skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: What about a read later Feature in HN?
Where I work there is a really stupid DansGuardian setup that doesn't allow me to see 90% of the internet.

So a lot of times I see nice topics here that I wish I could save to read later.

Is there a way to implement some kind of read later feature ? so I can log in my account and get a list ? it could be daily erased so we don't need a lot of space to put all this, just for reading at home late night.

Thanks !
If anything it's a sign of overconfidence. They almost all their money through hardware, and the App store/iTunes store is a very small part of their revenue.
Could you start making some good pizza? That place is one step above mozarella on cardboard.
Well, I look at it like this: If you've got the kind of bullshit we see right now at $100, can you imagine if it were free? You don't have to – look at Android Marketplace:

http://jonathanbuys.com/11-07-2010/Android-Marketplace.html

I'd, personally, prefer a $500 fee to get into the store, but whatever.

On the other bit, I meant doing the right thing relative to Palm's nonsense about grabbing the SDK after jumping through so many hoops. On Apple itself, I've long believed that you should get provisioning for three devices per year for free with an iPhone developer account. Obviously they aren't making money from the fee, so I wonder if there are practical reasons why they don't do this. Perhaps doing all the certificate/code signing/provisioning nonsense on the server would be too costly to just give away.
Except, that's not Jeopardy. That's "Answer these Trivia Questions". A legitimate game, but not one that is likely to get much viewership.

Everyone misses what should be knocked about Watson. The advantage isn't the buzzer per se. But rather the text message to get the question and the signal to indicate the question had been read.

The way it should work in the future is that Watson reads the question from the screen, listens to Alex, and sees the signal from the light.

Given the standard way Jeopardy text is written though, I suspect that all of these additional requirements won't change the outcome by much.

Watson is just a better Jeopardy player than humans. Are there other trivia games where humans are better? Probably so. But people don't watch these other games in prime time.
You can’t be thrown into prison or fined for saying the wrong thing in the US. That’s what I mean. You might argue that this is not true for some things but it is true for the vast majority of things you could say. Being anonymous matters a great deal more when freedom of speech is not protected.
John Henry beat the machine he was up against: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Henry_(folklore)
My guess is they have a large-ish set of root certs like every other SSL/TLS library, but one or more may be marked 'magic' in some way. Plus they'll probably want the option to utilize third-party CDNs at some point which often implies a common CA.

Given the rest of what's known about their design I doubt they've deliberated it at a particularly high level in their organization. Or at least, high enough where management doesn't see the benefit of maintaining their own trust root and is glad for the opportunity to outsource something critical.
Claiming you are exempt from any responsibility does not actually legally exempt you from any responsibility. You can't legally bring a spy camera into my home by presenting me with a free gift that contains a hidden camera. You can't legally blow up my home, even if I accept a free device from you and press the buttons you told me to press, unless you were very clear about what the device would do (and no, claiming in the license that it is not meant for anything does not nullify the website and the examples of what the code is obviously supposed to do). Going from the realm of the obvious to the realm of the somewhat less obvious: if you give me a free bicycle, knowing it's fron fork is starting to give way, you are responsible for my skull fracture if you don't tell me about it. The practical problem, usually insurmountable, is proving you knew about it. More broadly: the consequences of known defects that obviously have disastrous consequences are the responsibility of the provider. This also holds for software and doesn't depend on the license.

Now my point is not that this is the case here or that such cases are common or even important. The point is that the blanket statement of my parent is plainly false.

Of course, IANAL, but you don't need to be a lawyer to understand jurisprudence. There are plenty of known cases where people intentionally harmed others and tried to plead guilty based on not actually performing the action that lead to the damage. It doesn't fly.
DreamWorks Animation - What's The Point? - OnMedea
From a competition perspective, I think it was fair: every player is entitled to capitalize his own advantages within the rules.

However, I think this would have been more interesting intellectually to isolate Watson's "thinking", with everything else on a level playing field.
I'm certain it was a copywriter who created that headline. Would you read "How to learn to play Piano" or "They Laughed Until I sat down to play?"

I know HN tends to dislike overtly dramatic headlines but copywriting is also an interesting art.
The only way to set a monitor's brightness so low that it doesn't cause eyestrain with an all-white screen over a 16 hour period is to turn it off.
Do you also block Google Analytics?
As a game developer, the recipe I like is C++ with classes but I try not to use inheritance/virtual functions unless there is a clear benefit. Instead, common code can be grouped into utility classes. For example, the classic "Shape" base class example with "Circle" and "Triangle",etc derived classes could be instead a "Shape" class that held a small list of arcs segments and line segments. Then a "makeCircle", "makeTriangle", "makeRoundRect" function.

