skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
http://jsperf.com/object-freeze/3

http://jsperf.com/object-freeze/5

http://jsperf.com/object-freeze/6

A reminder on how immutable objects are meant to be used. When used properly even under attempts to mutate, they run circles around trying to use mutable objects in an immutable manner.
How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy
This is my favorite part, and could be significant in the future as a citation supporting a broad fair use of published online comments, regardless of ToS.

Each of the four factors either support Defendants’ fair use defense or are neutral. This is unsurprising. In an age of blogs, listservs, and other online fora, a person’s short comment in cyberspace is frequently quoted in its entirety as others reply or forward it elsewhere. It would be strange, dangerous even, if every such quotation subjected the copier to liability and a federal lawsuit. Such heavy-handed tactics are akin to using a cannon to kill a mosquito; they carry the same attendant risk of collateral damage by chilling free speech. A free and vibrant democracy depends upon the unfettered exchange of ideas.
I think power is very much an issue.

Most people I know who have an iPad 1 complain that speed is an issue. The iPad 2 certainly fixes that, but Apple's have focussed a lot on optimization and their stack is all built around compiled code.

To me that suggests that tablet performance is only just adequate today.

If we want to realize the dream of a truly open, programmable-on-the-device tablet, we're going to need it to burn some cycles on languages that aren't as efficient as C, and frameworks that haven't been as tuned as iOS.
I don't think that has much to do with using a separate, automated account to make the posts.

If weekends turn out to be an issue, the person running the posting script can just edit the post date (e.g. set it to "the first monday of the month") or whatever.
>Why are you trying to discredit everything I have done in the last ~5 years?

I'm not, I'm trying to instill caution and judgment in the use of terminology that has real meaning.

Don't claim something is real-time when it is not. You are misleading people.

By all means, keep hacking. I have nothing against you or your work.
You should also def include a Who's Hiring H1Bs as we saw in February if I remember correctly.
> You want to criticize Google for attempting to exert the same control that Apple is rightfully lauded for.

We're criticizing Google for falsely describing their approach as "open". Apple is rightly lauded for their closed approach because it is effective in ensuring quality, looks like Google is starting to learn the same lessons. I have no problem with Google taking that approach, I'd like to see quality Android tablets. But it isn't "open".
HiveSpun.com Beta: Online Art Collaboration
Would love to see a close-up of this.
The lunch image loads almost instantly for me as well... only 67k. Someone seems to have taken some time to tweak the compression of the images to maintain very good quality.
How to go faster than jQuery, Ext, Mootools...?
http://myjs.fr

I coded a JS framework that goes faster than jQuery, Ext, Mootools... (I haven't find any faster on the web for now)
Accessing and modifying HTML Element properties are the main taks of JS frameworks and My.js does those operations way faster than others.
My.js also handles custom classes more efficiently. See the tests.

I presented the framework and the core concepts I used to build it to the Paris JS communauty yesterday (parisjs.org). Paris JS Hackers gave me real nice feedbacks, comments and tweets.

I would love to have feedback from Hacker news hackers too!
Making The Jump From Side Project To Full-Time Job
Depending on your service changing names can be expensive. Of course if you can buy domain names for $250k then everything becomes more fluid.
I just exported a bunch of date fields to a CSV. They look fine. Probably 95% of Excel files in use can be exported as a CSV and capture all the data.
Are you hitting the ball out of the park?
Note: Submitted by me, by hand, after reading the posting and deciding it's relevant to startups.

Branding is important, and what you do with your brand is important. Actions speak louder than words. Google is still associated with "Do no Evil," but that's starting to wear a little thin as some of their actions belie the mantra. Similarly, you can get people chanting a slogan, but if you do something wrong, people will notice, and the backlash can be severe.

I would add that this:

> There is no way to explain all this in a way that does
> not make GoDaddy and it's CEO look good, and plenty of
> ways to interpret it as bad.

... appears to have either too many or not enough negatives. I suggest it should read:

> There is no way to explain all this in a way that makes
> GoDaddy and it's CEO look good, and plenty of ways to
> interpret it as bad.
Um, what? They are still open. You can choose to use an old version of Android and do whatever you want. This is only if you want premium support.
There is a detailed, concise article on how the model was prepared:
http://www.planetary.org/programs/projects/pioneer_anomaly/u...
And I saw this Daring Fireball post coming all long. I also see one that says Google is not exerting enough control if Google relaxes it's rules and another several hundred snide remarks on Google/Android regardless of what they do.

