skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is related to, but NOT A DUP of, the post incorrectly titled "Google map a cellphone knowing its MAC address" at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=298073. The article intruiged me but I knew there had to be an easier way to send any MAC address to their API since there is no way for them to remotely determine your MAC address. In the blog post I show how.
Why Twitter cut SMS in Europe: Interview with Evan Williams
Simpler way to achieve the same thing here:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=299982
You mean like http://www.shapeways.com/?
It makes me feel quite a bit more confident about my decision to save first.

http://foohack.com/2008/08/why-im-not-working-on-my-startup-...
TonchiDot meet Denno Coil, where augmented reality goes next.
If they have foosball and free meals, they must figure no one would ever want to leave.
People that complain so much about C never had a change to learn it well. Go talk to Linus Torvalds about changing from C anything else....
Well, at least Joe Tucci isn't making more money because he fucked a founder over.
Overview of Various Threading Models
XUL is worth it but not for XUL apps. The advantage of Firefox is in the huge body of add-ons. The vast majority of Firefox's add-ons are written in Javascript and XUL. They modify the UI. They add to the UI. They do an amazing level of customization and it's completely cross-platform!

Chrome will never have the comprehensive add-on system that Firefox has specifically because it doesn't have something like XUL; instead it has those different native interfaces for each platform.
Good luck. Make sure you quit and do it, though. There is no better time than the present... with Posterous we could have waited another 6 months to apply to YC, but I have no regret at all that we did it earlier.

Anything can happen, and tomorrow is not promised. So start. =)
Babies?

http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/04/intercourse-and-intelligenc...
Ask YC: An analysis of Java's Class Library - any ideas on what it means? 
For a while I've been working on an opinion piece on Object Orientation for my company blog (http://www.jodoro.com).

I decided to try and generate a few facts and figures to flesh my article out. With that in mind, I did a quick analysis of the Java Class Library (JDK1.5 to be precise). What I found was curious, so I decided to share some of the raw figures whilst I mulled over my article.

If you take a look at the class library for Java, you'll find that the majority of the libraries either inherit directly from java.lang.Object, or are just one level of separation away (In fact this 1,2 level is ~60% of the class library). If you take the Swing package out of the equation, almost half the library (47%) directly inherits from Object.

The maximum level of inheritance depth is 7. This depth amounts to less than half a percent of the total. Perhaps not surprising to anyone who has worked with Swing, but this maximum level only occurs in the javax.swing package. It includes deeply nested things like javax.swing.JCheckBoxMenuItem.AccessibleJCheckBoxMenuItem. Moving upwards - Swing is also 65% of the 6th level of depth, with java.util being the other majority. Swing also represents 25% of the 5th level of depth. Again, if you're familiar with Java and Swing this is not a big surprise.

Exceptions take up around 13% of the class definitions. If you take exceptions out of the previous examples, the figures go up. 48% of non-exception classes are at level 1, and 73% are at level 2 or below. Excluding Swing again these figures leap to 57% and 80% respectively.

Turning to interfaces. Interfaces only nest to a level of 4 - and 70% of all interfaces are either root (34%) or one level of extension (36%). Of the roughly 2,700 classes that ship with JDK 1.5, around 40% of them implement interfaces. Interestingly, this is reasonably consistent across most packages. Even quite hefty packages such as AWT and Swing clock in at about 45% each. Aside from outliers, most packages fall in the range of 30% to 50% (classes that implement interfaces).

Some other facts - Around 20% of classes are what I'd call "The most basic" - both at depth 1 (directly inherit from Object) and do not inherit from any interfaces. In other words, of the 60% of classes that don't have an interface, a third also do not inherit from anything aside from Object.

I've got a dozen theories on this - Some controversial, most mundane. The most logical conclusion to leap to is that the JDK is made up of a lot of concepts that come from systems programming, and aren't necessarily well suited to OO. However, right now I'm mostly just curious rather than particular on an agenda or soapbox.

Any before I went off on any crazy tangents, I wanted to ask YC/HN what they thought of all this?
Are Linux Programmers Getting Too Fat?