skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a very typical religious argument. It puts religion, in this case Christianity, on a piedestal where it doesn't belong if you don't happen to be Christian.

The original statement in it's logic form is this: You believe in 530 gods, I believe in 529 gods. 530 minus 529 is 1, so we agree on not believing in most of the gods.

That's it. Nothing more to it. And assuming the date didn't secretly worship Zeus it's true. It's simply a way of dismissing the subject, knowing that a discussion between an atheist and a true believer is bound to end in an argument. Especially on a first date.

Instead of taking this for what it is there seems to be the need for an elaborate explanation of why there is a god and why that god is the one you happen to believe in. And the whole explanation is based on the premise of Christianity which the other part doesn't believe in.

Please don't take this as a personal attack - it's not in any way meant as one, but it's an interesting discussion.
This interested me actually. In the UK we have a general baseline of Christianity but I generally thought that the beliefs were mostly agnostic to atheist. But when I happened to mention I was an atheist to my parents (who show no other interest in religion) they were outwardly surprised.
True, but Objective-C is a strict superset of C, and there are a large number of new Objective-C programmers that never learned C, or only used C in a class or two at school, and need a refresher.
I'm sorry, what?

Apache doesn't have security issues at all like Wordpress, you are confusing FLEXIBILITY with INSECURE software.
It's not just the Dutch and Germans who owe these guys thanks, we Irish do too, as our moronic government tried to bring in very similar e-voting machines to our shores also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Ireland

Sticking it to the man, making a great political statement & protecting democracy, educating the less-technically literate, utilising their technical skills for the greater good... Mr. Gonggrijp, I would buy a hat so I could take it off to you, sir.
Nice story. As a fastmail user this makes me happy for them, though with a bit of trepidation for myself -- change is not something you want to happen to your email ;)

(FWIW I've been very happy with them. I'm an offlineimap sort of person, and having their service host my mail has been perfect. I just pay my bills and don't think about it, and when it comes to email delivery, that's how it should be!)
Facebook vs. Zynga
I haven't seen it for people you aren't friends with before the last few days, so I'm pretty sure - either that or it's a bug. Either way, some feedback on it would be welcomed if anyone knows anything.
> This is what GoDaddy does in spades. Love or hate GoDaddy, they are kicking ass at it.

For what it's worth, I dropped GoDaddy because I got tired of the upselling. So while it may work on average, you can't expect to retain every customer.
Yes.

It's actually rude to show up excessively early for ANY sort of social engagement and, despite the business context and objectives involved, an in-person interview IS a social engagement.

Despite the professional context, you are still considered a "guest" and the employer is considered the "host". In most cultures, the host is expected to provide some sort of accomodations for the guest--if only acknowledgment of arrival and a simple waiting area considered a non-public space. By showing up excessively early, you're placing an "excess of obligation" upon the "host".

If you find that, by happenstance, you'll arrive "excessively early" for your interview. The default behavior is bide your time in some fashion that does not involve any obligation on the part of your "host" until just shortly prior to the appointed time.

Depending on the circumstances of your arrival, one can try calling ahead to ask the other party "If they would prefer, it's unexpectedly become possible to move up your meeting". I generally don't recommend this as it can greatly over-complicate previously agreed upon schedules and, if not handled delicately, can convey the impression that one or both parties don't place enough value on each other's time, attention, and prior commitments.
thank you, how did you do that?
And Android's built-in WebKit-based browser.
Earliest known example of the Reddit front page. From November 1865.
Hey,

For anyone having problem cleaning it up, we have a simple script to do it for you:
http://blog.sucuri.net/2010/05/simple-cleanup-solution-for-l...
I strongly disagree.

Just because something hasn't been proven to be false it doesn't mean it's true. It hasn't been decisively proven that the Earth wasn't sneezed out of the nose of a giant space-goat, but that doesn't mean that the goat-sneezing theory should be equally valid to other theories which have more empirical evidence to their name.

I have never seen any empirical evidence for the existence of a god, and thus it doesn't seem like a valid theory.
There have been many occasions previously when Facebook did something that was really fast - Beacon, profile redesigns, moving apps onto separate tabs, etc. etc. - each time there was a lot of bad publicity and some high profile account closings; in the long-term it didn't do anything to slow down Facebook's growth.

I am not saying that there can never be another social network that knocks Facebook out of #1, but bringing back features or privacy settings that Facebook dropped in favor of long-term growth is not the strategy that will bring about that kind of change.
I have the soundtrack from it, which is admittedly the most embarrassing part :-)
The way facebook is going about this is absolutely the wrong angle.

