skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You must not like music...
Even international companies?
Browser prefixes are often misunderstood. There are very good reasons for using them, A List Apart has a nice article about them: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/prefix-or-posthack/
That's silly. Email auto-logins have a time-limit (within 10-30 minutes) and a good developer would limit such email send-outs. The users would understand that email logins to the website are due to the links.
Google and others were also rejected by when they started. Like you said, rejection means nothing.
F5 Friday: ‘IPv4 and IPv6 Can Coexist’ or ‘How to eat your cake and have it too’
I don't like prices like $9.99 first I have to round up to $10 and then I haven't actually seen that price next to the item.

When someone quotes the price verbally $9.99 it's longer than $10, so sounds bigger.

Also, $9.99 sounds like they are embarrassed that it's that much and they have to trick you into paying more than you thought you were.
We agree, in a way, but disagree about the severity of the distinction. Google can't build a good search engine w/o mining an existing network of interlinks between sites to build a good measure of quality. Bing can't provide results as good (or perhaps "good" -- "torsoraphy", "hiybbprqag"...) as they currently do w/o watching what users click on, which includes Google search results. You're saying (if I follow you) that what Google does is fair because they always transform the form of their input, whereas Bing, in some instances, does not transform their input -- they use search engine results to provide search engine results. OK, fine. But I still don't really see the outrage.

I don't care about piggy-backing or fairness; I care about maximum public good.

So here's the situation. Google wants Bing to stop harvesting its results. Why? Very broadly, there are two scenarios:

- Bing is adding value
- Bing is not adding value

In the latter scenario, Google should not care. No one will use Bing, and it's a non-issue.

In the former scenario, it's not clear at all to me that Google should have a monopoly on the information entered and sites visited of people that happen to visit their site. Google is trying to assert ownership, in a fashion, of the link between the users query and the site they visited, because the site they visited happened to be shown to them by Google. I see no reason to grant them this right.

The fact that Google acts outraged be Bing's behavior strikes me as particularly rich, given that Google itself is a notorious and cavalier harvester of data others would consider "theirs".

(Edit: This is pure, uninformed speculation, but I wonder if Google's (to me) odd outrage is because they place such a premium on algorithms over human-generated content. I.E., the idea is it's fine to harvest other people's human-generated work ("information wants to be free"-style), but harvesting other's algorithm-generated content is verboten, because that's essentially stealing the algorithm. I have no inside knowledge, but this would agree w/ the pop-culture characterizations of Google.)
On the other hand, that would require more code, and he's made plain on many occasions that he does the absolute bare minimum of development to keep ad revenue climbing - and that he's untroubled at not bothering to fix things if it isn't actively driving off users.

Plus my gut feeling says that "here's your username and password" boosts re-logins more than a token link - there's a certain "it remembers me!" to that for non-technical users, I suspect.
Does _everyone_ in society really need to be working. It seems that as technology advances the number of labor hours required per person would decrease. Maybe only a small percentage of people need to be following a productive passion.
I don't know about Fire Department, but in regards to the other two, booking a taxi isn't the same as dispatching. Dispatching would be the taxi company telling sending a driver to a location.
As a replacement for STORING PASSWORDS IN PLAIN-TEXT and EMAILING USERS THEIR PASSWORDS IN PLAIN-TEXT an auto-login link sent in an email without a time limit is a vast improvement.

For example, what happens if you discover you've been hacked and all of your encrypted passwords have been stolen? No big deal. What happens if you discover a hacker has stolen auto-login links for a large number of accounts? Invalidate all of the existing ones and send out new ones. Compared to the problems of getting 100% completely owned (and screwing over your customers) due to storing and sending plain-text passwords, these problems are vastly preferable.
We should do a sweepstake on how long it takes Microsoft legal to issue a C&D due to the use of the Bing trademark in the URL: http://www.betterbing.org/
</sarcasm> :)
Based on what I have seen of old people, people tend to become more of what they are so if you are generally a happy person, you should be more so as you get older.

Which means I will be terrible in my old age...
So why not ask the user for permission to play audio? It's already being done with geo-location and storage.
Of course, you only want to do that for medium-security stuff - if banks mailed out unrestricted auto-login URLs, sniffing unencrypted POP/IMAP traffic at a coffee shop would be rather profitable...
Vodafone network 'hijacked' by Egypt
Mobile phone firm Vodafone has accused the Egyptian authorities of using its network to send unattributed text messages supporting the government.
agreed. the case still will never be a slam dunk for many because user generated data is a full partner in the signal, but to me the author's epiphany just means a shift to thinking of Bing asking a user which of these 10 Google results they like best.
"I'm not sure there is any way for Google to Tell MSFT to not use their search results in the Bing search engine."