If you have a few (hundreds) of objects and many types (circles, triangles,etc) then the "classic" example is better. But in the real world, you often have many (millions) of objects and a small fixed number (say, <10) of different types. Knowing that everything is a "Shape" (and not just something that implements its interface) is very powerful, for example you could collapse all your segments into a spatial data structure and not even keep the "shapes" list around anymore.

One of the best things you can do is realize just because you have classes, doesn't mean you can't still use plain functions anymore. I hate it when I see classes like "ObjectMunger" with a function "munge()" ... just write the munge function unless there's a good reason to do otherwise.

Templates are actually a good feature if you don't get carried away. But too often I see people use templates like FooMuncher<float> fFooMunch; where <float> (or something) is the only type that is ever instantiated. Why bother templatizing something if you're not going to use that flexibility. If you want a double-precision foo in the future, you can always search and replace ;).

Look at the EASTL library for a nice alternative to the STL that fixes some of it's warts such as the clumsy allocators.
Background: I started my first big startup in college, studied abroad+traveled, and also took summer classes in my 4 year college career.

My #1 recommendation: Build something lots of people can use. You need a portfolio of things you've built outside of school/work.

You can do this while you intern somewhere, go abroad, or take extra classes in school (meh).

My personal preference would be to go abroad to a country where your own currency goes very very far, so you can live/travel cheaply and also hack while you are at it.
In Application Security, Good Enough Isn't
That's possible, but let's take an analogy with the housing market.

Market's were overflowing with liquidity due to low rates and easy credit, and then the housing market securitization exploded to the upside, which then fed on itself and created it's own bubble. There was mass participation from all the major banks, and we saw real estate riches books in Barnes and Noble.

How does that compare to now? We've yet to see public securitization of these "overvalued" companies, and there's no outrigh participation by banks leading them to IPOs, at least not yet... there's GS raising capital for facebook but that's really it.

Yeah we could get all zerohedgey with respect to how the fed is pushing up assets, but the majority of capital is coming via public equities and commodities... and the participation really isn't there at the moment.
A year ago Google promised that social searching twitter back to 2006 via would be possible "soon".

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/replay-it-google-sear...

"For our initial release, you can explore tweets going back to February 11, 2010, and soon you’ll be able to go back as far as the very first tweet on March 21, 2006"

But the search is still limited to 2010 as of February 2011.

I wonder if the reason is technical or "political" ?
Confessions of an Apple Store Employee
Why Elle, Nylon and Pop Sci Said Yes to Apple's iPad Subscription Terms
Do you really think you're saying anything useful by baldly ignoring the context of the original statement in order to make a fuss over "free market capitalists"?

The context is not funerals or family reunions or random events, it's communities of people interacting over time.
Is there a lot of sexual harassment/chauvinism on wikipedia also?

Personally, I've observed vastly more sexist/chauvinistic behavior on Facebook (where women seem quite happy to contribute) than on OSS mailing lists, but that may just be an artifact of the people I interact with.

Another question: can anyone think of other free/for-pay intellectual activities which do/dont exhibit a gap? We can compare OSS to paid programming, Wikipedia to Demand Media, are there other comparisons of this sort one can make?
Yep, it would be more difficult and probably make its buzzer reaction time a little more "honest".
That doesn't solve anything - "to" is still a preposition and the "Who" in your sentence should still be "Whom".
Call me a dog, but fast is not even on my list for reasons to choose a NoSQL solution (namely Riak)

1. Operations. I do not want to spend my time doing this, at all.
2. Linear Scalability. Scalability is not about performance for me, it is about being able to predict costs, and to grow capacity without downtime or high cost surprises.
3. Flexibility. The ability to work without having to fight a schema. No schema means no schema migrations (which goes to 1) but also no inherent assumptions in resource allocation. I've got a new idea that works a different way? Great, just add some new buckets and try it. No more ORM impedance mismatches, no dealing with arbitrary SQL vagueness. IF I don't like the mechanism for doing queries I can create a new solution. Map Reduce should be enough for everybody anyway. (joking!)
But the buzzer timing is also part of Jeopardy. It's just a part of the game. You can change the game to disadvantage the computer, but then why not change other rules like require all responses to be handwritten using a hand with human blood flowing through it to a pumping heart, which is connected to a working human brain.
The title is misleading. The point that the author is actually trying to make is that adding Scala to an existing project can be harmful. He does not say that Scala is inherently harmful for large enterprise projects, in fact, he explicitly states the exact opposite:

Neither Geir nor I consider Scala inherently harmful to a large-scale programming project.

I would argue here that adding any language to an existing project would have at least some of the drawbacks that the author mentioned (developers not familiar with the language, added complexity...).
No natural light for 12 weeks? No problem: build a huge mirror to redirect sun.
See also, hailstorm numbers -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collatz_conjecture#Statement_of...
Read my first comment again quoting Zach, it's pretty clear:

"Of course Rhapsody [insert Last.fm] can't sell their stuff for a 30% margin. It's not their own stuff!