DF has got to be the most predictable site on the internet. Also pretty irrelevant unless you want to know what people inside Apple think.
Openness is indeed a continuum and different degrees of it make sense for different people and different situations. The problems arise when you claim to be more open than you are or become less open than you were. Apple is clear that it offers proprietary platforms; Google claims Android is open but isn't acting accordingly.
Search "register domain GoDaddy" on Google and click on their sponsored links. They contain an embedded coupon code bringing down the .com price under 8 USD (the ad is targeted for most countries).
While some of these are great examples of common pitfalls with 64 bits errors, I find it amusing that the first example has a deeper conceptual problem: You can't (shouldn't) use memset to assign NULL to a pointer variable. In many (maybe most) implementations the address 0 is used by the implementation for NULL pointers but the standard allow any number (that can't be a valid address). The compiler automatically converts both 0 and NULL to the proper number when assigned to a pointer; but setting all bytes to 0 (as with memset) only works in the implementations that actually use address 0 for NULL pointers.
Against Gamification
Try this size: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dfid/5571181942/sizes/o/in/phot...

It requires scrolling to see the trees.
Easier, yes. But would it be better?

Layering transactions atop a key-value store would be very difficult to do efficiently, for example.
This is absolutely not the kind of content I expect from HN. Namecalling? Baseless accusations of lying? Shit like this:

> Android was “open”

Why put open in quotes? Are you suggesting it was never open before? As in, the source code wasn't open? Or the community was never open? That's so hilariously biased and rude it's obscene.

Can't we have decent conversations about mobile here? Honeycomb source will be released eventually. Android will stay open. Why are people upvoting this name-calling childish blog post with zero content and tons of flamebait?

Flagged.
So, I guess this means I can finally go update my twitter client.
John Gruber is an Apple pundit and fan? Yes, we know.

His attack is hypocritical? Maybe.

Off base? I don't think so.

Yes, as the article says, Android is still far more open and customizable than iOS (and it's not that hard, actually).

Still there is another definition of open that matters to some people, and that definition applies less and less to Android, giving to all this a taste of bait and switch.

I know a lot of Android developers that believe in open software not on merely his advantage from a market point of view, but also from a philosophical one. These developers are all disappointed.

I am an iOS developer, I like Apple products, I agree with some of the arguments for a more closed system even if I disagree on a lot of Apple's decisions. I look at Android as a good competitor to iOS that keeps raising the bar and as a possible future market for what I do. I thought from the beginning that Android as a platform would have benefitted from a little more closed approach.

Still, I'm disappointed too, looking at Google's behavior. It angers me a little, even if I'm not an Android fan. Because I think about all those Android developers that now feel somewhat betrayed. This has a bitter taste not because Android is becoming more closed, but because this was not done from the beginning, luring people to the platform with different promises.

Am I an hypocrite too?
Yes, it's quite awesome. But to be fair, it's a graphics technique designed to calculate a physics problem.
It's harder to do limited roll outs, but not impossible. It's feasible to have all the code in place and only trigger it based on a server response, for instance. That's basically how they handle the web app.
You can install iOS dev apps on way more handsets than that. The installers simply need your certificate/profile.

As for a limited rollout, they could've rolled a new binary and only turned on the feature for, say, 100 users selected at random.
Android is more open than iOS. It is less open than Ubuntu. We just saw a story today about Google playing favorites with access to early releases of operating system code; when you're shipping multi-billion-dollar SKUs based on that code, this isn't a minor detail. The fact is, Android is "open" to end-users, but not completely "open" to vendors.

It's frustrating to watch people try to reconcile this, because not only is everyone using different definitions of the word "open", but they change definitions from day to day.

Meanwhile: this is second-order punditry. It's a critique of a pundit. And it's a pundit who wears his bias on his sleeve. It's boring. People don't read Gruber for the unvarnished truth about the mobile market. If you want to right whatever wrong you feel is being committed because a gifted writer has overtly taken Apple's side (gasp!), write an excellent blog advocating for the Google ecosystem. But don't waste our time litigating against Gruber. Nobody cares!
TOTALLY OFFTOPIC: I am so sick of articles like this that end with "Follow me on Twitter!" Why? Just because you wrote ONE article I found interesting? (And it was a good article)

I even looked at his Twitter and it's about as interesting (to me, I stress) as biting my toenail.

Imagine you're at a party and someone tells a joke. You laugh. He then walks up to you and goes "Hey you laughed at my joke, we should really be friends, please give me your phone number so I can text you when I want to!"

EDIT: I notice the text of the article has now been changed so that the "Follow Me" link is now separate. Before the edit the article said "I can't give it all away at once so be sure to Follow Me on Twitter" as the single finishing sentence.

EDIT2: Turns out the reason for this is explained to me here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2392935
Don't you ask for milestone payments?
I live in both the iOS and the Android worlds, and I have seen how utterly frustrating it is for both users and developers alike that they have no idea what they are going to get when a new Android device comes out.

The carriers and handset manufacturers are not interested in a common Android user experience. They each, individually, want to be the iPhone competitor. They do not want to be a Dell or HP running the same Windows as everybody else.

