skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The problem with this argument is that I'd like to see data that single people subsidize married people. I suspect it is that wealthier married people subsidize everyone else.

But again, maybe you actually have the data that shows that single people subsidize married people.

One way to handle this is to separate out the economy into single vs married economies. Effectively different tax pools. Although I suspect the burden of single parent households on the single tax pool would be pretty weighty... especially if you get rid of child credits.
Google put absolutely 0 muscle behind this product. Android got front page placement on Google and it has now overtaken iPhone. They either didn't truly believe in Wave or the marketing team just made a huge gaffe by not even making a half ass attempt to push this product to the consumer world.
It's fascinating that they only used rational basis instead of intermediate or strict scrutiny. While precedent currently places sexual orientation in the realm of rational basis, I think that an extremely strong case could be made that a law concerning the right of gays to marry involves a suspect classification. All of the following criteria appear to be true:

- The group has historically been discriminated against, and/or have been subject to prejudice, hostility, and/or stigma, perhaps due, at least in part, to stereotypes.

- The group is a "discrete" or "insular" minority.

- They possess an immutable and/or highly visible trait.

- They are powerless to protect themselves via the political process. (In this case, they are subject to the tyranny of the majority.)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspect_classification)

It will be interesting to see what happens when this reaches the Supreme Court.
Interesting points even if we don't agree with all of them - most of all, for the importance of a) not typecasting everyone with a particular piece of paper and b) emphasizing the best things that business-y people could bring to the table.

Upvotes for the cached version, thanks!
I did read the ruling and I’m sorry but it doesn’t change anything. The whole premise of the case was built on people claiming they were discriminated against but that IS ALREADY ILLEGAL IN CALIFORNIA. The question presented by the person who made the comment I responded to was “were people being denied specific rights?” and I’m sorry but they aren’t.
Sound Opinions is a fantastic music talk show.

http://www.soundopinions.org/
I was thinking about this recently: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1362223
I'm actually glad that you stopped spreading your FUD and started looking at it realistically. Thank you for that.

But look at it from my perspective. You seem like the one spreading bile and being obnoxious because I come to that thread expecting a reasoned debate and instead I see you replying to every thread that disagreed with you and putting words in my mouth.

You changed your story multiple times, just quote a numbers without actual data (although I see you might have some real data this time), and basically came off like yet another person who's more interested in winning by rhetoric rather than trying to analyze the problem.

So to me, your behavior made you come off as yet another one of those assholes who's only goal is to troll. Now that you're actually collecting numbers and participating in the debate I'll start to listen.

Incidentally, one of my blogs is already banned from HN because they don't like it. Same as any negative news about Mahalo or other "friends". Eventually the only thing left here will be a bunch of douchebags and neckbeards fighting each other for the next YC round of scraps if the trend continues. So, you should hope that they don't ban more people because trust me, tons of you guys would get banned hard.
University Research and Untapped Potential
You would often be right, but only because this site attracts a very specific kind of people - not at all the kind that this article attracts.

Second you cannot have a rational discussion about this, since politics is not rational (the extreem hate that I have for these people isn't rational either, seeing as I am not in California and not gay, but that doesn't stop me).
Yes, the best solution is getting better (un-)schooling, instead of having to work around and against the education system.
Read up on lean startups: http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2008/09/lean-startup.ht...

There is a lot of information out there about customer development and creating Minimum Viable Products. Very interesting concepts.
True. Coincidentally, I blogged about it recently - http://www.nilkanth.com/2010/08/02/the-transparent-toaster-c...
I’m sorry but that’s just BS. Brown vs. Board was about keeping people in separate facilities where things could never be completely equal. In that case separate is inherently unequal. Legal rights on the other hand are abstract meaning they can be equal if the law says they are.
Let's put a minority rights issue up to majority vote. What could possibly go wrong?
Novell is working in something you could like: http://www.novell.com/products/pulse/
That's a good point, regarding SS. See: http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/issuepapers/ip2003-01.html
This is the usual argument taken but what many fail to realize is that while a State can declare that domestic partners have the same rights under STATE laws. States cannot guarantee the same rights under Federal laws. Because the federal laws use the word marriage, domestic partners are not included and do not receive any of the federal benefits.

Declaring it marriage does fill the current gap of equal rights.
The polite thing usually doesn't make good business sense. Ask Bill Gates.
i don't get which problem was it solving. is it cool that they've introduced character-by-character typing? well, kinda.. but is it useful at all?

it's also cool (for someone) that it looks like a desktop app, but is it needed?
it's maybe cool that i have all my contacts from gmail there, but do i need this? i mean i don't even get why would i think of my gmail as a social network, it's my inbox, and it's fine for what it does.

