skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Kodak, Bill Gates and efficient markets
Ahh, you see, somewhere along the line it stopped being at all about the redress of grievances.
Im sure that the military is curious about chain reactions and things like that.
Why does this require asynchronous GA and jQuery in the head?

When a browser hits a script tag it waits (blocks) while it downloads the script and evaluates it. As such, including a bigger library like jQuery in the <head> will slow your perceived page load time significantly, so moving such includes to just before </body> is often a best practice. This way the browser can go ahead and render the page, and add the Javascript once its done.

However, this introduces the possibility that the user will see and click a link before the Javascript (on which the event tracking depends) has loaded. In this case Google Analytics will not track the event.

So by adding the Javascript includes to <head> he's forcing the browser to have Google Analytics running before the page is rendered, ensuring that this can't happen (at the expense of page load time).

I would not recommend taking this advice. As Travis pointed out, the event binding can easily be written without jQuery, giving the best of both worlds.

However, its a good article and this has little to do with the central point.
Global Buzz: Why TV Show 『Fated to Love You' Is an Obsession in Taiwan
Ask HN: Best corporate caterers in the Bay Area?
I could certainly get on Yelp and Google for this, but wanted to get the opinions of the community. Given a (star_rating, num_employees, num_meals_per_week) triple, what's the corresponding unit price range (i.e. $/(meal * employee)) for a subscription service?

Ideally we could crowdsource a table like this:

| User | Caterer | Nstars | Nemployees | Nmeals | $/unit |
|------|---------|--------|------------|--------|--------|
| asdf | Foo | 5 | 20 | 10 | 11 |
| jkl | Bar | 4 | 100 | 21 | 7 |

If you returned info on your caterer as a row in this form (anonymizing as necessary) we'd have some structured data!
Doesn't work in FF2.0 (unsurprisingly).

BTW: a nice thing about xkcd's drawing is that the heads are slightly off-circular, to imply direction, tilt of head, and some cases even expression.
Enterprise Rent-A-Car vs. Zipcar
"one of the richest, most productive states sends most of its revenue to DC where it is spent on wars and bailouts."

This argument is pretty disingenuous. California is a huge beneficiary of defense spending and tax dollars [1] in general and California, San Francisco in particular is a huge beneficiary of federal bail out dollars.

[1] http://www.nationalpriorities.org/publications/what_came_to_... Notice table 4 shows Southern California received nearly 2 dollars for every dollar it's residents paid in taxes in 2005. Also notice that California is the number one recipient in defense related contracts by dollar amount. California isn't the most productive state in terms of tax dollars per capita either in fact it looks like they rank near the bottom in the amount of federal tax paid per capita.
Drat. If the earlier rumors I had heard were true (unlocked phone for $199), I was thinking they were committing to a smart strategy to decimate Nokia and their N900 phone. Guess that's not the case.
You could make the whole 'a > 0 => increment' thing even cleaner than the first example:

let a = (if a > 0 then a + 1 else a)
in #something or other
That'd be a more reasonable argument if say Californians' taxes were used to fund the progressive policies of other states (though it is true that Californians get something like 80 cents per dollar sent to Washington). Californians however at an individual level are subject to the same federal tax rules as people in other states (and if they were poorer I'm sure the pendulum would swing the other way).

This being the case, it is even more remarkable the financial straits that California finds itself in. It has some of the biggest advantages geographically and started with and still generally has a wealthy and high income tax base.

The state of California also chooses to tax well above that of other states - stats here: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/15.html - and still manages to run a massive deficit.
No - radioactivity/nuclear reactions are properties of the nucleus of an atom, whereas the chemical properties mimicked by these "superatoms" are the result of their outer electrons.
Consumer protection
Submit your consumer related queries and experiences that you are going through and get advice on how to go about the issue. Find out what other have done in the same situation and their outcome.
> Why is balancing a budget important?

Is this a serious question?

> If it is, then why focus on one state's budget when the Federal deficit is massive and orders of magnitude more costly to the nation (and to California) than California's own state budget issues?

