skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A favorite productivity hack: if you've got a project that you know how to finish and estimate it'll take an hour or less, instead of finishing it at the end of the day, save it til morning so you can start off productive.

This fits well with their #2 and #9 (plan tomorrow, and start tomorrow with your plan), and as a bonus, helps keep you from getting stuck on e-mail or social networking sites (#7,8).
Can someone point the foundation paper for their technology? I've Googled some of their scientists, and most of them are working on neural related area (some work on sparse coding, I guess that is remotely related to this).
Anyone use text-link-ads.com?

Given they don't nofollow links, will this damage them significantly?
Steve Ballmer Talks Strategy, Ushers Microsoft into the Cloud Era
The problem is, society as a whole is concerned with the outcome less than the path taken their. If you are able to get an honest A, does it matter that you didn't have to study? If your client asks for X, Y, but not Z, then you give him X and Y, and get paid and move on. After all, you don't want to spend your life working.

Life is about goals in so many ways that for many it's hard to avoid getting there as quickly and efficiently as possible.
This insight reminds me of Scott Aaronson's list of 'Malthusianisms':

http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=418

On the other hand, this style of thinking has some risk of demotivation. It collapses varied results into a static judgment prone to a 'fixed mindset': no matter the inputs of intellect/talent/effort, the end result is you hit a limit. So smile at the insight but remember which limit you hit still matters. The deeper snow is more fun.
Anyone have a working URL?
A rationalization means to come up with reasons to support a belief, idea or action that one knows (or could know) is not actually rational. It is a form of dishonesty mimicking rationality. The issue with smart people is not that they rationalize (i.e. are dishonest) but they are able to come up with sincere reasons, often very convincing reasons, for their beliefs. This makes it very difficult to get them to question their premises.
Local affiliate marketing in general.
While I hesitate to call myself gifted I can recognize some of that. I never really studied in high school, the only homework I ever did was hand ins. University came as a bit of a shock really, and taliking to friends, I know I'm not alone in this. I really wish they had done a bit more to prepare us for higher education, and I suspect dropout rates would go down if they did.
Researchers find way to zap RSA security scheme
I've basically stopped reading books, and have gone 100% audio books. I listen in my car, in bed, while going jogging. I love it, although I imagine it's not for everyone.
Isn't hindsight grand. I never had to study, take notes (or write anything down for that matter), or do homework to get through highschool. College wasn't too difficult, but it was too much of the same, and I couldn't keep with the grind.

> "For some people, that's an obstacle they never overcome."

It's amazingly difficult to create these habits. I often struggle with large projects, where it's impossible to keep it all in my head. The urge to take notes happens too late, or I don't know what to take or how to take it.

A recent project where I'm learning a new codebase and language simultaneously is forcing me to reevaluate how I work. It's almost more than I can mentally handle at once, and even still, I'm brute-forcing it by internalizing everything. I'm taking notes here and there when I think of it, trying different methods; wikis, textfiles, carrying a notepad; but it's slow going.

Parents, teachers, mentors - do your best to make sure your kids are challenged. Praise them for succeeding, but don't let them ride that success through life, because it does end.
I think they do. I am getting different labels for the same thing quite frequently.
I love that Linus did what brilliant people do, which is modify the world to better fit how they want to work. I'm sure he modified his own practices somewhat, but he also modified the world by creating Git to enable his preferred workflow.
Now you read the research.
Conserve your best thinking for emergency use only? (Something about that seems wrong, even though the systematic logic of leaving a tolerance for error is sound.)
How to Use Geolocation in Chrome Browser
I think you and the previous commenter have mistaken "note taking at all" with what I actually said, which was "note taking intensity."
Games reinventing music distribution: the Rock Band Network opens
> [...] should preferably be given in Amp-hours or kWh [..]

How about Joule?
How To SUCCEED BY BEING COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC
IO Data is latest company to pay Microsoft for supposed "Linux patents"
there's a lot of words in this article without anything really noteworthy being said
text-link-ads.com is already penalized in google search.
Transparency: America's Wealthiest Religions - Transparency - GOOD
Can We Kick Our Keyboard Addiction by 2013?
Original Meaning of the Second Amendment
Or alternatively: this was 10 years ago, and the kernel is vastly more complicated now than it was then, running on hardware of a sophistication most of us scarcely imagined. And yet the kernel development model really hasn't changed much.

It may be that ESR was especially humble and constructive in that post. But honestly, I'd argue he was also objectively wrong.
Seems pretty clear that it was worth it. The actual bill was closer to $250,000 -- $618,000 was without any discounts.

We work and save and pay premiums for decades specifically so that we CAN have someone pay $250,000 to extend our lives by 17 months. That is the PURPOSE of a health insurance policy.

