skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I always thought that Levchin's PayPal experience would give Slide an opportunity to dominate the micropayments space that is generating so much revenue for competing social games companies. That thought wasn't very well fleshed-out (what specific advantages would it have given Slide? Was handling payments really a key pain point for Zynga et al?), but it still seems like a big missed opportunity to me.
If you are into health & fitness, try Bikram Yoga. It's the kind where you're in extreme heat. And there's also some extremely fit/attractive women there. Google for the closest one in your area.

FYI:
I have found a great mix of people there; so, it's not feminine. Actually, the founder is an Indian man. Also, it's a little expensive, but you get what you pay for.
Excerpt:

The notorious stage theory of Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, whereby one progresses from denial to rage through bargaining to depression and the eventual bliss of “acceptance,” hasn’t so far had much application in my case. In one way, I suppose, I have been “in denial” for some time, knowingly burning the candle at both ends and finding that it often gives a lovely light. But for precisely that reason, I can’t see myself smiting my brow with shock or hear myself whining about how it’s all so unfair: I have been taunting the Reaper into taking a free scythe in my direction and have now succumbed to something so predictable and banal that it bores even me. Rage would be beside the point for the same reason.

To me, this is the best bit from the article. Having gone so far down the road back to health when all the world tried to tell me it could not be done, it is very clear to me that one's thinking, and the actions that grow out of that, is critical to the ability to resolve the problem. I wish him well and I hope the above bodes well for his ability to think clearly and therefore see clearly whatever the necessary steps are for him to make the journey back to the land of the living.
Diagnosing Prostate Cancer and Its Treatment Options
Maybe you could elaborate on what you mean by "foaming at the mouth"? I read the wikipedia article you linked to and nowhere was that mentioned.
The US is in a somewhat unique position - as the de facto reserve currency, it can inflate its debts away.

Like Monopoly's "Get Out Of Jail Free" it's a card you can only play once, though.
You misunderstand what I'm saying. I personally find this less invasive than the current security measures.
How to generate a 500 Servlet Exception on www.vanityfair.com
Once you get to the highest level of beer connoisseurship you'll realize that blends are not a bad thing.
As someone who recently entered the advertising and design industry with my company, I would like to chime in with my thoughts.

I think a logo should be well thought out design, it doesn't have to tell a huge story but when someone looks at it they have to be able to say "Hey, thats the bingo card creator logo" or "that's verizon wireless". These cookie cutter design sites don't really produce results other than generic trendy designs built with skills obtained through generic tutorial sites - but props to them for earning some extra cash with those skills.

Secondly, I think it`s the all encompassing strategy that really represents the brand. Put simple: The brand is MUCH more than just a logo. It`s how you interact with your customers, it`s how you handle bad publicity and it`s how you advertise to your customers.

Patrick, keep the old logo. It`s not phenomenal, but it`s you.
I managed to invite my friends, only to find one non-geek who didn't know how to install Chrome Frame, and couldn't run anything but IE on her work machine (corporate policy).

The overhead of using IM group chats when she was in the conversation, and Wave when it was the rest of us, was too much, so we just dumped Wave.
Yes. They have been outspoken advocates of net neutrality in the past.

I could understand if net neutrality fell by the wayside and lots of companies started bidding on preferred access, Google could reasonably say "we wanted net neutrality, but in order to compete in a world without it, we have to buy preferred access as well". But having them be one of the first to bid for preferred access is immensely disappointing.
CNAMEs totally work -- the problem is that they override MX records. Earlier on we used to encourage users to use CNAMEs, but then they would inadvertantly lose ALL their email, even if we tried to explain to them that they shouldn't use CNAME's if you have MX records on there. So we stopped telling people to do that.
Whaaa? Either the NYTimes is completely wrong about what this agreement entails, or Google has a lot of explaining to do.
What does it mean to "drop down to C when needed" (under Mobile Engineer)?

If you're on iPhone aren't you always in [Objective] C? Are they talking about the NDK for Android? Embedded devices?
Well it is possible to work for a tech company and stay in SF. You just need to work with a more restrictive set of job requirements. I got tired of doing the long commute in 2003 and decided to only look at companies within the city limits. It took a year to find something I really liked, but it was life-changing to be able to work and live in the same place and avoid the 50-mile one-way commute.

And, of course, you can start and operate your company out of SF (which is what I eventually did as well).
This article a little hard to believe to me. It's unsettling to see it from the NYT. Is there a need to bring up Android twice? I fail see to how Verizon running Android phones strengthens the notion that these two companies are forming an alliance.

