network is trying to reproduce). Sure, it's a broad range, but the theory that can be used to study it is surprisingly detailed and generalizable.
Apparently I'm still really, really bad at this.
del.icio.us is an awesome domain. I'd be inclined to believe someone came up with the domain before the name.
Considering the current drop in value of the TSLA share, would this be a good opportunity to grab some of them?
Show HN: Work remotely
Charity Majors – Hiring a Tech Ops Team (video and transcript)
"Copy that connects always considers the reader."

This is true, but personally I've become jaded with over the top, long, emotionally manipulative copy. I've fallen for these in the past and wasted lots of money (I am embarrassed about it). They annoy me these days and I quickly close such pages and make a mental note not to click on them again.
The function type A -> B corresponds to A => B in logic. This is a subtle but important difference between logic and type theory. In logic a statement is true or false, but that's it. In type theory a statement (= type) has evidence (= values of that type). The type A -> B can be interpreted as turning evidence for A into evidence for B.

The logical statements "for all x:A it's the case that B(x) holds" and "there exists a x:A such that B(x) holds" correspond to dependent function types `(x:A) -> B x` and dependent pair types `(x:A, B x)`, respectively. In intuitive terms "if you give me an x:A, then I give you evidence of B(x)", and "I give you an x:A, along with evidence of B(x)".
No, because his thesis is "change your name", not "start out with .com"
What also bugs me is that there are probably things that:

(1) successful companies do often,

(2) marginal companies do less often, and

(3) aren't actually in any way instrumental to success.

It could just be that there's a mindset among successful founders that produces a particular vector of decisions, not all of which are all that important.

Graham would probably respond: whether every component of that vector is important or not, investors are scraping for every bit of evidence they can find, and your name might be a "tell" that other components of your decision vector are hinky.

And that might be true enough, but cargo culting every decision Airbnb makes in order to slip through an investor filter is no way to live either.
I was developing websites in 2003, so I feel like I should be able to relate here, but he has this comment at the bottom that I can't figure out...

"Use a stock photo CD and find cool pictures that match your name BEFORE you pick the name. If you can find a bunch of $30 images that work with a name, grab the pictures, then the name."

Huh?
and even when you stay big, your brand name is big enough that your domain doesn't matter (e.g., teslamotors.com)
Thanks, now the only question is how hard will it be to use my own UI framework instead of VCL (to avoid complexity and overhead)?
The first sentence of the documentation tells you:

"Pollen is a publishing system that helps authors create beautiful and functional web-based books."

I think it might be good to get something like that on that introductory page, though, you're right.
Political horse-race stories are well off topic here.
Little details are always important as long as they don't require big effort.
I couldn't disagree more with this article and am kinda surprised Paul wrote about this.

Domain names are transitioning into becoming useless. When you open any web browser or mobile phone and go to look for a company it does a search. The most relevant results come back at the top. This type of trend, as we abstract away from using TLDs, is only going to continue. Owning a .com isn't nearly as meaningful today as it was 5 years ago.

What I think will happen is ICANN will continue adding more, useless TLDs as quick cash grabs and the next 10 years you're going to see people stop referring to their domain name at all. I mean, why would you? You're Uber, you look for "Uber" in the app stores, you open your browser and type in "Uber". All of these take you exactly where you need to go.

> 100% of the top 20 YC companies by valuation have the .com of their name. 94% of the top 50 do. But only 66% of companies in the current batch have the .com of their name. Which suggests there are lessons ahead for most of the rest, one way or another.

Correlation is not necessarily causation; this statistic should be compared with general domain name availability with the time periods mentioned because an incredible amount are purchased every year making it impossible to even compare in this way.
I have a related question. When you have one product, which name is different from the company's name, is it better to use comapany.com or product.com?
In the coming years we will see a lot more applications powered by deep learning. If someone releases a chip that provides 10x performance compared to the current GPU-based method, they will sell a lot of chips.
I agree, paying a small fee for it sounds good. However it might gain a lot of popularity and support if there is also a free version, e.g. for non-commercial purposes only and updated only once a year or so.

