skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a very interesting look at things. I'm currently building a backbone-based frontend in a very similar way, only without the node.js counterpart - yet.

One problem I immediately see in this hybrid approach is the requirement to keep the state for all [active] users in memory on the server. This does not scale well - which is why conventional web development tries to be as stateless as possible.

It's not hard to remedy this partly by adding basic lazy-fetching and cursor capabilities to Collection. But you lose some of the most interesting features in the process (push-notify on changes), and preserving those at the same time becomes much more tricky then (bordering on classical ORM problems).

There's also still ground-level stuff missing in Backbone, i.e. the support for recursive updates of nested collections (e.g. from one big, nested json blob) is just not there yet. A few approaches have been discussed, but afaik not implemented yet. The models need to be beefed up with some sort of schema (e.g. json-schema) to truly solve this one.

However, none of that is insurmountable. All it takes is some more of the smartness that the Backbone developers have already demonstrated. And elbow grease.

For example I'd love to see backbone paired with 'dnode' or a similar RPC approach. That might open amazing possibilities.
Ten random ideas
Mutable state.

OO prioritizes encapsulation ahead of immutability as a way of making the problem of a mutable struct tractable. Most OO programs are graphs (picture as a complex web) of mutable objects holding references to one another, synchronously passing control from one object's method to the next (picture as a spider travelling around the web, making modifications). Concurrency means there is more than one logical point of control flowing around the graph, making modifications. To ensure modifications are consistent, one must now fight against the interconnected nature of this graph, and make certain areas mutually exclusive; that means you need to set up gates on all the edges leading into those areas (often called semaphores or mutexes).

But OO gives you precious little help in setting aside these areas, and guaranteeing internal consistency in the face of multiple mutating points of control.

Programs in a functional style are different, with their heavy emphasis on immutability. In this case, the web, as it were, is fixed and cannot be changed; instead, if there is to be a modification, a new copy is created (possibly only of the local area of change, and the unchanged portion included via references). Since there is no way to change data, there can be as many points of control performing operations as desired. (Actually, one of the models of computation used for functional programs is that of graph reduction, which pictures the program as a web of expressions rather than structures; and that big expression is iteratively made smaller by calculating different parts of it. In principle, the more points of control you have doing these calculations, or reductions (in the same way as '1 + 2' can be reduced to '3'), the better.)

Programs written in an agent / actor style are also different. Here, there is no single point of control flowing from one node in the graph (web) to the next; instead, each node has its own little point of control, and it reacts to messages coming in from each edge, and sends out messages along edges in response. This makes the program locally single-threaded, but globally concurrent.
RingRevenue and DoublePositive Join Forces to Make Your Phone Ring
You can watch it on YouTube:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PSPvHcLnN0

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtHlxzOXgYs
> "Why should publishers and customers have two middlemen?"

That's the point, there aren't 2 middlemen. There is only one: Amazon. Apple wants to take Amazon's place by asserting their privilege over the platform.
Ah. They may have meant the first version - being "blanked" - but clearly I need to take this into consideration.

Sadly.

Still, that's the way the world goes.
Perhaps its better to simply enable prison systems to treat people with mental illness properly without regard to whether the mental illness was diagnosed or related of the original reason they ended up in prison. Of course, treating mental illness is expensive and requires more staff per inmate, etc... Its my understanding there are quite a few schizophrenics in general population as its simply too expensive to deal with them in a more human fashion. But of course if we are talking about more humane treatment and possibly rehabilitative treatment then we need to extend the discussion to all prisoners.
Java SE 6u24
RIP Microsoft Zune brand
I think that DirecTV setups transmit power and control signal through the shield. A given wavelength carries two polarized signals and the control signal tells the LNB which polarization to watch for. (or maybe I've got it all wrong, but this is what I've gathered from setting up and troubleshooting my own)
To me, popularity implies being seen in a favorable light, whereas "notable" is more like the absolute value of popularity or un-popularity.
To answer your question, it might be too much for some startups to afford–but if that's the case, you simply don't have enough paying customers yet or (dare I say) you're doing it wrong.

Thomas is right, the cost is fair. We support several thousand paying customers with 3 full-time CSRs. They all take home more than $3k/month ... let alone taxes, health insurance, and other costs.

What I think a lot of startups don't understand is that good or great support isn't just a cost center–it's marketing. We get a lot of business just based on referrals and our reputation.
OK, so I'm running mongodb on the same machine as redis.