I understand its their platform, and they can do what they want, but they should live and die like any other payment system. Zynga should choose them because even with the 30% skim, Facebook credits still give Zynga more revenue than other payment systems. This isn't too hard to imagine - Facebook has the ability to integrate credits with their site like no 3rd party provider can.

Instead they come across like cry babies.
"Ultimately, scientists may find that only travel into the future is possible"

WOW! I did it! I traveled into the future! Not by much, but I'm at least 1 minute farther into the future than when I started.

The entire article talks only about travel into the future.

Now while that's correct from a scientific point of view, it's not really time travel any more than day to day life is time travel.
It's had its fair share of problems. Mostly in the past at this point though. It is heavily bloated and overgrown compared with something lean and mean like nginx.

Even if Wordpress didn't have security issues there'd be room for an nginx of blogging.
That is interesting. I've never discussed religion with my parents or other family - just assumed them to be agnostic. Maybe I'm wrong...
Hopefully, Valve will release the rumored Steam for Linux and make massive profits. That would go a long way towards proving that Linux users will buy stuff.
Oddly enough I was brought up a churchgoing Christian, but was convinced by arguments of pretty much this same form that Christianity was almost certainly false.
That should be 'devolution'.
Similar conversion going on at LSC:
http://groups.google.com/group/lean-startup-circle/browse_th...
I'm trying to provide a concise overview of different language features and to highlight some common gotchas when using them. I'm assuming that most of my readers already know how to program well in at least one language, but are inexperienced with C and Objective-C. I agree that it's not a good tutorial for people just learning to program.
clickable-> http://www.ticketspyer.com
Seriously, how on earth does Facebook expect to get away with a 30% tax and reduce virality to the point of only being able to advertise to get users?
"Scientists around the world agree that every scientific topic should be debunked. The ones that are left -- the ones that survive an attempt at debunking -- should be taken as fact, presumably until they are debunked and replaced with something more valid."

This is exactly the same as what many modern religious thinkers would say, which was my original point-- that debunking old dogma doesn't do anything to disprove the 'cutting edge' of religious thought.

edit: Whatever, if you read my archive you'll see I'm probably the most atheist atheist on HN, but at least I'm willing to be intellectually honest and give the other side a fair shake.
Aw, man, I'm so conflicted about that.

I made the financial effort to refurbish the "fat" PS3 when it died, even though I'd already bought a Slim, just to keep that system around to learn Cell programming. It's still running the old firmware and, in fact, boots directly into Yellow Dog Linux by default.

Yet, I agree, it feels kind of pointless nowadays, with the GPUs becoming so much better all the time. Just recently the GTX 260 broke the $200 floor at newegg.com and I'll probably buy one pretty soon (maybe when they are around $150) - and those things are pretty powerful. The real motivator is actually to play Tomb Raider Underworld :-) but I'm pretty sure I'll at least try and do some CUDA with it.

So, doing an open source project on the Cell doesn't seem so attractive nowadays. Maybe just for bragging?

I've also heard rumors that there's a successor to the Cell in the works. I'm not sure how it will compare with the GPUs though.
The acceleration is what worries me... What's next: July 2010 - SkyNet
Indonesia Furniture Handicraft Wholesale Marketplace
I was going to make this same point.

No amount of investigation into god/religion is going to prove the existence of a god. Once someone reaches this realization and at the same time still lacks faith, I see no reason to go any further if they aren't inclined. There's finite time and only so much people can do with it. I don't see why god/religion should be any more deserving of this time than anything else.
It works well against the argument, "How can you not believe in God?" The belief that 'belief in God' is a given is equally stupid.
I think a lot of people are missing the point (although the comments are really interesting...keep those up).

One person is just trying to say to the other that their different beliefs don't make them very different people. Based on the second person's reaction, I'd say their beliefs don't make them that different (in this case).

Someone mentioned that this argument came from Dawkins' book; this seems like a small twist on that argument to make a different (and demonstrably valid) point.
> I've never really understood why we shouldn't be able to travel backwards in time.

Because time is not a place you can go to. Time is a measure how how fast the various reactions, and forces, and processes that make up your atoms, moves.

Those reactions can move faster, or slower. But there is no place you can go to to travel backward in time. Time is NOT a river or a line. Time is just a measure of how fast your reactions processed relative to the reactions of other things.

The reason time is sometimes talked about as a line is that it works mathematically. And the mathematics works if you reverse it too. But that doesn't mean the math has a physical reality.
New FTC Complaint Filed Against Facebook
The Ancient Greek word it comes from is (w)oida, "I know". Structurally, it's the perfect tense of (w)eido, "I see": knowing something is equivalent to having seen it, for Ancient Greeks. I loved reading that in the dictionary.

