skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As far as I know there was a bug on 4.2.1 where home screen web applications marked with a specific flag couldn't use the HTML5 Application Cache. Maybe they didn't get to fixing this in 4.3, but on 4.2.1 there was a reasonable-ish workaround.

Look, I hate Apple as much as the next guy (maybe more so: I mean, I've dedicate my life to messing with them), but the random rumor mongering surrounding tiny actions that they perform needs to stop.

Like, the HTML5 Application Cache? That code is horribly broken. I started using the HTML5 Application Cache in Cydia (and am now sufficiently "down that road" that I'm launching with this, hell or high water), but WebKit's implementation's barely works, and I don't think it is reasonable for people to be holding Apple quite to task on whether this feature happens to be working in every scenario.

I mean, seriously: when you start going through the WebCore code history and public bug tracker teasing apart what is going on, you find that the developers working on with some of these issues (and there are still critical show-stopper bugs that have only been noticed a few months ago, as well as ones that are still open) actually claim "no one understands this system", something you really believe when you see the massive unstable state machine that surrounds it.

It is therefore entirely plausible to me that the reason the app cache isn't working in apps with some random meta flag is solely because of one of the numerous queue bugs in WebKit's appcache logic that totally wedge the mechanism (even crashing it at times) if things happen to reload in the wrong order.
Prefetching Web Content: Trials and Tribulations
Sounds like JavaScript or Lua.
Node Blog by Ryan Dahl & Isaac Schlueter
I apologize -- I should have cited recent events as the reason I brought up Adobe specifically. I did think I worded it in a way that made it clear I was speculating, but I see now I should have been much more specific.

Yesterday Adobe released a very serious advisory for Flash Player:
http://blogs.adobe.com/psirt/2011/03/security-advisory-for-a...
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2328928

And I was thinking of the highest-profile hacking case I can remember, when Google was infiltrated primarily by vulnerabilities in Adobe software. If I recall correctly, maliciously crafted PDFs were e-mailed to staff with cleverly engineered "From" addresses and subjects. For example, an employee received an e-mail from their boss's e-mail address.
Yesterday, I fired one of my Middle Manager. His coworker reported to me that "He got average english skills".
I have to agree with this. It's obvious these guys are smart and savvy. Couldn't they have come up with a new, brilliant idea instead of a Pokemon clone? I hope this gets acquired so they can spend their 20s doing something more meaningful.
People are still MINTING money on Facebook. I imagine the top 5 grossing facebook games make the top 5 grossing iPhone games look like adorable little hobbies. The #40 game on Facebook has 6M monthly active uniques. THe #120 game on Facebook has 2M MAU. How many iPhone games have those kind of numbers?

Platform quibbles aside, I imagine it's the fastest/cheapest way to get tens/hundreds of thousands of users to test their gameplay. It's easier to develop for Facebook than mobile, doesn't have the approval nonsense for rapid iteration, has a built in viral channel, etc.

I think it's a smart move.
this article makes it seem like they IPO'd because they were getting close to their 500 shareholder limit.
Very cool, I really like it.

Could you add an option to keep to the current tab when following a link, rather than opening a new one? While this isn't as annoying as it used to be when it actually opened a new browser session, it is still a little annoying when you go to hit the back button and it doesn't work.

Congrats on the sale, best of luck and keep up the good work.
I don't know of any robots that are powerful enough to carry water cannons, but still able to be deployed in short order to a hazardous and unusual environment. The robot would have to be very strong: the flow rates they need to cool all that uranium are really quite huge; the hoses they would be dragging would be heavy and stiff.

But it does seem like a ground-based robot like a packbot:

http://www.irobot.com/gi/ground/510_PackBot

which is used to inspect IEDs, among other things, would be helpful to get video. As well as airborne drones.
Agreed, the bet isn't on this game, its on the team. As in, "I bet they could displace Zynga one day".
I initially thought you were just splitting hairs, but seeing as you've used this argument somewhere else in this thread I think this might be a genuine thought you have so I will take the time to explain why home-screen web apps are absolutely nothing like other native apps on the system, and actually essentially the same as loading a web page in MobileSafari. So for starters, let us observe that there are three instances where JS can run on iOS that we care about:

1. MobileSafari, from a web page loaded from a URL.

2. Home-Screen Web Apps, web pages loaded from a URL that the user then 'saves to the homes screen' which are loaded in some mysterious, but APPLE WRITTEN, "wrapper" process X.

3. UIWebViews within native apps that you buy on the App Store.

Now, my position is that (1) and (2) are for all intents and purposes the same, and (3) is possibly different. So, the whole argument about turning it off for UIWebView is that the interaction between native code and Nitro might offer an additional vector of security concern. Well, in both (1) and (2), there is no user native code. It literally just either downloads the JS off the web, or reloads it straight from the web. All the native code is written PURELY by Apple. So in a world where the only user modifiable code comes from the web, then clearly this is the same as where we started with MobileSafari. The additional thing to realize, is that unlike native apps (3), home-screen web apps (2) are NOT code signed, just like web pages (1). So that also nullifies the argument that allowing Nitro on home-screen web apps would go against Apple's code signing policies.