I do have mongodb replicated across two other machines, but could you briefly shed light on what the problems between redis and mongo on a single box were?
25 reasons I know Mark Peter Davis isn't living in the stone age:

1. He drives a car.

2. He owns keys, cash, and cards.

3. He receives medical care.

4. His life expectancy is above 35 years.

5. He owns a computer.

6. His basic survival doesn't automatically involve exercise.

7. He has alternatives to walking when traveling long distances.

8. Universities exist in his time.

9. He sleeps on a mattress.

10. Medicine exists to help control many causes of death. He'll likely die of natural causes after a long life.

11. Flight is possible for humans.

12. He's able to express his thoughts in a way that can be recorded and processed by non-living machines.

13. He's able to consider nutrition in his diet.

14. He meets people outside his immediate community without necessarily considering them a threat.

15. He considers his own impact on the wellbeing of the planet.

16. When contemplating his family's safety, he is able to consider the assistance of police, firemen, and medical professionals.

17. Monetary investment exists in his time.

18. Monetary transactions exist in his time.

19. He's learning a foreign language.

20. His child's education includes reading, writing, and arithmetic.

21. He recognizes the concept of mental health.

22. He recognizes that disease has medical causes.

23. He is able to form written contracts to help counter the deceit of others.

24. Industry exists in his time.

25. He typed that post.
No, the cypherpunks have already won.
Google Chrome is warning me that soccergoalplans.com is including content from an external website known for malware.
Kindly, can any one tell me why would we need such a website?
Adioso (YC W09) begins Booking.com love affair with Valentine travel site
Judge to consider Twitter information request
Best Diet Plans
Diet plans that celebrities promote gain maximum customers and the actual motive of a firm gets fulfilled. A celebrity involvement may attract few individuals but what matters is the product quality that is usually realized after making purchase. In most of the cases a customer suffers post purchase dissonance.
plate??
You're both right. But SwellJoe's argument was basically, "A hundred thousand dollars isn't cool. You know what's cool? Ten million dollars!" The OP was lucky enough to find a vein of gold underground, mined like 5% of it, then stopped so they could go open a restaurant. They could've mined out the rest of that vein and with the extra cash started ten restuarants and bought a yacht, etc.

That said it's always hard to criticize success. It's like these guys just did a gymnastics routine and got a 9.5 and then we harp that they should have gotten a 10, while we sit here gobbling popcorn from the couch. :)
Stocks used to be priced in eighths of a dollar. So if a stock was selling for $1.50, the next increment up was $1.625 and the next step down was $1.375. They are now priced down to the penny, so a $1.50 stock can go directly to $1.51 or $1.49.

I'm not entirely sure why he cites this as a bad thing, but I'm assuming that there's some arbitrage opportunity to value investors when dealing with eighths of a dollar (since if a stock was priced at $1.50 but was really worth $1.55, you'd be getting $0.05 of "free" value by buying it).
Before you level this accusation, think about Apple's history. Haven't they always been like this? Forgotten the $500-600 iPhone? The $2000 for an entry-level MacBook Pro?
I really prefer someone to be a rockpaperninja.
Actually, this one is a fairly coherent review. Take this for example:

"But a lot of third-party developers both large and small are going to be very, very pissed off by this move. Why? Because it totally changes the game. Companies with subscription elements of their content had been accustomed to leveraging Apple’s platform for free. Now there will be a fee. And it will be a significant fee."

And, here is some useful commentary:

"And, here is an answer to one of the questions that I've been wondering about:
"The Amazon question (which originally sparked a debate a couple weeks ago) seems more complicated. Because Amazon content isn’t sold by subscription, it’s not clear how this affects apps like their Kindle app. It may not affect it at all, but then why did Apple reject the Sony reader app? Was there a subscription layer in it? Apple clearly wants to move towards a full in-app purchase environment, but today they’re only talking subscriptions. One-time payments may be the next shoe to drop."

Update: A couple more things. Apparently, Apple has just updated the App Store Guidelines alongside the announcement today. And yes, it seems that one-time in-app purchases like those made through Amazon for the Kindle will fall under the same rules. That brings up another question: could Amazon just make a Kindle reader app that didn’t allow you to buy anywhere in the app, but only use previously bought content? The guideline wording seems like it would still be a no-no but it’s not entire clear that such an app would be rejected.
"
The current running down the wire produces an electromagnetic field in a circular pattern around the cable. When current also travels the opposite direction it creates the same field in the exact opposite direction to cancel it out. That is essentially how shielding works in coaxial cables. The outer sheath is just a continuation of the wire traveling in the opposite direction.
Hong Kong and Singapore have a huge advantage over the States in that the population there is extremely concentrated. A thousand households there is a single (albeit large) apartment building, while here it's a small neighborhood. I don't know how much cheaper it is to wire a single building than 20 blocks of single houses, but I imagine it's several orders of magnitude.
I'm not sure it's possible to disambiguate his point and the culture shift. i.e. perhaps the culture has shifted because of the issues he's described.
Our lives are better, but I doubt we are happier. Sometimes, I observe people that are much worse (economically) than me, and I see how they laugh. I am in general a happy person, but I don't think I can laugh with the same intensity as they do.