This is very bad for Android as a whole. It's bad for the users, developers, and the success of the platform. If the carriers want to distinguish themselves they should do it with service quality, hardware features, and apps.

If the user wants to replace the UI, the launcher, etc., fine. Let them. If they want to build a custom firmware image, that's awesome. Let them! But don't let the carriers force their own Android vision down their customer's throats and fragment the UI.

This is not about bait and switch. This is common sense. I hate the fact that my iPad is a walled garden, but I hate even more being forced by a carrier to swallow their own idea of how my phone is supposed to operate. So, yeah, from a carrier standpoint Google is cracking some knuckles. But as a user and developer, this is all about freedom.
this is second-order punditry. It's a critique of a pundit. And it's a pundit who wears his bias on his sleeve. It's boring.

But... But... Someone is WRONG on the Internet!

http://xkcd.com/386/
If by locally you mean running your on desktop/laptop/smartphone/robot dog acting as a web server, then yes. If people have to download it, no.
I agree that Myspace sucked from a visual and experience perspective. It's easy to see why Facebook killed it. When Facebook came along, it was a welcome relief from the garish graphics and "Thanks for the ad!!!1" wall posts.

The real question here is not "What was it about Myspace, the site, that sucked?" though. The question is "What was it about Myspace, the organisation, that prevented it from fixing its sucky site?" It's probably safe to speculate that Myspace, the organisation, knew that their site sucked and that Facebook's site was better. What held them back from fixing it? Was it clueless management, lack of talented developers or the decision to use a particular technology that doomed them? I don't think that the recent debate has cleared that one up yet.
I didn't see this posting, but I do think it is a bit too much.
Not necessarily, with the amount of money the labels would want as a bribe^W"non recoupable advance" to sign the contract in the first place, after months of negotiating and nitpicking.
First, as I read the report, the system ran out of liquidity due to a large Program Trading dump of a particular kind of security. Note that Program Trading is not HFT.

Some HFT firms are designated market makers at the large exchanges. They are required to always be in the market, and are paid by the exchange a fee for each trade accomplished. So if they make nothing on the trade, they come out ahead. So big volume for them leads to income. Further, if they can make a profit on the trade, that is theirs to keep.

For big HFT firms, the average time that they hold instruments is, well, zero. So they are not concerned about position. They are contractually obligated to always be in the market, providing liquidity.

Some HFT firms did back out when it looked really bad (clearly not designated liquidity providers) and lost out on the opportunity to help.
Show HN: an app to help you shop for food
Wanted to get everyone's feedback on the web app my startup has been working on for the past few months. (didn't want to tweak it anymore before getting feedback from viewers who weren't my friends/family).

http://www.foodia.com

Would definitely love feedback on the UX (which needs work) and whether this is something you'd use before shopping/deciding what to buy.

I'd also love to hear what food problems (if any) you all feel need solving. Thanks.
Second that. Also don't forget to unsubscribe some of the default reddits, like the frontpage and politics.
I beg to differ. We could have it all if it was really an open source project.

The community would be able to make it into something great - not just by making apps. If it was great, it would be desireable. Carriers probably wouldn't like it, but Google could commission open hardware just as they have done already, and demand would cause other hardware makers to follow suit.

Google's intent behind Android is to put them in control, and they aren't afraid to say so.
Same story:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2386692

There are probably more. This one has
lots of comments.
Of course you can do limited roll-outs of new features.

You just put it in a feature flag. The app can check w/ Twitter if that user has the flag enabled.

More on Feature Flags: http://code.flickr.com/blog/2009/12/02/flipping-out/

-David
Tcl: a brief overview of language design gone wrong
John Gruber has a very specific audience: people that adore Apple products.

His narrative is extremely well tuned to please these people and to keep them coming back for more. I can't fault him for his success as a niche blogger, but his material is so predictable and formulaic that I stopped reading long ago.
The annoying thing is, Gruber's not wrong. He's biased and he's going to adopt whatever findings of fact and findings of analysis are most favorable to Apple, but he's been doing this for 10+ years and he's not simply going to make things up. Which makes it especially dumb to get into a blogfight with him. Because it's never going to end.

There is still a case to be made for Android over iOS based on openness. People should make that case. But what are they saying when they make a case for Android based on Gruber? Is that the best they've got? That an Apple advocate is advocating Apple?
Facebook releases +2 button
What a truly awful stunt & person. How can he even live with himself for this?
There was a post on lifehacker recently comparing the browsers available on Android: firefox, dolphin, default etc the winner is irrelevant.

Amazon recently released an app store 'appstore' for Android and an app for their cloud music service.

Source: http://source.android.com/source

All the above point to 'open'. The off-color name calling isn't justifiable nor worth of a response.
The spare time issue is as much a bad crutch as the tricky questions are.

