skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Don't know about the last two, but some people would definitely benefit from learning table manners and fork etiquette.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_manners
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_utensil_etiquette
Node has actually had quite a few blocking API's, I'm not sure for how long, but there has for quite a while been a fs.*Sync, they're just undocumented, because their usage isn't recommended.
Cz jewelry
Huge selection of sterling silver cz jewelry includes sterling silver cz necklaces, cz rings, cz bracelets & cz pendants.
If this is true of flash, why is it not the same for Javascript. If suckerfish style menus can work on iphone, why would hover and clicks be handled differently?
Yes. Perian mostly includes ffmpeg decoders that plug into the OS X Component Manager.
Pseudo science as its best.
Among the many erroneous assumptions this makes is that the demand for software is not elastic or limited by the cost of development. In reality what would happen is that if code becomes cheaper companies will get more than they could before to automate increasingly larger aspects of their infrastructure, improve the quality of their current software, and make custom software more accesible to small businesses.

As the very same article says, custom software is more than 90% of all software out there. The cost of licenses for proprietary enterprise software like Oracle, AIX, SAP, etc. is dwarfed by the costs of consulting and customization to make those fit into existing infrastructures.

Programmers aren't going anywhere. If anything more people will need training, more computers will need fixing, and more experts will need to be called to fix the newbie's mistakes. Just because there are more programmers in general doesn't mean that the number of competent programmers will increase.
Study: Ages of social network users
Google is sticking it to Apple.
node is amazing and the community is non-stop.

http://www.howtonode.org

http://wiki.github.com/ry/node/node-users
Are dolphins sufficiently self-aware to deserve more ethical treatment?
I agree with #2 and #5, but I've seen plenty of examples that violate all the others. The first millionaire I came two degrees of separation from (friend of a friend) got rich in the first dot-com bubble by essentially selling a list of links to Yahoo. He had compiled a small website of about 5 static HTML pages, that was just a list of links to "resources in [niche]". It got popular and got a lot of traffic, so Yahoo bought it for multiple millions of dollars. He was not a genius, not hugely passionate about it, and not particularly well networked; I mean, it was just a list of links on a website that he occasionally updated.
Thanks for making this! Let me know if you want any help hacking on this. [username]@gmail.com
I'm always surprised when I hear people comment about facebook needing to a find a way to be profitable. It is like they are on cruise control and haven't bothered to check their assumptions.

It even applies to twitter. Twitter is likely making less than facebook, but is still likely profitable from search deals. Jokes about revenue don't really cut it.
never trust any Brazilian financial institution, they are lazy, bureaucratic and profit driven.

Do you mean that they have perverse incentives?
And it's typeset in Gill!

Did anyone who went to his Open Space session have a report?
hire people... I just had that problem... I couldn't finish any project, but I knwe how to do everything... I hired people, tell them how to work, micro manage them... and all I can say is that I'm quite successful...

Stop trying to do all by yourself... you are too valuable to spend time actually doing things...
Love or hate Gruber, it's hard to argue with his approach to advertising. A single Deck ad and weekly, NPR-style "brought to you by" posts give a distilled exposure to his advertisers completely unlike any ad-chocked site, placements that I'd imagine must command significantly more than banners that have to compete for attention with a wall of ads. The added benefit being that it doesn't look like a chaotic mess.

I wouldn't be surprised if a single ad on DF is only slightly cheaper than the entire wall of ads on a lot of similarly-ranked sites.
Sure, but who cares? There are a billion websites which use hover events, and the hover just doesn't do anything on the iPhone. The author acts like this is some kind of NP complete problem or something. It's at most minor revisions.
A lot of people make the mistake of thinking that Godel's result suggests a superiority of human over machine, or something of the sort. There is, however, no reason to believe humans aren't themselves subject to Godel's theorem. Formalizing knowledge into a simple elegant system is very difficult, but this isn't a matter for Godel.
Not 18 months ago I just finished reading "The Blind Watchmaker" and then he posted this article and the people who did this research are not 8818 miles from where I live. What are the chances of that happening?
"on a touchscreen, pointing at something without clicking isn’t a mouseover: it’s just holding your finger vaguely in the air"

Good point. Funny too.
How risky it is depends on how many people are paying for it. I'm guessing they're simply finding that that number is incredibly low. Anecdotal: I've never heard of it, and I use non-web-based products it competes with quite frequently, and also read this site and tons of blogs that cover this sort of stuff.

It's entirely possible they're transitioning to a freemium model and will make much more that way.
Wow. Ok, here goes.
Friedman's answer to Mackey is brilliant and exactly as how I expected it should be. I remember reading Friedman's "The Only responsibility of business is to increase its profit", which makes Mackey words here quite laughable.

