skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I panicked slightly when I noticed that there were no documentation links visible. Luckily they're all still there at http://dev.mysql.com.
Oh, come on. You're just disagreeing for effect here.
I've never used Ruby but that snippet is clear as day.

The hell it is. I find it quite confusing. I'll take the Python 2 solution anyday, which clearly seperates what is called from when it is called. One of the main problems with the 'my language is so flexible' approach is that inventing concise solutions becomes a goal in itself.
I think you are wrong. I agree with you, in the sense that I would not feel comfortable doing this. "The gun is always loaded" is great rule, as is "Never point a gun at something you don't want to shoot". But it has its limits, and context is important.

Assume that you're a hostage negotiator, or someone in the police or military that otherwise expects to end up in a situation where someone is pointing a presumably loaded weapon at you at close range. I think there's a good argument to be made that you should train for this circumstance under the most realistic conditions you can muster, rather than hoping that your first live experience will go just the way it did on paper. If having a real gun pointed at you helps to simulate and train your real life response, this might be a good strategy.

Personally, as someone not in such a field, I'll spend the bulk of my efforts on figuring out how to avoid such situations. But for a professional training for a situation they expect to encounter, this is not 'play'.
So basically, no one besides political parties (and groups of people too small to make a difference, I suppose) should be permitted to advocate for or against political candidates?
Is something like this even possible? Can Windows physically tell a battery 'don't hold charge anymore'? Isn't it more likely laptop batteries are always going bad (and boy are they), but now it happens to be at around the same time as a Windows upgrade cycle? And how the hell is this [Confirmed]?
I hope this kind of thing illustrates the absurdity of democracy in general. For a company to have influence, it needs to accumulate money, which means it needs to make customers happy or convince investors that it can do so.

For a voter to have influence, they have to survive for eighteen years and then find their way to a polling place.
Surely this is a joke, or at least a publicity stunt...

"Now that democracy is truly for sale, Murray Hill Incorporated are offering top dollar..."
Why the strong reaction against advertisements? Are they such a terribly efficient means of mind control that no collection of individuals banning together should be allowed to sponsor them?

If so, then why allow any advertisement at all?
The truth is an absolute defense.

(Yes, I know it's impolitic - and Chris does the same "all the people I know will be told" line - but as one of those crazy transparency > feelings people, it'd be my preferred outcome. I only spent one year on the VC side in my short career, but I'd have resigned if we ever even thought about pulling this stunt.)
I suppose my post was more inflammatory than necessary. I don't really have any problem with people who know what makes them happy and manage to achieve it. What I don't like to see in the community around me is people who have no desire to see the "big picture" or how they fit into it, trusting their senator/boss/etc. to do that for them. People seem to me to be lacking a concept that they are part of a bigger system, except when the media reminds them of the fact.
n=2 could also mean "Bison do harangue."
Why, when something becomes politically animated, do standards tend to be lowered?

HN is a community of very smart individuals and, when it comes to argument, has had several very good discussions about Paul Graham's piece on the merits of logical argument, entitled "How to Disagree" (http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html?)

The essence of that piece was as follows: "If we're all going to be disagreeing more, we should be careful to do it well. What does it mean to disagree well? Most readers can tell the difference between mere name-calling and a carefully reasoned refutation, but I think it would help to put names on the intermediate stages."

There followed a series of stages, ranked from low forms of argumentation such as name-calling, ad hominem attacks, etc. to high forms such as carefully reasoned refutations.

Now, if we were to classify the spirit of the implicit argument made by the idea that a corporation is running for Congress, it would amount to saying: "I can't believe that anyone would say that a corporation is a person and isn't it ridiculous to assume that an artificial construct of this type has rights - therefore, anyone who would say this is assumed to be a real idiot in believing that a 'person' of this type could run for office."

Though the "argument" is implicit and not cast as an express argument, the implied argument it does make ranks, I think, right at the bottom of Paul Graham's hierarchy, somewhere among the "name calling," "ad hominem," and "contradiction" categories (the latter, by the way, representing a form of argument where one simply sets forth a contradictory position without attempting to reason why it is valid, as for example, when one asserts "it is obviously unsupportable for someone to treat a corporation as a person.")

I know there is a certain level at which this is being treated as a joke, or more precisely as a clever jab at a disfavored position.

My question: how does jumping on to this bandwagon get reconciled with the normally high standards of argumentation and debate found here at HN?
Suckers Invest $50M In Glam Media
It's not just about diversifying, but about allowing the companies you invest in to make their own decisions.

