skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
People that are in business and successful because they were in a high school clique?

I never said this. Obviously, it is not true.

I said that the people who'd consider it some kind of moral transgression, rather than a strategic move, to tell a VC that you have other VC interest are the kinds of people who want to keep "the doors" closed to the hoipolloi, because their worst nightmare is outsiders getting into their club, so they have to throw into place a moral "consensus" that judges such moves to be wrong.
I call BS, even if you build an application for a single browser on a single OS trying to get any sort of complex application running with the range of screen sizes and interfaces (keyboard/touch/PS3 controllers/crappy cellphones), and processing power is just not happening without serious compromises. So while the browser wars are part of the problem you still need to pick your target audiences and develop for several platforms.
Interpreters were already prohibited.
Handheld computers (with and without a phone) have been around forever. Apple has changed the game from that open reality to this and have been quite successful with it. You have it backwards.
They wouldn’t have to. Just let people tap on links to .ipa files in Safari, pop up a huge and frightening warning dialog and let them then continue to install the app. No need to put anything into the app store they don’t approve of.
They need a cartoon mascot that can itself be person of the year.
A brief history of tablets
"I generally assume that it's okay to lie if it doesn't lead the other person into a decision that will bring them harm..."

Humility is knowing you're not smart enough to know when other people are better off being lied to. Once you start justifying your lies as being helpful to the victims, you've crossed from malice to delusion.

Further, you've just admitted on a public forum read by many with deep connections in the startup world (and others bright enough to crack whatever anonymity you think you have), that you're okay with lying to investors. This doesn't bode well for your career as a master fraud.

With skills like these, the Dark Side doesn't have much to offer you. Please consider switching teams.
I like this advice. Usually developers are wary of fixed-bid, because the client tends to want to tack on a bunch of "oh, and"s, and they end up spending a lot of hours working for free. People commissioning software, on the other hand, are worried about whether or not 0 to working prototype will take more hours than they are willing to pay for.

Your system seems to keep everyone in their comfort zone. No uncertainty for either party. (Except the usual, "will they pay my invoice?" and "why isn't he replying to my email!?" that is implicit in any business transaction.)
This is especially important for the Apple App Store because there is no other way to know if your app will be approved.

This is HUGE! Do you believe a company can flourish just as an App store app. or is that just too risky. Would love to hear your personal opinion.

I'm working on an enterprise solution, and it's reliance is completely on Apple's code-of-conduct.
I got a very rough quote from a Toronto firm to do a location based app for web, iPhone and Android for approximately $370,000. I just talked to a Vancouver developer who charges $120/hr. As others have mentioned there are numerous variables, but most developers will usually be happy to do an initial free consultation to learn more about your project so that they can at least ballpark a figure to you.
The hardest thing to me about ditching Mac would be that Apple is the only company capable of doing a user interface.

ALL other user interfaces by ALL other vendors suck.

For some reason, no human beings on the entire planet other than those that work at One Infinite Loop in Cupertino are capable of doing a UI.
I don't see how. They don't ask for source when you submit your app, so it shouldn't matter at all what language you "originally" wrote the app in. This is just a bullshit control-freak move. Apple has stopped looking out for the interest of it's users and has started looking to punish it's competitors. Epic fail. <sigh>
Even though I've been in business for 20 years I'll bet the number of people who have knowingly, intentionally deceived me is very low, probably in single digits. Maybe none.

That sounds naive, and maybe it is. But psychological and neurological research all points in the same direction: that people perceive the same situation radically differently, and even remember the same incident differently. There are even physiological artifacts that accompany or cause these divergences. So most of the time when people are 'lying' to me they probably believe what they're saying.

That doesn't answer the original question, but it challenges the assumptions in the article, that lying is commonplace and a constant temptation. It also changes the way I (and I think others) should respond to a 'liar'. Assume the person isn't lying, even if you think they're wrong and should know it. Accept the data, evaluate, verify, and move on. Ascribing motives or morality might be satisfying, but it's unhelpful. Worse, emerging science suggests it may be a mistake.
Who cares what you think they want? Read the developer agreement. What's it say? Anything that isn't C, C++, or Objective-C is banned.
There is very good evidence for short lifespans until quite recently, including the remaining bones from Pleistocene times. Much of the evidence is reviewed in The Nature of Paleolithic Art,

http://www.amazon.com/Nature-Paleolithic-Art-Dale-Guthrie/dp...

a book full of interesting information on how our ancestors lived.
MSN is far worse.

On several of my sites, it routinely requests URLs that are 1) blocked in robots.txt and 2) have been 404 for years
I don't know about the rest of you, but attempting to open this in Chrome on Linux totally toasts my browser, i.e. nothing will load any more.
I have, and it has some significant bugs that make it difficult to use:

- There is a bug with the compiler not properly counting references when assigning a variable that needs a
release to a property marked "retain". The property will increment the reference count, expecting the caller to decrement it, but the static analyzer does not see this, and so fails to warn.