Yes, we're going to feel that pain at some point too, and it will hurt orders of magnitude more than California failed budget pain.

> Also, if even 10% of the money sent to DC were used to cover CA's expenses, there would be no budget problem.

It doesn't matter how much money you take in if you spend more than that amount of money. When an organization is consistently over their budget, the solution is more complicated than "get more money".
Why is tax dollars per capita a remotely relevant measurement? California is the 5th largest economy in the world and it generates tremendous revenues for the Federal government from businesses and individuals.

Also, your argument is self-contradictory since if you care about per-capita spending, California ranks very low in per-capita spending on DoD contracts.
I love textmate's subtle and predictable completion. No abnoxious popup menu, it also forces you to learn and focus on the page to predict the popup.

apt-get completion in ubuntu

firebug's command history
Wouldn't the best policy be to run a surplus during boom times and save that money for times like this?
There's another design approach, taken by Eiffel - not allowing overloading at all. Bertrand Meyer's arguments are that it's of relatively little use, compared to the cost (i.e. the kind of complexity you're describing), that it can get in the way of multiple inheritance and that genericity is a better tool for the sort of thing overloading is often used for. There's a section in OOSC about it (then again, there's a section in OOSC about more or less everything).
This is interesting, but it seems so simple that if it actually works (ie if you can actually substitute tungsten carbide for platinum or zirconium monoxide for palladium), it's quite surprising that no-one has noticed this before.
California state taxes are a small fraction of what most California residents pay in overall taxes.

Plus, because of California's high cost of living, a worker in California is paid more to do the same work as in another state, yet falls in a higher federal tax bracket and so pays thousands more per year in Federal taxes for doing the same work and experiencing the same standard of living as a citizen of another state.
I asked the first question rhetorically. I think it's sort of silly for anyone (in any state) to critique California's budget when the Federal budget problems will cause much more pain to Californians than state budget problems.

I think it's generally California bashing... probably fueled mostly by culture warriors.

This is not to say that California has no problems, but I think it's fairly absurd to focus on them when we have such massive Federal problems.
Only a finite amount can be pooled on a plane though. So instead of possibly losing 100% of your shipment if you are one lone cartel flying your cocaine to the US and it is shot down, you can now only lose 10% of your shipment.

This could be one of many reasons why VCs team up and do deals together.
It would be nice if you spent some time explaining why you believe selling at $199 would be "smart". Google already gives too many things away for free. Selling a phone that might be able to compete with the iPhone at $199 almost certainly means selling at a loss. To what end? I can't imagine that search queries can make up for the remaining $100 or $200 that it costs to manufacture the phone. Unless you believe "decimating Nokia" is an end itself, I'm curious why you think it would be a smart move.
Which architectures are those? And this is a FreeBSD announcement, which has a much more limited port list than NetBSD.
I was excited about the rumored $99 pricing. This is a huge disappointment.
Florida Advertising agency | Florida Advertising agencies
The Darwin Agency, a full service marketing agency and advertising agencies with locations in Florida, south florida, denver and Colorado.
The very highest level of the Disagreement Hierarchy, of course, is DHH:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetargon/127984254/
Why are phones so bloody expensive? The iPod Touch can be had for $200ish, so why does adding the "phone part" double the cost? (full disclosure: I'm on the iPod Touch curmudgeon phone plan -- I pay Skype $3/mo for outgoing calls and insist that incoming callers leave voicemail, which is emailed to me through Google Voice.)
Sure the cost of living might be higher, but the opportunity for making money is also higher - or that's how it's supposed to work. One of the problems in California is that the benefits are now beginning to under weigh the costs which is why you have a outflow of migration towards surrounding states like Texas. Many of the problems are now structural like higher state and municipal taxes - so that despite getting ever fewer benefits, taxes are ever increasing.
If this paper weren't biased, it would mention the chief source of evidence in favor of the idea that smoking damages your lungs: Men who smoke die of lung cancer at 23 times the rate of nonsmokers.