Hopefully that explains my thinking a little bit clearer.

Once again, I am very willing to believe that they had a deadline to meet, and turning it on for home-screen web apps got punted. That makes perfect sense. The security argument however falls flat on its face.
When I design RESTful APIs, I tyypically wind up with a collection resource for each of my resource types. (This is a common pattern, I think.) Searching and your getHeavyRotation are examples of "GET the collection resource, but filter the resources to include in the list". For this I use the path to identify the collection and query parameters to specify the filtering.

Query parameters are appropriate here because they're not being used to specify which collection resource to retrieve. They're being used to alter the representation of the collection. This is just like using start and count query parameters to allow paging through a large collection.

For your search, you would use a single query parameter, and for getHeavyRotation you would use one parameter for each field you can filter on. They'd be optional of course, and if none are specified you get the whole collection.

Regarding deleting songs "safely", I'm not sure what you mean but I'm guessing you want some confirmation or recovery. I assume each song has a playlist attribute; instead of allowing a DELETE method on the song I would have a trashbin playlist, and allow the song resource to be updated with the playlist attribute changed to the trashbin uri. That allows the songs to be recovered if they are moved by mistake. To really clear it out, you could allow DELETE on /{trashbin uri}/{song id}. Eg: the song resource can only be deleted via the trashbin.
Are they? Who else other than Zynga is. Making money?
Perl to the rescue: case study of deleting a large directory
Where is Mexico?

"I hate that fcking stadium. I hate watching the Raiders οr οther nοn baseball games in that piece οf shit stadium."

http://www.thehansonso.com/search.php?q=where+is+mexico%3F
Digg wasn't a "popular competitor" at the time. It was an unknown competitor. TechCrunch did a first profile on Digg 5 days before Reddit launched. I'm going to assume reddit took more than 5 days to build.

http://techcrunch.com/2005/06/18/profile-digg/

So is it that absurd that they started on Reddit without knowing about Digg? For that matter, TechCrunch wasn't that popular either in 2005.
Ryan Dahl (@ryah)
3/17/11 4:53 PM
Please subscribe to blog.nodejs.org/ !
The inefficiency is reduced, and making it 'twice as efficient' would be .7*.7=.49 inefficiency. 3.5 would be about .29, or a 71% efficiency. Though it's cute that you tried to make it come out to more than 100%.
Microsoft Office 15 to Support Facebook Chat, productivity drops?
You should read my other comments on this thread. All of them basically start with "yes JIT may be less secure". That is not the argument I am making: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2338724
This doesn't sit well with me. We are talking about open source software! Let's assume I have some cool little gem I wrote that works well for me, but maybe not the ideal solution for everyone. However, there is enough utility in it that I want to push it up to github. Someone can take it and make it better, using my base as a start.

I believe the above scenario is common. But now I have to fear being reviewed on something that wasn't meant to be a complete work anyway? You don't like it...branch it and make it better! The community will win! People will end up using your version instead of mine if I don't pull the changes back in. Isn't that the way this is supposed to work?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this post entirely. It's hard enough for a lot of us to post our work publicly - then to have it scrutinized and attached to my github profile seems unfavorable to me. You don't like my stuff - don't use it! Have I done something incorrectly? Email me and let me know! Github seems to be doing just fine w/o this feature and the good projects somehow rise to the top.

BTW - I'm not opposed to being critiqued on my code. I just don't know if a public rating system is the way to do it! And I do believe I would be more reluctant to release anything if I felt it could be rightly criticized for things I know it lacked. Make sense?
I guess you could say in a way Google Docs has always integrated with Facebook as it's in a browser heh
Visualizing a product's UI and code layers
Can you come up with something? No, alright then.
Arguably their unique take is the Facebook side of it, does Pokemon exist on Facebook like this does?
Prada mens low shoes white 2
Cheap mens prada sale low breathable shoes white sale are made up with high quality leather and breathable mesh materials.The logo was printed on the outside of the shoes show its brand value.They are not clumsy,airtight ,but light,ventilate,durable and very comfortable!They looked leisure,simple yet stylish!The solid outsoles are antiskid.It is very smart for you to choose such a pair of shoes for outdoor activities and sports!
I'm working on an RPC API that works with XML over HTTP. I'll be calling it an XML API. If it did JSON I'd call it a JSON API. Some customers seem to want to call it a REST API, but it would pain me to call it that when it isn't.
Like using an iPad.
Makes you wonder why sidereel hasn't evolved that much, the only major update I recall is their design revamp..
Gobbler: Cloud Media Project Management
The ideal is that these kernels of value (investigative journalism, for example) flourished under the subsidization of advertising. They reality is the opposite, they withered away while news media grew fat and lazy. It's easier to concentrate on reprints of family circle, regurgitated wire reports, opinion pieces, and facile human interest stories than it is to do the hard gum-shoe work of real reporting.

