skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We (Braintree) have never had contracts or termination fees. Customers can cancel whenever they want and port the credit card data elsewhere.

As for our pricing, it's actually very competitive. It may look higher because we disclose all our fees. Nearly every provider we know of obscures fees both during the sales process and in the monthly reporting statements so merchants never really understand what they're paying. Here's an example of pricing trickery http://bit.ly/9NSZCa .

Prospective customers regularly do thorough pricing comparisons and we are consistently among the most competitively priced.
Best solution is just to put the javascript in another file. Barring that, escape your javascript. Replace < with &lt;, etc. I am not sure CDATA exists in HTML (I seem to remember it being something for XML and DTDs).
I understand tax deductible. But that doesn't make it free. Unless you really do have a mighty need for the free gifts :p

I'm kind of having a hard time taking anything else this author says seriously when he also says that.
Congratulations on making the move to full-time!

At the beginning of last year I made a similar move from being a Japanese salaryman to my own business. I was writing code in a notebook on my 1.5 hour train commute and on my lunch break and then typing it up on weekends.
After I went full-time on my own business I found that the scope of what I wanted to do expanded and my productivity dropped. Also, the time-management skills that worked well on a part-time basis didn't work as well when I went full-time. I also found that it was easy to get sidetracked by side-projects and that personal life (time with friends, holidays) became a larger part of my life. I also found that a lot of things that I wasn't so great at (web design, graphics) etc. took up a large amount of my time.

So I would be interested to hear your thoughts on time-management, prioritization and working from home once you go full-time if you decide to do this as a series.
America’s Real Dream Team
It is just pictures of really cool, well-dressed personalities, and then (in the small pictures) information about what they are actually wearing and where you can obtain the items.

I suspect it is mostly interesting for fashion-nerds who appreciate the detective works gone into finding what kind of shirt John Huston is wearing on that particular picture taken 40 years ago. It is probably not that useful as a general guide to fashion and for dressing sharp, since it is clearly the personalities that makes the clothing items cool, not the other way around.

It may be pointless for people who aren't obsessed with style, but I don't think the site is poking fun of anyone.
I see what you're trying to do, to help the parent with American/British English, but actually the language the parent is writing in is a typical idiom found in Indian English (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_English).

English is the official second language of India (which doesn't mean an awful lot but consider that Hindi in Devanagari is the main language and is only spoken by just over 40% of Indians) and is generally spoken with Indian idioms. It's been this way for several hundred years. Indian English is generally as valid as American English, although less formalised.
Be willing to relocate. This is the single biggest factor. If you're not in a tech-hub you'll find it a lot harder to find employment as a developer at any level.

Where abouts are you based at the moment ?
Robin Li is an American? Who are the other founders?
Windows PowerShell Cookbook
Kojo - Scala for Kids
An additional interesting number is the number of hours that freelancers have worked on this project, if that wouldn't be telling too many secrets.
The iPod of Baby Tricycles
Passing the Microsoft Interview
I often feel like people here are drinking too much of the Google kool-aid. A corporate slogan is just a corporate slogan - it's a form of advertising, designed to make you like their brand more. Google, like all publicly owned companies, exists to make money, not to forward a political agenda - unless that political agenda helps them make more money.
Faster List Intersection Using Skip Pointers
Targeting IE for "web" apps resulted in unupgradable windows-only apps plus a lie. The lie that they were "web apps". A cautionary tale about Microsoft lock-in causing damage to the web and to IT as a whole.
Thanks! I missed the tiny type with the names. The only one I readily recognized was Robin Williams (listed as "Dr. Malcolm Sayer (Awakenings)". That makes more sense.

I actually like "fashion" (dressing well), but my personal relationship to the topic has changed a lot over the years. I still find the topic fascinating and I still exercise my skills in that regard, but to a somewhat different end these days.
Crack passwords and keep my office warm.

Alternatively I'd set up a transcoding farm and build a service to help people to edit their videos online and download them in multiple formats. My goal would be something like iMovie but cross-platform with subscription meaning exclusive filters, wipes and effects with more formats.
How To Earn Money Blogging Online
I'll see how we can implement a useful vote feature.
i see your point, but it doesn't mean that they are identical. you would need to do another test - one that compared people who were tired through some task that was not considered "hard", and those that are tired through something that is considered "hard". if the two groups behaved identically, then you would be right. but you are assuming that result in what you write.

alternatively, it might even be the same task, but two groups that have a different attitude to it (some might consider it play, others work).