Now, that may not be from a randomized trial. But nonetheless, I think that's an important explanandum. See Judea Pearl's Causality if you don't think it's possible to get important data off of mere observational studies.

It just seems really unlikely that, you know, future lung cancer would cause people to start smoking now, or that some common cause makes people decide to start inhaling carcinogens and tar and then causes them to get lung cancer later at 23 times the base rate.

But if anyone actually believes that, we can get a group of 1000 of them together and have 500 of them start smoking with proper random assignment, and see what happens.
Check out http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1006808
What did you use to interact with Heroku? As far as I know, there isn't a public API...
Vowpal Wabbit: fast, scalable, useful learning algorithm
Well there's the phone part. The GPS. The camera. It costs $99 subsidized, and if I'm not mistaken you can get out of a contract for $200, so that's $300 right?
My latest flash game, Robokill 2
The last version of this, Robokill, got a great response here so I thought I'd post the sequel as well. We've redone pretty much everything, resulting in what I think is a much stronger product. Love to know what everyone thinks!

Last thread was here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=218322

Shot 1: http://www.rocksolidarcade.com/static/robokill2/shot1.jpg
Shot 2: http://www.rocksolidarcade.com/static/robokill2/shot2.jpg
Shot 3: http://www.rocksolidarcade.com/static/robokill2/shot3.jpg
Tax dollars per capita is relevant because one of your arguments was that people in CA are more "productive" than any other state. If earnings is a measure of productivity and taxes are a reflection of earnings then lower per capita taxes paid is indicative of lower productivity.

It's not contradictory. It follows that if you put the least in per person it's only fair that you get the least out. But, in fact they get about 2 times out what they pay in if those numbers are correct so really I'd say its your argument that is just based on emotion and not backed up by any facts.

Yes California pays a lot of tax in total because it is the largest in population not because there is anything inherently special about it's culture, population, or economy, compared to the rest of the country.
You were disappointed by a lie?
http://www.isuppli.com/News/Pages/iPhone-3G-S-Carries-178-96...
It's not the "phone part", it's the size. They're packing a phone, various hardware components, a CPU, storage, a bright screen, and a battery to power the whole thing into a tiny package. I'm surprised it's only $529 unsubsidized.
Archway
Archway can help you reduce printing, production & shipping costs through order fulfillment services.
The various ways of taking screenshots in OS X. Something I do nearly every day and am amazed at just how much thought and refinement went into the process.
thanks! @banjiewen
2 guys + 6 cups of coffee + 12 hours = 1 iPhone app
Cross-domain privacy vulnerability using CSS, in all browsers
Google has a lot more at stake than just profits from this particular phone. They are interested in establishing the Android platform as a major player on smart phone devices, and are coming into the game with a pretty weak position given Apple's current dominance. To be able to make headway into the market they need every advantage they can get, and neutralizing Nokia's N900 offering would help prevent another player from complicating the market for them.

Not to mention at that price they'd be dealing Apple a major blow. I figure they have the cash, why not use it for something like this. I admit this is all idle speculation on my part, and that Google may or may not have a lot at stake in the success of Andriod.
You seem to be conflating the individual statistics and aggregate statistics to suit your argument.

Because of California's high cost of living, a worker in California will make a higher income (but live at the same standard of living) as a worker in another state. This results in the worker paying higher Federal taxes and (often) more Social Security taxes than the equivalent worker in another state (both of which drastically outweigh the amount paid in state taxes -- state and municipal taxes cover most of the ways that people interact with government).

All of these are somewhat tangential points... The bottom line is that California's own budget woes pale in comparison to the massive Federal deficit (which we know will certainly result in drastic cuts to Federal entitlements and increases in Federal taxes in the future).
The $199 was never the attraction for me, and seemed unlikely. $300? Ehh... Maybe. I always figured it'd land in the $500 range, and this isn't too far off.