Google could send a DMCA Takedown or other Cease-and-Desist letter.
If you're going to have a review process at all, you should at least add something of value. Either ask for source code (and deal with the backlash) or don't have a review process at all. A two-level review system (one with source code, one without) with appropriate warnings is fine, too.

The app store review process as it currently stands is worthless, useless and meaningless.
21-25's death is poisoning results :)
Making everyone pursue his passion is a bit hard i think , but framed differently , this becomes the question : can everyone have a job he mostly enjoys ?

I can think of a few ideas that might help:
1. giving people the ability , at work (drivers, assembly line etc..) to have conversations with interesting people, cheaply.
2. a music/audio player that can measure when someone is in a state of flow , an can give the person the optimal mix of music , audio(podcasts/text-to-speech) audio speed , volumes , pauses , content types , etc to achieve maximal flow times.
3. job demands some attention , and that decreases the flow
state when you talk/listen to something. there's some research that the brain can do 2 things at the same time , allocating each side to some task. maybe there are ways of achieving multitasking and flow ?
4. Use game theory to make boring jobs more interesting.
5. Gallup strength model give an interesting abstract way to query people's strength(passions). view at this abstract way , a person can adapt to more jobs(instead of programming as a passion, solving complex problems is a passions and then you have many more opportunities).
6. This gallup way of thinking can give you better ways to interview ,assign jobs , and design jobs.
7. find ways of using augmented reality to make the job less boring.
If is has your name then I think that's usually enough for the 'it remembers me' feeling.
Well, parody occasionally stands up as a defense to trademark infringement, at least when the use is wholly non-commercial and editorial. The lawyers might not bother with this one.
I think you meant to say Google UI. There are a lot of instances where people think Google's UI is not polished. UX is more than just the UI you see on Android tablet. Some notable UX achievements of Google:

- Search

- Google Analytics

- Gmail, gmaps, calenders, spreadsheets, etc

- Groups

UX failures: (and yet had pretty decent UI's)

- Buzz

- Wave

Sidenote - TIL about bagcheck.com, looks pretty cool.
Google Maps should be on that list. Can you remember the sort of maps we used to put up with on the web?
Remembers me of drop.io (sadly not arround anymore)
Brilliant - I love it. Thanks for sharing!
I was wondering where my group was. Thanks for the hint!
Poll: Do You Use the HN Showdead Feature
I find HN's showdead feature provides a broader overview of our site. It let's you see links (mostly spam, sometimes hot topic dupes like 37 Signals' $100B valuation) as well as input from users who have been hellbanned.

As an opt-in feature I'm curious how many of us have opted-in, aren't aware of it, or went back to the base model of having that part of the system look after itself.
No - never
No - tried, and changed back
Sometimes - I toggle on and off
I didn't know it existed until now
Pure awesome.

That article nicely documented the work I (and presumably everybody else trying to get Audio to work on iOS Safari) went through a couple months back. This would have saved me a lot of headache.

I like the sprite idea for playing one clip at a time in a sane way. I might give it a go.

Thanks for the tip, and it's good to see that there are other people out there battling this same stuff!
I agree. Storing passwords in clear text is a security issue, but from the point of view of the user experience is better.

When the user does a few times the password recovering procedure, he'll finally memorize it. When instead the password recovery ends sending you a random password, I end doing the password recovery every time I need to enter that site. And I eventually get bored enough to don't enter the site again.

Even the url in the email does not fix this issue IMHO, what the user want is typing yourcompany.com and log in, without searching for emails, at least in the long run.

Now since plaintext passwords are insecure, when it's worth using them? Only when the service is not very security sensitive, and only if you are ready as a developer to face the negative PR if something bad happens.

So: If you use plaintext passwords you should know what you are doing, and you should secure your systems very very well so that is unlikely (but not impossible...) that there will be a leak of informations in the database.

There is another usability problem related to authentication cookies expiring. Setting cookies to expire in 2036 is a good trick to avoid part of this problem. If you want to do the right thing storing hashed passwords, at least make sure that unless your data is very very security sensible, like 23andme or alike, please don't log out the user automatically.

What I like is that the authentication token in the cookie lives forever and is the same in every session opened (so you can have the same site open in office, laptop, desktop, and everything works), but once you hit "logout" in any of the sessions the auth cookie changes, and you get logged out everywhere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humour
In Europe at least, they seem to also actively look for people too. A recruiter contacted me via LinkedIn and suggested I apply. I got rejected after 3 telephone screens, the suggested working somewhere else for a year and to reapply. I can't see any particular reason I would have stood out and they didn't mention one.
I don't know, doesn't Google harvest the content of anything I send to an @gmail.com address? Or how about the massive scanning of books over the objections of book publishers a while back (though I think this ultimately got resolved)? My general impression of Google, and part of why I find their crying foul so jarring, is that they will harvest as much information as they possibly can, to whatever end, until restrained by public outcry. (Which, BTW, I'm fine with!)