The internet has pulled the rug out from under newspapers by taking away the value of all that fluff, because broadcasting is now effectively free and ubiquitous. That means that the only substantive value newspapers have anymore (outside of tradition, which will only maintain for so long) is in their original reporting and the quality of their opinion. Even in the off chance that there are news institutions with substantial value in these areas it's unlikely that the public is willing to pay enough for that to also support paying money for editing wire reports and redistributing beetle bailey. But newspapers are generally fundamentally incapable of redefining themselves as anything other than the bloated institutions they've been, they would rather go down with "dignity" than to change who they are.

Why do I care? Because I care about the news and I hate to see it continue to be dragged down by these failing corporate behemoths.

I think the future of journalism is, as I said, in much leaner institutions who put the focus on the subject and the quality of reporting first, are not burdened by the bloat of outmoded institutional conceptions of what being a "newspaper" means, and who have financial incentives which align with the incentives to produce better reporting.
I don't know why they said that. I still can run http://code.google.com/p/pjs4ipad/ on an iPad 1 with wi-fi shut off with 4.3 (8F190). It works after a shutdown, power-up cycle too.

It's not just the Register, Ars http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/03/confirmed-some-web... makes the same claim, but it works on my desk ;)
New and brilliant ideas are much more difficult to gain traction. Great execution on a "cloned" idea is much easier. How many Groupon clones are there? How many of them are making a lot of money? (Hint, a lot). How much money is spent on Pokemon and related collectible card games? (Hint, also a lot).

Meaningful is in the eye of the beholder.
7 Business Tips for Mobile App Developers (Digiday)
Batch requests in Facebook Graph API
The really hard part sometimes is getting political support within an organization. Someone usually went to a lot of trouble to argue that a feature was worth building, and a lot of senior people had to agree to it. A bunch of folks worked on it. Now you're asking them to admit that it didn't get traction, and more work should be done to remove it (and maybe annoy some customers along the way.)

It's necessary, and it should be done, but it's often unpalatable and doesn't happen, leading to bloatware.
50 Creative and Funny Digital 3D Monster Wallpaper.
"Types and Reflection" by Lauri Emil Alanko
Engineers Hack Cars with Digital Music
I think the reason they were trying to use water cannons was because of the great range they offer in shooting water.

They needed that range because humans couldn't go near the pools containing the spent fuel rods because of the radiation.

But if a robot could get very close, they might not need to use a water cannon, and could use just a regular water hose. Or they might be able to use a water cannon but with water coming out at a much lower pressure.

And I'm not sure that the hose dragging is an unsolvable engineering task either.

They could, for instance, erect a tower with a spool of hose on it. As the robot moved away from the tower and towards its destination, it could unravel the hose from the spool and have most if not all of the hose be suspended in the air behind it.

Another solution could be to have a second robot following the first, to support a portion of the hose. They could even use a third or a fourth robot behind the first two, if needed.

Those are just off-the-cuff ideas.. I'm sure professional engineers could easily think of dozens of other methods to solve the hose-dragging problem.
In Common Lisp we have optional type declarations, and a common strategy for implementations (for SBCL, say) is to treat such declarations as assertions by default, leading to more safety, and for performance-sensitive parts of the code you can "(locally (declare (optimize speed (safety 0))))", which makes the type declarations act as performance optimizations for that part of the code.
Section of Highway 1 near Big Sur fell into Pacific (video)
Not TFA, but....there are a few companies like this one (http://www.reveredata.com/about.html) who do tremendous work gathering and organizing data into something useful for consumer customers and sell off the labors of their work for a nice bit of money...a very interesting model to follow.
The point is Groupon Clones did something Groupon wasn't doing (targeting countries Groupon wasn't targeting) meaning Groupon isn't entitled to be the market leader and the other startups are free to create one for their country.

Pokemon is not making a social web game, this is a big difference to the Groupon situation in my opinion as they are different things. I wouldn't say it's a copy just the story/theme is inspired by Pokemon.
Tragedy, Disaster, and the Human Flaw That Keeps the World Working
Scaling Development
Saurik answered it, but it turns out that clearing Safari's cache will show that offline webapps are broken: http://technologizer.com/2011/03/16/the-trouble-with-iphone-...
"Web apps that are saved to the home screen", despite being "thin wrappers around the UIWebView control", are not "any arbitary App that may choose to include a UIWebView".