I don't think anybody here would be happy about once of their investors trying to force them to delist themselves from google.
The fear of forking is a powerful psychological holdover from the pre-git era.
Stop Being an Idiot.
That's not a python, that's a milk snake. Feel free to downvote me for pointing that out.
a/b? Are you entering your sentences through a twitter client? 'Readability' looks like a handy tool but so is plain English.
Germany just seems bizarre. I've heard stories of forced union membership for high-level positions like engineers, low-level employees having voting rights on executives, exorbitantly lengthy vacations (with increased salary to make it easier to vacate), etc.
Scoble interview with FathomDB Founder (W08)
You don't say.
Complementary Iteration Loops: Product and Customer Development
Everybody seems to argue about this issue without ever referring to the text of the first amendment, which is what the majority of the Supreme Court based its decision on.

The first amendment says
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

To me, it seems pretty obvious that by passing McCain-Feingold, Congress had made a law "abridging the freedom of speech." It should not be surprising that it was ruled unconstitutional.
How is it going to haunt the VC if he doesn't name them?
Building a Lean Startup Presentation - Austin Lean Startup Meetup, Feb 2010
Quite right. Batteries die and sometimes they die prematurely so 100s of users - probably many thousands - will have battery problems at any point in time. I'm not saying the article isn't true, but anecdotal evidence doesn't mean very much. You'd need to do a comparison of x number of identical laptops, half running Windows 7 and half running something else.
Thats what you get when you divide 1/40 in the calculator and forget to move the decimal over.
I've been wanting to write about this, and this is as good a time as any: We have evolved this far, not in spite-of, but with the help of stupidity. You cannot have a successful company where everyone is exactly the same intellectual type.

What you call "stupidity" is often just a lack of curiousity - such people are the workers of society, the ones who don't get bored. Just because you belong to the "curious" caste does not mean you are better than the others, it just means you have a different role. If you had to do what the uncurious do you would have problems coping, because you would constantly get distracted.

Stupidity is not an insult. It's an attribute - and a large part of our evolutionary success is built on this specialisation of humans into the different intellectual roles.
I don't know off hand how to do it using a vim selection, but you can use screen selections. ^a, [, then navigation keys and space to select, ^a, ] to paste.
yup, i hope this encourages other universities to invest in opening up their resources too. it doesn't at all dilute their 'brand', and it helps spread free education to people across the world who can't afford to attend in person
The second sentence is implied: "Be stupid. Buy our products."
All using the same blog template is definitely not in the same ballpark as overriding default browser behavior with something that doesn't work.

It's not even the same sport..

Edit to respond to your revised comment that replaced its content with the title of your article (wow, way to be accepting of criticism, dude! When you do usability testing and a user finds a bug or complains about something, do you tell them they're an idiot, too?):

Even if it's a bug in Chrome's rendering engine, you have an IE7 specific stylesheet, assumedly to support the bugs in its CSS rendering engine. And considering IE7 usage is 11.7% while Chrome's is 10.8% [1], you've just alienated a fairly large portion of your potential readers.

[1] http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp (orderedlist's statistics may be different; being a usability-oriented blog, it probably has a higher portion of Chrome users than the general public)
Why would this be flagged/downvoted? Tufte says it better, says more about it, and gives awesome examples.
It isn't a joke. It's a very serious legal precedent that, if pushed hard enough, can go all the way to Supreme Court (which would most likely reject the case, letting the last decision stand). It is an excellent example of a serious issue with case-based law, as practiced within the U.S. It's a hack, and it's designed to demonstrate both the absurdity of the Supreme Court's decision when taken to a logical extreme, and the limitations of our legal system. It's also very clever. The fact that it is satirical in nature is only of cursory interest.
The wording of the post reminds me to the classic FUD/troll: "It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying". I just can't take anything worded like this seriously.
The Stupidest Country Lyrics Of All Time
Another way to state the implicit argument is "If corporations are considered persons with regards to free speech, then we must be consistent and afford them other rights, such as the ability to run for office." No name-calling necessary.

Although I consider that beside the point, since this company did more than just make an ad. They actually filed to take part in the Republican primary. Assuming they get denied, then that could set precedent for the limits of corporate person-hood.
First of all, the whole point of the company doing this is that coporations are persons according to the law. I know nothing of citizenship of corporations.

Second, I was replying to the poster talking about presidency, not to the company's bid for congress. The relevant bits for president are No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; The specific word being natural. The basis for corporations being granted personhood the same as a human being is the lack of the word natural in the relevant bits of the US constitution.
I posted our own usage data for these services:
http://blog.crowdvine.com/2009/10/16/twitter-auth-vs-faceboo...