Mackey does not realize that Whole Food may be putting the customers first, but this is done SOLELY because it would also benefit Whole Food in the first place. It is exactly as Friedman had already stated in his article. Businesses do contribute to the community, but the motive is not (and should not) be without the consideration of the investors.

Mackey keeps talking about "balancing responsibilities to stakeholders". Well, I'm sorry but that's disguising the fact that investors do and should always have higher priority. Sure, Whole Foods did well donating 5%, but imagine a scenario where Whole Foods did bad: donating 15% of its profit, and not getting many customers in return (in other words its disguised marketing fails).

Do you think Whole Foods would continue donating 15% until it goes out of business? Will Mackey be able to use his Whole Foods argument anymore?

1) "The most successful businesses put the customer first, instead of the investors" (which clearly means that this is the way to put the investors first).
I really really like this sentence, because it summarized my sentiment perfectly. How could you not see that? If it works for you, great. But you wouldn't be doing it if it doesn't work. Don't even pretend.

Mackey: "Making high profits is the means to the end of fulfilling Whole Foods' core business mission. We want to improve the health and well-being of everyone on the planet through higher-quality foods and better nutrition, and we can't fulfill this mission unless we are highly profitable."

Let's be serious. This is what Mackey wants people to think. What Whole Foods does, is "enhance the pleasure of SHOPPING for food", which I agree. Whole Foods does this well, with all the food literature in its store. It creates a false illusion that you're buying something more than just food (thus justifying its price). I have Michael Pollan's The Omnivore Dilemma next to me. If you read chapter 9 you'd have a different perspective of what Whole Foods is about (different from the one Mackey is advocating here).
"Current Flash sites could never be made work well on any touchscreen device, and this cannot be solved by Apple, Adobe, or magical new hardware."

I can think of a few easy fixes. A toggle button that makes touches count as hovers rather than clicks (easy). Hardware that detects a finger hovered near the screen (probably hard). Nobody caring because most things that occur on hover you can do without, and websurfing on even the best phone is so fraught with compromises and frustrating relative to a desktop that you really don't care (free).
Dolly, Rejection and Radiohead Journalism
Building a Better Mailbox - A Tale of Determination
They probably just have one publishing to the other automatically. Where tweet links are hosted is hardly something that most big companies care about.
From what I know of the issue, the technical problems with Flash are not difficult to solve. The fundamental problem seems to be that Adobe is not willing to put in the effort to make Flash work well on multiple platforms.
Lets fish out two hypothetical news items from a parallel universe where someone gives a shit. Contrast and compare:

"A browser plugin crashes and takes Safari with it, on this maliciously crafted file"

"A kernel module crashes and execution continues starting at byte 0xDEAD0101, with kernel-level privileges"
Good to hear.

However, I don't there was any need to justify the comment with an answer, or your parenting to the internet.
Clearly the scope of this article is limited to developing software for personal computers, which really aren't all that common (in a certain sense). See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microprocessor#Market_statistic...

BTW, this article is from 2003.
Eventually Consistency == Caching?
Spooks Seasons 1-7 Dvd Boxset
He did specifically mention Windows, though.

Actually, I've also noticed that Windows users maximize everything (maybe from the Win 3.1 days?). Having the dullness of empty app-space makes me feel that same way that living in a sea of concrete buildings does. Having my (dark) desktop image visible is a bit like Central Park for NYC.
Neither Facebook nor Twitter make the kind of money that's eventually expected of them. No one really knows if they ever will. No one doubts they can make the kind of money MySpace does, but can they ever make the kind of money Google does?
Can you explain why this cost money without revealing too much?
But axioms are by definition unsupported :)

Also, the universe does not follow mathematical rules. Mathematics, like Plato's Forms, only exist in our minds, and are simply attempts at categorizing our perceptions.
No experiment can verify the truth of any statement.
I bought a stolen laptop off ebay. Told paypal it was stolen and they gave me all the money back, just told me to keep the paperwork from sending it back to the owner incase the seller decided to object. I never heard from the seller.
Teach someone least squares - least squares learning tool
Why does 'self aware[ness]' have any effect on ethical or humane treatment?
50 caliber bullet impacts in slow motion
Same here. It's the little things. Like how menus don't have any elastic when you get to the end. I could never tell if I was at the end or if the phone froze. I'm looking forward to checking out the Desire. The hardware buttons plus Sense could be pretty nice.
Talk about a moving goal post. You don't need to make nearly as much as that to IPO.
We read the bug reports, I promise.
Actually, there was one nugget of truth in the article, and that was the _best_ way to determine if your operating system is low on memory, is to watch it's swapping activity. This is probably true across all operating systems, Linux, Solaris, etc..