If they can make it work for Mobile Safari, they can make it work for a "thin wrapper" without working for all UIWebViews.
CurrentColor
A more relevant question perhaps: is there a substantially different impact between careful clean room reverse engineering and simple hacking with public disclosure?
Did I just miss it or is there no actual link to digg in the article? I expect that crud out of the newspaper sites, but it seems odd there.
Cofounder of Apple only has less than 50 followers in Twitter
Batch requests in the Facebook Graph API
You should hire aptitude every time. You can work with and around attitude for more the most part (there are exceptions) but if somebody can't perform on a small team, there's simply nobody to cover for them.
1) This article claims several times that APIs are copyrightable. That is a fairly bold claim to make, and would imply that any libc implementation for linux would need to be licensed by whomever the linux IP holders are. If glibc has not received such a license then it is in violation of the GPL, since it is not released under the GPL.

2) There is the much less strong (and more tenable) claim that functions and macros defined in the headers are copyrightable since they are not a necessary part of interacting with the linux kernel. Google can then become in compliance by removing the offending code and re-implementing it themselves. They could still be liable for damages but...

3) If someone were to sue Google for copyright infringement, they would not be able to compel google to release the code to Bionic under the GPL. That could be part of a settlement, but the most they could hope for in a court is to get Google to stop distributing Bionic, plus receipt of monetary damages.
The license of glibc is a red herring. The issue is google's copying of GPL headers.
You seem to be missing a key point.

The way Apple implemented Home-Screen Web Apps was by placing a thin wrapper around a UIWebView.

Hence, Home-Screen Web Apps are not like Mobile Safari at all in actual implementation.

They are, instead, exactly like an iOS application developed by a third party developer who put a thin wrapper around a UIWebView.

Hence, they do not get the same special privileges as Safari Mobile.

That is a fact of their implementation.
You forgot the very next paragraph:

These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.

In other words, my code remains mine. I still control the copyright to it, and do not have to relicense it.
callmeed, my comment wasn't a counter-argument (I upvoted your comment), I was just adding on my 2 cents .
I find mathematical notation to be very read-friendly. Reading a paper from an unfamiliar field can be tough, as knowledge of the standard notation is typically assumed (as is the case when reading code from an unfamiliar programming language).

Mathematical "code" isn't usually meant to be read without the surrounding variable and notation declarations, for example "Let x be ..." or "where • is the ... operation". If those are provided, short variable names and terse notation allow for the intent to be presented clearly, without it being obscured by line-length restrictions and a limited number of generic constructs (eg. for-loops instead of the summation operator).

That said, I'm finding this C implementation of J to be pretty cryptic. Of course, that's no reason to dismiss the J programming language itself.
People are still the best computers
No, it was patched only. Democracy is a system that can't effectively scale beyond big room or small town square (in particular, the voting event is a "synchronization barrier" that restricts the scalability). As a result with increased number of participants we are forced to keep oligarchical structure with small cardinality set of equals (among themselves only) peers - city council, Congress, etc... - on top of the managed society.

The development of human society calls for a system where everybody is a peer equal to everybody else. While it is early to say, it is possible that network technologies pave the way for such new forms [or may be some completely different, hard to imagine] of society organization
Even nuclear defenders begin to have their doubts
Wrong. You can copy BSD-licensed code into your GPL-licensed library with no problem, but GPL-licensed code copied to a BSD-licensed library will have problems. GPL-licensed code into a BSD-licensed library prohibits redistributing the resulting work under BSD.

You say "wrong", but then argued something completely different from what I claimed.

I said: "If I copy GPL-licensed code into my BSD-licensed library, none of my code has to be relicensed."

You replied: "GPL-licensed code into a BSD-licensed library prohibits redistributing the resulting work under BSD."

These statements are regarding completely separate concepts.
I suspect Google uses the fear of GPL to bind the handset manufacturers to their platform.
You make a good point. It's very easy for people to take things out of context ... and for that matter having a single rating on a scale of 1-5 implies that everybody sees it the same way and so could wind up penalizing little gems that work well in very specific circumstances.

As somebody who loves to reuse code I do like the basic idea of having a way to find out what others think of it. The simplicity of a 1-5 scale has a lot of appeal, but my gut instinct is the downsides may outweigh the advantages.
Maybe someone can answer a question I've long had: in a BSD licensed library, isn't the copyright distributed over all collective author's, not just he one listed in the license? That's why some projects make people sign agreements stating that they send copyright to a foundation right?

I never understand why it's not standard practice to say "(C) Copyright 2011, Please see authors.txt for a list of people"
Operation Aurora was an Internet Explorer vulnerability, not an Adobe vulnerability.
I imagine they have a vested interest in obscuring private keys and passphrases.
I think a good start would be to read http://www.amazon.com/Art-Software-Security-Assessment-Vulne...