I mean its hard not to appreciate people trying to innovate, but it actually has to solve some sort of problem.. or maybe it's just me not getting the concept (however it's still so much more interesting than all these buzz, rule.fm etc)
Bilingual is quite a low standard.
Do you have any hard evidence that I think (and have observed in real life) that servers spend more time doing other stuff than they spend time polling, is true?
i live in murray hill and love it. Close to grand central, union sq, madison sq park, great selection of restaurants (not trying to compare to downtown or even some ues areas), and it doesnt hurt that I work 4 blocks away from my apt.

Plenty of cheesy bars that are sure to bring in the 'i just graduated and trying to break into PR' crowds of girls.

Whats not to love?
No, actually we don't. Marriage throughout history had very different social and legal rules. Inheritance rules, power, authority, and care-taking of children are elements that have changed radically over the years.

It would be accurate to say we've had experience with many different kinds of heterosexual marriage, but once you're lumping in, say, 16th century English marriage laws and customs with 21st century Californian ones, gender starts to look like a minor detail.

We talk about "marriage" as if it's a simple, single idea, but historically, it's been applied to a wide range activities.
That's true for some couples, but not all by any means. It also completely ignores the marriage subsidies.

According to the CBO, 51% of married couples received a marriage bonus, and only 42% paid a marriage tax. In total, $32.9B was paid in marriage bonuses, and $28.8B was paid in marriage penalties. Data is from 1993, sorry, a quick google search couldn't find anything better.

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=7&type=0

Note that in 2004, Bush eliminated the marriage penalty for everyone besides the rich, so I expect the numbers are more skewed now.
We live in a hetero-normative society. Hetero couples are everywhere in media and popular culture. I'm pretty sure that kids being raised by same-sex parents can see that different people have different sexual orientations and work that out.

I'm sure it's harder for young gay people to have straight parents than for young straight people to have gay parents, yet nobody ever worries about that scenario.
Reminder: Apply To Launch At TechCrunch Disrupt SF By This Weekend
They discontinued development themselves.
States have their own laws for recognizing marriage so it doesn't matter what the state itself recognizes. Thats why you dont see the words "federal law" anywhere in the plantiffs case (page 5 in case you missed it)
I wonder if part of the reason for groupon's success is that businesses need to drop their prices because of the recession. Instead of directly dropping prices though, Groupon allows businesses to keep their headline prices as they were, but run these deals. The business owner feels better and more secure - it isn't a price reduction, it's a marketing exercise. But I wonder what the rates of repeat deals are? Any research on that?
What happens if every state has the same law?
Simply Explained: Boolean Logic
Extracting Text & Images from PDF Files
URL for nova/nebula?
I disagree that this is a "conservative/libertarian" question, but I agree that this is the better question to ask.
http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=albeit&oldid=...
You keep using this word "strawman" but the way you use it is the way Scarecrow would use it on the Yellow Brick Road.

Otherwise, very good reasoned argument. I'll be trying some stuff out and you can pitch in comments along this vein then I'll gladly listen. Thank you for disagreeing with me.

However, when someone says things to me the way blasdel did then, and not expect me to insult back, then they're in the wrong game. You can't dish it out and expect to not get the same back. I most definitely expect it back and take it on the chin frequently. That's also why there's no pictures of me on the internet in my underwear.

Keep it civil and I keep it civil. Be a jerk and I'll be a jerk, and frankly that's how the "real world" works. You get what you give.
Based on that argument I'm not quite sure how you can oppose gay marriage. It would appear you would have to rally against marriage subsidies, or at least marriage as a whole, etc. - because singling out a facet of the group (or a facet wanting to be part of that group) you have reason to dislike strikes me as discriminatory.
White mother explains to daughter: "THEY have to use THAT drinking fountain. They AREN'T ALLOWED to use ours."

Another example: A college grants Bachelors (BS) degrees. Gay people get a IG instead. Who in their right mind wants an IG! Employers wouldn't know what they are, or bother to understand them. Since all of their friends aspire to get BS degrees, employers would think an IG must be inferior -- why would anyone in their right mind make a second label for the exact same thing, if not to discriminate?

EDIT: To the downvoter -- if you read the ruling, my examples ARE the crux of the gay marriage debate. The state is condoning discrimination simply by making a second label for the exact same thing. By rule of law they are identical, but socially they are not -- the new label is undesirable by everyone. (No married couples would switch.) Hence, simply having two labels for the same thing and forcing gay couples to use the inferior one IS discimination.
Sorry guys--Posterous is experiencing a DoS attack. They said they should be up shortly. Thanks woodrow for posting the cached text.
This is really interesting. For those intrigued, there is a business here. I have a friend working at a fincial services firm [willing to pay $$$$$] finathat really wanted a feature for an internal intranet where they would be easily able to 'take images from PDFs and put them on a blog.' "You can't do that," I said. "I mean, you could, but..."

