skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree with you. It is very important in a discussion to show everybody, that you still respect each other and emphasize how important that 'working together' point is to every body.

What happens in that company, will happen to every company earlier or later. Surviving this situation shows that the company really has some fundament to stand and live on.

Every company needs a lightning rot. Some person who is able, to end unproductive discussions without anybody losing face. Maybe you, gogy, are up to that task. Maybe not. If you feel as overwhelmed with the situation as I guess, then maybe you should find some body else to take that job. And you don't need to hire somebody for that. Maybe you find an older, more experienced person to be you advisor. Somebody all of you 3 can trust in and that maybe has some business experience himself. Older people are often good at recognising arguments that are not real arguments but just a way to let out some air. And because as an advisor he does not have to work full time on your projects, he can look more clearly on the big picture and maybe even help to make better strategical decisions for the company at all.

btw. why do you guys overload yourself with more customer projects and stopped trying to build something yourself?
he wants a tool to dig up passwords that have already been cached. I don't think there's an all-in-one tool to do this, and I'd bet the ones that claim to be able to are shady or very expensive. Probably both.
The community promise covers only the core of .NET. It does not extend to the rest of it, to what you actually need in order to write a functioning program.
Here is an earlier incarnation of the "writing a compiler" thread:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1608129
I don't think we were in substantial disagreement to begin with. I just don't find language like Do it ridiculously better than they do. to be very useful. Certainly English superlatives have lost most of their punch at this point but for most people their best isn't going to be ridiculously better than everyone else's.
That indeed seems to be horrible. I just wanted to suggest that the number alone is not all that meaningful. (My comment was a bit too assertive for that purpose. I slightly reworded it.) You are certainly right about the US being the outlier with respect to incarceration rates, but even compared to Europe Japan’s numbers are low.
Twitter is close: http://t.co/XPZB6Ka
This video contains content from Sony Music Entertainment. It is no longer available in your country. (from Germany)
> You have a promise for all patents necessary to implement the standard

And that's the whole point. The standard is the bare minimum one needs to make an implementation comparable to the .NET stack. Unless I am terribly mistaken, Mono is nowhere near fully covered.
That's the difference between reference documentation and introductory documentation. You go to reference documentation when you want to look up the details of something you already know; you go to introductory documentation if you want to learn it for the first time.
I think you misunderstood me: I was saying that the notion of who is a "real" programmer is stupid. I really despise using PHP. Does that make everyone who works at Facebook not a "real" programmer?

However, the notion of a Java programmer deriding others for their language choice is even more ridiculous because of the comparative ease of the syntax. If the argument held any merit (which it doesn't), Java definitely wouldn't be on top of the "real programmer" mountain.
"But now suppose that I have a single machine with a single IP address hosting multiple virtual servers, and I want to replicate this setup for each virtual server, i.e. I want each virtual server to have its own instantiation of the custom server application. Now I have to manually assign each instantiation of the app to a separate TCP port number. If I have hundreds or thousands of virtual servers on the same machine (Oh? You think that's not reasonable? Can you say "multi-core architecture"?) that can become a serious administrative (to say nothing of security) nightmare."

Not quite sure I'm interpreting you correctly here - but woudln't you be using localhost for this and/or using loopback interfaces?

Also - if you were designing an application that had to scale out to that many cores, you'd be dealing with things at a system level and using sockets anyway. Whether you are opening unix domain sockets or assigning ports, you still have to track and configure everything - and that can still be automated. While it would be a neat feature - it doesn't seem like a terribly necessary one.

Yes, it would be cool if apache could forward things to a local unix domain socket. Agreed there.

But there's no security nightmare unless you create one - in the instance you describe you bind applications to loopback interfaces, either on ports or creating more loopback interfaces. Designing the applications to use TCP sockets rather than unix domain sockets also leaves you with more flexibility when it comes to design decisions later on - you don't have to leave them on the same machine.

ALso - one wouldn't generally use apache for this - one would use something else as a front end these days that's better suited to forwarding requests and dealing with timeouts, resources, etc.
2-3 major failures.

Failed many times, starting from trying to start a cereal company for religious children at age 15.