But it seems very hypocritical to get butt-hurt on behalf of Bing toolbar users who are having their movements tracked.

(BTW, I don't find Google's observance of robots.txt to be particularly compelling or telling, because they've never been in a position where ignoring it would be significantly beneficial to them, as far as I know.)
If you run the search on Google Books, there are definitely 80s usages, though not as many as in the 90s or 2000s: http://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=%22kill...
I had started my business and things were going more slowly than I'd imagined they would. So slowly I needed to take a job to pay for rent and food and the salaries of some very part-time staff who were essential for various reasons. So I picked up a teaching gig at a small private training school that brought in foreign kids working on ESL and dumped them in small group classes while they got ready to attend real schools.

The money was not great, but I rationalized myself into taking the work because the teaching time was compressed so I could work from 9-4 each day and then cram away at development until 2am or so. Or that was the idea. In reality the job was a massive psychological drain. There were no textbooks or support of any kind so doing anything half-decent required a lot of energy and creativity. Meanwhile, doing a bad job would have meant letting down the kids and being actively complicit in a system that functioned primarily to separate their parents from their parents' money.

It wasn't what I had signed on for, but it seemed easier to push through and try to do the best job I could than back out. The work was only a month or two, and what other choice did I have, I asked? And so it happened that as I walked in to class one day about three weeks after starting I literally burned out in the hallway. I had just dragged myself out of the stairwell when I suddenly felt like the bottom of the world. I was tired and depressed and exhausted and all of a sudden found myself perceiving myself from the outside and looking down and pitying myself at the same time. Before that I'd been able to shelter myself from those emotions by convincing myself that my actions were positive sacrifices that were necessary to start the business. But in that moment I saw my defenses as pointless delusions. I felt like a dead man walking. I was clearly the world's biggest failure. Career. Business. Whatever. Anyone with any sort of objectivity would have to agree.

I stopped working there after that first class wrapped up, but the money paid the bills and helped get me to the break-even point, or what I managed to convince myself was the break-even point. I don't think it is as bad as coping with bankruptcy or death or anything, but it was my lowest point and I don't want to go any lower.
In case anyone's interested:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2068669

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2077491

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2110475

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2111857

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2122857

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2130163

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2163366

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2166411

A nice comment is here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2122865

Since you've tried 5 times why not take a little time
to write a more compelling job offer? Describe what the
person's responsibilities will be, what you're expecting
from a potential hire, what makes working for you cool
and worth while, etc. Write a little about yourself in
your profile. 5 failed attempts had to have told you
something.

Also the comment here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2166468

First of all, who "hires" a co-founder? But that lexical
issue aside, the biggest reason nobody will respond to
this here is because nobody is interested working on a
mystery project without anything to remotely pique our
interest. You don't provide the slightest detail about
the project, or even what industry or problem it might
be relevant to. For all we know you are trying to get
somebody to write a Wordpress theme. Please provide
insight into your project or frame it in terms of how it
is useful or important to this community. Or stop posting
it again.

As I wrote earlier:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and
expecting different results.

-- Albert Einstein, (attributed)
why this guy keeps acting as Apple PR, and people even upvote this kind of articles?

If there is something that sucked, sucks, and will probably suck is the Apple app submission process and review process. It's not easy to get this right, as the approval rules are the kind of rules that are very hard to apply in a consistent way in large scale. This can be a partial justification maybe, but the whole process is slow, prone to make mistakes, company-biased (think at Google Latitude and so forth) and in general a pain in the ass for the developers. Note exactly something to Ode.
"doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" - I'm beginning to wonder whether this applies to you more than the OP... :)
Yeah, unfortunately there's no way for the browser to know whether it's looking at a website (which should never play audio at you) or a Web Application (which might need to play audio with impunity).

It's the same with every other browser trick that gets abused on people's MySpace pages. There's a real reason to use that stuff, but only some of the time.
I know one company that was rejected by yc that is happily investor free, profitable, and doing quite well for themselves.

I know another guy that was rejected from YC and just sold his company to another company all of you have heard of.

YC is great, but it's one of many paths. Every time I read, "YC rejected me but....." it sounds like "Harvard rejected me, but somehow my life didn't end."

Sometimes you wonder how a company managed to exit with their idea but people count for so much. I have friends that, if they had the dumbest idea in the world, I would put my money down because betting against them is a losing game. If it sounds ludicrous, is because you've never had friends like that.
I don't mind some websites storing passwords in plaintext for convenience reasons. But if you are storing them like that than at least warn the user at registration time so that they know this is not going to be as big a secret as they hoped.