An operating system will typically not swap out (or in) cache memory to disk, so, as long as you are exhibiting no swapping behavior, (And you have swap enabled) then you have enough memory. I think it was Adrian Cockroft, in fact, in "Sun Performance and Tuning: Sparc & Solaris" who in fact said that was _the_ way to determine if you have memory pressure on your operating system - run vmstat and watch the si and so column for activity.
Agreed. I think we're going back to this for online "television."

Some forward looking company is going to sponsor an entire run of premium content (something by Joss Whedon?) on a YouTube channel and even the major networks aren't going to be able to ignore it.

If done correctly (not intrusive), it even mitigates the need for torrents. Just stream it legally.
I care. Personally, I would rather that something not work right off the bat, then think it will work, only to find out that it won't actually work, that by design, that if it was to be released right now, it would be impossible for it to work on the device that I'm on a decent portion of the time.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that the problem can't be solved. I'm just questioning the wisdom of solving it, in the first place. Or maybe how well the solution will work. But, not the solvability of the problem itself - especially if a few smart people are thrown at the problem.

This might be the part of me that likes my nice and pretty Mac-specific software, but, I don't see anything wrong with software that targets one specific platform. And for Adobe, with Flash, that platform looks like it should be the desktop, not the mobile web.
Two 4000 ft plumb bobs hung down a mine shaft, with baffling results (1901)
Gotta admit "Herpes Bomb" was a great hook. Somebody earned their A+ in high school journalism.
I think you are right - more programmers will drive more demand for programming, not just lower wages.
> "Now computer literacy is widespread enough, and basic programming tools have gotten easy enough to use, that the ability "to write a program" is no longer in short supply, and with the Internet at our fingertips we all have the combined output of the whole world's supply of programming talent available to us, not just programmers in our own city, state or country."

On the contrary. I wish it were. Notice Apple's efforts to streamline the UI on all of its devices so that any idiot could use them without a problem. The computer literacy goes only so far as operating a GUI application, not anywhere toward the more important underlying theories of computer programming.
Starving artist is not a good analogy. Software is a trade that provides economic benefit to the recipient, rather than purely entertainment.

Better analogies would be to an architect, general contractor, plumber, or mechanic. Anyone can do these jobs with proper training. They don't live off repeated sales of single pieces of intellectual property. And they all make reliable livings (though few of them become millionaires).
Titanic men took boat, left women (New York Times, May 11, 1912)
Here is a prior thread in which I asked essentially the same question, from which quite a lively discussion ensued: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1029406.

On reflection, I think I see the legal angle here (which I did not in the prior thread). Activist groups have long looked for a hook by which to bring class actions against those whom they see as perpetrators of wrongs that they wish to stop. In this case, it is commercial tuna fishermen. However, the courts have denied them the right to sue on behalf of the dolphins (which are accidentally killed in the course of industrial tuna fishing) on grounds that dolphins aren't human beings and therefore do not have 'standing' to sue. This means that the activist groups also cannot bring class actions in the name of the dolphins. Of course, if the dolphins are 'self-aware,' then they arguably can be treated in a special way by the courts - as 'non-human humans' - and be given the right to sue. The research is being cast as disinterested science, but I believe it may be motivated by this extra-scientific goal and that is why it is routinely presented along with arguments for better ethical treatment of the dolphins. In essence, the bottom line will be this: better ethical treatment = enforceable legal rights (i.e., enforceable by activist groups suing tuna fisherman in federal court once a court recognizes their right to bring such suits on behalf of a 'self-aware' species that now should have 'standing' to sue).

As I have come to see this in such a light, I believe the science here may be authentic but it may equally be agenda-driven, potentially making its findings suspect. I leave that to those who understand the scientific issues (I do not) but it does need to be evaluated in light of this background motive and its implications.
Does anyone trust PayPal at all anymore? If you have ever needed technical support from them you'll learn to hate them immediately. I once spent 2 days trying to talk to a real human about deductions from my checking account that had no corresponding line item in paypal. I finally got a human who said he'd call me back, and never did.

I eventually got it sorted, months later. Eff paypal.
Funny that there's no mention whatsoever in the article of Wikipedia's co-founder, Larry Sanger. I'd be surprised if Wales even mentioned Sanger in the talk itself.
Also, Google didn't make the kind of money that Google does when it IPO'd. Companies' revenue numbers don't stay static forever. (Or if they do, the company is likely dying.)
Maybe that's because of how Indonesia dealt with journalists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balibo_Five
As long as people can put it in context.