I would personally not want to pay up front without knowing anything about this database from a company (or private person) that only asks 5 bucks a year for it.
That assumes no opportunity cost. Investing that $51 billion in a generic basket of stocks would have had a big payoff instead of a loss.
I couldn't always remember where the dots went. Not a great property for a domain name.
Perhaps both? Company.com can describe the company, show your products, etc. Product.com could be either a landing page advertising your product or, if it's a service, perhaps that's the login / primary access for your product.

Just my thoughts.
:). Just think to yourself what apples have to do with computers and phones.
I can't wait for http://www.matrix.org to mature. But this looks interesting.
You forgot (4) require significant effort. Yes, those things bug me as well. As he points out though, naming is not particularly difficult, expensive, or time consuming when done right.
xUnit is a testing framework, TAP is a tool to allow different testing modules to interact with each other, and their output collated. The most commonly used Perl xUnit implementation uses TAP.
But he's implying that having a .com correlates to success - so % starting with a .com would be a more apt comparison.
so, where can i find more information about this NeuroBayes algorithm?
That assumes the alternative use of the money they were considering was putting it under a mattress.
I thought the exact same thing. I was really surprised by this comment coming from PG.

This Forbes/Quora article explains how the name was chosen: http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2014/04/02/how-did-stripe-...
There are different strategies and it certainly can be an advantage if you have a single word .com domain that encompasses a core value or offering.
The latest "new TLD" thing was a money-making scheme for domain registrars. Nobody goes to those domains. Even the previous round of TLDs (".museum", ".aero") are not used much; ".aero" has entries for all the major airport codes, but they're redirects.

Amusingly, even if you have your very own TLD, it doesn't help you. Most browsers send single-word lookups to a search engine before they send them to DNS. Try "ca" in a browser. There is a web site at "ca". But to get there, you'll have to use "ca.", to force a DNS lookup from the root. Nobody knows to do that unless they're into how DNS works. There are some low-level bugs embedded in very common C libraries which cause problems with single-word domains, and they probably won't be fixed.

As for the original poster's advice, the price of the domain you want in .com is probably more than YCombinator's initial funding. With all of today's domain hoarding, the ".com" domain usually comes later. Facebook started as "thefacebook.com".
We've seen how careless and illogical the mob is when they remove people from non-profits or other businesses.

Voting may not be perfect but it's a better decision making process than the Twitter alternative.
Yep, I agree, that's what I thought it referred to the entire time (and even commend them on a smart name because of it)
Dropbox was getdropbox.com and airbnb was airbedandbreakfast.com
Stories about politics are off-topic here unless there is something unusually intellectually interesting about them.
This is necessary because there is a branch (if) in our code and traces are not allowed to have internal branches.

I (mostly) understand the performance of the assembly, but don't know much (if anything) about the limitations of tracing JITs. Predictable branches such as the one in this example are approximately free on modern CPUs, so it's not clear to me why the JIT couldn't just treat the branching assembly as part of the root trace. Is there a fundamental reason why a trace is not allowed to have internal branches, or is this just a implementation detail of the current trace selection algorithm?
They 'require' it, but it is still possible to use the service without SSL. At least it was possible on stripe a few months ago. I'm not sure if they end up cutting you off after they notice the non ssl traffic, but I setup some test apps that worked fine without ssl.
The Internet is more alive than it's ever been. But it needs our help
Not sure what you're talking about, I didn't see a single amazon link in the article. They even link to google books instead.
Libreoffice looks far more native than Qt does on Windows or Mac IMHO. So it still seems to be worth it.
Is deep learning suitable for self-driving cars? I would expect that cars, like other safety critical systems, need to be formally proven to work as intended, which AFAIK can't really be done with neural networks.
There seems to be heavy interest in a low-cost service, even free if it was sustainable. Just curious if anyone has seen innovative pricing around services, similar to how open-source software made expensive software much cheaper or free, where the vendor made the main "service/data" much less expensive but monetized in a different way.
I feel like if you have to ask this question, the answer is "too hard".
Evan Williams of Blogger/Twitter fame disagree with it.

http://evhead.com/2011/06/five-reasons-domains-are-less-impo...
The nice Opera Mobile reflow works only on Android, maybe some other smaller systems. But not on iOS and Windows Mobile. Opera is the only mobile browser I can tolerate.