The feeling I'm getting via my own anecdotal research of users behavior on our sites and from talking to people is that these are not major conveniences or site differentiators. The people I've talked to who seem most optimistic are looking for ways to make the experience more compelling than just saving the user from typing a password, for instance by auto-importing their contacts.
I find the type of salaries discussed here downright surreal. I live in Vancouver, BC which has some of the best 'quality of life' according to various random surveys. This translates into an median annual FAMILY income of ~$60k CAD and a median house price approaching 1 million CAD. My wife and I both work in tech, and both make more individually than the average family income, but not a whole lot more.

The salary range in Vancouver seems to top out around $150k, and that is uncommon. New grads can expect something between $50k and $80k. The intangibles definitely make a difference to expectations. I sacrifice both salary, and to some degree interesting work (at least at my day job) to live here.
Agreed that there are a small percentage of people who are professionals, for whom the risk of live practice is probably worth the risk, also considering the likelihood that they would have to deploy their skills in this way.

For the rest of us (and I didn't see anything to suggest that these two martial artists were practicing in a professional context), the likelihood of needing to deploy this skill in a real attack is small, and if you want to practice such a skill as self defence you should be doing it with a fake gun, or at most in a way described by novas0x2a's link to the Tueller drill.

To invoke a programming saying, "you ain't gonna need it."
Unfortunatly in this specific case, no, because as another person pointed out, the corporation in question is not yet 25 years old. The real question will be deferred until a corporation which meets all other requirements runs.
1. Most people objecting to this have a problem with large corporations effecting elections -- this ruling had nothing to do with that. They could easily put money in PACs to buy adverting. All McCain-Feingold did was limit the ability of small groups of people and small companies to do the same thing through mountains of red tape.

2. Companies do not have to seek profit at all costs, public corporations have a responsibility to shareholders, but even then there is great leeway in what they're allowed to do.
A company may be an entity and not a citizen, but how do you differentiate between GE and its spending through its subsidiaries to broadcast various views (or Fox for that matter) from other companies? This ruling seems to simply level the playing field with other companies (especially given the case on which the ruling was based). Just because corporations are allowed to spend money to broadcast a message doesn't make it convincing or effective - but why should they be denied the ability to broadcast a message?

From the article on the original ruling:
“When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought,” Justice Kennedy wrote. “This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.”
Why is there are google redirect for this submission? Is it so it will get the (google.com) in the title?
TEDxNASA talk featuring humanoid robotic soccer players, tripods, spiders & more
I wish someone would write an actual article on tmux and post it here, every time screen comes up I just here statements about the vague superiority of tmux.
Tmux solves a problem for me. Previously I was using a combination of Screen and dvtm (http://www.brain-dump.org/projects/dvtm/) to get the equivalent of multiple screens, each with their own splits. Screen can do splits but you can't maintain splits in one screen/tab and move to another screen with independent splits. It's hard to describe, but if you've used screen or dvtm you probably know what I mean. Tmux seems to have that built in. Awesome, thanks.
A Webs Life - Entertainment. Social Media. Random Nonsense.
For emacs users Tmux is far more intuitive, what with the bindings you expect doing what you expect. Binding C-space for begin selection in screen seemed to be impossible.
Dude, slide immobilized it will still go bang.
The name for the type of argument used in the linked article/video is reductio ad absurdum (or maybe ad ridiculum), and unlike ad homeneim, it is not inherently a fallacy.

I think there is real merit in challenging, even via theatre, the have-their-cake-and-eat-it-too role held by corporations, and the very real growth of corporate personhood interpretations of law.

(... An example of ad hominem might be your implication that, by holding the views in my prior sentence, I'm "jumping onto this bandwagon" and abandoning "high standards" ...)
A Difficult Distraction
Adobe's creative legacy & the proprietary aspirations of Apple & Google
This Engadget review has a screenshot, and mentions you can change both the SSID and password via a web interface:

http://mobile.engadget.com/2009/05/13/verizon-mifi-2200-revi...
Study links excessive Internet use to depression
X Prize CEO: 2010 NASA Budget Good for Space
Android has never been recognizably Linux -- their systems code is almost entirely written as if it were running on an early 80s UNIX and they had to invent all their own modern facilities. Not surprising considering that it was all done by the crew that developed the Sidekick, which was based on a heavily hacked NetBSD.