To a software person who's given AI some thought, the holes in Searle's argument are glaring. I had a very awkward conversation in college with a philosophy student who had just been taught it and was taking it very seriously; I guess they have a lot of reverence for Great Thinkers who hand down Deep Insights, whereas to me this guy Searle sounded like an imbecile.

Despite my initial horror at someone's taking the Chinese Room argument at face value, I realize it raises interesting questions about the chasm between AI's starting point (e.g. playing chess with S-expressions) and real human-like intelligence. I think we have more perspective on the problem these days for countless reasons -- work on understanding how subsystems in the brain work, being able to build or simulate neuron-like systems, applying powerful computers to a wide variety of problems.

The big questions that remain are ones like whether a human brain can be simulated; how brain-like a machine would have to be to "understand" things -- self-aware? neural-network-like? embodied? -- and to what extent constructs like language reflect deep structure of the mind (i.e. human firmware we have to reverse engineer and duplicate) rather than universal logical constructs.
couldn't agree more with the views expressed in both articles.
Essay On Why Software Patents Are The Problem
Some forward looking company is going to sponsor an entire run of premium content (something by Joss Whedon?) on a YouTube channel and even the major networks aren't going to be able to ignore it.

Wasn't this already done by Joss, with Dr. Horrible?
Bill Gates at TED 2010 (Video)
As a side note...his slides are awesome!
uhh... actually that is covered:

"A) The best case: every Flash app on every site is re-thought by its designers and re-coded by its programmers (if they’re even still available), just for touchscreens. They wouldn’t use mouseovers any more—or else they’d have dual versions of all Flash content, so that mouse users could still benefit from the mouseovers they are used to. That’s a ton of work across the Web, for thousands of parties, and just isn’t going to happen. Plus, with many sites, mouseovers are so fundamental that the very concept of the site would be altered, creating a whole different experience that would annoy and confuse the site’s existing users. (And would this be any easier than simply re-designing without Flash at all? Not always.)"
How mathematical modeling may lead to predictive police work
I think for a blog of that size it's not that monetized. I mean, if he would, he could make much more money. I remember steva pavlina making 30,000/month from his website in 2006, which had less than 1 third of Gruber's subscribers.
Breeding the million-dollar-cow
I can't stand maximized windows. Everything ends up being justified to the left edge of the monitor, which means I have to turn my head and not be looking straight ahead when I'm working. Bad ergonomics, bad for my neck.

I have whichever window I'm using centered, and various folders that I frequently access peeking out on the sides of the main window. Really, the only time I ever maximize a window is when I'm viewing video, or if I'm on my laptop where the LCD is much smaller than my desktop LCD.
RHIC Collider Creates Quark-Gluon Plasma at 4,000,000,000,000 Degrees Celsius
Chaitin's constant is also quite underappreciated.
Disposing of Radioactive Waste in Volcanoes?
I think the sheer number of helpful responses this post has received indicate the absolute value in the Hacker News community. If you are reading this or have commented here, I respect you -- me and you are a part of a great community.

In regards to this post, I can connect with you, kksm. You are certainly not alone, it's common to find yourself overwhelmed, especially if you, like myself, are ambitious and love to take advantage of opportunities.

Unfortunately, the downside to this type of ambition is that along with a few great things you make take up, you often take up many "bad" things. By "bad" "things" I mean tasks or projects that you are not motivated to do, or as others here have described, "do not align with your life goals and motives."

I want to repeat JustOnce's suggestion, diligence is critical. Diligence is the mother of success. Look at all of the responses on here--it is evidence that what you are trying to resolve is an issue many people deal with.

Good luck, and don't ever give up. Divide and conquer. Fight for what you love, it is my guess that you are not stupid or lacking any passion in what you do. You may simply be taking on more than you can chew.
No, you're right. There wasn't, and I probably shouldn't have justified it with a response. Normally, it wouldn't bother me but tonight, for some reason, it struck a nerve. Thanks.
Wanted: System That Automatically Gauges Who Can Be Trusted
this sort of story illustrates what a wikipedia type repository of knowledge misses. wikipedia will typically have the most up to date explanation of an event or phenomena, but it can be very illuminating to see past wrong explanations and the people and situations which gave rise to those incorrect explanations. this is even more valuable on topics where heavy revisionism has made it difficult to discern why the current explanation is accepted.
The Brazilian banking system is actually pretty good. That's not to say that some banks are bad. State-owned banks are usually like you describe, but private banks usually work very well. Bear in mind also that in Brazil financial institutions are the ones who invest the most on IT, by far.

After two years living in the U.S and having banks charging you outrageous fees for the most idiotic reasons, or having transactions taking almost one week to be completed, I can confidently say the Brazilian system has is pretty much first-class.