skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't know the answer to this, but I suspect that you can teach gratification deferment to many children who currently don't naturally have it -- though there will always be people who are unreachable.

I'm thinking children here because at least in my anecdotal experience, I've had no luck getting any of the poor adults I know to show even the most basic ability. Children can be more malleable in this way.
Kinda sad, I love WP7.
I'm sure there are many ways to make money with no capital, I was responding to what I perceive to be the flippant 'if only poor people just WORKED, they wouldn't be so damn poor' mentality. A hell of a lot of people work their ass off and are still poor.

I'll go further than that. Hard work doesn't actually correlate with salary. I know this becuase I have an incredibly easy job while my cousin busts his ass everyday at two jobs. He works more hours than me a week, and each of those hours is far harder, and one of his jobs actually involves risk of personal injury. All of them are outside in the heat. He gets pissed off at me because he works so hard and I seem to not have to work at all, but at the end of the day, hard work is not a recipe for sucess. He does stuff that plenty of other people are willing to do, while I do stuff that a lot of people never bothered to learn (at some point, they probably decided that they 'didn't like math' and closed the door for themselves).

Hard work is a necessary but insufficient condition for sucess. Yes, you have to work your butt off in order to suceed; but you can toil everyday and get nowhere very easily. You have to work hard on the right things in order to get ahead.

That realization has a lot of implications. One of them is relevant for this conversation: working hard may or may not lift you out of poverty. You can't extrapolate from "he lives in poverty" to "he isn't working hard". I've worked at a McDonalds, I've pumped gas, I've mowed lawns. All of those jobs were significantly harder than what I do today, and all of them paid barely enough to support myself, much less work towards a better future.

You could work full time at McDonalds and then put in an extra 20 or 30 hours a week at another minimum wage job, and not get ahead. Or you can work full time at McDonalds and go to a vocational school at nights and probably get ahead. They are both equally hard work, but one will likely lead you to a better life and one won't. But that doesn't mean the people in the first group aren't working hard.
I have used this book and it has helped a lot http://www.amazon.com/Professional-Android-Application-Devel...

I heard good things about this http://commonsware.com/ so you might want to check it out.
I guess it's to the point that what is in your head is no longer yours. Never had to deal with those kinds of issues personally but if someone told me I couldn't get another job somewhere else for a few years to keep what's in my head safe I'd be baffled.
People are also more intelligent simply because their environment becomes more complex.

Remember, the average level of IQ back then would be considered retarded today.
Even in Hebrew, that is a useless error message...token names should mean what the token means, not what it looks like.
As th said, it's a House reference. I think this project is great, and I admire the effort put in, but not everything on HN needs to be Señor Seriousface.
Thanks, that's just the sort of advice I was looking for.
I've suffered from the same confusion, on finding that ELPA no longer worked for me with Aquamacs 2.0, I tried using the Marmalade repo with no joy.

Quite frustrating as I was using ELPA in my fork of the Aquamacs Emacs Starter Kit: https://github.com/evangineer/aquamacs-emacs-starter-kit
Back in the days I did a lot of assembly programming for the CDC 6400/6600 computers. The instruction set was simple, but processor flow wasnt. IIRC there were 3 or so integer units and 1 floating point unit. If a result wasnt ready when an instruction needed it, the processing flow would stall until it was ready. So you needed to remember the instruction timings for each of the models, how many processing unit you were using, etc. to get maximum thruput. This is stuff that a compiler does easily, humans less so. Part of my team was writing hand tuned libraries and part was writing the compilers to produce optimal code. I got to see the trade-offs.

Rick James, now at Yahoo, was the king of assembly. He wrote a character move library that was faster than the character move hardware, $100K add-on. He kept getting poached from my projects, because, even at CDC, there weren't many as good as he was.

Then there is the productivity issue. The HLC programmer can produce 10x the number of instructions more than the assembly programmer.
Me too, but my point is that you have to do that to begin with.

If anyone is interested, this gets rid of the splash screen + chrome:-

(setq inhibit-splash-screen t)
(if (fboundp 'scroll-bar-mode) (scroll-bar-mode -1))
(if (fboundp 'tool-bar-mode) (tool-bar-mode -1))
(if (fboundp 'menu-bar-mode) (menu-bar-mode -1))
Mostly I need to shred credit card and other financial offers, to make sure nobody else tries to fill them out for me.
What's the source on that?
The word is (almost) extinct and has long been replaced with "small talk".
I am not completely against patents. Not even software patents, as a principle. What I am against is bad patents - patents on obvious ideas or ideas anyone could come up with in a couple minutes.