I work long hours for a company which has the "we own your life" clause. All but one company I've worked at has had that clause, ironically the one exception was a start up!

And even if that clause wasn't there, when I leave work I'll be damned if I touch a computer. I guess I'm not a true hard core hacker, elite geek or code ninja, or what ever the latest buzz word is.

But I'm not stupid. I myself ask for code samples when I interview people. So I made sure I have two open source projects. They are so old, you can find them on source-forge!

The first one is a silly toy application I wrote waaay back in college. And when I started interviewing I was very worried about how trivial it was. But it impressed everyone who saw it. I learned you can always tell who has real programming talent, no matter how small or trivial the project is. This is why I now want code samples from people I interview.

My other project came a bit later, it's not my project it's a bunch of patches which were accepted for a large highly complex project. A good chunk of it was just memory leak fixing and comments ranting about destructor shearing.

Have I touched either one of those projects in years? Hell no!

When I leave a job I plan to work on open source projects, but every time I end up getting a great offer before I'm even out the door. I have to fight to get a few weeks of vacation between jobs, and that's a vacation from computers as well.

My advice, is take two weeks, and write a tiny, trivial, open source project, a calendar app, a scrabble app, anything. And then let that be your side project.

And if someone is crazy enough to expect everyone with a day job, to also have an active programming hobby, just don't work for them.
"Folderol" is my new favorite word, and a clear improvement on "poppycock".
Probably should include one more, Whose hiring freelancers edition, that way we could get all the "I need someone to build X" wrapped up under one section.
Twitter is experiencing what I believe is a much larger issue with today's platforms.

You cannot attract a mass of users, give them a nice UX, build a community - and then one day throw ads all over to place, call it a monetization strategy and keep a straight face.

Twitter is going to have a very hard time monetizing their platform, if the #Dickbar is the best they came up with at this point. If I were them, I would be afraid.
Hopefully some good will come out of the Honeycomb fiasco. Amazon etc could emerge as another center of android innovation and hopefully android becomes that is not completely conrolled by google. Currently android appears to operate a lot like Java did under Sun, where the source code was available but the governance was not open. We need the android governance to move to an open body.
No, you can't have it all, but that's the point. Google rode the "openness" train to gain philosophical support for Android from the open source community, even though critics pointed out that Apple's strict control has a reason. Now that Google has established a beachhead, they're exerting a kind of control over the platform that goes against the principles they originally espoused and ultimately justifies the very reasoning from Apple that Google and its supporters publicly antagonized for being a "draconian future."

Furthermore, Honeycomb's source is being withheld, allegedly for quality control reasons. However, Google's privileged partners are allowed access, which means they can start work on Honeycomb products earlier than those without access. That's not an open platform. That's an insular platform of privileged access.

The article also states that Google is requiring licensees to agree to clauses that give Google final approval over changes to the operating system. The implication is that if you make changes Google doesn't like, your Android license is at risk. This is supposed to be an open platform with which you are free to do what you want, not some Google platform.

Most troubling is the claim that Google is obstructing phones which use Bing. Bing is a Google rival. With Google having the power of final approval, holding up a Bing-using phone reveals the motives behind the Android platform. An Android phone modified to interface with Bing directly affects Google's bottom line. If Android is an open platform, it shouldn't matter if a device manufacturer chooses to go with Bing over Google. But apparently, it does matter to Google.

Google has exploited the positive feelings of the phrase "open source" for years. The point behind their free services has always been to support the closed source, proprietary search and advertising platform that makes them their money. Now, cracks are beginning to show as their genuine motives begin to influence their public behavior, revealing that Google is just another capitalist. I don't have a problem with that, but the open source community that Google has wooed and relied on for buzz over the years might.
If you want a tl;dr of the article, take the last bit:

Both approaches have their merits and their failings. How about we focus on that instead of which system is open or closed?

What is he referring to when he says "both approaches"? He's talking about open versus closed.
> "Hey you laughed at my joke, we should really be friends, please give me your phone number so I can text you when I want to!"

And that is exactly what parties are for. Performing a BFS on a bunch of people to find interesting nodes you want to explore further.
It really depends on the situation. At my last job the pay wasn't great and there was no profit sharing or stock options. At least they had interesting projects for me to work on, but still they got me for 8 hours and I did my own projects on the side.

My current employer has profit sharing, I love the work we do and there's always more interesting work to do than a 10 hour day allows. So now the projects I do at home are my pet projects for work that excite me but aren't part of my core tasks.

The question is "Is this someone passionate about programming?" and involvement with open source projects are a great way to find that out, but it's not the only way.

Some one who shows initiative and puts in extra work for a company they're excited about show's just as much passion for programming.

It's that programmer who puts in their hour and a half of coding in between reddit posts and forgets about it when 5 oclock hits that you want to stay away from.