- http://www.openradar.appspot.com/7338181 - CodeSense fails to work when Static Analysis is turned on.

(DISCLAIMER: I am using Xcode 3.2.1 on Snow Leopard 10.6.3)
Although historically I have always agreed with you, I dare say Microsoft is starting to figure it out. Slowly but surely. Win7 is almost a pleasant experience.
That's what I'm worried about. The instant that happens, I'm gone.
Video of the iPhone OS 4 Event
Yup. And your point is? For the third time now, my point isn't that this is a good thing, and I'm certainly not a fan of the decision. My point is that Apple isn't doing this because they hate developers, or want to tweak Adobe's nose (well, maybe a little), but because all they care about is their product's user experience.
so they cripple the tools that developers may use

By only allowing the tools they use? It seems like if what you said was true they would do exactly the opposite.
Adobe's response, from a game-theoretic perspective, is to adhere to

3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs
in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use
or call any private APIs. Applications must be
originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or
JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit
engine, and only code written in C, C++, and
Objective-C may compile and directly link against
the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link
to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation
or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

by simply generating Objective-C as their Object Code. Developers then compile this for their target platform (iPhone) and stay within the bounds of 3.3.1. I see Apple is trying to put a kibosh on this with the "originally written" clause, but, that will be a stretch to enforce.
The fact is that older people incur much larger healthcare costs over their lifetimes [1]. In fact, "[those 85+] consume three times as much health care per person as those 65–74, and twice as much as those 75–84."

That's why curing aging should be both a fiscal and moral imperative.
No... because DuckDuckGo can't afford to pay them.

The announcement omits the part that Google is paying them for the spot on default search.
You're wrong: every decent product is a platform. Photoshop and GIMP have plugins developed on top of them, and professional designers are very much reliant on "photoshop the platform" for their existence.
Ask HN: How do you organize the online "content" you consume?
I'm re-constructing my process for collecting, sorting, using and archiving content from the numerous feeds, websites and links I go through during a day.

The amount of things that I have coming in can be overwhelming and I'm trying to find that balance point where I sort and retain useful things, without spending a huge amount of time on it.

How do you do it? Any tips you can share?
Hmm... if it's flimsy I probably wouldn't like it. One thing I don't like about Apple hardware is how you have to treat it like a family heirloom or it turns into a scratched up mess. Anything less hardy than that would be unusable.

Toughbooks are also promising, but they're light on the specs... could someone please make a durable and well-specced laptop?
Developing for iPhone, you write the app once and it will work the same on everyone's hardware.

I think you meant, "it will work the same on everyone's iPhones".
This is exactly what I thought the original app approval process would be for: an Apple "seal of quality". That would be a fine trade off for users -- they may only get the approved apps, but at least they're screened for quality.

However, that isn't what the approval process is. There are literally thousands of crappy applications that were happily approved and clogging up all categories in the app store. It seems non-trivial app rejections are not done on behalf of the user but are done solely to protect Apple's own interests. Remember when a bunch of high-quality Google voice apps disappeared from store? And that's just one example, there have been many more.

And now they're rejecting apps not based on their quality, but based on the programming language or development environment used to create them. How is that at all relevant to the user? This is entirely about protecting Apple's own interests and the comparison to Nintendo's lock down of the NES is not applicable.
Yeah I think he totally misread it, as it specifically says that it has to be compiled directly from c/c++/objc. Is he tied directly to Monotouch beyond being the creater of Mono? If so he's either crazy or lying to try and save sales.
Poor comparison. All you need to be an authorized Apple Developer is $99. They aren't really trying to lock down the developer market, only the developer-compiler market.
So you'd allow it would be possible to bring out a kick-ass JS app framework targeted only at the iPad?
I took at look at your main app page. To be honest as a one-language-only filthy American I do think twice whenever I feel the wording does not "sound right". It makes me question the quality of the product or service (however unwarranted) and makes it a lot harder for me to trust you with my money.

With that said, here's a quick rewrite of some of your copy. You can use it verbatim if you like it, but otherwise I will not be offended if you think its terrible either =)

------

The Internet gives You the unique opportunity to change the way You interact with Your customers.

Let's imagine you want to sell shoes on the Internet. You go to a site like eBay.com and signup. With a couple of clicks
you get instant access to a huge marketplace of buyers and sellers, powerful merchant tools like payment processing, inventory management and automatic printable shipping labels; you get a complete service solution instantly.

But what if you sell services?

Selling & delivering shoes is not like selling & delivering services. Service-based businesses typically must deal with:

-- Long, drawn-out sales cycles.

-- Project delivery and continual customer communication.