This would go against everything Google has publicly stated on the subject.
It is clear that Hitchens is facing grim odds. His is a voice that I'd hate to see silenced, but judging by this article, we could see some of his best work in his remaining days (however long they may be).
A question: how do you use delicious/ffffound on an iPad?
Heh, no. And he was a major factor in my resignation. We were all pretty sure he fit the clinical definition of psychopath.
Why would there be extra overhead when using edge triggered? There's definitely extra complexity on the client side, but it's close to what you're trying to do with super-poll (the extra complexity is basically to find out when an fd isn't busy anymore).

I think it might even be faster, kernel-side. From what I remember of the implementation, both modes have to walk the same list of ready fds, but that list is shorter in edge triggered mode, because they get removed from the list as it goes.

Edge triggered might have more overhead if many fds change between ready/not-ready quickly, but that's quite the wacky situation (and if it has an even distribution, would ensure your ATR is about 0.5, so probably still winning).
How To Read Mathematics
It really irks me when I hear comments like this. It seems as if MS can't win as far as some people are concerned.

I think this is a great article that demonstrates MS's commitment and enthusiasm to pushing their browser forward.
Can Language Shape How We Think?
As long as the site isn't true-blue porn, I wouldn't sweat it. In other words: if the site caters to people looking to hook-up, no big deal. If the site caters to people looking to pleasure themselves, this is perhaps a problem.

Of course, if you're asking this question it sort of indicates that the site is seedier than you're letting on or perhaps it is seedier than you want to admit. :)
As in "only the 3rd or 4th" (so I'm possibly clever), or as in "a bunch of people"? I don't know your sample size. :-)
Even Engineering degrees aren't necessarily the solution. It really depends on the times and severity of a recession. I lived in Malaysia through a time when the term "walking engineers" (unemployed engineers) was commonplace.

Lots of stories on the net about rocket scientists losing their jobs, and conducting tour buses.

What about the name of that guy who's preliminary work on bio-luminescence won someone else a Nobel prize, but he himself is now unemployed?

It's human nature to think that we can avoid somebody's misfortune by simply following some known heuristics. It is true only some of the time.
No, because people just care if they are going to make money with the deal.
If they go through with this it may be the beginning of the end for Google. At least for the google we once liked. Too many people are being hired by them. When they hire a lot of people not all them can be that great. I guess is time for the next great startup to come. The great next challenger of google may still be but an idea on the mind of an entrepreneur at this point. May explain why google likes to buy a lot of startups. Better kill them now before they kill google.
That random selection for additional screening was really getting to me until I shaved my beard, and it stopped.
The only thing that bothered me was the metaphor of the cancer being alien. It's not, which is worse: it's you. The cancer cells are your cells. Perhaps a better metaphor is that of a traitor.
I think that is wishful thinking. My gut is that they are seriously considering this if it allows them to grow.
I ended up reading this article multiple times and combing over every line of it to try and find the part where Google was going to buy Internet priority. In the end, I've concluded that the opposite is taking place. Google and Verizon are in talks about Google not taking legal action against Verizon, no matter how they choose to manage their network. While still troubling, the real concern is what this would show legislators about the need for net neutrality provisions. And it could go either way.
"Although I receive a small salary from Apple, I do virtually no real work at the company." -- Woz

That seems....wrong.
wow. the downvoters are strong in HN tonight.

an actual discussion would be an interesting thing.

sure, its easier to just downvote someone as you go past without actually engaging sufficiently to understand or discuss the issues, but ask yourself...is that really who you want to be?
Run a forced air line to the lowest level and run regular central air from the lowest level (rather than simply the basement, you'd be running it from the 2nd or 3rd sub-level).

It would also be ideal to ensure the basement is fully sealed (IE the moisture wrap they bury after you've had a leak can actually be laid before the foundation) which will help dramatically with the moisture in the basement levels.

I would imagine a house would become more vertical in narrower confines. I know my friend had a house that was only 12ft wide but long. The ground floor was kitchen and dining room, 2nd floor was a huge living room with a small bathroom, 3rd floor was 2 bedrooms, 4th floor (attic conversion) was the master bedroom with a huge en-suite bath.

I don't understand why you'd build a single story home on a <500sqft lot. A spiral staircase doesn't have a significant impact on square footage and a second or third level would dramatically increase the usable area rather than keep at the limit of ground level.
Do people really think like this?
The absolute worst part about this is that there is no reason to update basic infrastructure anymore on the lowest tier.

