skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That is awesome, the flute looks like the gun from the toon-world in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit".

They gave themselves quite a challenge trying to 3d-print a playable instrument: as you can see from the video, on the modern flute most keys depress one or more other keys when pressed, so the mechanism has to be adjusted just so in order for all of the pads involved in a key press to seal at the same time (in fact thin pieces of paper are used to shim pads to get a good seal, so it's quite a precise thing).

I really, really hope they fabricate some new and amazing Dr. Seuss instruments and commision some student composers to write pieces for them.
Let's hijack a botnet and see what we get: 1million IPs, 100k bots, 70GB of data
the VLC guys (specificaly Rémi Denis-Courmont) contacted Apple to urge them to remove the app

Citation please.
Nice article! If anyone is having trouble figuring out the pictures exactly what to do, my girlfriend did some illustrations for Poets and Writers Magazine that might complement them:

http://www.pw.org/content/diy_how_to_make_and_bind_chapbooks

I think the first one ("DIY: How to Make a Pocket-Size Book") is the same as what is illustrated here, but I linked to the top in case people are interested in the other stitched variations too. The first half is how to set up a template in Word, and the second half (starting at #13) covers what this article does in a slightly different style.
The talk is really about using Erlang in a hardware multimedia switch. I briefly mentioned CORBA within the talk because I spent about 16 years working on it, and was comparing it to Erlang.
He's talking in the context of console game programming (though it applies to everything). The current generation of consoles has pushed a lot of this stuff to the forefront - with in-order processors and cache behavior in particular exposing the flaws inherent in OOP/Inheritance based paradigms. I'd guess that it's a bit of a perfect storm - inflow of PC developers who previously could rely on hardware upgrades, massive increase in fresh/grad programmers (who are now filling positions on enormous teams of programmers compared to previous generations), and much more PC-like hardware that requires less specialized programming.

It's hugely important in console game programming to know exactly how you're using the system's resources - memory and clock cycles. The styles he's criticizing aren't just bad for limiting resource usage, they're hard to analyze. On top of that, it can be very difficult to silo components of game code (and game engines) behind nice clean interfaces. When you're the engine programmer tasked with optimizing game code because you're the one who knows how to squeeze performance out of the console, you don't want to have to climb up and down hierarchies to figure out where everything's hidden. I've been there - it's especially prominent in 3rd party developers with cross-platform game engines - and it's a nightmare.
If 5 years and tens of thousands of messages have failed to convince gmail that messages to me in chinese are 100% spam, I have little faith more training is going to fix the problem.
It's a push notification platform for anything you can build it into. Load up your HN profile and there's a Notifo box to get notified when someone responds to your comment. Apps they put together like Push.ly to notify you when someone DMs/RTs/Mentions you on Twitter (note: they released this before twitter added the functionality to their apps).

My friend uses it on a site for his sales/signup process, when a transaction goes through he knows immediately.

One of the plugins I use the most is their Chrome to Notifo plugin for Google Chrome. If I'm on a page I can hit the button and it will push the page URL to my phone.
Cool! It's great to see real-world haskell in action.
How would that be used in light cycles? Would you see your opponent's trail jump around as the client prediction is corrected? Would the game let you pass through your opponent's trail if you couldn't see it at the time?

Lag comp takes advantage of the independence of your gaming experience and your opponent's. It effectively hides inconsistencies in places you aren't paying attention to, like where your opponent is aiming. In light cycles, your actions and consequences are much more tightly coupled to those of your opponents. There is nowhere to hide the inconsistency.
I personally use Toodledo [http://www.toodledo.com/]
New Subatomic Particle Could Help Explain the Mystery of Dark Matter
If Apple had explicitly promised Aperture 3 purchasers free updates until Aperture 4 and then they'd put out Aperture 3.5 with new features only on the App Store (and told people to just get over it because it's too hard to maintain two versions), then the situation would be similar. And people would very rightly be pissed.
One reason could be user acquisition. It can cost a lot of money to acquire new users or reach a specific target market. So sometimes it makes sense to buy a company who reaches that audience, regardless of their revenue. Then you can roll that business into your existing product.

Other times it's worth a premium if you want to get into a particular business and have nothing or are playing catchup.
Are you actually certain that Quake1 didn't use prediction? I mean, there's this entire part of the Quake source code devoted to it:

http://www.fabiensanglard.net/quakeSource/quakeSourcePredict...
They restrict in different ways. GPL restricts in order to give more freedom to people who wish to use software in certain ways; apple is protecting developer rights, in a blanket way that not all developers want.
Because in a really bizarre way we're investing in the utility of a company rather than the money it makes.
> For example, many science-fiction fans get involved in lengthy discussions about physics [...]

This always bothers me when talking to sci-fi fans that only read sci-fi. It also bothers me in more modern sci-fi when the author puts too much time into explaining the mechanics of whatever concepts are used.