It's hard to see this one as an example of our (admittedly terrible) healthcare costs.
Clojure has a leg up over most Lisps for another reason: the people that know Clojure well and participate in its community are not complete douchewieners, and they're willing to accept that everyone has different needs and backgrounds. They actually want people to try Clojure out (even if they were - gasp! - Java programmers!), rather than making the assumption that anyone that doesn't already worship their language as The One True Holy Solution-To-Everything Language is a moron.

To hear the more vocal Common Lispers tell it, even people that code Clojure are retarded code apes that need to be lectured on why they're stupid for not using a Real Lisp, more deserving of scorn than encouragement or support. Haskell's community is not nearly as bad (Common Lisp's userbase has become one of the most bitter, self-important cesspools of snobbery the programming world has ever seen, and Haskell is far too active and useful to foster such degeneracy), but there's always that pervasive scent of "If you're not already using Haskell, you're cheating, and it's clearly because you're dumber than I am."

Then again, the Haskell folks piss me off for other reasons - after studying such things in the context of real math, it's infuriating to be talked down to by people that just "got" monads and think that their shallow grasp of the concept entitles them to wield Genius Points over everyone else's heads. I suspect this is just a small but vocal sub-population in Haskell-land, but it's a really annoying one that seriously turns me off from the language...
Impressive fundraising in the tech community - let's hear it for New York
> Imagine if people told Plato he couldn't write about philosophy because he didn't go to harvard and get a degree in philosophy. Or tell galileo that he was wrong because he didn't have a degree in astronomy.

Very interestingly, your examples only add to my point. Plato didn't had a degree in philosophy because philosophy was just being "invented"; Socrates (his master, btw) had just brought rigor to the sophists blabering. And Galileo didn't get a degree in astronomy mostly because it didn't exist by then. He did however get one in mathematics and tought astronomy in a university before he made his observations to support Copernicus' model. You see, both men where very far from amateurs giving opinions in a complex field.

> Valid scientific investigations don't require scientific training.

Bulshit. Most of times it does. Particularly in complex matters. That's why the peer review process matters. Numbers don't "speak for themselves"; that's why we talk about "lies, damned lies and statistics".

As a pratical exercise, I'd suggest you, as a "trained computer engineer", to let your projects to be designed and implemented by a non-trained computer engineer. You'd know what I mean.
Google's not worried about nofollow links. They are only worried about followed links because those are the ones that affect organic search results.
I stand corrected. Jesus they do in part.
Finish what you start
I have big problem, and I have a feeling I'm not alone on this. I get an idea, I get super excited, work on it like crazy and then I either get burned out, or loose interest and eventually move onto something else. I've started 5 web apps, 4 iPhone apps, 1 hardware project, a blog. Out of all of those, I released one of the iPhone apps, which made me about $70 bucks (6 months), two web apps, one of which has had about 7k visits over the year (2 weeks) and another that just fizzled right away(2-3 years) and my blog which has had couple hundred visits over the year (ongoing).

Now I know those aren't very big numbers, but I've noticed something....you have to release and release early!!!! A crappy project that gets released, fizzles and dies is still better by leaps and bounds, than a project thats been worked on for 2 years and never sees the light of day. Now I know this is all common sense and I know that everyone and their mom spews the release early mantra, but it's the truth. You need the positive feedback loop to keep you excited about working on something, otherwise it will die. What's even funnier is that the web app that took me the least amount of time to make, 2 weeks, is the one that succeeded the most in terms popularity and the one that took me the longest, 2-3 years, did the worst and I almost pulled the hair out of my head working on it. Life's funny like that...

Your thoughts?
An idea on content micro-payments that just came into my head:

Let's say that you are a user that wants to contribute $10/mo for all the good blogs and content that you consumer online. You go to paymentstartup.com which puts a cookie in your browser. All content providers that wants money from paymentstartup.com users will add a tracker to their website that will report to paymentstartup.com whenever somebody has visited their blog ir whatever. Then, by the end of the month, you might have visited 50 blogs so paymentstartup.com splits your contribution among these sites using some smart algorithm.

What do you think?
The version of this that I've seen work is the "Northern Exposure" one (remember that TV show?).

I had a friend whose MS in Nursing was paid for by a state government and in exchange she had to agree to work for a number of years (I think 3) at a hospital in a low-income neighborhood that was having trouble attracting good nurses. Yes, she was paid, etc! It worked out great since she got a free education and found out that she enjoyed working with that particular population and the state had one more highly qualified nurse on its roster.

Win-win incentives like these have a fighting chance, "opportunities" that are heavily weighted in one party's favor tend to not do so well.
If you're linking to sites as an 'editorial decision' (i.e., you vouch for or approve of the content on that site), then you're fine. Otherwise, and if it's a paid link, you are supposed to nofollow it.

