skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We (Casepad) also applied via the traditional path to YC Core and YCF. We put in a weak application the first time around, unfortunately offering a less helpful signal as to whether or not HN identified something that was missed, so we took Apply HN very seriously as a second chance.

I'd like to echo /u/jonwachob91's post above in saying that we can't thank the community enough for the votes, feedback, and support. Also, many thanks to Kevin and his team for giving us a wildcard slot.
>They are already well educated and don't have time for checklists to remind them of every little detail they learned during their 10-year long training program.

Sorry, but no one is too good for checklists. Not doctors, not 747 pilots with 35 years of experience.

On the contrary, the amount of training training and job complexity that physicians deal with are actually good reasons to have checklists in the first place.
You can't be serious
Yeah I have to admit that this puzzled me as well. I think Kevin and the rest of the YC folks have every right to do whatever they please with this process, and am not bothered in the least by the fact that Pinboard wasn't chosen, but reading Kevin's explanation somehow made me think that some of those WOULD be reasons to select it.

Pinboard is in a relatively unique situation amongst all the other companies in that it is beyond finding product-market fit -- it's got an established userbase and a founder with proven chops and a large following. It seems like he is in the exact position where something like YCF can help pour gasoline on the things that he's doing that are already working.

I understand YC's tremendous focus on finding a right fit with founders when they join the regular batches. But, at least at first, it's not entirely clear that this criterion should hold as much weight with YCF. They'll talk less frequently, invest less money, etc. -- maybe the optimal strategy for YCF is in fact focusing much more on the present stage of the company and whether or not the little bit of cash/partner influence can cause an inflection??? Who knows, really... but it sure sounded like accepting Pinboard -- not in spite but because there were these issues with Maciej -- would make it an especially interesting case to try out.
OK, the downvote made me take another look. I'm blind - disregard the above comment. I guess I was expecting to find it in a header or footer or sidebar, and when I didn't find it there I gave up too quickly.
But yet our current system of malpractice is directly responsible for inhibiting systems that would help prevent mistakes.
It seems like CreateProcess uses the one-long-string for the command rather than the POSIX model of one string per argument. Is there any way to run a process on Windows using one string per argument?
Can you explain a little bit about how your values don't align with YC's values? It would be interesting to hear your thoughts.

If you don't mind me asking, how would you have used the money, if you were accepted into the program?
The survey says that the median age of respondents was 27 and on average they started programming 11 months ago. They didn't give a standard deviation, but presumably there are not many who are in their early teens.

I say this because the cohort you describe will have started playing games at a younger age, and would have self selected itself out of this survey by venturing into small time game development on their own at an age younger than the survey respondent demographic.
OmniDB: An Open Source Web Tool for Database Management and Conversion
I work on a workflow engine (aka DAG processor) that dates to before 2008. We use it for many things in an astronomy experiment. It has executed over 900M batch jobs and 200M "scriptlets", and most of those workflows can be re-executed at any stage, even today, five+ years after they were originally ran, to recreate data products. The workflow engine also serves effectively as a provenance database for each data product to trace its origins back to raw data.
I’ve been a lurker for some time but had to comment on this one, as I too got shafted by Invoiceable/Invoicely. More troubling is how something more than an update is happening here - they seem to have actually ripped off another invoicing service when coming up with the new product.

I upgraded a couple of months ago to have a custom domain and remove Invoiceable branding, and didn’t even receive an email about this move. Yesterday I visited the Invoiceable site and landed at Invoicely: that’s when I learned that I had to migrate!

Apart from this total lack of communication, we have been given just one week to move everything over to the new platform - a major hassle when I have an actual business to run. Their support hasn’t been of much help either: they seem to have mastered the art of stonewalling.

I have no desire to throw money at people who don’t value me as a customer. But more importantly, I can’t trust my financial
data with a company that seems to have shamelessly ripped off a competing product (Hiveage - http://www.hiveage.com). Just look at the UIs of Hiveage and the new Invoicely and you’ll see what I’m talking about.
> Do the best tools able to solve this in a satisfactory manner(the tool issue, the organizational issue) ? How ?

The best solution is I believe relentless continuous manual curation, which is discussed below. Automated tools are rather frowned upon in this area because I don't think there is any that is good enough until everyone is comfortable to rely on the black box.

> Can't this be done in parallel ? and why are resources an issue for such an important thing with a clear health ROI and maybe financial ROI ?

It definitely can be done in parallel. It takes years mainly due to political issues - like doctors arguing against each other which treatment/alert/option is the best, doctors/nurses/pharmacists arguing against each other who needs to look out for certain alerts, etc. We are not talking about tens of alerts, the number usually comes up to thousands.