I am successful now by my own standards which would not have happened without the failure experiences.
I also have a theory that I've never seen data on. They say that 95% of new businesses fail; I'm willing to bet that the percentage is much less for a person's second or third try.
I'm not sure that "older founder" necessarily means "first let's buy aeron chairs", or that "let's do more with less" means "younger founder, but ok.
I was looking up some Python documentation not long ago, and was shocked by how well it was written. Definitely agree that it is the gold standard. Documentation quality should probably feature more highly in the never ending discussions about "what's the best language."
Make it their fear - they are still in business, so somebody is getting paid.

Call them up and tell them straight out that they have a week to get the money otherwise you go after them in court, which will throw the company into banckruptcy.
Why social media gurus should be trampled by elephants
I figured that too, still a huge political windfall for them.

I see stuff like this and it makes me redouble my commitment to groups like fixcongressfirst.org.
Yes, we call it the white doughnut.
That's really awesome -- have always wanted to find something like this. Thanks!
I think that falls under doing #2 the right way - interesting on-topic discussions of potential value to your followers, not just for the content but also for referring them to other twitterers they may want to follow.
One little thing like this isn't a huge barrier to entry, but a hundred little things like this make a whopper of a barrier to entry.
In rural Kenya, Coca Cola is the only thing visitors are advised to drink.
Skip the law suit, call the fbi. The guy committed fraud, used a interstate commerce system (the internet) to do it, and he should be rotting in jail.
Next time, read the comment carefully before fixating on a single word and starting an unproductive argument. I know it's hard; I do it all the time too.

Re-read Patrick's comment, but this time, take the Cliff's Notes with you:

* It's not enough to be better; you have to find ways to be measurably better; implied: better along axes that people who write checks care about.

* Learn to market yourself; implied; the business world is not like Github, and nobody is going to invest any effort into learning how awesome you are, because your awesomeness is not inherently interesting to most people who write checks. You have to make it interesting.

* Develop non-commodity domain expertise; implied: not only is "learning Merb" not a credible differentiator, but, all respect to Yehuda Katz who is smarter than me, it's likely that writing Merb isn't either.

* Own your company.

The fact that Patrick managed to pack this into 91 words and all you appear to have taken from it was "Do it ridiculously better" may account for some of the downvotes.
You need to run a SMALL business first

Keep 90% of that capital OFF LIMITS, and make a run at something with the other 10%.

This is a "learn by doing" type of thing.

Build a website, do affiliate marketing, etc, something low investment to start, and read read read read and more reading.
I agree, and I don't understand what jdietrich is complaining about.

The great thing about learning kanji is that you can usually figure out meanings of words or phrases you've never seen before b/c you know some of the characters or even just their radicals.

It was a huge advantage when I moved from Japan to Hong Kong: even though I couldn't speak Chinese, I could still read signs and other printed text.
This one's on the FAQ: http://ycombinator.com/faq.html
now I want to travel around the globe :(
As a very occasional Python user, it was very informative for me to see that String is a Sequence type. That immediately tells me something very important about Python, that I might be able to use similar functions and methods on lists, tuples, etc.

It's this comprehensiveness of the documentation that has impressed me before when I've needed to look things up about Python, and was enlightened about things I didn't expect to be.
This article, "No need to know the law, but you must obey it," is an excellent introduction to the topic.

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20100629zg.html
I'm not a rails person, but I had a look at the api docs he decided to link as an example... And I understood why people might be complaining.

I started with railsapi.com - selected something at random: first ActionView::Layouts (seems like a crucial class):

find_layout(layout) - This is the method which actually
finds the layout using details in the lookup context
object. If no layout is found, it checks if at least a
layout with the given name exists across all details
before raising the error."

Right... where does the "lookup context" object go? What is "layout" What's returned? Where does it "find the layout"? Why does this method exist? What error is raised? Ok - maybe I just chose something that's not popular - another try is ActionView::PathResolver:

to_path() - Alias for to_s
to_s() - This method is also aliased as to_path

You're kidding me, right? Ok - something easy this time - "Float" -> "round(precision = nil) - Rounds the float with the specified precision." Rounds which way? What type of rounding is used? How does it behave for infinities and -epsilon? Something important "I18n" - there is NO documentation at all.

I checked APIdock, thinking it might be better - it took a lot of clicking to get to a class which had any documentation at all (ActiveRecord in this case). If you check "browse", you'll see yourself how many classes lack any kind of description...