(i suspect you can also continue down your route, re-labelling things; for example, you might say that people only calls things "work" if, for that individual, they are "theft-inducing". at that point i am not sure if we simply agree to disagree, or if the argument becomes whether you are still learning something new over the original experiment)
Tricky. I'm in a similar position (3.5 years of info sec background) and I'm willing to work anywhere in the entire world. The problem becomes interviewing; nobody wants to fly me out to Amsterdam.
I don't think this is necessarily a mistake. I'm American, and I think "everyone doesn't X" has a clear meaning of "Not everyone does X". It only fails to mean that if you don't take it as a whole, but no one ever says "Everyone doesn't X" to mean "No one does X"; it always means "Not everyone does X".

There are lots of phrases in English that do not mean the same thing as the literal meanings of the words would indicate.
I appreciate your comments, and I agree with some of what you say. Idiomatic language is not always literal language.

In America, for example, people often say "The proof is in the pudding." Logically this does not make sense. Logically the original saying - "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" - makes sense, and can be interpreted literally.

But idioms are atomic. They cannot be understood in any way other than as a complete whole with a meaning unextractable from the components.

But idiomatic language can lead to non-understanding, and sometimes mis-understanding. Recognising it when it occurs can be important, especially when what is said can be interpreted literally and logically in a manner other than intended.

My intent is not to prevent idiomatic usage of language, that would be Sisyphean. My intent to to highlight a case where was was said, when interpreted logically, is not what was intended.
Indian English is generally as valid as American English

Perhaps when I'm in India. However, if you're in an English class in Britain or America I don't believe any instructor would say "everyone doesn't want to be an entrepreneur" is valid as meaning "not every person wants to be an entrepreneur". If I start my own country on an island and declare English the official language, and say "I'm drinking water" actually means "I'm going fishing" it's only valid English for that meaning on my island.
1. No: The goal of Computer Science is to provide and improve methods, languages and frameworks to manipulate a computer. The goal of Software Engineering is to apply these tools in order to achieve a requested result with a computer.

2. No, that's the purpose of Engineering. (Science creates models, Engineering applies them)

3. This is engineering for scientific purposes :)

4. This is still engineering, applying different models.
"New Features in the Next C++ Standard" doesn't work (deleted by user), anyone got working link?
I love this guy.

Great article about him here: http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-05/ff_woznia...

See his apology at the bottom of http://www.supermemo.com/english/company/wozniak.htm
Scooter framework allows you to use both ActiveRecord and direct sql queries which you either embed in code or list in sql.properties file. See http://www.scooterframework.com/docs/lovely_features.html#na...

Django is a nice framework. But don't you think that listing table columns in Django model code is a violation of DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself)? Database already holds meta data. Repeating it in model code is unnecessary.
"they are not trained to mentally play with the theoretical tools they use"

That's because the actual theoretical tools that are in place from computer science are generally not practically applicable to 99.9% of the work that most developers do.

A knowledge of lambda calculus, CSP, Turing Machines etc. etc. is of no relevance whatsoever to someone building a CRUD business application or (for that matter) another client for Twitter. Formal abstractions from other fields aren't of much use because the mathematical techniques used for modeling the "real world" don't apply too well to programs.

"Programming languages, frameworks and patterns are scientific models, designed to represent the working of a computer"

That an interesting idea - but as far as I can see, completely wrong. Scientific models are created (usually using maths, but not always) to provide logical structures that have predictive and explanatory powers - and have to be consistent with observed behavior and have be falsifiable.

Programs aren't constructed to explain observed behavior of computers or to predict what computers will do - they are created to control (through layers of abstraction and translation) what the devices will actually do. So I don't think "scientific model" is the right phrase to use.
I agree with you. However, sometimes such phrases can be a barrier to communication across cultures, and this one especially makes it difficult to teach formal logic.

People say "You know what I mean" and that's fine when you're talking to someone from your own culture, or even just to a human. Such an audience will interpret what you say, realise it makes no sense, find an alternative, more sensible interpretation, and go with that.

Computers, and some cultures, are otherwise. Recognising such things is important, even if you don't change the way you speak.
The article doesn't even cover gen-class?

You can use Clojure to create a Java library. Then the Java (or Scala or JRuby or Jython) code that calls it doesn't even need to know it is calling Clojure rather than an ordinary Java class.

The only problem I have with this so far is that it doesn't seem to support generics, so I end up creating the kind of APIs that you would expect from Java 4. Would LOVE for someone to show me I'm wrong about that.

http://richhickey.github.com/clojure/clojure.core-api.html#c...