The 1950s, 1960s and the earlier 1970s sci-fi is usually about ideas. The 'science' is mostly there as a plot device. This gives the author huge freedom to just take an idea (however absurd) and run with it.

Whatever kind of fiction your read, though, it's always characters, their development and their reaction to the environment that they find themselves in that is the key to a good story.

(Yes, there is plenty of good sci-fi to be found today, from the hard kind to the lyrical/meta-physical kind, I'm just commenting on the general development of the genre. Also, see Sturgeon's Law).
Major requirements ...

* MongoDB support (the more 'built-in' the better, a full ORM is not needed however.)

* MVC (and nice pretty urls ... if you will ... too!)

* Must work on Apache (2.2) on Ubuntu (10.04.1 LTS), but nginx is also a nice plus.

* PHP 5.3 or greater.

Nice to haves ...

* I'd prefer more readable code than lots of "shortcut" shorthand coding (that just ends up confusing me later.)

* I've used PHP for a number of years, but don't use a lot of it's OO (nor do I really care to.)

* I really love jQuery, so a framework that "thinks" the same way would be nice.

* Lightweight, I don't need a ton of features ... I just need to make my life easier.
The PhD Problem: "Talk of a ‘higher education bubble’ may not be idle chatter”
"turning on the Z axis" (dunno if i said it correctly, could be also X or Y) would essentially be changing the plane, meaning, the arena would be a cube instead of a 2 dimensional plane. Let's say a couple of players would create a dead end you couldn't avoid by going up, down, left or right, you could rotate the view.

For example on a normal snake 2D game, pressing the key oposite and to the direction your'e heading is meaningless, you can't go straight back and your'e already going forward. On a cube those keys could be mapped to 3D rotation.

You would still see the game as 2D and depth would be emulated for example with transparency, were close trails are opaque and deeper objects are transparent, so that you could know if you could turn or not, for example on a trail right in front of you.

edit: fix typos

ps.: of course playing on a cube is only be interesting when you have a lot of players in the game, or else it would be very impractical to corner someone (since you would need to get him wrapped completely)
Awesome. Hmm, why not do the same for HN for a weekend project? How to organize it, though, since HN doesn't have tags submissions with most votes, most comments ...?
You're right. I thought I was able to publish from the SDK I have, but, can only run the apps in the emulator.
As a mechanic, you also need good grip strength and not be afraid to bloody your knuckles.
Rocket Powered Matchbox Cars
And "simplification" means what exactly? --My main point.

The real trouble is, unless these statements are very clear in the legal sense, some poor bastard might unintentionally become the poster child of bad litigation/direction. Even unintentional violation of the export laws is a federal offense, and must be taken very seriously.
People actually "cheat" using lag compensation. There are players that induce lag on their system so they can shoot at players on a "snapshot" of the game. Very hard to detect. Usually when you see people with 500ms ping at the top of the scoreboard, you know it's probably someone who uses this method. It has its disadvantages, mainly that opponents are hard to track (they "jump" on each sync). So it's usually snipers that do this from a distance.
Qwest has interleave on for DSL which means my first hop is easily over 40 ms so a minimum ping of 60-80 is rather likely for me.

I don't know if the same holds true for their fiber but I'm sure interleave is common among DSL providers. Cable also suffers from neighborhood overselling where in peak hours people get ping times in like 200-600 ms when they are likely to play.

I don't know if this problem will be fixed soon but I think prediction is still necessary (or more so required) for a large population.

This may just be limited to American broadband services though, and I'm sure larger cities may have less of a problem.
1. Brand and scale.

If a company buys a startup with a promising product that they can quickly sell to a large portion of their customers, they're willing to give up a portion of that future revenue. It may not be at all tied to past performance.

2. Talent

Facebook payed a premium for FriendFeed because they wanted their team to work on the Facebook platform. This team has developed more than $50 million in new value for Facebook.

3. To keep a competitor from having the advantage.

Google paid $1.5 billion for YouTube. They've lost money on owning it, but in the process kept their biggest competitors from controlling an asset that drives an enormous portion of all video traffic on the web. You'll see companies buy up companies they're not really interested in just to keep someone else from having them. Powerset was bought for $100 million by Microsoft because if they had developed some interesting or successful search technology, they couldn't chance letting Google have it.
So my original point still stands;

There is only one marketplace [for iOS applications] ...

2. The products that are created for the iOS AppStore cannot be sold anywhere else.

--

There are multiple commercial marketplaces available for Android - so I don't think highlighting the Apple AppStore is necessarily a needless restriction.
Big companies are using startups as proxy innovation labs. So instead of figuring out themselves what users are doing, they let startups. Then they buy the startups. Much easier to buy an audience and all the possibilities associated with a new brand than try to make it all work in-house.