Summing up - I'm not sure about the screencasts, guides, etc., but API docs are almost non-existent.
Sure, I'm just pointing out a potentially valuable problem to solve.

Yes, copyright is a problem but it can be worked around somewhat. I would probably start by searching for open source sample libraries to see if anything is worth building on. Obviously people using only their own samples will have to upload them somehow.
I worked for a company that did exactly the same thing.
I didn't take them to court. They jerked around my friends who kept working there for years. They wouldn't pay them for months, fire them, rehire them with promises of giving them their backpay... all sorts of financial abuse. My friends were on the "creative" side of things, so they didn't have as many other options for employment, which is why they took the abuse. About a year after I quit I met someone who had worked with the CEO a long time ago, and said pre-startup the CEO was notorious for not paying bills, stiffing employees, was in estate lawsuits with his own sister, ex-wife and so on.

You should take them to court. Part of being a CEO/founder is taking care of your people. If you don't do that, you're really just using them.
I don't think we would ever stream them, because a lot of the startups say things to investors that they wouldn't want to publish to the world-- e.g. about how they plan to beat their competitors. It might be interesting to record them and publish them later. But so far we haven't had time for such refinements. This was the first time we even had a sound system.
I'm willing to bet that people who have the capability of making $30m rounds are far less emotional about failed investments than the people making $3k investments
I don't have a good sense of pain points in LLVM; the inliner hacking was a while ago, I don't remember many of the details, and LLVM has surely changed quite a bit since then.

As for GCC, I think the pain points are twofold: the documentation for the middle-end is somewhat scattered. I honestly think enough information for figuring things out is present, it's just not always obvious where to look. There are lots of other passes to look at too, which can be extremely helpful. Assumptions of the interface, or side-effects, are not always stated, which can be surprising at times. The other pain point is contributing upstream: you're going to get dinged on formatting, documentation (usually just "did you do it"; the review is generally not as thorough as say, GDB's documentation review), compilation time, etc. etc.

Also, GCC's hash tables (htab_t) are a pain to use correctly.

Of course, my experience is somewhat slanted towards the middle-end; the set of pain points is somewhat different if you are working in the front-end or the back-end. And my set of pain points from the middle-end might be different if I had worked on different optimization passes. (My passes cared very little about things like aliasing, for instance.)

It's surprising to me that you mention memory management as a pain point, though I can see how the variety can be bewildering. The only distinction that really matters is between GC'd and non-GC'd memory. obstacks and alloc pools are only ways of providing specialized malloc interfaces. A useful rule of thumb is that if your data is only needed for one pass of the compiler, then you can allocate it any way you like; if the data is longer-lived than that, it needs to go in GC'd memory. I can elaborate if you'd like, but that's the basic idea.

FWIW, I agree that the whole GC system is somewhat baroque. The GC was a decent solution to an engineering problem and the whole mechanism nicely solved memory management problems and provided the basis for precompiled headers, but it causes problems in other ways nowadays and trying to get rid of it would be a huge effort.
"they are still in business, so somebody is getting paid."

It's actually possible that no one is getting paid and equity and commitment are driving the ones that are left.
It's great that some of these issues are actually being discussed, now that the LDP is out of power. I have to wonder how much longer the current government will remain, though.

By the way, the 6 PM news in Tokyo carried these pictures on Friday. Unfortunately, can't tell you what they said.
I agree that all of that needs to be made clear in the documentation, but that need doesn't directly entail everything being on one page. What if the string page noted at the top that was inherited from the sequence type, or displayed sequence's methods as well as string's methods, and noted that they there are from sequence?
Here's another way to think about it: if you had a pile of cash in the low five figures, would you re-invest it to speculate on that $100M acquisition? Or would you take it and pursue other opportunities?

If the tax implications are ok, can you borrow funds to cover the discounted stock purchase price, sell the stock, pay back the cost basis, keep the profits and don't look back?
I think the main reason we get more applicants in their 20s is that the older people are, the more difficulty they have getting n cofounders to be free of obligations all at the same time.
I'm doing multiple things - I didn't want to have all my eggs in one basket, revenue-wise. I'm getting to the point where I may want to refocus on just one avenue again, but the issue of having all income dependent on just one source, then getting shafted, was painful. Diversification was a reaction to that.

I know what you mean about $9k feeling like a lottery win. As I said, I ended up suing, but it's likely going to be years before you get a trial, and assuming you get a judgement, you still have to collect.
>I do own it. By law. And they cannot legally copy and distribute it. Read up on copyright law.