-- Virtual team management and subcontracting.

-- Billing & invoicing - often in phases based on billable man-hours.

Above all, we must be human. A service based business succeeds on the quality of human-level support and follow through.

-----

Notes:

I took out a lot of unecessary filler words. You don't need to put things like "we feel", or "I believe", be confident and talk as if it's fact! Also be very conscious of using "I" and "we". Replace those with "YOU" when applicable. The application, the service, the benefits, its all about YOUR CUSTOMER. YOU YOU YOU YOU YOU. Get used to writing about your customer.

Hope this helps.
Content Management Projects
Over the years I've been involved in hundreds of website projects, most of which have been built on some sort of content management system. I’ve used open source software, proprietary software and a fair number of custom built CMS’. Each one has its advantages and disadvantages, but overall CM projects tend to suffer in the same areas.
Yup, freedom to have: no access to hardware, no ability to do anything computationally intensive, no filesystem access, no storage, no disconnected access, ...
I never claimed to be a master liar, and it should be obvious that I'm not one. I don't like doing it, as I find it distasteful, and I don't, but I recognize that certain kinds of material and social success will require deception for 99+% of people.

Most people live in a world of fiction and react horribly to having that fiction refuted, which the truth often does. If you're willing to piss them off and have them hate or reject you (which I often am, because it's endlessly amusing to me) tell the truth to them. If you want smooth relationships with them, offer up a story.

One of those fictions is "Society"; many people have a deep desire to believe that they're among an exclusive elite-- and those who are powerful have the means to persist in this semi-delusion-- and that this elite encompasses all people who are of any value-- this part is obviously ridiculous. If you ape their values and manners (spin a story; uphold the fiction) these people may let you into their club and you may benefit from their resources; if you upset their story with the truth (that most people of talent are not like them and have different values and backgrounds) they will either reject you or (if you pierce their shield of self-deception) become very angry. The former is more likely, but neither benefits you.
In other words, "correlation rises the chance of a causation"?
Sure, 'multiplatform compiling/targeting' is one thing.
But banning non-approved languages is silly. Even apple is funding projects like RubyCocoa and bringing Python compatability to the Cocoa API. If somebody wants to write an app using CocoaTouch but finds Ruby, Python, Lua, or Mono to be a better fit for the project or their own capabilities than Obj-C, why stop them from doing so?
If the apps still have to interface with Cocoa somehow, how are such app's any more/less native than one written in Obj-C? Such a policy does nothing to stop somebody from writing a cross-platform targetting framework that uses Obj-C. The language is not the real issue.
Yeah, I noticed that too. Kind of ironic for a design firm to have such a bizarre nav interface. Doesn't help that any logos have no labels attached either. One cool element of the weird UI becomes apparent if you click the different coloured bars on the left hand side of the page, the weird floating boxes rearrange themselves according to their tags/metadata. This would be one sweet way of visualising 'linked data', perhaps some thing we'll see more of in future.

More on linked data from the grandaddy of the net:

http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_berners_lee_on_the_next_web.htm...
I think if your whole business is based on one iPhone app, you are at high risk. Even if you get approved today, there is no guarantee that Apple doesn't change their mind tomorrow.
Yes, but then the app still wouldn't be "originally written" in Objective-C.
My email is in my profile if you want to talk.

The long and the short of it: You can flourish, but you can also get dragged along and then watch your app get shot like a dog after 6 months of being dragged through "maybe if you did this it would be okay" from the developer liaison people.

If you'd like, I can call one of them and go "Hey, is this in any shaky territory you can think off of the top of your head" if you want me to. I talk a lot about the environment in my HN comments if you want to read about it.

They're totally non-committal, but hey, they'll point out anything that sticks out.

Then again, we're starting android development here too.... :OD.
I do freelance iPhone/iPad dev work. I'm in Boston. grinich@mit.edu

For reference, I built this: http://michaelgrinich.com/hackernews/ The rest of my portfolio isn't yet online. Send me an email and I can show you more.
I think I'm already gone :( I am now seriously considering mowing down my iMac and MacBook and putting Linux on them. (Not that this makes a lick of difference, but it will make me feel better)
Phusion (makers of Ruby Enterprise Edition and Phusion Passenger) definitely make a profit.

I think they basically just do it through consulting + a little support and training. (See http://phusion.nl/services). But since they wrote Passenger and REE, I'm sure they can command a very high rate.
I'm using rent-a-coder to develop an iPhone app for an automatic thought record -- a tool that clinicians use to help people challenge irrational thoughts with evidence and rational thoughts. I put the bid out at $300 just to see what happened. I had 3 bids and ended up choosing one w/60+ reviews and a 9.7 (out of 10 rate) for $250. Feel free to email me with any questions. I'd be happy to share the project plan they developed.
if you want more meat - go the the wiki where the projects are and the links to the code

http://dccodeathon.pbworks.com
or readup more at http://citability.pbworks.com

after the event I will post all the links to source code. There isn't much yet only discussions about architecture.