Combine that with raw talent acquisition, and a lot of startups begin to look like highly-rewarded spec R&D work for big companies. Picking up that kind of talent, audience, and potential? It's easily worth it to BigCorp, even if there's no income at all.

(I hope the tone sounds okay on that. There's nothing wrong with gaining a million users and flipping your company to Google -- assuming that's what you want to do, of course)

Of course, there's a ton of startups that don't fit that model. But many do -- at least many in the valley.
But what if you don't have legs?
Apple’s unsolicited idea submission policy
Oh, man. What a great hack!
> "Open source" is a misleading term, please stop using it

It's less confusing/misleading than free-as-in-beer vs free-as-in-speech vs free-as-in-dammit-you-cant-do-that-tivo.

> Apple is working on clang because it doesn't want to deal with the GPL (unless you own Apple stock, you're the one losing because of this decision)

Have you seen the sh##t g++ provides for error messages? clang++ is a massive improvement.

> There is very little incentive for companies to invest in BSD code, and no disincentive for them to steal it.

Which is of course why http://www.postgresql.org/community/contributors/ only includes people working out of their mothers' basements, why http://www.sqlite.org/index.html doesn't show any corporate sponsors, and why BSD died years ago...

> If Linux wasn't GPLed, it wouldn't be where it is today.

Yeah, I think the original license had something about "no commercial use" in it.

> think that somehow Apple releasing some of their code under the BSD justifies restricting their end-users to their locked-in App Store

I don't see how there's any relation between those?

> shows that you don't understand that Apple doesn't care about you and your open source; they'll take whatever is convenient

"Caring" is an emotion, which organizations don't seem to have.
Would you be able to use Stackless Python instead?
There's a variety of reasons why you'll see M&A prices that are several multiples of a startups revenue. In financial terms, its a long term investment just like any other. Figuring in the net present value of money, the selling price must consider the asset's future value. Everything such as good will, userbase, and talent that comes along with the startup are simply indicators that the asset's value will grow with time.
It seems that it needs to sample more tweets. I've done 5 tweets, and 2 of them were exact tweets that I sent (they were only a few words long, and I guess they had words that I rarely tweet, so it had few or no other ways to go once it started repeating the tweet)

Edit: Then again since there are only a few words in a tweet, you'd have to go a really long way back to really ensure that won't happen. Possibly farther back than Twitter will let you.
It is already vanishingly unlikely that you would be prosecuted for "exporting" crypto software. I shipped commercial software in the mid-90's, when we actually had to fill out forms to export code that used (eg) Blowfish to protect secrets, and I didn't even remember that until this announcement.

My understanding of this announcement is that it simply makes official what was already near-universal in practice: it's safe to export any non-classified crypto code. (What's "classified"? You'd know it if you had it. Classified crypto has more to do with the setting in which its used than the actual algorithms in use.)
Don't get me wrong, we did a lot of good work in CORBA and learned a lot while doing it, people still use it, it's still very widely deployed, and a ton of interesting research was done based on CORBA. But one of the reasons I think so highly of Erlang is that it treats distributed system concerns as first-class citizens, whereas CORBA was born of RPC notions of trying to hide distribution behind programming languages. Now, it's not entirely as black-and-white as I just stated it, but that's one of the fundamental differences. Erlang just gets a whole bunch of things right.
I believe this prediction code wasn't included in the original Quake. It was added later in QuakeWorld which was some sort of multiplayer enhancement for Quake. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Don't get me wrong, I understand the stark contrast between CS and this style of gameplay.

>>Would you see your opponent's trail jump around as the client prediction is corrected?

The prediction in this game would only be which direction the opponents are moving in. Between packets the client would continue moving opponents in their last known direction. Once the client knows better it must change the game state to the player. If that means one opponent moved several game units in one direction and must be moved back those several units and then turned in a different direction then that is what must happen, and yes it will be jarring to the player, but this happens all the time in online gameplay.

>>Lag comp takes advantage of the independence of your gaming experience and your opponent's. It effectively hides inconsistencies in places you aren't paying attention to, like where your opponent is aiming.

I'm not sure I actually agree with this statement. Client-side lag compensation as far as I understand it (or at least how I'm describing it) is to allow the client to predict what is going in-between server updates. Server-side lag compensation takes into account the latency of each client and attempts to give a fair assessment of each player's actions based on what they must have been shown by the server at the time.

>>Would the game let you pass through your opponent's trail if you couldn't see it at the time?

I suppose it depends on how long that trail existed. This is certainly a difficult problem when it comes to a Tron/snakes/nibbles kind of game online. I do see where you are coming from here with the difficulty of deciding who or what should take precedence. That is the issue one will always have when employing these techniques and I think it would require some bit of experimentation to get right.
That's something strange from my point of view.