See Matthew Garret's appraisal of it: http://mjg59.livejournal.com/100221.html -- especially in contrast to his review of WebOS: http://mjg59.livejournal.com/111453.html
I mostly disagree with this based on my own observations. I don't know what age group they are talking about here, but I have a 5 and 7 yo. My 7 yo has problems with some of the boys in the neighborhood. They gang up and beat on him sometimes. It isn't because he doesn't understand social skills and he doesn't share. None of them share. They're all selfish. They're seven! If I were to judge, I'd say my son has the best social and verbal skills of all of them, but I'm probably biased. One of the boys that does most of the bullying can barely speak and has the worst social skills of all of them. The reason they pick on him is because he doesn't like to play sports with them and he isn't very good at sports. He also doesn't care to smash each other in the face with sticks. He'd rather play imaginary games outside or computer games inside or program the computer in MIT's Scratch IDE. The reason they isolate him is because he's different and there aren't any other kids like him the neighborhood. If there were 10 other 7-yo computer geeks in the neighborhood and one kid who liked football. The kid who liked football would be bullied and rejected. It's a numbers game.
how did you get the idea of connecting caste system to this ad? Do you know caste system is an almost a prehistoric sociological invention that has long been abandoned and forgotten - and for a good reason too. And yes, other than the so called "Curious" people - there are another kind of people who can't do a repetitive, boring job, criminals.
The Upside of the Financial Crisis
Loopt Will Donate $1 To Haiti For Select Check-ins This Week
Nice infographic, but I didn't even realize these were interactive until I hit the annual employment revisions one, and it didn't make sense without hitting "Show me".
The "Rube" comment was a joke, not a serious insult. If it genuinely offended you, I apologize.

On the other hand, if you're looking to be offended to prove a point about who is "flamier", you've succeeded.
In this context, it's not about curiosity but about following your feelings rather than your reason. Arguably you could say that it's 'stupid' to go off and found a risky internet start-up rather than be an employee at a large 'sensible' company or finishing that degree or whatever...but I think most risk-takers our outliers would prefer to think of themselves as passionate AND smart.

Like the OP, I really don't care for the subtle anti-intellectual vibe that equates stupidity with being more 'authentic' or 'real' or whatever. Then again, it is Diesel, who have always had weird advertising designed to seem edgy to the sort of people who buy $150 jeans at retail. I presume they're trying to tap into the disillusionment many feel about how the financial elite wrecked the economy despite all their 'smarts' (and here, I agree with the point you are making, Max).
I like "The Los Angelos Angels", which means "The The Angels Angels".
That's beautiful! It must be 20 years that I've been subconsciously bothered by that puzzle, because I couldn't understand what “more fun” was supposed to mean in that context. With ‘where’ in place of ‘while’ and “a better effect on the teacher” in place of “more fun”, it sudddenly makes sense.

Also, the linked article links to “List of linguistic example sentences” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguistic_example_sent...), which introduced me to a beautiful Mitch Hedberg quote:

> I haven't slept for ten days, because that would be too long.

and helped me remember a word that has been eluding me for some time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguistic_example_sent.... Thanks!
You don't have to "build" the data structure. You are using your native structures.
But the freedom of speech isn't absolute. It never has been and never will be. There are certain limits to it, and it's up to Congress to establish those limits. (It's also up to the SCOTUS to make sure Congress doesn't go too far).

In the decision, the question wasn't "does this prohibit the freedom of speech", it was "does a corporation have the freedom of speech" in the first place.

The argument could be reframed (based upon my limited reading of the decision) as "Does a person have the freedom to hear the speech of a corporation?". In this case, yes, they do. But they don't have to listen to it. And this is where I think there is still some play with McCain-Feingold in that perhaps it could be reworked to include a ban on corporations to use broadcast media w/in 30 days of an election. They could put up a website, print pamphlets, etc... but just not use a passive medium for their message.
No coke, pepsi
There are lots of serious implications stemming from the Court's recent decision and one doesn't have to look far to find a serious discussion of them, no matter how one views the merits of the issue. See, for example, this piece on how the "High Court Campaign Finance Opinion Roils Dozens of Cases" (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202441779559&High...).

Since the law has recognized corporations as "legal persons" for a couple of centuries at least, all without anyone even beginning to think that a corporation is a citizen entitled to vote and to run for office, I think there is a long-standing rationale for this position that its critics need to address before simply declaring the point to be absurd. This sort of stunt obviously fails to do this. And, far from demonstrating the absurdity of the Supreme Court's position taken to a logical extreme (to paraphrase your characterization), it does no more than take a straw man position out to a logical extreme and therefore illustrates nothing (at least nothing serious as far as law is concerned). It is, therefore, a low form of argumentation.

I understand that people feel passionately about it, and therefore appreciate a clever ploy that appears to make their point, but that is really my point: it is that very animated spirit that we can have about politics that allows us to lower standards and find acceptable in that context a way of arguing that we would axiomatically reject in another context.
I'm talking of castes like in ants : worker caste, soldier caste etc. Recently wrote a paper about this, so it seemed natural to me, I forgot it may be misunderstood.