I think I should do a video capture how nicely pretty much any site works in this browser. Unless the text is burned into an image, you can pretty much read it all without horizontal scrolling.

This feature is badly needed in Mobile Safari, Firefox and Chrome.

I really hope Opera can continue to support this amazing browser.
I think of it as LaTeX for HTML. You write markup and Racket code that produce websites; the author used it for his web book Practical Typography: http://practicaltypography.com/

Since you can write arbitrary Racket, you can create markup for anything you want. Write some code that automatically generates plots, formats code examples, makes custom asides and footnotes -- just like you can write arbitrary macros for LaTeX to do all sorts of things. Except with Racket instead of TeX macro goo.

It natively outputs HTML but you could have it render anything vaguely XML-y.

At the moment it feels more like TeX than LaTeX, since it provides the low-level features but not a default setup for building specific things. I'd like to try it to write a website, but there's a steep startup cost of reimplementing all the basic macros first.
A lot of things can be advantageous. But lets keep in mind that 99.99% of all companies are not going to be unicorns with budgets to buy +100K domain names anytime soon.

That doesn't mean they can't become a hugely successful company.

My general point is just that you shouldn't prematurely optimize because you end up spending a lot of time on it. Unless you stumble on a great name that you can afford it's most of the times simply not worth the effort.
Titans are $1.5k each, so that's $6k down before you even account for the rest of the hardware to run it. Ouch.
> Take a pass on bad manners, on thoughtlessness, on unreliability, on carelessness and on all the other ways people distinguish themselves as unappealing specimens.

I've also moved in that direction as I've got older, but I think it's because I've also got wealthier and gained more options. If I still had to choose between sharing my kitchen with thoughtless people and living in a ditch, I would still choose the former.
Usually two different methods.

1: I have a large list of books saved on goodreads that I want to read. Most of these were heard on podcasts, or were recommended on the internet. When I need a new book I just look over the list and pick one that looks interesting.

2: If I hear someone talk about a book that I am really interested in I will buy it right away. This method usually ends up in a book that sits on my desk and doesn't get read
Have tracing JIT compilers won? (2010)
Agree. Problem is changing your name, to most people, is a big effort :)
Brent Black, the hat dealer mentioned in the article, has a problem that is itching for a solution:

> Manually counting the rows of weave is a tedious task.

> If there are any inventors out there, the ideal scanner would be about the size of the handheld scanners I’ve seen used at the checkout register in some stores. The scanner would have a one inch by one inch reading window that would be placed against the surface of the hat. The user would push a button or pull a “trigger” and the scanner would scan the rows of weave both horizontally and vertically. The LED readout would report that the hat is 23-27-621.

> Call me when you have my scanner ready.

http://www.brentblack.com/pages/panamahatgrades2.html
It's more than that. Tesla doesn't report with GAAP numbers, so they do stuff like exclude expenses and overbook revenues.

For example: (From: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-19/tesla-when-just-gaa... )

"Here’s how it worked. In April, Tesla started a new financing program under which customers have the option to sell their vehicles back to the company after three years for guaranteed minimum amounts. The accounting rules say Tesla can’t recognize all of the revenue immediately in those instances and must account for such transactions as leases. So after Tesla takes customers’ cash, it records liabilities for “deferred revenue” and “resale value guarantee” on its balance sheet."

They are a cool company, but figuring out how they are doing is non-trivial.
Yeah. I heard this 13 years ago too.
http://shirky.com/writings/domain_names.html
Ok, we s/on/for/'d it.