I mean, imagine some big company opening a BigCompanyName-Seed division, where they do something like Y combinator is doing, but instead of giving a small amount of money for 6% they get 50% of the company for a bigger investment (at least in perspective, so if future investments are needed, there is no dilution up to a given sum).

But in the process of course the company doing this stuff should be smart enough to don't force any strict rule like technology to use, type of authentication, domain name, and so forth. Must be a startup with its own life. Just they can select things that are interesting in general, or are interesting for the general goals of the big company.

I'm not sure why this model could not work.
I assume as a 5 or 6 year old, you did not have as many responsibilities or obligations as an older person. Perhaps if you had not learned until later in life, the learning curve would be steeper?
The client/server separation for prediction never made sense to me. The article notes the trust and cheating aspect, where a client could lie about whether a particular player was hit. But, since the authoritative information about actions in the time sequence are transmitted to the server anyway, it seems like the server could do post-game validation. If the game actions all fit the rules, then the results are valid-- otherwise, the cheater(s) stick out like sore thumbs.

Even a lagging validation could be done. Yeah, your cheat comes off, but you're kicked out of the game and your team gets penalized.
I think I understand your point, in that with the game play of light cycles there are only absolute moves that you've made. You still want to the player's action to play instantly on his and show up as fast as possible in the server's and other players' simulations.

Obviously lag in a moment of high importance is really going to feel unexpected in a light cycles match so it isn't a game suited to high amounts of lag.

You still want to see the other player move smoothly, and you can have that happen if you guess where he is rather than wait for acknowledgement. His prediction happens to be super easy while also being dangerously wrong if he's turned in front of you.

There is no solution to this type of gameplay being networked synced. Low latency is your only bet.
Interesting stuff. Reads like Apple sees itself as a walled garden of creativity, innovation and initiative. Any external, unsolicited idea that crosses the semipermeable walls of Cupertino is swallowed into a black hole becoming Apple's property.

This gives a whole different meaning to all the recent "ideas are worthless, execution counts" talk. If you're very lucky, your idea may result in another exceptional Apple product which you can then buy in a store.
A friend of mine was in an orphanage in MX when he was a child. He suffered from extended beatings on his soles (among other things like cigarette burns and the like). I don't know if it's true, but he says he can't feel absolutely nothing with his soles (ie No pain).

So yes, this is definitely torture, with permanent consequences.
Welcome to the study of how groups of people interact. We'll probably have it all figured out in a few hundred years or so :)

Couple good books come to mind. The best of which is probably The Innovator's Dilemma, for how new ideas get killed by companies.

There are a lot of reasons what seems obvious won't actually work -- even though many companies still keep kicking that can down the road. This whole area is like a siren's song both in the corporate world and in government. Everybody is building "centers of excellence" and "knowledge incubators", and whatever else buzzwordy thing they can come up with to spend money. But the record of such efforts is appalling. Just for one example, take a look at Microsoft -- tens of billions in cash, tens of thousands of brilliant people, and they're lucky to get a release of windows out in time. Too many reasons to go into in this short of a space, and of course there are a lot of true believers that would argue with my conclusion. Suffice it to say that smart companies have figured out it's easier just to write a check.
Edit: My bad, this code IS for QuakeWorld. As far as I'm concerned I have no evidence to put forth that the original commenter is wrong in his assessment.

---

You may be right. I'm genuinely asking the guy if he knows one way or the other, as I do not know but certainly am curious. I mean, no lag compensation in the days of dialup? Seems like id/John Carmack would have know better even at that stage. But then again, it could just as easily be that they didn't realize the need for that tech in the beginning.
> So what would have to happen would be for everyone who ever contributed to VLC to say, “Okay, I’m chill with BSD,” and the code contributed by anyone who refused to do so would need re-written e.g. in a cleanroom to avoid copyright infringement. :-/

And since one of the VLC developers has already invoked the GPL to prevent the distribution of an iOS version, the same developer would probably block BSD relicensing for the same reason.
It is all 1's and 0's.
Wow. No. This article seems to completely ignore what makes the valley the epicenter of tech, and instead posits things that have very little impact as being game changers. Car-driven societies aren't social? Silicon Valley startups would do well to act like New York ones? Which would those be?

Hand-waving does not a hotbed of innovation make. It'll take more than bullshit to make NYC into the Bay Area. I'll pay attention when they have top tech universities and a culture friendly to innovation and entrepreneurship rather than big money.
"Let's run an article through a computer translator and back and see what we get..."
"...but instead of giving a small amount of money for 6% they get 50% of the company for a bigger investment..."

I think one reason is that most seed investments don't need to be that large, and large investments can actually be detrimental to the progress of a startup.
I believe that is most businesses, not just startups.
There are dozens upon dozens of video players on the App Store including commercial services like Netflix and Hulu Plus that directly compete with Apple's own offerings. Claiming this is an anti-competive move on Apple's part frankly makes no sense at all.