We don't require anyone to follow any standards - and we aren't reinventing the wheel. We are just dressing up the distributed versioning wheel for govt people so they can understand it. That is why I think we can get it done in a weekend. Re-inventing a wheel takes more than that...:-)
If you believe Trefis, the iPhone makes up a little over 50% of AAPL's value as compared to ~20% from the Mac line, so anyone that thinks of it as more successful is right: http://www.trefis.com/company?hm=AAPL.trefis&hk=34d9a244...

I really hope that this ridiculousness doesn't start to bleed through - the MacBook Pro is pretty much the only laptop I've ever considered usable for development, and I don't know what I'd do if I had to abandon it...
when people are 'lying' to me they probably believe what they're saying.

One one level yes, this is true. More than true, it's wise. The problem is that we can deceive ourselves into holding self-serving beliefs... sincerely. Upton Sinclair said it best: "It is very hard to make a man understand something, when his job depends on his not understanding it."

And such people aren't lying or dissembling. It's just much cheaper, in terms of mental effort, to develop beliefs that the world is the way you would like it to be.
But Apple will still be the first-class platform and Android will be the second-class citizen in that scenario.
Agreed -- I had just found Titanium and was gearing up to make app ports using it. Now I'm nervous whether they will be allowed.
I view this also as Apple forcing developers to make a choice between Android and IPhone.

Let's say you have limited developer resources and can only develop an app for one platform, most would choose the IPhone due to its large install base.
Hyping, shading and puffing are normal in entrepreneurial circles and, properly limited, are probably expected to some degree. People discount the statements accordingly.

Misrepresenting material facts or omitting to disclose something major (like the loss of your major customer the day before a funding) constitutes securities fraud and can get you in a heap of trouble, notwithstanding how it may have worked out in a particular case such as that cited in this piece.

There are also limits to hyping if it amounts to misrepresenting material facts. I was once approached by an entrepreneur whom I turned down as a client and who later got busted for securities fraud for having done a demo claiming that certain of his company's whiz-bang technology was in fact doing something stupendous when it was in reality just a rigged demonstration designed to simulate what he claimed his technology could already achieve. Having raised $7 million based on such demonstrations, mostly from gullible investors, he went to jail for his "over-hyping" of his product.

When it comes to issues such as lying, there are moral issues and there are legal ones. If you are an entrepreneur who wants to avoid serious problems, the rule should always be: never lie in a way that amounts to fraud or misrepresentation (legally speaking), no matter what the supposed benefit. It is not worth it.

Concerning moral issues, the issue for me is one of integrity. Just as we all can stretch something when it helps us, and just as we all do so to some degree, so we can stretch it to the point where it amounts to a pure fabrication. Mild stretching might be considered a gray area. Fabrication is a character issue that can reflect badly on the entrepreneur. Of course, this depends on context as well. If it is clear you are speculating (such as about growth rates), that is one thing. If you are knowingly misrepresenting facts, the natural thought that occurs to people you are dealing with is, "If he will do that once, how can I trust him not to do it again." You might think it is innocent in your mind, but crooks make a living off such misrepresentations. And there is no percentage in aligning yourself with that which is unseemly. I have repeatedly seen the consequences of such activity in courts of law, and they are not pretty in cases when things do blow up.
Windows 7 is usable for two reasons:

1) They removed much of the "originality" that they did from Vista.

2) They copied more stuff from Apple, and a little bit from the Linux ecosystem.

Oh... and what's their fetish with that sickening shade of teal/blue? Yuck! It looks like smurf vomit.
Xtranormal - Text-to-Movie
Apple is letting them fail in the market. On their competitors' devices.

Don't worry, if you savor the cross-platform software experience there will be plenty of options for you. At bargain prices, in fact.
It would greatly surprise me if they did so, not least because every new piece of Apple software might get hit with speculative IP lawsuits if they had any features that bore even the most remote similarity to an iPhone app for which the developer had submitted code...even a company as wealthy as Apple would weep at the compliance costs.

But the indirect effect would be to shut people up. Rather than spending much or any effort on peeking inside iPhone apps looking for signature traces of cross-compilation, Apple would benefit because people would stop talking in public about which 3rd-party development platforms they had used for their cool new app, out of fear that mentioning anything besides C, C++ or Obj. C might result in their app being taken off sale - so without Apple doing a single thing different at the technical level, this license provision would have a chilling effect on discussion about competitors' development tools.
If Apple was judged a monopoly alot of this type of behavior, along with AppStore monopoly, would likely be barred. Until they are judged a monopoly, this is legit from a legal POV.