I'm sure there is a semi-real market for some good innovation around the annoyance of PDFs.

;)
Also, the component that powers Word's text layout also does it for IE7/IE8/IE9, WPF and Silverlight (and maybe more, I don't know).

I've heard that Word doesn't play as well with the text layout component as the component authors would prefer. It's possible that this will improve in the future.

As for TeX vs Word, that's a great question. I know that the authors of Word's text layout engine are familiar with Knuth's dead-tree works on typography, but beyond that, I don't know.
Like his meaningful investing in WePay (which does seem meaningful) -http://www.businessinsider.com/max-levchin-is-pretty-excited...
Dup: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1575892

Submitted an hour ago, currently has 112 comments.
Excellent news. I think gay people deserve the right to be just as miserable as us straight people.
I have an idea for a website.

literalpolice.com (I've already bought the domain name)

A community of people who care about preserving the power of the word "literally."

The site maintains a list of websites and people from the community who are assigned to them. When you are assigned to a website, your task is to have an account with as close to a variant as "LiteralPolice" as possible. You simply read the website as you normally do, and whenever someone abuses the word "literally," troll them for it.

With enough community members, we could have literal police on every website!

What do you think?
There was another idea that came out of the Maxcubator at the same time as Slide, can't remember what it was

Maybe you're thinking of Yelp.
The test page contains extraneous CSS that will affect the outcome of the tests, including a @font-face declaration (yikes).

Also, given the extremely low times in question here and the lack of iterations, JS-based profiling using Date objects may give an inaccurate picture of the differences between techniques.
The real shame is no IE9 for Windows XP. [1]

Some 60% [2] of the market share is Windows XP.
IE 6 - 8 are going to be with us for some time.

[1] http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/info/FrequentlyAskedQuesti...

[2] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Microsoft_Win...
Yes, I'd love that too. Especially looking a penetration rate but more focused on top sites (i.e. 1-50K, 1-100K, etc.)
GroupOn isn't taking a small cut, they're taking 50% of each deal.

Your theory may be correct if they were only offering the discount, but in addition to the 30% a business has to offer, they then have to pay 50% of the deal to GroupOn. So, GroupOn allows them to eliminate ad costs via the discount, but then tacks their fee on top of it, which crushes any hope of margins for the business.
The call for great quantities of hard evidence that is occuring on both sides is both entirely reasonable and utterly unrealistic.

These are two good developers who are drawing on their real life experiences to develop their opinions, backed up with some simple tests performed on local machines.

While it would be pleasant if they could provide hard data for a wide range of webservers to 'prove' their opinions it is hardly a realistic option for either of them without investing a degree of time and effort that is far greater in scope than the work being discussed.

I would prefer to see less of a cry for hard evidence of real life usage patterns from either side, and a greater acceptance of the fact that this is simply an interesting discussion of technical possibilities by some good developers.
The browser wars are back!

MS, please bring the strength of this engine to WP7!
I'm against gay marriage for non-religious reasons. Civil partnerships fine, have the same rights and freedoms as married couples, just call it a civil partnership instead.

But IMHO this isn't hacker news and will pretty quickly get nasty.

edit: Also for same reasons as http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1576226
For me the real issue with the Antenna4 issue is not to say that Apple makes bad products. It was an example of Apple treating its customers badly. That's different, and not something addressed by Woz. "You're holding it wrong" is not a respectful move, it's an arrogant one. The issue could have been dealt with similarly (free bumpers, etc) without fostering the same airs of superiority and arrogance.
Have the web read to you
The idea is kind of like http://www.iscroll.com but would integrate into any web site using standard JS/DOM/HTML5 audio.

The idea: If you hover over text on a blog or a news article or online book, it reads (speaks) the words to you.

It will continue to read until you tell it to stop, or scroll down, at which point it would start reading the new text.

This would make it possible for people to listen to any article.

Feedback/crtique is appreciated.
How is it hyperbolic? Your definition of a "professionally-designed" logo excludes the normal professional process for identity design. Then you conclude that engineering always beats aesthetics.
They are probably working on something cool after wave. Maybe Google Me?
So would you be against gay marriage if marriage didn't have the side-effect of favoring married couples over singles (or so you claim)?

If yes, then you would have to amend your reasons for being against gay marriage.

If no, then first you're not really against gay marriage, just against marriage in general. But by opposing just gay marriage you're being selective which is discrimination i.e. you want to deny gay couples the same rights that are given to non-gays. Whether you like those rights or not is irrelevant - they're already given and accepted by society.
Cool conference! $50 for students? :(
You got me there, but I am not sure it matters. Like hacker news, Google and craigslist (and to some extent the other two) make their money from having a large number of users who don't directly pay anything for the service. Are you arguing that if hacker news were somehow monetizing it's traffic people would no longer be willing to tolerate the design?