The real carrot for me was the idea of a prepaid $29/mo data only plan, which I actually thought was believable. T-Mobile already offers pretty much the exact same plan ($1/day) for prepaid Sidekick users (voice is 0.15/min.) I barely use voice (~100 minutes/mo), and if I could drop my unlimited text/internet/450 voice plan for something that was only $29, I could definitely learn to live with the quirks of VOIP on a mobile handset and the loss of MMS.

Honestly, even if you threw me in a contract to get the phone at $199, as long as data was that cheap I'd gladly sign up for two years the same minute I was sending Verizon their $350 good-bye letter.

I don't use my phone as a phone and am sick of having to pay so much for minutes I just don't use. The cost of my voice plan before data and text is around $40/mo, which works out to me paying .40/minute for what I use. Even if I used real voice instead of Google Voice I'd be saving money.
All of the other rumors about google products/services have turned out to be true, so I felt a bit more inclined to believe this one than I typically would.

Also, I would really respect Google for using some of its billions of dollars to subsidize the phone to the $99 price point and take tons of market share (thus creating a huge incentive for app developers).

Sadly Google seems content to release just another phone.
Disappointed by it being a lie. This is why rumors can be a bad thing for upcoming products: overhyping leads to disappointment with what otherwise might have seemed a solid offering.
Looks like kw_ has to pay up on his bet with michaelkeenan http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=997078
Google is missing an opportunity here. This device, sold at or near cost, could have been an iPod Touch competitor. That would have been a huge boost to the Android Market. It seems the iPod Touch is outselling the iPhone these days by a pretty good clip -- at least according to holiday App Store downloads:

http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2009/12/28/flurry-app-store-sees...
Holiday doodles ala Google
If I buy the unlocked phone can I use it with AT&t (or any other GSM carrier)?
I've had nothing but great experiences with Enterprise. Then again it sounds like the author is very picky about his vehicles.
The Wire premiered in 2002, and the New Day Coop (what you refer to with the hotel conference rooms) really started around Seasons 2 and 3 (2003 and 2004).

So why did this idea take five years to reach the streets then?

I think this theory is a little too cute to be true.
"using some of its billions of dollars to subsidize the phone to the $99 price point"

easy to suggest when it is not your billions of dollars being thrown away ;-)

"This device, sold at or near cost, " (as jsz0 suggests) is a more reasonable strategy, since (a) Google's main revenue streams are not affected (probably enhanced) and (b) Apple and Nokia can't compete without reducing their profit.

That said, I think Google is a sufficiently big company now to have mediocre middle managers who'd scuttle such "radical" ideas.
I would also assume that less flights overall equals a lower amount of shot-down planes.
I concede that CA has higher state taxes, but I don't see why this is particularly relevant when I and most Californians pay a massive chunk of our income to the Federal government, which spends the money frivolously and doesn't even have a balanced budget.

California could add a few percent to state income taxes and inconvenience its residents minimally in comparison with the high rates of Federal taxation Californians experience (due to higher cost of living).

It's just so far out of proportion that I consider it absurd to spend much time worrying about California's budget.
On a sunny weekend:

Enterprise - you call, make a reservation, get a car.

Zipcar - you've get a choice of 0 (zero) available cars within walking distance from your apartment.

That's how two first weekends of being a Zipcar member went for me. I cancelled my membership without ever seeing a Zipcar.
S3 Versioning Beta
It's going to box them into objects, which will cause it to return false.

object i = 0; //object, so we will cause no boxing
Object.ReferenceEquals(i, i);//now refering to the same objects, returns true;
How Googlebot views your site
Not that I have much love for Enterprise, but I think this is a pretty biased review.

* Claiming Enterprise locations are in bad parts of town may be true where you live. There's one a block from me, in a very nice part of town.

* Leaving out the fact that Zipcar requires an application to join (which takes days to process).

* Zipcar requires a $50 annual membership + $25 per family member

* A spotless driving record and that you've had your license for over 1 year.

* Enterprise is cheaper in many cases (always if you have your own insurance that covers a rental).