While I believe in the market some things are best as a baseline like basic education, roads, telephones, and internet access because those baselines actually create more market benefits and encourage opportunity and innovation.
The most obvious feature Google should have invested 5,000 man hours in: making Wave seamless in GMail as a standard. If you are talking to another GMail user, Wave should be automatically turned on for that message. I do not understand why this wasn't deathly obvious to them from the day that they announced Wave at Google IO 2009.
Murderers can kill bad guys too.

Calling someone a murder means you assert that they have murdered.

Don't make a leap of logic and then try to tell other people what they 'risk implicitly' doing.

The fact that you took this nonsense as far as you did makes me wonder whether you have some emotional need to justify these murderers, or if it's just part of your job.
Google has supported net neutrality legislation, but I don't think they've ever ruled out playing along with the carriers, had the regulatory efforts failed.

I'm not so sure what is so hard to believe; fast response times are crucial to Google's core business, selling eyeballs to advertisers. They could have waited for Microsoft or Yahoo to make the first move, but it's possible they were worried about being shut out.
I love how many positions there are and how varied they are. It's like "hey, we're hiring a whole company".
This article makes a lot of assumptions and is generally completely wrong.

"For one, apps require 3G connectivity in order to verify a transaction."

This is irrelevant at least with a system like the one we've developed (http://www.facecash.com). First of all, you can pay with your paper barcode. Second of all, we've designed the app to work on devices with flaky connections, or no connection at all, like an iPod Touch outside of a wi-fi area. The merchant needs a connection, but you don't.

"So, the same middlemen will take their cuts for all the same reasons when we switch from credit cards to credit phones..."

Our system has no middlemen.

"Instead, MacPherson says, start-ups should continue focusing on areas where they can gain ground — municipal parking systems, public transportation, vending machines and the like — because all other attempts to disrupt the credit card status quo have failed miserably."

I wonder how much MacPherson gets paid, directly or indirectly, by the credit card companies in his position as "IDC Financial Insights practice director for payments and security" to scare away competitors?
I'm not sure this is really an about-face on Google's part, even if true. There's nothing in the article to suggest that Google wants Verizon to require payment, just that there are talks between the two companies about Google paying Verizon not to put it in the slow lane. Reading between the lines, it sounds like Verizon is implementing a very non-neutral service and putting pressure on Google to pay up or have its sites penalized.
Wrote in some detail on this subject a few months back (and wound up in HN Monthly thanks to you guys upvoting!):

http://conversionvoodoo.com/blog/2010/04/increase-your-conve...
You've had a lot of insightful comments about this isssue, and although I tend to disagree with your conclusions, I think the quality of your analysis/argument has been superb.

I'd respond with only two points:

First, if Assange makes it harder to keep things secret, then less will be kept secret. This will have good and bad consequences, but I think it's safe to say that strict control of information (secrecy + focused propaganda) is a tool that despots rely upon heavily. That open democracies rely upon it can be viewed (as you seem to view it) as a necessity, or (as I view it) as an excess.

Assange is risking his own skin by doing this. Surely one or more of the governments could/would arrange for his assassination. Which is why this essay puzzles me. This sort of right wing critique will fuel the fire that has helped Assange publicize his mission, and will have the effect of making wikileaks just go away much harder.

Keep in mind that so far the secrets being leaked are not particularly revealing in terms of their information content. The harsh words by government officials are because the leaked information might cause the public to question its propaganda message about the war.

What I have come to realize from all of this is just how tightly intertwined a war effort is with propaganda, and to a lesser extent secrecy. Assange just may put a huge hole in the ability of modern governments to do easily achieve the level of secrecy/propaganda necessary to get a comfortable, complacent yet principled people to approve of mass slaughter.
they were nice enough to let you use it for free

They didn't give me the option to pay for it to keep it though, did they.

It's not the case that google (or any other tech company out there) gains nothing by "letting people use things for free". They gain the possibility of creating/cornering a niche, they get a bunch of advocates that help them spread their brand (see swombat's comment), they get an army of unpaid beta-testers, they can sell market dominance to their advertisers, etc etc.

But, if they keep releasing and dropping products, they will lose those things. That is their call, and they are free to make it - I just wanted to point out one consequence.

The plus side for the HN populace is that people like me are more than happy to pay a specialist shop for the chance that it will stick around and develop its product. This is why my photos are on smugmug and not picassa, why my notes are in evernote and not google notebook (another release-and-drop product), why my to-do list is in toodledo and not google tasks, etc etc.