Their word that properly meant "I have seen" was "(w)idon"; the wid- root comes into English as wit/witty, and via Latin as video and visual.
Am I right in thinking (from your domain) you are Danish? I'd be interested in whether you're right or not in that assumption. Because It's common thought to me that northern European countries are generally more agnostic anyway (I suspect because the Roman Empire/Holy Roman Empire never really touched it)
His argument was not a "we're basically the same, you can round off the way in which we are not, QED" argument. It was a way of giving a theist an atheist's perspective.

"HOW can you not believe in God? I can't imagine life without believing in God!"

"Well millions of people used to not be able to imagine life without believing in Zeus et al, and you don't believe in them."

It reminds them that there isn't even a consensus within theists over which god is the right one, and it's a way to diffuse the issue.
No, he was saying that whether or not there is a God is either a true or false statement.

Now of course, whether or not we can determine the truth of that statement is another question entirely. I certainly am not aware of any way of proving it either way in this life, and indeed the evidence I am aware of (in either direction) is highly ambigious. And of course, even if you decide you personally beleive there is a God (or a multitude of them) that does not indicate which (if any!) of the currently available religions is closest to correct.

I arrived at my decision to believe in Christianity by a leap of faith. I think there is some evidence I can bring to bear to support it, but I am the first to admit that it would not stand up in most courts of law much less in the arena of science. I believe it because on an intuitive emotional level, it seems right.

Thus, I try to respect all religious beliefs. I cannot prove my beliefs are correct. I cannot disprove someone else's beliefs (excluding a very few fringe groups that make provably false claims, and even then it is those specific claims not the religion as a whole I could disprove).

But, while my belief in God is a personal thing, the existence or nonexistence of God is a fact. We may not be able to answer the question in this mortal life, but it is still either true or false.
They should make a "what is this?" link on the front page, instead of people having to guess "API".

I don't do much front end web development, so I'm not 100% sure I get the point, let me know if I get this correctly:

Problem 1: You want to embed things from different sites. You have to learn each of their APIs. Come oembed, there's just one that all participants agree on. whateversite.com/oembed/url=$url&otherparams=stuff (where $url is within whateversite.com) which saves a lot of code and debugging efforts.

Problem 2: You still have to send requests for embedding for a.com to a.com, and so forth. Come embedly, you can send all your requests to the same place, embed.ly/url=$url

Thing is, Problem 2 seems trivial compared to Problem 1. oembed seems to do almost everything I'd want. I'm already testing if a given link is in embed.ly's list, right? I have the link I want to embed, I'm sending it to embedly. I might as well parse out the domain, add the oembed path, and send it to the source.
"if you don't actually believe in god in the first place, than the decision to believe in god or not is just about as relevant as the decision to believe in santa claus"

That's not really an a accurate statement. What a person believes doesn't determine what is relevant in this case. What does determine what is relevant is what the truth about God actually is.

If God does exist, and if the Bible accurately describes His interactions with and expectations of man, then not believing He exists has ramifications that will affect you for all of eternity!

If God truly does not exist, then you might be able to argue that it is irrelevant whether you believe in Him or not. But even in that case, it depends on how the belief in a false deity affects the believer. Does their belief in a false deity guide how they make important decisions in life? If so, then even belief in a false deity is totally relevant.
Can't get anything to return in the search.
IMHO there is a decent alternative called Byteflow http://byteflow.su/

based on django btw
URLs in the comments, but not in submissions, are converted to links automatically.
It's the perceived hypocrisy.

Apple either cares about app quality (their stated reason for barring Flash) or they don't (thus it would be fine to let the crapps stay) - but they want to have it both ways. That's what people are down on.
Not to mention pybloxsom
Ritalin was just a stand-in that had the right connotations for the discussion. Something that plays the role of enabling/encouraging focus. The real point was surrounding that state of focus with a turned-up reward system, and then using the random rewards to get the person hooked on getting and staying in the desired focus state.
CSS Transparency Settings for All Browsers
Don't _you_ have anything better to do? ;)
I'd say they are valid theories simply by affect of not being completely absurd by "our standards". Many scientific theories have been considered absurd then ultimately proven. Obviously the religious argument has been around much longer; perhaps it is just a bigger question that "what is light", or maybe it is just bunk (I'm in the latter camp, if it matters).

Also, from a personal perspective, I would say that the weighting is clearly in favour of non-existence. However from a religious perspective it is the other way.

That, ultimately, is the source of all disagreement over religion. How do you find a common measurements of truth/non-truth when your "markers" are entirely different.

Which is invalid? Who judges?