Resource is an issue here because the best people to manually curate are the healthcare professionals themselves, but they are usually, you know, treating patients, so they are hard to find on their desks. And as mentioned elsewhere, the industry is highly hierarchical, so a bunch of minions can propose changes to alerts but everything needs to go to some higher authorities because the stakes are too great. Sometimes this "higher authority" does not decide without a formal consultation with some other authority. (nobody wants to be blamed if an error happens because the hospital just removed a perceived low-quality alert a week ago)

Coupled with the need to perform lots of research to produce high quality alerts, I would presume only large-ish hospitals / clusters (perhaps > 1000 combined bed capacity) can afford full-time people to look into this.
> in my experience people who do things like that tend to have serious confidence issues

It has been noted that prisoners tend to suffer from low-esteem. Also, "it is really the weak who commit the crimes, not the strong." - http://fittish.deadspin.com/an-ex-cons-guide-to-prison-weigh...

Humility is overrated.
Software Engineering Podcasts Review
Heh, it is also a consequence of the web limitations (can't easily replace javascript, or anything else without breaking backwards compatibility) and its associated technologies. You can only poke the browser, not understand it.

I find funny that only last year with MVC scaffolding generators I can do forms to access a database just as easily as I was doing them in Foxpro 20 years ago.

Yes, now it is client server, safe against common hacking attacks, responsive, etc. But it's been 20 years !

And the productivity valley between both points is abysmal.
Serious question: What is stopping you from going back?

I'm naive but curious and I do not want to make guesses.

I wonder how are we going to preserve knowledge about programming from first principles if, under pressure from corporations and lazy peers, no one does it anymore?
I've been sitting here trying to digest everything that has happened since we applied for this endeavor. And while we're disappointed we didn't get many votes, it was a proud moment for us to be among the top 20 companies out of so many that applied. I really mean that. We never thought our platform, that hasn't even launched yet, would get this much attention and we thank EVERYONE who voted for us.

The feedback we got from this process was very valuable and we even got some great beta users signed up. However, we likely wouldn't go through something like this again.

This was a bit of a distraction for us to be quite honest. We spent a lot of time working to craft a great pitch and responding to the feedback we got (despite some obvious trolling) in the best way we could.

I get why some people are/were upset though. Anytime you include such a robust community into a decision making process, you're just asking for trouble. You're not going to please everyone and even if everything goes the way you thought, you'll still be met with skepticism. This is especially true for a site like HN in which there are clear "regulars" who understand the nuances within this community.

I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I've been an outside observer for a long time and get tremendous value from the posts here. It's a site I check regularly many times a day.

All-in-all, it's an indictment of the community when you witness how the process plays out. This is not dissimilar to our own US presidential race happening today. You get people that say dumb shit, people who make outlandish claims, and people end up feeling disenfranchised. Long live democracy! :)
An Ex-Con's Guide to Prison Weightlifting (2014)
In general, when a smug moral imperialist tells me to watch my language, I see it as an invitation to dial the taunting up to eleven. Why resort to violence, when it is so easy to make them press their (very accessible) Emotional Self-Destruct buttons?

Also, being slapped by a Badthinker such as myself would confirm their Sacred Victimhood; my handprint on their gob would be like stigmata on a medieval saint. Deep down, they'd love it in a very disturbing way that I refuse to participate in.

As to my so-called 'privilege', I suppose I can cop to being raised in a milieu where we desired to do no insult to others, on the assumption that we would be given reciprocal goodwill and consideration, unless we were explicitly looking for a fight.

(That is what used to be called 'carrying a chip on one's shoulder', if you are unfamiliar with the idiom.)

The practice of actively courting offense as a method of social signalling would have been seen as perverted and maladaptive.

This isn't about actual psychically wounded people who may need support, or therapy or drugs. This is about filth that use other people's mental anguish (real or imagined) as the base cosmology of a faith of their own creation. It has it's own dogma, and part of being Elect is to denounce heretics. Guilt-tripping innocent people into feeling bad about maybe thinking a crank or malingerer is...a crank or malingerer.

However, given the nullity of soul in most of Misery-Worship's practitioners, once you've heard one denouncement, you can script the rest. It's like listening to a chi-com cadre loudly quote Mao at you from the little red book, or having a particularly inept Scientologist try to audit you.

(Quick, search and replace "trigger" with "charge" and "privilege" with "Body Thetan" and "othered" with "exteriorization". The parallels are eerie...)
Not taking medicine like epidural anaesthesia that isn't absolutely necessary would reduce the risk. I find the idea of spinal anaesthesia scary in general. It's poison with such a dose that it shuts essential parts of your nervous system down, but just under the dose that kills you. It's also in one of the most vulnerable places of your body, so that any mistake will likely have great consequences.
Google Voice works in my experience. Just to be clear because I know moxie reads hn... What should happen differently?
It's because it's keyword analysis based. For example, you might call your product a "platform", and not use the words "website" or "app", in which case you wouldn't appear on the graph.
Student scored 20 out of 20 after help of Marketing tutor
There are several cases where students don't understand "Where to START". They knows the answer but need a trigger to write. Tutor at http://www.Pantaron.com helped student to get the idea to start and ways to write down answers. There are several cases that we see on daily basis and get feedback from students about tutor.
> Edit: Also, many people refuse to install/use Chrome for various reasons, so even if you don't have to open ports, this still won't be a solution.