They're trying to be the last link in a chain of 90/10 (or more) splits. They repackage record labels' repackaging of artists' content. Do you think the artists would find 30% economically untenable?

The App Store is 70/30 because Apple can take things straight from content producer to customer. When the Apple takes the place of publishing, distribution, inventory, sales, payments and shipping, there's real value for that 30%.

When all someone wants out of Apple is merely to process the payment and send things down the pipe, gee, who do they think they are? But that's not what Apple is actually holding themselves out as. Apple doesn't want to be in that kind of commodity market anyway. Seems reasonable to me."

Apple is giving them distribution, billing, discovery/advertising, inventory, shipping, et al-- 30% is a pretty fair cut I'd say, but hey if you disagree, don't support them.

And why would you expect to get your money back? You had no guarantee at the time you bought the Apps or iPad that the marketplace rules wouldn't changes, that's to be expected as nearly every marketplace's rules change frequently: see Amazon, eBay, etsy, Wal-Mart, whoever. I really don't understand your complaint.

Also, I'm tired of discussing this topic as it seems most people have already made up their minds on the issue regardless of the facts surrounding the situation.

Disclosure: typing on a Dell, I own a Blackberry and an HTC Aria, and I own a Macbook. I am agnostic to corporate entities, but I can step back and try to detach myself and be as objective as I can.
With that use-pattern, the issue clearly isn't background color.
>Rights can exist without them having to be recognized.
>They can't be taken away, just infringed against.

Property rights - it is government license to you for the exclusive (subject to zoning and other laws/rules) use for a specific parcel of land. That infringes upon all Earth's creatures' (humans including) rights for that specific parcel of land. The same way IP rights - government grants you the license for the exclusive (subject to various laws/rules) use for an idea, sound, symbol... That infringes upon all Earth's creatures' (humans including) right for that idea, sound, symbol...

It is like in logic/mathematics - the same basic rules create the same structure. The nature of individual objects doesn't matter. The IP space is undergoing the same parcelization, zoning, fencing, etc... (RIAA as a crazy city council) Actually, so far we've seen only beginning of this process ...

>Also, the difference between IP as a 'right' and as a 'privilege' consists in the difficulty of arranging for a system of IPs in a world without a monopolistic enforcer (or 'privilege granter').

This is what World Wars are for - solving such problems in the specific areas of rights, specifically real property rights, human rights, etc...
> I looked at the Amazon Android Store terms the other day. They are horrible. The wording is vague but it looks like Amazon will pay you between %20 and %70, and they get to set the price.

Yes, the last thing in particular is horrendous, and yet everybody shouts at Apple...
hmmm.... I've used that together with a friend for quite some time now and we never had problems. I assume we were just lucky. Thank you people, for clearing that up.

And yes, of course you're right, it's not really a server.
It's ok, but it's specifically for GMail. Lots of phones have magic wizards for GMail, so that doesn't help for us setting up IMAP.

Plus, it's not branded, and not editable in the sense that it could be improved by the community based on feedback from customers to eliminate confusion.
Back then people were saying there was a "new economy" driven by the Internet, and that productivity was going to go up like a step function, which justified higher p/e ratios for any company that could claim to be a participant.

We're seeing the saplings of a similar movement now, though. This time, people are talking about online advertising as if the Internet is the second coming of television, even though there are serious doubts about the persistence of revenues going to the Internet's second-largest advertiser (Facebook).

Some other companies: Groupon sells coupons to millions, but small business have mixed reviews of their experience and might be engaging in questionable pricing schemes. Quora is a question-answer site with no revenue model in sight, and they're already valued at eight figures.

If there is any evidence of a bubble, it can be found in how people wave their hands at the future revenue streams of these companies. They're great products, but if their click-through rate sucks how will they make money?
Texas governor backs Amazon; Seattle Times backs Texas tax
I feel like in the interest of full disclosure, it should be noted that this is pg's wife's book.

I second the recommendation, however ;)
An electronic signal and a photonic signal ("the light") both travel at the same speed.
what do you mean by buying customers? advertising?
This is really amusing in light of the recent wailing and gnashing of teeth on Hacker News at the horrific requirement by Apple that folks plug in their new iPods or iPhones to a computer to get things setup. That setup process looks like even more of a breeze after reading about Palm's.
Thanks a lot for chiming in.
Also in Safari scroll is laggy. Apparently webkit is redrawing the shadows every time. I actually made shadows very similar to these for one of my web apps but didn't end up using them because it made scrolling laggy.
Why are so many people angry about this? Lots of our country's wealth and jobs comes from companies started recently (e.g. Apple, Google). And we have to develop alternative energy sources to break our dependence on oil (which is coming to an end sooner than the foreign oil cartel will let on).