One of my issues with this is that on one of my sites, I have paid links that I vouch for. They're people I know providing services I've actually used and if my Google Account got pulled up by a rogue complainant or competitor, I'd be really pissed off.

The help docs on these sorts of things are pretty ambiguous though. One frustration I have is that they routinely discuss getting 'editorial' backlinks from bloggers, but for small businesses this can be exceptionally hard. If you're a tiler, for example, you might (if you're really proactive) have a four page site with some examples of work, testimonials, contact info and a list of services. None of your customers/testimonials are going to be blogging types. Most of your suppliers aren't going to link to you because they've barely got on top of their own web issues. But you'll get beaten in the rankings by a blogger or general content-producer who knows about SEO. Why isn't paying to advertise on those sites and getting some link juice (without the link being nofollowed) an option?
Interestingly, Google has no references to that exact quote except for this conversation on HN.

Got it -- the end should read "more remote places"

Intelligence is like four-wheel drive. It only allows you to get stuck in more remote places

http://www.quote-feed.com/Quote/Quote31.htm

Sorry -- quote collector here :)
How was ESR wrong? He seemed damn insightful to me. The curse of the gifted is a real thing. We've seen it many times before. Developers that can write 20 times the code of a "mere mortal" but don't think it's necessary to check it back in to version control. Or unit test, or run it through QA, or any of the other things that "mere mortals" need to do.

Sure, you can get away with this when you're operating in "Founder only mode," and you're the sole contributor, but his point is valid. If you don't plan for the point in time when you have hundreds of developers working on several branches of forked code before you reach that point, by the time you do, your project is doomed.
http://www.educause.edu/blog/sworona/TrollingforTrolls/16800... has some information.

Methods for a first party to acquire and assert a patent property against a second party are disclosed. The methods include obtaining an equity interest in the patent property. The methods further include writing a claim within the scope of the patent property. The claim is written to cover a product of the second party where the product includes a secret aspect. The methods further include filing the claim with a patent office. The methods sometimes include offering a license of the patent property to the second party after the patent property issues as a patent with the claim. The methods sometimes include asserting infringement of the claim by the second party after the patent property issues as a patent with the claim. The methods sometimes include negotiating a cross-license with the second party based on the assertion of infringement of the claim, where under the cross-license the first party obtains a license to an intellectual property right from the second party. The methods sometime include attempting to obtain a monetary settlement from the second party based on the assertion of infringement of the claim.
"But honestly, I'd argue he was also objectively wrong."

Considering how Linux is being developed today, I think Linus disagrees.
You imply that by being a scientist, you are untrustworthy, and that being a layperson without expertise makes you trustworthy.

Not at all. Being open with your data and methods make you (more) trustworthy. Stonewalling and avoiding disclosure makes you untrustworthy. It has nothing to do with your role, but with how you play it.

if a scientist falsifies data and gets caught, their entire career can be lost.

Which of the East Anglia scientists lost their careers, or even their job? (I understand that there's no real evidence that they falsified data, just some implication. But they were badly unethical.)

Not to mention that scientists generally have no vested monetary interest in the results, despite what people here seem to think. Grant money can only be used for research, not for personal gain.

The continuation of their research is personal gain. A conclusion of "nothing interesting going on here" means they've got to find a new area of research, find new grant sources, etc. If they happen to find evidence of something scary, that gives them job security. I have no proof that they followed this line of thought, but it is definitely a conflict of interest.

That said, virtually anyone involved in the field is there because they've got some passion for it, so probably everyone has some degree of conflict.

The fact that someone made a choice that leads to a lower pay scale does not make them above corruption. You may as well ask me to believe that the NEA's sole concern is teaching kids, rather than preserving their members' benefits.
The real problems start not when "end of life" becomes very expensive (which it has) but when technology advances to the point where it is possible to keep someone alive indefinitely but at geometrically increasing costs. We've set it up so that everyone will feel entitled to that one extra week, no matter what the cost.
After a WP article about writer Alan Cabal was deleted, following many AfDs, I re-wrote it from scratch as a Squidoo lens, probably for the better: http://www.squidoo.com/Alan_Cabal

The WP article does still lie in userspace waiting to be resurrected, but it's a complete waste of time to try and get it back into mainspace: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox_Th...

There are other options out there. Citizendium? If the article about dwm is deleted, re-write it at Citizendium. Why not?

Wikipedia is so 2001-2009. Its time is over, I think.
"Didn't get that round of financing? Don't tell me the VC's are idiots or didn't "get it." You didn't pitch it right. Or you went to them too early. Or too late. VC's fund companies every day - they didn't fund your company. That's your fault."