Let's be honest, there aren't many. Chromium is enough to please the majority of OSS people. And if they are not using Chrome for 'security' reasons they are very misinformed.
"This rule implies that 2, 17, and the number of possible human life experiences are all equally distant from infinity." [0]

Thanks for the link. I do have trouble with the above statement, and what follows it, as I would think that the number of states of the human body (or even just the brain & nervous system) would be infinite (that is, in the sense of the infinite cardinality of real numbers) and not countably infinite (as in the set of whole numbers). This would follow from the entire system operating as a biochemical process, and neuronal stimulus being an analog signal between a finite number of neuron cells. Thoughts?

[0] http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/finite.html
Half a billion for that building? SF is crazy.
Must have for every YOGA lover
This. For design-challenged people like me those guidelines are lifesavers. Ironically, I'm not a big fan of Material personally but it helps a lot to have these kind of guidelines handed down to me.
You misunderstand. There was a time when I thought we might be #2, and I thought, 'I think that gives us a good chance'. I didn't think, 'therefore they have to pick us'. They were clear about that.
(Assuming I'm understanding the exploit correctly, obviuosly:)

Limiting JS to a few sites won't protect you fully from this attack, though it will obviously limit your exposure.

If one of your trusted sites, A, has been compromised by, say, an XSS attack, with the ability to inject JS then this attack can be leveraged to also compromise your access credentials to site B by redirecting your login attempt on site B to a malicious imitation of site B's login page. (Of course this assumes that you already have B open in a tab somewhere and that you opened site A through a _blank link on site B. Mostly I would think that would be a plausible scenario for sites mostly based on user-generated content such as forums, social media, and such.)

AFAICT always explicitly force-reloading any login page should make you a lot safer, but remembering to always do that is perhaps not realistic.
the real price is "request for quote", so your number seems to be in the ballpark :)
That was my life for a while doing field service in the power generation industry. Fall through spring are busy with work because power plants make most of their money in the summer so maintenance is done in the off seasons. so we'd get the summer off after working months of 7/12s. Still worked out to a really good yearly salary as well.
Where does he claim this?
Uber Faces Class Action Lawsuit for Robo-Texting Austinites
I'm interested in more of your perspective here. I was around back in the Mojo Nation era as something of an observer, but there's lots maybe I didn't see.
You're saying (a) YC's values are diametrically opposed to yours, (b) your call with Kevin wasn't successful, and (c) YCF isn't designed for companies like yours—but adhering rigidly to the original guidelines you still ought to get your bag of cash.

Basically you tried gaming the system, with your fanbase who voted for you despite your comments like "I will go through YC like a bowling ball," and now you're protesting that YC won't let you. You don't even like YC. May I ask, out of curiosity, why you're doing this?
The halting problem on medium is a satirical blog. Here's another of their posts

https://medium.com/halting-problem/sf-man-stabbed-while-brun...
There's this narrative that you see a lot of people here express. The narrative is that there are no trade-offs to be made in terms of success and quality of life -- that the most work output you can get from people is also when you ask relatively little of them and dedicate yourself to their happiness.

You should be suspicious of people telling you that the world has no trade-offs, that everything's win-win.

While there is of course a point beyond which trying to work people harder is strictly counterproductive, that point is, for most people, well north of 40 hours a week. It's probably well north of 80 hours a week. Your 81st hour in the week is almost certainly nowhere near as productive as your 35th hour is, but it's probably not negatively productive.

And if you specifically hire for people who can be productive in long weeks, you can definitely find people who can add productivity to the 80th hour and beyond.

Those people may quickly become unhappy. They may eventually (or rapidly) burn out. And you may be a real dick if you ask this of people. But it's one way to get a lot of value, fast.