(the answer, I feel is that society judges - and currently we are in transition from pro-theist to pro-atheist, but it will be a long transition)
I don't disagree with you at all. If you look at a lot of modern religious thought though, the assumptions are usually just as sound as the assumptions behind science. In fact, they are usually the same plus or minus one, with well-grounded reasons behind any diffs.
Meh, I don't find it to be in unacceptably bad taste. The comment was made more out of sympathy at the horrors of paralysis than out of cruelty or a desire to offend. It's "gallows humour", not "a sick joke".
but he won't. and neither would any other deity. they're just made up.
Many people have actually dabbled in several religions before ending up in the one they're currently in. Alternatively, they may have studied other religions to some extent to reassure themselves of the "correctness" of their original religion. In that sense they are familiar with other beliefs and probably feel that they have rejected those other systems on their own merits. In that framework, the 519 of 520 argument does make since, exclusive of the monotheistic prohibition against other gods.

I think what you are saying is that a Christian (for example) would say, "of course I don't believe in other god X, because I'm not allowed to". The 519 of 520 argument depends on whether the monotheist can also reject those other gods on their own merits.
You can deactivate your account when you sign off, then reactivate it whenever you want to do something with it. That way you are hopefully less vulnerable to their bugs and random privacy changes.
George Carlin put it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o
Some problems:

Can't use the tab button to access your states drop down. The JavaScript looks cool, but it is slow and can't be accessed via the keyboard.

Can't search by zip or city unless you use a whole address.

I would leave the ads out until you launch...they're distracting.

You should let people review without logging in.

I own a review site of my own and it is really hard to get people to leave reviews for things like neighborhoods. The problem is that people only rarely look for neighborhoods. Hotel review sites are successful because people are constantly searching for new hotel and like giving back to the community. That doesn't work so well for neighborhoods. You'll need a good marketing strategy.
How is this different to the project it is based on, dm-cache[1][2]?

Briefly skimming the documentation it seems that the first difference is the eviction policy: LRU in dm-cache vs FIFO in FlashCache (although LRU is an option).

Anyone know what prompted the name change and code fork?

[1] http://github.com/mingzhao/dm-cache
[2] http://users.cis.fiu.edu/~zhaom/dmcache/index.html
FFox here, but the read-only browser is Konqueror without Javascript. Two browsers are better than one ;-)
In both cases our CTO and Community Director were looking to do something new after almost four years and there were people coming up behind them. They got multiple job offers from amazing companies and decided to work at one of my companies... which actually share space with Mahalo.

So, we get to keep them "in the building" and all that knowledge stays here and Mahalo gets it for free!

This is my model: hire great people, invest in them and if I can't keep them past 3-4 years at one company get them a slot at one of my other companies! :-)
> Then, yes, Judaism influenced or started pretty much all of the modern religions.

If by 'all the modern religions,' you just mean the 'big 3.' [namely: Christianity, Islam, Judaism] I've never seen claims that any of the 'Eastern' religions were influenced by Judaism.
http://anyvite.com/events/home/dq4gjpnquo/w7ji380d8kmwpc/lhc...
I think its the same difference between investing in company lead by a former-consultant/bean-counter/"professional"-CEO and a real founder.

data is important, but it only gets you so far: table stakes. the thing that differentiates us is the ability to use intuition.

don't forget that your "gut" has been developed over millions of years of evolution to keep you alive, and its done a pretty good job. playing with numbers? couple thousand?
If you get a 600x speed increase, you did something wrong in your CPU application; there simply isn't 600x as much processing power on a GPU. Typical increases are about 5-10x, a bit more in applications with heavy floating-point math.

More importantly, regardless of how important you think encoding is, if I can't encode a 5 second test sequence in less than a day, I'm not going to be able to do much experimentation with the software. Sure, you can port it to a GPU, but right now it isn't on a GPU, and right now, I'd like to experiment with it.
The idea is that if you're going to do it at all, you should do it competently. The biggest component of the early uproar over the approval process was that it was a total cockup.

As for "written policy or term of service", those only apply to you, not Apple, and are enforced at their leisure under their interpretation. They can do whatever they want -- they don't have to publish your work if they don't want to.

Currently Apple only polices trademarks and copyrights that they own themselves -- for everything else they willfully turn a blind eye and wait for an infringement notice from the IP owner. They probably think they can successfully argue to a court that this absolves them of responsibility in all cases under the DMCA, but I'm not so sure.
why should religious belief have a special place in the continuum of silly thoughts? (you say they should be respected)

if you can make someone believe anything (e.g. there's this god with x,y,z attributes), you can make them do anything.
But you're talking from a position where it is currently not possible to prove the existence/non-existence of a God.

If, for example, God were proven to exist then the definition of an Atheist would not change. However the people who were Atheists would absolutely change - myself for one :) because many current Atheists are also rationalists.
Now now, that's a skepticism failure. A proper skeptic should acknowledge that it's very very unlikely that Thor exists, but that there is a small nonzero probability that he might.