I can't find the reference, somebody posted a study where they show that after one year of either winning the lottery or becoming paralytic, people have the same level of happiness. I think is comforting to know that now matter what, we adapt, and we go on with our lives.
But the subset of HTML that is used on most real sites won't change much at all. It will be too much hassle for casual web sites to keep up, even if they could benefit from any of the new features, which most couldn't because it's still as crazy as it ever was to view the web as a good alternative platform to native apps. The cost/benefit will be dubious for most businesses for similar reasons.

The entire rapid-release-cycle idea is one big overreaction by people who are fed up with the glacial pace of standards development at organisations like the W3C. In a few years, I expect we are all going to be looking back in bemusement, wondering what possessed us to try to advance such a complicated industry without meaningful standards, and wishing we'd just stuck with stable standards all along.

Another possibility is that we will have simply lost interest in the whole affair, because the advancing technologies that help to build more practically useful tools around remote protocols won't be HTML and CSS anyway. For example, a simple delivery mechanism for native apps, along the lines of mobile app stores today, could have ended the current fool's quest to rewrite every serious desktop application on top of poorly suited web technologies, because, leaving the web to do what it does best, present and collect information.
That may not be true. The exactions imposed by shamans are effectively taxes imposed by a priestly class.

Present customs about taxation seem to derive mostly from tributes extracted by conquering tribes. But even in those cases there may be a thin historical thread connecting them to shamans, since the royal families of conquering tribes often had a semi-divine status.
One of the best comments so far on this whole strategy of Apple, bears repeating:

"Apple does run the risk of killing the golden goose, or alienating publishers to the point where they pull their wares from iOS entirely, which is bad for both users and the platform."
You can see that computer science is an applied science. A mathematics professor would have given a proof that such an algorithm exists or, more likely, that algorithms exist for solving several more general problems, and left it at that.
I think I'm glad we're still in the stone ages. I would break that list up into two distinct categories, the first of which I would define as positive (beautiful?) aspects of being human.

Being Human, positive

---------------------

I age.

I sleep.

I will die.

I walk places.

I educate my child.

I think for my computer.

I put effort into exercise.

I make purchase decisions.

I make investment decisions.

I meet people by happenstance.

I don’t always know when people are lying.

=====================

Problems / Annoyances, negative (fix these)

---------------------

I typed this post.

I waste resources.

I still drive my car.

I plug my computer in.

I know a foreign language.

I know people with diseases.

I contemplate my family’s safety.

I traveled to universities and work.

I carry things - keys, cash and cards.

I eat bad food because it tastes better.

I need to get my medical reports "faxed".

I know people with mental health problems.

I sit for 6 hours on a flight and write posts like this.

I breathe polluted air, drink impure water and eat contaminated food.
He absolutely is. Surprisingly, html5 apps haven't gone very big (even as installed bookmarks on the homescreen, or with the use of local caching, effectively mimicking an actual app) - at least in comparison with any meaningful iOS app.

Now, when Apple launched the iPhone, it only had webapps. One of the very good examples is the iPhone user guide, which is linked from within the Safari bookmarks, and which is a super smooth html5 experience. Based on the complexity of iOS app creation, i think it might even be possible that Apple did not originally want to publish the App store, SDK, etc (huge chunk of salt).

Anyways - the App store works because it makes money for developers. The html5 story does not, as it does not make money for developers, even if the experience for the user can be almost as good (or better than shitty apps, plus cross-platform).

Now, until there was a way to properly pay for mobile web apps, in the browser, not many ressources will be focused on html5. I hope this move from Apple will change this, and establish a standard before Apple will integrate iTunes payments in mobile safari to lock you out of that 30% chunk of revenues as well.

Because they can.
Yes there are. There are plenty of rights which the law gives you which you can't surrender, because they occur in asymmetric situations where one party has more power than the other.

For example you can't sell yourself into slavery and you can't surrender your right to reverse engineer a technology (in most developed countries).

Anti-competitive practices is another area where the law has intervened in these sort of situations in the past. For example in the case of printer ink refills (although the law has chosen not to intervene in the console market).
How is Apple's pay to provide content model legal?
Can someone better explain how Apple's app store model is legal/what led to this situation? When Microsoft first invented the Windows OS, did they get to charge 30% to everyone that built a software program that worked on Windows? (for all I know they did/do.. I'm just wondering how this ended up the way things are).

Apple has a monopoly over any content provider that is marketing to someone that uses an Apple device. You would think that they'd have to allow other marketplaces (app stores) to exist on their devices, same as Windows had to allow other web browers, accounting programs, etc.

Thanks for any info
Dan
Before I bought stumbleupon stumbles I was amazed at the exceptionally high pageviews per visit I was getting from SU. As soon as I dropped real money on it, the PV/user went to roughly the same as everywhere else.