Patents should be hard to earn.
Resolving arrays like that causes parse errors in a range of contexts. Anything that is a "function" cannot also pick one array key... leaving a lot of XML-parsing code that looks like

$xml = getXpathWhatever();
$xml = $xml[0];

Stranger yet, is that it works perfectly fine with resolving objects... for example

$xml = funct()->something->somethingelse()->a

Works fine...
> making the switch in if() be a boolean only

What exactly is the alternative?

If there's any problem here it's automatic coercion.
I do enjoy the content in the Google docs, I just can't focus while reading through it. If I need to read something I usually do better by having a hard copy of it. :(
For unexpected token I think what it looks like is more valuable. Unfortunately most English PHP developers don't speak Hebrew. =\
We're working on a product that will be able to give you this data regardless of number of views. Ping me if you'd like more info or an early access account!
Now Is Never Too Early For An Entrepreneur
"Of course, quantum theory might explain consciousness, but that can only be proved or disproved through scientific method rather than by simply making stuff up."

Umm... I feel like I'm reading a horoscope.
Agree completely.

Also, college and internships are the best places to create social relationships with people with money. Remember that even though you may be intimidated by all of the fanciness and money around you in those environments, this is a period of time that rich people are actually slumming (assuming you're not at an expensive private/ivy league college) and will likely come into contact with more people that are out of their class than at any other point in their lives. A good number of people you can meet in highly contested internships are in the last non-managerial/executive job they'll ever have.
This attitude is exactly why I will never have a facebook account. He sees the protests as a problem, not the degradation of privacy.

Yes, people adapt when they feel they have no choice, but that doesn't make it right.
How Zynga Uses Ghetto Testing, A/B Testing, Minimum Viable Products
It's this kind of thinking that turned Facebook from a fun way to share with friends to a glorified contact book for me. What is there that I would want to share with my drinking buddies, mom, a person I met on a plane, coworkers and 16-year-old niece simultaneously?
>it increases the amount of wealth you can create with the same amount of labour,

The end result of this is that there are fewer jobs. There is a certain amount of "production" (for lack of a better word) needed to maintain the same quality of life. As production becomes more efficient, it takes less and less labor for the same output. This inevitably reduces the amount of jobs available.

Knowledge work can't fill the gap, partially because most people just aren't capable, and partially because it takes an order of magnitude fewer knowledge workers than manual laborers for a given amount of output.

>What, then, do we do with the world's stupid people?

The answer is that we're going to have to change our attitudes towards "redistribution of wealth" for society not to fall apart.
I think what you're trying to say is that technological progress brings highly increasing returns to intelligence such that one person has the capability to produce an extremely high amount of value relative to their peers (increase in income inequality, perhaps).

And I agree, this is most likely the case. But inequality as a side-effect is something that can be dealt with via relatively inefficient policies that do not distort too heavily the division of labor as it exists.

In other words, we should let this grand increase in efficiency happen, but correct perhaps for inequality resulting therefrom in a relatively efficient way as we need too.

Far too many people use the inequality argument to prove too much (that we should attempt to slow specialization of flat-ouf efficiency at its source), and this argument is deeply flawed IMO. In other words, don't shoot the messenger. Intelligent people are creating enormous amounts of value, but their income/price is just a messenger of this information.
Yes, but there's a causal relationship that I think you're not quite expressing. We are where we are because here is where all the ingredients came together.
Being both an accurate House (the tv-series) reference and a flippant Haskell reference, it's actually quite brilliant and definitely appropriate.
X=X+1
I, for one, appreciate what you guys are doing. Kudos for setting up the site and including competitors' products. We need more stand up products and studies like this.
For every racist who actively hates another race, there's fifty who don't hate 'em but merely have negative beliefs about 'em, the same way I have negative and overgeneralized beliefs about (but don't actually hate) people who wear Ed Hardy t-shirts.

I think both kinds you mention are actually part of the same mechanism. I'm beginning to suspect that the mechanisms of tribal organization (human social organization) are paramount for human psychology in the same way that pack organization is paramount for dog psychology.

http://www.hiiraan.com/2005/july/op/Abdishakur_Jawhar_PartFi...

Many organizations exploit tribal psychology for group cohesion and control. Marketing is clearly dominated by tribal psychology. I think programming language communities are organized on mechanisms for tribal cohesion.

Is it possible to hate someone and not "have negative and overgeneralized beliefs about" them? How common is it to "have negative and overgeneralized beliefs about" someone and not hate them? Interesting questions, I think.
And yet, they can afford the hardware, which costs a minimum 5x as much as the software. It's not that they can't afford it. They choose not to. It's easy enough to obtain pirated copies of Windows in China. It's harder in countries with developed business environments and legal systems.