- I disagree with this entirely. It's possible to pitch perfectly and not get funded. How often do VCs get it wrong? 8/10 times according to the conventional wisdom. Remember Google tried to licence their software to Yahoo for a million dollars in the early days. VCs are motivated more by missed opportunity (to other investors) than potential gain.
I'd like to see an example of where choosing Ruby / Python / Perl is a momentous decision.

The only one I can think of is that a lot of people have an intense hatred for one of the three, so you've got to weigh your team's preferences to make sure you offend the fewest number of people.

Personally, I have a deep seated, all-consuming, perfectly irrational (though I'll happily invent reasons) loathing for Perl, and I just refuse to use it.

But Ruby or Python? Eh, close enough that I'm not going to complain either way...I'm sure you'll find plenty of Ruby zealots that wouldn't touch Python with a ten foot pole, though, and vice versa.
No, Ubisoft may still be right. It's quite common to spread your checks throughout gameplay. For example, there were actually several copy protection checks in the old Karateka game. One triggered later in the level and made the eagle unbeatable. This caused the cracker group to have to re-release it.

This kind of in-game check led to the practice of cracking "100%". This means the cracker played the entire game through and verified everything worked properly. They'd often add "trainers" (eternal life patches) to make this process go quicker.

With a fully online system as Ubisoft claimed to have, you can just store the level code/data on the server. In this case, EVERY crack will be limited as you can always download new protection code with level N+1. It remains to be seen how well they adopted this approach to updating their protection, but you can see it work in fully online games like WoW.

We designed the Blu-ray protection scheme to have the same renewable property, it's just that the disc itself is the transport channel since your player is not guaranteed to be online. A PC-only environment can make that kind of requirement, and an online-only system is easier to protect.
How cretinous the comments are. Facebook clearly fails as a blogging platform for this sort of content.
On the psychology, I think it's more a positioning problem than a cost problem. For instance, I'm more than happy to pay $0.10 on Lala to listen to a song, but that's because all of my purchases are collected in such a way that they're easy to return to later. As a result it feels like I'm paying for some kind of ownership.

I think it's much harder to conceptualize paying for a news article as providing some sort of ownership interest. Fact is, there are several authors and essays I read over and over again, but that's probably less than 1% of my internet reading. You're basically asking me to pay to own something I don't want to own.

Granted, news orgs are spinning micropayments as paying for a service, but each individual article fits more naturally into my idea of product (tangible, doesn't really change) than service.
The main problem I have about Google searches is that they usually lead to self-help forums instead of original authors. For example, a search for "Asus P6T BIOS" doesn't show Asus's own site until page two or three of the results. The result is similar when searching for some Linux kernel internal or gcc feature (like mudflaps). The problem with using links to calculate relevance is that people rarely link to the original author of a program, but forum systems and mailing list archives have tons of links in them to the same posts.
Anyone know where I can download the Zen Coding plugin? The link on Google Code seems to be broken.
Change appft1 to appft in the url
Based on the conclusion of the article it seems that she agrees.
Rapidshare Fake Login Page  - خدمات العرب
Self-reference has just waved the white flag and gone home.
Actually, for the last two years before striking out on my own, I ended up working on a project involving complex calculations with credit derivatives. And before, I created a side project implementing risk models such as Black Scholes, Monte Carlo, etc. So the math ended up being useful after all.

But yeah, I think even none of the things you learn in college end up being useful to you in "real world", it's all about problem solving techniques you master that apply in any situation.
I doubt that costs can increase geometrically for any significant period of time. The technological ramp would have to be enormous. Unless your belief is that current technologies will remain at their current prices and new technologies will be built at exclusively higher prices.
Even oncologist question their utility today when they can offer the average cancer patient only meager life extension, and those are often pain-filled years at that.

But it's a good business model: people will often spend their net worth to extend the life of themselves or their child a few months. But in the end they almost always die the same miserable death. So I expect even more "childrens' cancer centers" to open and rake in millions.
Fails as a blogging platform or fails as a comment platform?

I don't think anything about these "blog notes" and how they are presented could improve on some of the inane comments; that's just the users.
DPL-Surveillance-Equipment.com: Surveillance and Security Equipment Blogsite
I wish I could upvote this more. There is no way compilation is I/O bound.

Even over the network this is true. My old lab had homedirs all on NFS (gigabit I think, but that's not too important) and all our builds were CPU-bound, even without raising the -j argument from cores+1. The same lab (before I was there) even wrote a paper on why the "compile" test is a horrible one for measuring filesystem performance; it just doesn't do enough I/O.

I'd be interested to see what happens if you were to compile something large written in assembly (or close to it), but I'd put money that just the sequential optimizer would be slower than I/O.

EDIT: found the paper and an article about it http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7464/1.html http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/project-fsbench.html