Anyway, the article looks like the kind of stuff that was being written over a year ago, before gen-class existed, but with considerably less depth.
I'd love some dressing tips for nerd women. All I ever wear is jeans, polo shirts and knitted pullovers. No glasses though, I prefer contacts.
I don't even know how to dress otherwise or how to use make-up.
I think it's gauche? I upvoted you though for trying to use a nice french word :)
which country are you in?
BTW: There is no such thing as "Nobel Prize in Economics"
Seriously? I'd much rather get a potential repeated contributor who can follow my style than clean it up without asking him to do it. Double for tests: I frequently can't figure out exactly what the best regression test will be and the contributor needs to make it himself (though that may be a special case of my VCS work). Pull requests actively make commenting on a patch harder than a patchbomb in email. The fork queue (imnsho) is even worse, as I've had people just assume I'll see it and just take it from the fork queue page.

Feel free to write me off as a cranky old fart - I've been doing OSS long enough to remember Subversion as a wonderful thing on the horizon and the pure joy of its relative speed. This is all based on my mostly-poor experiences with GH preventing a community domain forming by causing nobody to talk outside of their commit messages, which is a huge loss.
Computer Science in most schools is mainly mathematics and a couple of programming courses thrown in. To become a working programmer however is a craft that you learn and become better at through experience. The education that you get from Computer Science is similar to that you get from say political science. From political science you usually go to law school to learn something more concrete. Computer Science doesn't have a law school equivalent where you go to learn software development, usually you have to learn on your own. Depending on the type of software development work you do, you can find your Computer Science education quite useful. Basically any math heavy subject is a fine prerequisite education for software development craftsmanship.
a) The Telegraph is a tabloid, why not link to a better news source?
b) There is precedent for this sort of move, as Krugman's original article said it was done in the 70s with Germany and Japan until they raised their currency values.

Is it a good idea? It's probably a bit risky but it's got to be better than letting China continue to manipulate currency and be a drag on the rest of the world's economy. I imagine a tariff that large would probably get them to float the renminbi fairly quickly.

// Edit: I take back the tabloid comment, I was thinking of the Aussie Telegraph which is absolutely a tabloid. My point still stands, that what China is doing needs to be dealt with and that it's hardly the end of the world to put tariffs on them.
Jeremy Warner simply doesn't understand the issues at the depth Krugman does. Doing nothing threatens the world much more than a surcharge to offset the renminbi.
I'm the author of the original article. A typical server costs $1500 (DELL, HP) nowadays, but I've seen java apps commonly take up a whole rack of servers, not just one. This is a base cost of $30k and > $1500/mo for rackspace, A/C, power, bandwidth and maintenance. That's one-half of an FTE up-front and one FTE's salary reoccurring.
I hear from java developers, "I'll need 6x 3Ghz, quad-core, dual-cpu machines for this (pretty simple) app I'm writing". Are you f-ing kidding me? Do you know what you could do with that kind of hardware if you wrote it in a different language? Your app is basically a glorified web server that does one thing that apache doesn't do out of the box. It sickens me to see this kind of waste because of the programmer's language choice.
How to choose essay formatting and Process essay topics
Of course if you write Python, Ruby, Perl and PHP code in the style of Java, and benchmark it against idiomatic Java, then Java will come out on top. This doesn't prove anything, other than you have a very flawed benchmark.

Language implementations are optimised for the most common operations in that language. Allowing only one implementation to take advantage of this renders the benchmark useless.
The apology is strange. It seems predicated on a false notion of efficiency, assuming that somehow one's interactions with other people can be "efficient" in the same sense as one's interactions with a book. But that's not at all true. I am reminded of Freeman Dyson's comment soon after he met Feynman:

"Feynman is a man whose ideas are as difficult to make contact with as Bethe's are easy; for this reason I have so far learnt much more from Bethe, but I think if stayed here much longer I should begin to find it was Feynman with whom I was working more."

More generally, working with and learning from other people requires dealing with all sorts of "inefficiencies"; they're not optional. But if you're working with the right people, those inefficiencies are more than compensated for in other ways.
An earlier report from a different source: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1194959
The indexable skip list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skip_list) is another interesting structure for this kind of problem.

It's an expansion of the concept described, with a probablistic twist. It has O(log(n)) insertion, deletion and random access time, and linear traversal time, for a log(n) space overhead over a standard singly linked list.

The main drawback is that, in order to get that kind of performance, you have to know roughly the expected size of your structure in advance (although it should be fairly easy to create one whose "added machinery" grows with the list).