The salary argument doesn't work, either. Chinese PC penetration is something like 15%, so you really need to look at the average salary of the top 20% when considering affordability, not the country as a whole.

It's better to look at this as your usual supply / demand curve. If the price of the hardware and software combination were $100 higher (about the cost of Windows 7 Home Premium in China), then fewer people would buy PC's, but Microsoft would make a ton more across all PC sales.

I believe the lost revenue argument, but it's not 100% and it certainly isn't 0.

EDIT: Missed a 'the'.
I have the utmost respect for anyone who programs a computer that has two round monitors ;-)
I think Zuckerberg really misunderstands the importance of privacy to people. Zuckerberg says having more than one identity "is an example of a lack of integrity." This implies that wanting to selectively show only pieces of yourself to certain groups is a "lack of integrity." Yet that assertion is laughably false as we all do this very thing every day. The job interview scenario proves this and it's only one of many scenarios in which you carefully include or omit aspects of your online identity to influence the perception others have about you.

This is just human nature. Call it social politics, call it whatever you want, but human beings are not profile pages and will never be.

Facebook should be working with me to help manage my online identity, instead of acting like my privacy concerns aren't real.
Designing Systems, Instead of Mere Objects (video)
2. If money doesn't matter, can I have all of yours, because I've found I don't have enough recently.

3. No, buggy whips were never free. People stopped wanting them. The problem now is that the things in highest demand, and which people want more of, and the same things which are free.
From what I have read in the lawsuit, PayPal doesn't seem to be complaining that people have the right to seek better jobs, in fact that statement from Google comes across extremely childish. Their argument is that Bedier used trade secrets from PayPal to create Google Wallet, and used his knowledge of secret and upcoming PayPal products to sell it to the retailers (comparing an unfinished PayPal product to the finished Google Wallet).
While it doesn't detract from the point of your post, the behavior of private is correct and intended. If you wish to override an internal method of a class in PHP, like Java, you must declare it protected, not private. This is the difference between private (completely internal, not inherited) and protected (internal, but inherited by subclasses).
altly.com for the win!
Where are the links to his bug reports for these so we can vote on them to be fixed?
This should disappear soon[1], it seems the patch has been accepted (or is on a good way to be), according the internals@ mailing list[2].

[1] https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improved-parser-error-message

[2] http://news.php.net/php.internals/52436
Nothing wrong with automatic coercion, as long as the rules are sane.

In ruby, everything except false and nil is true. Easy.

Unless you override the == method of course. With great power...
There is a significant risk differential and your post points it out. Google can walk away from Android more easily because their core IP is not present in the codebase and therefore providing it to the open source community does not create competitors to their primary revenue stream. WP7 on the other hand, has a code base which almost certainly incorporates significant trade secrets upon which their core business (operating systems) relies.

In addition, Microsoft has not walked away from Zune - they have simply abandoned the manufacture of proprietary hardware under the brand. Zune as software is alive and well (and a component of WP7).

http://www.zune.net/en-US/products/software/download/default...

http://www.zune.net/en-us/products/windowsphone7/
Yeah, cash advance checks are evil junk mail that the banks like to send every month.
Darnit Google. Can't you keep any API running for more than 2 years? Just take a hint from AWS and sell them!
Long-Term Pitfalls That Entrepreneurs Forget
True, but we haven't yet witnessed the consequences of giving up so much of our private information to Facebook (including but not limited to our Web browsing patterns, unique identity, and social graph).

When access to our private information becomes systematically abused for power and profit, then people will be more than anxious about what they've given up.
Chomsky is just appealing to our own biases. We don't want to be statistical approximation machines

Do we? Intellectual cynicism that makes people to publicly reduce humans and humanity to something mechanical and predictable is probably the most popular attitude I see online. This doesn't mean it's wrong in all cases, but surely it's not something exceptional.
Apple's Deals May Transform Digital Music
I think that's a little unfair. Programming languages are tools for your head: you're always thinking when using them. That means that the impedance mismatch of "switching" between languages is fairly low, and scales with the problem. So pick the tool for the job, and don't sweat the simple stuff.

Editors are tools for your fingers. There are huge penalties to being good with an editor if you are forced to use a different one. I use emacs for writing things other than code (email, web forms like this very comment) not just because I think it's better than whatever built-in editor is provided for the task, but because it hurts so badly to use something other than emacs.

The converse point is that there are huge benefits available if you give up all your existing editing tools and spend some time (and yeah, it can be months to years) getting really, really good at just one. Really, that one has to be emacs or vim, which are the only editors out there designed to scale to this level of specialization.