I don't mix my banking password with my forum passwords, but I'm running out of easily rememberable, for me, passwords that don't require me to use a password manager instead of mnemonics.

In other words, fuck this shit man!
Personally, I can't concentrate on doing development for eight straight hours. My focus doesn't fit in a neat box like that. Some days I'm burnt at four hours (but I might have had superhuman output during that time) and other days I can do marathons of crazy focus for longer than eight hours.
Ask HN:How is it to work in Accenture Technology Labs?
> Then why are newspapers not so happy about it?

Rupert Murdoch and his kin are shortsighted, blustering fools when it comes to the 'net. Relying on their attitude to make your point is counterproductive at best.
If you could use the unique, generated key only once, what would be the harm in not letting them time out?

I guess e-mail sniffing could be a risk... but if that's an issue then we have larger problems.
Mozilla Labs Retires Prism Project in favor of Chromeless
Giant Android shaped crop circle in the middle of Paris
Different terms for software developers
"from the point of view of the user experience is better"
Well I don't think a lot of users have a better experience now there password is exposed.

Agreed it would be nice when your old password could be recovered. But a lot of people will understand that you don't want to store there password and they will accept the fact they have to make sure they remember there password.
When you know a website doesn't store your password you are likely more willing to provide a password you can remember well.
It's not straight SHA-x, I'd wager; glibc includes a version of phk's MD5-based crypt() based on SHA2 (with some bonus insanity thrown in; it's a spawn of MD5 crypt and Drepper, after all.)

Like md5crypt, this new crypt() is not based on established cryptographic principles.
I feel the same way. I'm 25, and if I thought I knew it all, I wouldn't be here. I consider all of you my peers, and feel like I'm missing out on the HN experience by not engaging you all. I plan to rectify this in 2011.

I feel like I learn a lot from the experiences of the 'older' crowd, as they seem to have enough stabilityto take more risks with their ideas, but I also learn a lot from the younger crowd who jump in regardless.

Although I don't think there were any surprises in the poll, I wouldn write it off as a useless post, because like eveything else that hits the stream, it kicks off some great conversation. Thanks for your thoughts, everyone.
> You've still robbed him of the right of disposing of it as he sees fit.

Sure, but do you not see the parallel with copyright here? You are assuming a priori that the baker has a right to dispose of his goods as he sees fit, and that taking that right from him is a bad thing even if the disposal would have made him no profit anyway. I see no ethical problem with such a position, but you can apply much the same argument to intellectual property as to the physical kind.
I heared that Hp Emits more heat than other brands
PureTravel Botswana Adventure Holidays
Botswana activity and adventure holidays include safaris, history, culture, walking. climbing, trekking, sports, water activities, cruises, wildlife and nature. All travel tours provided direct by specialist local and responsible tour operators. Go direct, save money and give something back.
I was not referring to the user experience once the password is leaked, but if everything goes well :) But I understand your point. Part of the user experience is being comfortable with the handling of his private data.
This is fairly interesting, in the Jan-Feb 2011 edition of "American Scientist" [2] (The magazine) there's an article entitled "A troubled tradition" that outlines a few issues in academia with reviewing papers.

Peer reviewers traditionally have 5 main rules to follow when reviewing papers and one of them is "Fairness" which essentially states: "Avoid biases based on gender, institution affiliation, nationality, and career status."

Interesting to finally have proof that this doesn't only apply to academia but also to "real-life" engineering and that people discriminate no matter what.

Considering that the definition of engineering is: "The discipline dealing with the art or science of applying scientific knowledge to practical problems" — I can't even imagine why one wouldn't have the right to do "engineering" studies.

I digress, my point is made and I'm sad to still see such reaction to well put studies—Assuming it was well put [1]

[1] David M. Cox — PhD: http://bit.ly/hyf5Lj
The aforementioned assumption is made based on the academic knowledge of Dr. Cox and that he would know how to make a study and make an elaborated point explained in details.

[2] American Scientist — Volume 99 — Number 1 — January-February 2011
that's not even close to Paris
Show HN: Releasing DivCraft - a new HTML5 tool 
We are very excited to announce to this awesome Hacker Community about our newest tool - DivCraft - http://www.divcraft.com

DivCraft is a RAD software for creating mini embeddable dynamic content in HTML such as slideshows, product tours, interactive widgets, banners, website mastheads...

It is a desktop application and is freely available for download for Win, Mac and Linux (only restriction 'save project' is disabled in the demo version).

So kindly try the tool and if you Like it feel free to Spread the Word.

- Brought to you by the developers of the popular web-based wireframe service MockFlow.com