Example implmentations:

Python : http://code.activestate.com/recipes/576930/

Lua : http://love2d.org/wiki/Skip_list (a port of the former by yours truly, with some added functionality).

Both are released under the MIT License.
I don't use make-up. I'm allergic to everything. So no tips on that from me.

As for clothes: Pick up a copy of David Kibbe's "Metamorphosis". Learn what clothing shapes, patterns (stripes, polka dots, etc) and colors work best for you. Get a good hair cut for your hair type and face shape. If you have any health issues, work on those. Healthy people look better, regardless of what they wear. Once you have some idea of the shapes, colors, etc you need to focus on, try on lots and lots of clothes but only buy those things that are both very comfortable to wear and are also flattering. (With practice, it gets easier to shop once you know what works for you. You can eliminate most clothes in the store without trying them on once you have this knowledge.) If you are physically comfortable in your clothes, it helps you pull off a sense of "style" in the eyes of others. Elegance is not just about the clothes you wear but about how you move and that is enhanced by being physically comfortable. If you have self image issues negatively impacting your clothing choices, the best solution to that is probably having a positive intimate relationship with the right person so you Get Over It.

If you want to learn about power dressing, there is only one book that I know of which is based on actual research into what works: "Dress for Success" by John T. Malloy. It's apparently been updated a few times. Searching for it on Amazon brings up "New Women's Dress for Success".

I've read a lot of clothing books over the years. A lot of them don't have much value. If you want good results without investing a lot of time and effort into it, those two books are must haves and most of the rest can be ignored.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economi...
IPad Parody Highlights Device Shortcomings [video]
Thanks for alerting me to this. There's also a lot of great stuff available from the 'iTunes University' - whole video lecture series from Stanford among others. You can also access most of the support material through the Stanford website. It's awfully generous of them!
"A knowledge of lambda calculus, CSP, Turing Machines etc. etc. is of no relevance whatsoever to someone building a CRUD business application or (for that matter) another client for Twitter."

Fair enough. These are used as scientific materials for scientific purposes, and are indeed not suitable for an engineer's work. However languages and frameworks are abstractions (= models) of how a computer works and engineers do use them to control it and get the ordered results.

Think of a computer as a black box. You want to get some output from it (calculation results, commands, whatever). You need to know what input you must give them in order to produce the expected output. This is were programming languages and frameworks come in. They offer an abstraction of the working of the computer that you can use. Programs are indeed not constructed to explain how a computer works because they are the input, not the system itself. They are the input a developer needs to provide to the computer in order to have the requested result.

How does a developer know what input to give (i.e. what code to write)? He has to understand how the system works, or rather, how the abstraction layer/framework he's using works. If his knowledge is not perfect, he might observe some unexpected results. He then needs to investigate what part of the framework he did not understand, and adapt his program consequently.

This is what all engineers do. They manipulate a system using an abstract representation of it, they gain experience by figuring out how or why the output they receive is not what they expected and by iteratively adjusting their understanding of the system.

Since all engineers do this, why would developers do things differently? Engineers learn to manipulate abstract models (in a lot of different domains), and IMHO many developers fail because they lack such training.
Show HN: create-a-password.appspot.com
My latest weekend project: a memorable password generator, created with GWT and Google App Engine: http://create-a-password.appspot.com

Also, a tip of the hat to Diceware (http://world.std.com/~reinhold/diceware.html).

Thanks!
Kudos to Google, the only company out there openly saying what everyone is thinking. I don't know another company that would dare to do this (especially in the lights of a huge, fast growing market and billions of dollars to lose).
How to Get Unsecured Business Loans &#8211; An Expert&#8217;s Guide
The general (not just "languages" section) site being http://code.google.com/intl/en/edu/
These names sort of remind me of scratch lotto game titles.
github is without doubt an improvement over SF, and makes it easier to contribute to smaller projects.

> I remember back in the sourceforge day, most projects died before they ever got a mailing list, CVS account, web page, wiki, bug tracker, ..., all setup.

What happened a lot is that people thought they were going to do some great open source project, registered the project, then never did anything with it. This can happen anywhere, really, although it's probably less prominent on github, because a repository with nothing in it is pretty ridiculous.

Also, it's amazingly easy to set up a Google Group, even though they have some known issues.

Anyway, where I'm going with this is merely that putting it on github does not make open source magically 'work', and people need to pay attention to the human (communication, etc...) side of things too. Github is an improvement in many ways.