It always makes me sad to watch other people work and see how much time they spend fighting with their editor, moving their hand around to the arrows or mouse or function keys, fighting with the presentation logic of their word processor to get the page break on the right spot on the screen, etc... It doesn't have to be that way.
It sounds like the deal fell through over concerns about copyrighted music showing up in YouTube and Google search results. It can be pretty easy to imagine why the deal failed if the RIAA tried hard to get broad censorship rights as part of the license agreement. But it also would have been pretty dumb of them because Google could have put a "Buy the MP3" link whenever someone did search for pirated music on Google or YouTube.
Try some youtube tutorials, though there aren't too many, and some can't be easily found with a search.

Sites:
http://anddev.org/
http://www.androidsnippets.com/
http://p-xr.com/
There's a lot of valid points there, but "#33
Cannot override private methods with a subclass" is the right behavior. That's exactly what private is for, and it's important to know that such names are non-colliding and you can rely on their implementation.

Use protected for overridable methods. You shouldn't mock or directly test private methods in unit tests — they're not part of the interface!
I 'deal' with it but progressively develop less brand trust and dedication to Facebook.

Facebook Like tracking my movements forced me to install Disconnect in Chrome.
Don't assume modem = Internet. If you want to make your computer send & receive fax, you need to have one.
What makes me sad is that people will defend this horrible language to the death, regardless of how many problems there are with it. I don't get it; we know how bad PHP is, so why do people fight so hard?

Oh, and to demonstrate: "PHP has no native Unicode type, no native Unicode handling, and cannot treat Unicode strings as strings." This true statement, composed of three observations about deficiencies in the language, gets me flamed every time I mention it. Why?
I love this Walt Disney quote from the post: "We don’t make movies to make money, we make money to make more movies." That is exactly what separates great content providers (the top 1%) from hacks (the other 99%). HN commenters often dismiss John Gruber as the uber-reflexive Apple fanboy he is, but posts like this suggest there are deeper waters.
The ridiculously terrible behavior of == is what makes me the saddest.

http://www.php.net/manual/en/types.comparisons.php

We then have === which does what == is really supposed to do, but even that still sometimes does the Wrong Thing.
1.) No, you're confused on the very basic demand/supply. Efficiency = provides cheaper supply for a demand. Essentially shifting the supply line down. Free = wiping out demand altogether (market no longer needed). Two different thing.

2.) No. No. No. Money is a store of value. Only governments and economist believes otherwise (and prints money and reduces the value of them. That's why people buy gold/silver). "What matters for prosperity is the quantity of goods and services being produced in an economy" You're kidding me. So empty cities in Spain and China is prosperous? Walmart full of Chinese items is prosperous? Then why are we not prosperous now, instead of 44M Americans on food stamps.

3.) Buggy whip is not a substantial market. Therefore nobody cared about it. If a major market like software/music/movie/tv/website, worth hundreds of billions, is threatened by free, people care.

4.) Until we have a perfect world where everything is free, then we can talk about it. Otherwise we still need jobs for money to fight for food/clean energy/materials/infrastructure.

5.) free is $0. Company receives $0. Has to shut down. Lay off everyone.

6.) if we keep losing jobs to free, the net effect is negative. Not hard to figure it out.
What is your criteria for "Doing it?"
Inside eBay's Infrastructure: 75 Billion Database Calls a Day
you could say that all other web platforms are blub because they don't see the value that PHP brings to the table.

a total idiot can install PHP and get a system that will meet the performance and reliability needs of 99.5 of web sites out there.

tomcat, mod_perl, the ten different ways people host Ruby sites and all that make a lot more trouble for you. I've run PHP-based web servers for hundreds of sites that have served billions and billions of hits over the years and never once had to restart Apache because an application server got lodged. read that again because if you skip it, you're sysadminning blub.

every other system requires that you make choices, and the truth about choices is that faced with a binary choice there are two common outcomes: (i) a person freezes up like a deer in the headlights or (ii) a person makes a random choice that they're 50% likely to get right. (i)'s probably the better option.

i can complain about things wrong with PHP forever and i've got plenty of reasons to get off the PHP train. however, if you want to kill PHP, it's not enough to attack what's wrong with PHP, you've got attack what's right with PHP... You've got to make a better PHP than PHP.
Undergrad Finds Universe's Missing Mass - Quest Has Vexed Scientists For Decades
Sure, but you can't activate it anywhere worth mentioning; Verizon and Sprint won't activate phones they didn't sell.
At eG8, 20th Century Ideas Clashed with the 21st Century Economy