In other words, do you think a free service that was created recently and isn't especially pretty can be successful, but if the site is generating revenue from those users the design becomes problematic?

(btw I think ebay is the only truly ugly site in that article, and I think hn looks just fine).
For 182 mil this has got to be a lot of talent...
Which is why ultimately group-on will be squeezed. There are group-on clones springing up like crazy, primarily focused on increasingly small niches. Hell I just heard about a mommy-focused version that launched only two months ago and is doing really well. They're also taking a much smaller cut. It's really hard for group-on to defend it's turf, as you only need penetration in one city to supplant them in that city (or at least compete really effectively).

Ultimately those cuts are going to be under constant assault. It's really a race to the bottom, but it's going to be a money train until they get there.
This is an exceptional hack. Lord I need to have another hackathon soon. Between burning man, maker faire nyc, and "other" I am in need of some concentrated awesome.
To answer your question, I posted this on HN because I felt it would lead to interesting comments. The ruling is certainly cause for celebration, but it's also one of the most publicized cases of a judge overturning a majority vote. I wanted to hear how other hackers settled the internal debate of forcefully eliminating bigotry vs. lessening government intervention.
Since you do not want to subsidize a favored class wouldn't it be more accurate to say you're /against marriage/?
"It would appear you should rally against marriage subsidies,"

From my post: "Marriage fairness (i.e., no subsidies), I'll get behind. Gay marriage, no." In case that wasn't clear enough, I completely support eliminating all subsidies for marriage, and view gay marriage as a minor sideshow to the real issue. (See also my edit.)

I only single out gay marriage supporters because they are being jerks about the issue. Instead of pushing for fairness, they push for unfairness in their favor. Most people ignorantly accept the status quo, having never thought about the issue.

Gay marriage activists are not ignorant. They have thought things through, recognize that it is unfair, oppose the status quo, and still favor an unfair system. "I'm not against corruption, I just want the opportunity to participate in it." Why should I support them?
Ha, you're telling me.

This is one of the thorniest problems my startup (http://fifobooks.com/) has had to deal with, hence my work with PDFMiner.
It is my understanding that IE9 will come to WP7 - just not at launch.
Not to mention that for the first few months, none of my friends had an account. So even though I wanted to Wave, I couldn't really do it.

Once a few of my friends joined in, we thought we could plan our road-trips etc. on it easily and share photos later. Even then, there were always a few who said "What's a Wave?".
Hey Tom, you didn't seem to address the issue I brought up. :(

You stated that prop 8 has nothing to do with people's rights.

I stated that is does. When it is in effect they have none of the marriage rights under federal law. Less rights would mean that it does have something to do with people's rights.

How would you reconcile this with your statement about how "Prop 8 has nothing to do with people’s rights." ?
The sound of three sphincters tightening fills our tiny office.

Totally redeemed your trollish blog post with that line!
TweJay (http://twejay.com/) does this for twitter updates.
Certainly, several times and always ultimately disastrous, but besides commiserating with you in your misery what are you trying to accomplish with this posting?

Your only two options are appeal above his head (in my experience that never works) or find another place to work.
don't forget bestiality. If a man and a consenting horse wish to get married who are we to deny them that right!
You're right: completely invisible. Wave would have been so cool if Google had plopped it right on top of Gmail, like Gchat and Buzz. Our Wave-enabled contacts would have gotten their messages as waves, seamlessly, and non-Wave contacts would have continued to receive regular emails. Wave collaboration could have been supported with notification emails to non-Wave contacts, like "we're editing this on Wave, so click here {...} to join in." Best of all, every Gmail user would have been upgraded to Wave... I thought that was supposed to be the plan! What a waste.

I'd like to ask one of the top Googlers just what they were thinking by positioning Wave as a replacement to email, chat, and online collaboration and NOT integrating those services into Wave itself. IPv4 to IPv6, hello! No migration plan means no migration. Email support means being able to use Wave and email at the same time; not having to choose.

Still trying to wrap my head around this, but at this point I'm not sure what's worse:
a) Planning, developing, implementing, marketing, and supporting Wave as communications platform without regards to Gmail, Gchat, and Buzz or
b) Axing Wave before trying to add Gmail, Gchat, and Buzz support
That is unfortunate. Hopefully the popularity of Win7 will help with this.

I wonder if MS is contemplating releasing a non-video accelerated version of IE9.
From what you wrote you're against gay marriage for no reason at all. You stated a preference for how things should be, not a reason for that preference.

And you seem strangely preoccupied with semantics. If marriage and civil partnership meant the same thing, what would be the point of having a distinction?
@AndyKelley - literally the worst idea since bagpipes.
Design matters when there is great competition.
http://nebula.nasa.gov/