Just let the energy market do its damn job. Once oil become cheap, nuclear and solar energy looks damn good.
IPhone Nano Mockup: size does not matter
That first statistic is misleading. 30% of the homes currently financed by a mortgage are underwater. There are many homes owned outright so that percentage is much lower (about 17%).

Also, food stamp program participation lags economic growth by a fairly large timeframe. See http://bit.ly/igTa7W

Finally, I'd recommend using zerohedge as a primary source. That's like citing Fox News or Mother Jones for politics. Instead, go to the source that they scraped their info from for less biased data.
Why Can’t Tablet Makers Just Freaking Ship?
Crucially, nobody was calling it a bubble, until at least a year after it had, in retrospect, popped. Proper bubbles are a product of the madness of crowds, and are impossible to call in anything but hindsight. If we are in the middle of a bubble at present, by definition, almost none of us know what the bubble is in.
Why do companies need so much?

How much?

Why do they need money at all especially for a web startup?

Oh, I don't know... maybe the founders want to pay themselves a salary so they can work on the project full-time and still pay rent/electricity bill/car payment/mortgage payment/gas bill/car insurance/phone bill/etc. And as cheap as computing cycles are, they still aren't free. Sure, a small Slicehost or Linode node for development is dirt cheap... but what if your webapp traffic starts to grow and you need to scale it out? Or maybe there are expenses for traveling to trade-shows, conferences, customer sites, etc? Maybe you want to buy advertising or pay a PR agency for some work? Maybe you want some graphics designed by a professional graphics designer? There are all sorts of things that go into running a business that cost money.

The bigger question I have is what does the VC money earn you

Runway and the ability to move faster. If I'm trying to bootstrap something, the amount of code I can produce in, say, 6 months, is equal to how much code I personally can write in that time. If I can hire, say, 2 more developers, we can - in theory, and allowing for Brooks' Law - get a lot more done. Getting done quicker, maybe getting a certain feature finished in time for a big-splash product launch at an important trade show, etc.; are places where being funded would give you an advantage over pure bootstrapping. Obviously this won't apply to everybody, and not everybody chooses to pursue VC money. Different strokes and what-not...
Right. And just to drive the nail in a bit deeper: ending a sentence with a preposition is a grammatical construction that English gets from its roots as a Germanic language. German has what are called "separable verbs" where prepositions are combined with verb roots to create a new verb. In certain cases, the preposition prefix is split off of the verb and placed at the end of the sentence. The preposition must come at the end of the sentence in order to be grammatical. You can see remnants of separable verbs in English:

"I passed the man in the red hat by." pass-by

"I threw all of my old, useless papers out." throw-out

To repeat the parent's point: the stricture against ending a sentence with a preposition is simply a bias for grammatical structures that English inherited from Latin (through French) and against structures inherited from German.

The rule against splitting infinitives falls into the same category. It is not possible to split an infinitive in Latin because infinitives aren't made up to two words.

Again, these two rules (and others like them) are about biases, not about grammatical correctness or even clarity of communication. When you say "Who am I speaking with?" and "To boldly go where no man has gone before.", no one is actually left scratching their heads and thinking "I wonder what he means?"
I'm learning Scala now and am impressed by its difficulty. Not since I learned C++ in college have I needed to spend the same amount of time and effort learning a language, and the arguments given here against Scala are exactly the arguments you hear against C++.

That's heartening to me. C++ is a great language for people who 1) know the language, and 2) use it sensibly (which often means humbly.) There's all kinds of stuff you can do with C++, including metaprogramming magic that gives you DSL-like capabilities a la Boost Spirit.

I can't imagine using Boost Spirit in production code myself. Maybe there's a good use for it somewhere -- probably so -- but I really don't care if Boost Spirit is every a good idea anywhere. Maybe it's just an abomination; I don't care! All I care about is that I can make a good judgment about allowing it into my codebase.

I'm going to approach Scala with the same attitude.
Thingiview.js on Thingiverse
Say what you will about sarbox, but the fact that the public isn't able to get carried away in hype severely limits the size of a potential bubble.

Another data point to consider is the general internet savvy running around these days. Consider all the kids coming out of college these days that grew up with the Internet. A lot of them had cell phones when they were 10. Basically, all young people understand the Internet at a very natural level now; it's not just relegated to computer geeks and technology fetishists. This means a lot more ideas, and a lot better design, to say nothing of the improved tools we have today (REST vs SOAP, Rails vs ColdFusion, etc).

All that said, every bubble is different, and by definition happens because of what people aren't expecting. So I'd say there could definitely be a bubble brewing. Consider for instance, a future in which Facebook executes amazingly, but at the end of the day we discover that all that social activity is actually as worthless as Google hopes it is. The valuations are high because outcomes are unpredictable on this stuff, not due to irrational exuberance.