Zipcar seems like a cool little company, and I hope they destroy Enterprise. Right now they're a bit lame in a few areas.
I love ZipCar, but the author doesn't mention the difference in price between the two services. Zipcar costs $8-10 per hour and $66-101 per day depending on the car and your plan. You can often rent cars from normal car rental agencies for $20 a day (though with fees it ends up being 40).

One thing he didn't mention is that ZipCar is great for allowing multiple drivers. Any ZipCar member can drive any car, no matter who rented it.
Watch any old western :)
Zipcar is really a great concept, I've used it many times. That said, the author forgot to compare on one key segment: price. And that's where the companies differ in their model. Zipcar is about $75/day, where most rental cars are significantly less than that. But you cant rent them by the hour. And Zipcar wont come pick you up. And Zipcar charges a membership fee.

There is a place for both of these companies in the market, so a comparison like this is kind of like comparing chartered flights to Southwest. That's not to say the big nationals couldnt learn lessons from zipcar, like the audio jacks, reasonable insurance plans, etc.
Compulsory smoking in schools? Apparently yes, in the 1666 plague some schools like Eton made students smoke as a preventative. Huh. But the original post seemed to imply a broader requirement everywhere; this is all I found in a hasty googling.
Yes you can.
Stemware?
True, those are accurate points. I was just hoping for a really bold move. This does not seem to be all that bold (unless the $199 pricing is for people w/o "old" google accounts which might still leave room for the rumor to be true).
I suppose it depends on your use patterns, but I've usually taken advantage of Enterprise's 50%-off Friday-thru-Monday special, which works well when I need a nicer/larger car for a weekend. They've also fudged it for me a few times, so I've picked up a car Saturday and kept it at the weekend rate until Tuesday.

Also, between most major credit cards and most car insurance covering rental damage, many people don't need to pay for the damage waiver.

I could see how Zipcar would be great if you live in an area where a car is optional, but Enterprise has been fine for my limited rental needs.
When you factor in gas, Zipcar can easily be cheaper. If you live in SF, for instance, Zipcar is most likely the cheapest way to rent a car to go to Tahoe. On a trip last year my (Zip)car beat the other car by about $20 after all was said and done. So the $75/day can be misleading at times.

Also, unrelated, Zipcar allows members who are under 25, which makes it much more expensive to rent a car from a traditional place like Enterprise. Being currently under 25, this is a massive benefit.
Poor blog post but interesting topic. Sebastian Thrun of Stanford works (was working?) at Google. So they have the expertise to work on robotics if they want to.
Heroku has a rest api. The ruby gem is just a wrapper for it.
I don't know how useful Read Right will be since Apple doesn't make netbooks
About cracking GSM: 1479_26C3.Karsten.Nohl.GSM.pdf
The central plot of "All the Troubles of the World" is that Multivac was predicting who was going to murder whom. In terms of crime prediction the closest Google has come is mashing up maps and crime stats to show which areas of town are problematic. Unlike Multivac, Google has no interest in being a police officer. Whereas Multivac was built by the government, Google was built by a corporation.
Re: mobile payments, I'm assuming you've heard of companies like Zong, Paymo and Boku. It's a much better userxp than Paypal and much more accessible payment method for the under-21 crowd.
Somehow, I'd guess that the Googlebot is a little more sophisticated than just curl...
Why I Don’t Mind If TSA Employees See Me 'Naked'
Well yeah neither is good but you seemed to be arguing that because the federal government is doing something stupid California should be allowed to participate in the stupidity as well.
I don't miss Flash on my iPhone. There's nothing useful Flash can do that isn't better done with HTML 5 or a native app.
It looks like though if you want to use it on AT&T you'll be on EDGE until it is jailbroken. It has the proper frequency 3G chip in it but in the early testing it only connects to the 2.5G EDGE network so something with the AT&T 3G is disabled on it.

I'll be swapping from my BlackBerry Bold as soon as this gets fixed. Maybe I'm crazy for not wanting an iPhone since I'm already on AT&T and want to stay with them as a carrier but this looks like the first device I'm willing to switch to instead of a BlackBerry after making the swap a few years back from an Nokia N61.