I don't think that companies ought to routinely ask for very long hours. But that's because I think that it's inhumane, not because the universe has created natural law that says that long working hours remove productivity.
You'd be surprised as to how many people do not read the official documentation for the tools they use. They'll spend time on Google or Stack Overflow rather than a minute in the official docs—even when they're great (e.g. Rails guides).
"Two standards" isn't much different from "no standard" in this context. JSON was successful because it had a simple spec that almost anyone could implement for any language with virtually no ambiguity. It's not ubiquitous because it's good, it's good because it's ubiquitous. It's another episode in the long history of "worse-is-better".
Maybe you just need something that trains your porter stemmer to avoid such mistakes.
Or nazi cats.
Isis is a relatively common name; among other things it's the name of an Egyptian god. Also, the Isis in question has had that name for well before the terrorist group was getting called by that name.
I've heard the same thing about college graduates with minimal or no experience (no internships, for example).
Extensive discussion of related article here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11627213
The Future of SharePoint
I've very nearly rage quit Twitter over that bug. The WP 8.1 client doesn't have that problem.
Yes, I think for a conversational UI to work, it needs to be aware of the human world - like JARVIS from Iron Man.
Europe to Remove 500-Euro Bill, the ‘Bin Laden’ Bank Note Criminals Love
i up-voted your comment here because i really liked your distinction between "being smart and innovative" vs "having gall or heartlessness".

someone who used a new level of heartlessness, rudeness or cruelty to attain a difficult goal is often lionized later by the masses and considered "a genius" but, is, in reality, something else entirely.
Tesla “hell-bent on being the world’s best manufacturer“ after $283M loss
That definitely had a lot of buzz, but still less than Hamilton.
A very vaguely related question: are bindings lexical or dynamic in R? Or would it be fair to say that it's actually both at the same time? Or do we need a new term altogether?

For those unfamiliar with it, in R, environments are first-class objects, and identifier lookup in them is dynamic. But the way those environments are chained for lookup purposes is defined by the lexical structure of the program (unless modified at runtime - which is possible, but unusual) - i.e. if a function's environment doesn't have a binding with a given name, the next environment that is inspected is the one from the enclosing function, and not from the caller. So R functions have closure semantics, despite dynamic nature of bindings.

It would appear that this arrangement satisfies the requirements for both dynamic scoping and for lexical scoping.
This statistic gets bandied about every now and then and is completely indefensible. Extrapolation is hardly proof and the CDC statistics don't begin to validate this nonsense.

If it were true it would mean that for essentially every person you had ever heard of dying from any type of accident or pneumonia there would be one resulting from medical error.

Every fatal car wreck you ever read about. Every drowning. Every fatal accidental shooting or fall AND every person you had ever heard of dying from lower respiratory tract infection would have an approximately equal number of deaths CAUSED by medical errors.

In other words people who would have lived instead died because a medical professional made a mistake.

If you believe that's true I have a wonderful bridge here in Brooklyn I would be happy to sell you for a very reasonable price.
Hi guys. Alex from Gresham Dollar (now Greshm Dollar) here. It was a pleasure to share my project with all of you. Great questions and lively discussion from the HN community. Thanks to all of you who participated.

Thanks to HN and YC for putting this together. I doubt I would have been noticed if I'd applied in the conventional way.

Congratulations and good luck to the three startups who are getting funded!

Back to work.
Join, by joaoapps. Notification mirroring across devices
> Seems like that's an argument for a very discerning insurance company.

It's an argument based on a made up or uncited statistic.
That's one way to see it.

Another way is that the people who cannot access Forbes will access something else. Soon everybody will be going to this something else and Forbes will be another dinosaur.

Bullying the users never worked in favor of any online company.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_opinion should be made compulsory
Knowing a god existed would not remove the choice to follow him. If I were presented with irrefutable evidence that the god of the bible existed, I would absolutely not choose to follow him/her/it. The god portrayed by the bible is a petty narcissist who demands that people worship him, while using literally unlimited power to torture and kill people instead of doing anything helpful or responsible. He's also insane, as the only way he can forgive people is to send his son to be brutally murdered. I would not follow such a being even if it existed. Proving a god's existence would definitely not remove the choice of whether to follow a god.

Irrefutable evidence would remove faith (which is not the same as choice). But faith is just pretending you know something instead of admitting you don't know. So again, a god that wants you to pretend to know things you don't is not a being I care to follow.

At best, you've provided a picture of why an insane being might hide its existence, but that doesn't prove whether that being exists or doesn't exist.
Johnson won because of the Daisy ad. No kidding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_%28advertisement%29

Carter started getting favorable press when he started quoting Bob Dylan at the University of Georgia School of Law on May 4, 1974. The best person who was an outsider was going to win the Democratic nomination, and obviously, the general election ( because post-Nixon).

http://www.openculture.com/2012/07/hunter_s_thompson_remembe...
> I feel miserable doing the kind of programming I do nowadays! I wish I could go back to simpler times, where I actually had to reason about algorithms, data structures, hardware, etc.

Join the TXR project:

http://www.nongnu.org/txr

http://www.kylheku.com/cgit/txr/tree/

I made some 3000 commits all by myself since 2009. The main reason why this exists is the above: a project where I can stuff ideas, algorithms, whatever, into a coherent whole that has regular releases and is well-documented externally. And this coherent whole is useful to me in many ways.