I looked at the "referring sites" (in google analytics) and found that one of the pages was /refer.php which was the advertising page you mention.

I have an unproven feeling that my analytics from SU were somehow artificially inflated or something like that. My own personal experience is that I'm unimpressed with SU.

Others would disagree with me, and hopefully, someone somewhere will be able to convince me otherwise.
Don't know if it's in any way the cause of anything related to a decline in IPO, but this spread is what the banks make money on and what enables them to do what they do, effectively a measure of their margin on trades. Going from an eighth to a hundredth just means their margins effectively were reduced, but was probably a result of an increase in volume / trading activity.
I prefer the thousand yard stare... Then they all move!
Stocks used to be priced in eighths of a dollar per share (that is, 12.5 cents). A few years ago, the exchanges switched to pricing them in cents, like everything else. This was "decimalization".

What's not obvious is why this guy thinks that this altered IPOs in any meaningful way. (I'm not even sure why he thinks it altered trading volumes, which is how he claims it affected IPOs.)

But it fits a different pattern, in this article. It turns out that, at least according to this guy, every single change in the capital market structure since, I don't know, 1992 was somehow bad for small IPOs.

Item #3 is "the rise of the internet brokerages." You might think that having a broader customer base would make it easier to sell stuff, but no. Bad for IPOs!

Item #5 is Eliot Spitzer reining in fraudulent "analysis" at various Wall Street firms, which was getting people to invest in stuff they didn't otherwise understand. (Which, in the world I live in, happened to a great extent through internet brokerages, but ... never mind.) It turns out that chasing fraud from the marketplace is Bad for IPOs!

And so forth.

There are some good points here --- Sarbanes-Oxley regulation is a big deal, and so is consolidation on Wall Street. But some of this other stuff really does strike me as a bit of a stretch.
Show them the money. Those features are undeveloped because they aren't valued enough. If more people wanted and used them, they'd develop them better.

Here's my favorite quote from the comments: "Simple solution, don't let your kids get their grubby paws on your phone. I have none of these issues as my kids are not allowed to touch my phone. They have their own electronic toys and iDevices to play with."

Yes, that's right, the best way to prevent kids from destroying expensive things is to not hand them to them. There are devices designed for children that have these protections and more.
https://epbfi.com/

Chattanooga, TN USA currently has residential speeds of up to 1,000 Mbps. As far as I can tell it is still the only place in the USA where you can get some of the fastest internet speeds. HOWEVER it's 349.99 for that speed [see https://epbfi.com/you-pick/#/ ]

Has anyone else heard of any other place in the US that offers speeds close to any of this?
I use IndexTank for my startup(pilarhq.com), and search is the single most important thing for us. Seriously, IndexTank is terrific. Not only is their product pretty fast and provides great search which you can integrate in your app in a matter of minutes, but their support is AMAZING.

In fact, I've tweeted TWICE about how great their support is. They've seriously walked me through each step with various code samples and have resolved all my issues within a couple of hours....I have only great things to say about them.
Citi Summer Analyst Applicant Will Not Take Rejection Lying Down
IMHO it's more than just disruption - Valve has some of the most die-hard fans and supporters I've ever seen for any company in the game industry (myself included). They've done this by being relentlessly customer-focused.

Where EA will release a game, and then sell you unlock codes for content already on the disc as "downloadable content", Valve has ceaselessly offered perks for new and existing customers: years worth of updates to Team Fortress 2, all for free. Left 4 Dead too. Hell, when they introduced Steam Achievements they went back and added support for it in most of their back catalog! That's dedication to the customer.

And no small surprise, people flock to Valve, even when it comes to buying 3rd party games.
Starbucks: Mobile payments catching on -- 1 million so far
I'd venture to say the internet doesn't get Apple. Many geeks are just anti anything Apple, and have an irrational hatred for them.

Apple have made huge contributions to the internet, such as Webkit, promoting web standards, the iPhone and yes, even the iTunes store - still the biggest internet-based media distribution channel.
Symmetry between code on client and server has long been the promise of server-side JS. I'm working towards a similar goal of reusing Backbone's model/collection structure server-side. It does not attempt to pub/sub events to all clients with an instance of a model/collection, at least not yet.

My project simply proxies client fetch/save/destroy calls via Backbone.sync to the server. Through a RESTful URL convention and Express.js the model and collection of the client's request are recreated, any transformations applied and persisted, then sent back down the pipe. Server-side, models and collections extend their client-side bases and introduce additional functionality (i.e. per-user access control). Models and collections are not kept in memory server-side beyond the duration of a request.
This seems like a silly move to me. I would have expected a zune running Phone 7 to help push the OS to more users. I would love to have a Phone 7 device to hack around on, but I've already got a phone and data plan.