Frankly if Google went poof tomorrow, the only thing I would really cry over would be google reader. I am actually very sad it has come to this.
The question you have to ask is not just whether it bothers you, but whether it bothers anyone you care about - and not just "bother", but materially affect them, anything from bullying (think: teenagers at school) to body shame.
The US has decided that it is ok with the FBI breaking international law. It's like your parents being ok with you breaking the rules at your friend's house, or town curfew.
Bizarre how he so broadly paints the world with America's laws.
> The dominant opinion was absolutely that Android wouldn't crack the iPhone's dominance. Of course it's all clear now though, and everyone has carefully adopted new positions.

This is simply wrong. I don't know how you could have developed such a misreading of popular analysis, but the idea that 6 months ago most people didn't know Android would overtake iPhone is laughably false. Six months ago several of my coworkers already had Android powered phones and there were numerous reports of many more Android phones from multiple vendors on the way.

> Wow, I care so incredibly little whether Motorola or HTC or Samsung makes boatloads of profit. In fact... [snip]

> I care about the platform that I develop for, that I use, that empowers or limits us... [snip]

Well, then why are you so excited that Android has greater market share than iPhone? That's not relevant to how you're scoring. Lots of developers vastly prefer programming Linux or Macs over Windows, and it is often for intangible reasons as you suggest.

> Now that's the weakness?

No, that continues to be the strength insofar as it empowers entrepreneurial software developers. This is along the lines of your last point. Developers will choose the OS that helps them reach their goals, which in many cases is money.

It is a weakness with regards to market share since it is one phone on one carrier. How could this be any more obvious?
If they bought in at $2B valuation wouldn't that just mean they lost money and there would still be whatever percent of the shares / $182m that weren't sold to the investor's left?
Windows XP Pro price raised (on average) to around $150. Windows 7 Pro is (on average) $85. I know large corporations get killer deals, but over time the cost will outweigh the benefits. I think the phase out will be less than 5 years for most businesses.
Maybe The Google Monster Ain’t So Scary After All
No Please Don't. Google had the good sense and humility to let a failure fail. Don't y'all go fucking that up.
The Onion got a makeover? I can't say I recognise the design...
Fine, try again with better execution. No need to keep a brand name associated with flops.
Total capitulation on Google's part. They were one of the few companies that could have stood up to the telecoms. We can't expect the congress, bought and paid for by telecom dollars, to do it. The courts won't allow the FCC to do it. This was Google's moment to change the world. What bothers me is not only did they shrug off that responsibility we projected on them as being a smart company standing up for users but they didn't even put up a fight. They seem to be the first US company to happily surrender to the telecoms. I hate to say it because it comes off like a conspiracy theory but you can't convince me that Android and Google TV aren't the main factors behind this. Google doesn't want to pick a fight with wireless providers, telco-video providers, cable TV/broadband providers. They need them to push their products. I can't believe they're doing this. It's mind boggling.
Or you could ask them to make you sign such an NDA ... then it wouldn't be a lie :)
That's terrible reason. If it was a startup, they'd either sink or swim. Maybe better marketing would have helped, maybe the client sucks, maybe the concept sucks. But there's no reason for Google to throw good money after bad, it's not like there's nothing else they could be working on (including the next, better Wave from the etherpad guys).
Vanity license plates - a geek perspective
Why not just ask them for an NDA then it's not a lie.
How did this leave the front page so quickly? Hm...
Not to me. We hired a guy who worked on the, ahem, back end of a popular iPhone gay meet up app. That it got a lot of traffic was a plus to us.
That is sad - I have written a few Wave Robots and wrote an article on Wave. I never thought of it as a user-facing system as-is, but instead liked it as a development platform. I probably invested a little less than 80 hours playing with Wave and writing Robots, and I think it was time fairly well spent, even if Wave is going away.
The ongoing space exploration efforts will also serve to inspire up and coming young scientists. Their efforts will help to advance technologies across the board.
The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users.

But it could also lead to lower charges -- if the content/advertising side of the net starts to subsidize the last mile via the carriers. Broadcast TV is 'free', after all.

And even if such agreements caused higher charges in the short term, if that prompted new entrants and the deployment of new technologies -- mesh networks again, anyone? -- then the medium-to-longer term trend could again be lower charges.

I could easily imagine a starter broadband service that is totally 'free' -- with bandwidth to participating sites as fast as those sites want to pay, and bandwidth to all other sites under some smallish rate cap (no good for video/p2p). The same arrangement could also work well for areas of 'free' wifi -- subsidized sites are fast at bulk, other sites work but subject to some per-person (or per all-users) caps.

That's different than what we're used to, but not necessarily worse. It could provide incentives for creating new avenues to the end-user and new service opportunities. (Consider: a VPN account that pays the preference fee, so that again 'all sites' are top-speed.)