This discussion is on whether deprivation of income is sufficient to qualify as an ethical violation. You claimed that people are not entitled to get something for free "if I want them to pay me for it". (Really?) I asserted a general right to copy information. This right does not need to come from law, though law ought to recognize it.

I understand the law, what is the justification of the law?

>So are you saying that nobody is buying software? Software does cost "that much" and people are buying it.

No, you said:

>Name any big consumer application that could have been developed that way with developers getting paid about the same as they would by selling it (i.e. about the same as the value they provide).

Virtually nothing is sold at the price of the value it provides. It it were, the buyer would get no gains from trade.

In truth, commercial software is frequently sold way below the price of the value it provides. This is why people buy it. (though the provided value will vary from buyer to buyer.)

Some will make their whole income with visual studio or photo shop, but only pay a tiny fraction of that.

I realize you see an injustice in rampant copying, but I don't think you're thinking through your arguments, or not wording them well. Because these are coming out very obviously flawed.
This is true. As a rule of thumb, just assume that you aren't getting the performance bonuses and then see how sweet the deal sounds.

By the way, this sounds like a very familiar offer. Is the company LiveUniverse?
Developers should never have system level access. They should never be able to meddle with the core infrastructure their code runs on.

This has nothing, however, to do with who should be able to publish new code to the website (we're talking web apps here, right?) - that is something that should be handled by documented process, and automated tools to ensure accountability. Hypothetically, as the senior sysadmin, I'd like to sign off on every change that's going public, because I'll have to deal with the fallout if something is wacky. Realistically, I'd also like our senior developer, or failing that, even a more junior developer to be able to push code to production in an emergency if the right people are there to approve it (perhaps not hte proper technical staff, but they can get the okay from the owner to go-ahead). Accountability, automation, and process are key here. The deployment system should be accessible to some people who could potentially get fired for using it wrong, and it should be very clear to them what the right thing to do is. The deployment system could even warn them of this and include official signoff, etc.
I think you may be badly underestimating the track count of a lot of projects. If you aren't banking on having access to all the project plugins at the other end, then any track that is generated or processed by a plugin that isn't part of the factory set will need to be frozen to audio. Obviously there will be no alternates for these tracks, but they still add up. If you're recording live audio, then think of a number, add your age and double it. I would typically mic up a drum kit with between eight and fourteen microphones, depending on the size of the kit and the quality of the room. That is by no means excessive - a bargain-basement set of drum mics will usually consist of seven or eight mics. An electric guitar should get at least three tracks - two mics on the cab and one for DI. A decent pop vocal sound usually demands several tracks for the lead, plus backing. To give you an idea, Greg Kurstin used in excess of 70 tracks on most of the songs on Lily Allen's "It's Not Me, It's You" - an album recorded with only one singer, one microphone and two real instruments.

Lossy compression is absolutely unacceptable for work-in-progress files. The point of this exercise is to allow project files to be bounced back and forth between collaborators relatively seamlessly. Introduce lossy compression and you have to worry about generational loss - if the guy at the other end edits the file then it goes through the codec again and before long you've got a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy. All the major DAWs can import MP3s, but those that I'm familiar with need to decode them back to WAV/AIFF to handle them internally. This would demand something reasonably clever on the client-side to prevent all sorts of difficulties when an edited song is re-exported and uploaded back, because even without any edits the decode-encode cycle would mean that an exported track would diff with the originally imported version. It also takes bloody ages to bounce every track in a project to MP3, although that could be simplified somewhat if your planned client tool handled it.

Also a 10 minute song isn't really long - it's long for a pop or rock single, but by no means unusual for a 12 inch mix in a lot of dance music genres. Seven minutes is about average for House these days.
I've seen this come up a few times, and benerved myself to ask the really stupid question: what is this for? Why am I supposed to want a process boundary between my HTTP stack and my applications, instead of running them inproc with mod_whatever? If it's a load balancer, how is it better than using a NAT to forward TCP streams and letting the app servers handle HTTP?
> Then what do you do with these?

The same things you do with any other incomplete path name. I don't see why this is an issue at all.
While I suspect you're correct in your first point, why can't both be true (control and money)?

As for your last point, http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail40...; it's self evidently true.