skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I bought the book ("Getting Real") when it came out and it brought home a lot of truisms of starting up in the 21st century. But 'Firing all the workaholics' isn't as simple as that:

I've worked in places where people with no lives (and more importantly no equity in the company) spent most of their waking lives in the office because it was there- they obviously didn't have a whole lot going on in their lives, maybe needed some kind of social acceptance or maybe a combination of the two.

I've also worked in places with a fantastic buzz [where I've had no equity in the company]' where I slept on the floor to get a job done.

I've also worked for a startup doing 100+ hour weeks end to end just to get ourselves started (not naming any company names).

The latter two I enjoyed and did of my own volition; the first I didn't. If DHH is talking about losers who are several orders of magnitude less productive than my counterparts then fair enough; but sleeping on the floor is the manifestation of obsession. If you wanna stop that, go ahead you Danish wanker.
Chipotle already has an app that lets you order your burrito directly, pay from the phone, and skip the line to pick it up.
YouTube - ‪shockingtornados's Channel‬‏
Narciso Rodriquez Resort 2012
As someone that goes to the states often, and have been looking for telecommuting work, that puts a big fly in the oitment.
My parents own a vacation home in Fort Myers, FL and went down there from Canada one day to a foreclosure notice. They paid cash for the house, and had just fully furnished it the month before.

They JUST caught it before the inside was gutted out and the locks changed, but it could have been a very similar situation.

I can't believe that this happens so often, such stupid & critical mistakes by the Bank. How hard is it to get the number of the house right?
What makes the monitor "hacker-optimized"?
They give them a USD cheque after they've given the tutorial.

You're expected to sort your own issues out with regard to getting there and giving the talk - it's not their problem. Hence why I say: just say you're attending a conference.

* disclaimer: I've given tutorials at OSCon several times
I don't know what a foundationalist is. I think the difference comes down to what you demand from your knowledge of reality. Every time I use the GPS on my phone to see where I am, I am relying on the axioms underpinning GR to hold true within the precision required to correct the atomic clocks on the satellites for time dilation.

The principles of GR may not model reality completely -- and it would be really unusual and surprising if they did -- but they're good enough for me because they're testable.

I don't understand your "hint" it sounds like an attempt at snarky humour from a position of petitio principii but I really can't unravel the intention inside the gag.

Here, I'm poking fun at you because (assuming you're not just adopting a religious POV as a rhetorical exercise) you have to die to find out if you're right, while all I have to do is open my eyes and compare my location to what my GPS tells me. To the extent these locations differ, I can ask questions and eventually understand why.

I see no need to consider the supernatural until I have perfected my understanding of the natural... which ain't gonna happen anytime soon. If that makes me a 'foundationalist,' then so be it.
Hi! I'm the author of soak your head. We worked with the researchers to follow the scientific paper as closely as possible. Feel free to use the app (the source is open and available on the site). In addition, we already have the application in the Windows Phone 7 marketplace, and it's on its way to the iOS app store.
I find it ironic that someone who questions the value of schools has so many grammatical errors in his post. I think you might have answered your own question.

If I overlook the irony and just focus on your point, I can sort of agree with you.

You're one of the exceptions. I go to a public high school that ranks in the top three of the state. But even though the students here are supposed to be the cream of the crop, more than half of us are idiots. They aren't too dumb to learn, but they do struggle with what people on HN would consider to be basic math concepts. They read slow. They write like 5th graders. They know nothing about computers besides the absolute minimum to get onto YouTube. I think these kids would be even worse off if they didn't continue education after 6th grade. Would they learn algebra if they didn't have to? Would they learn the basics of human anatomy or how chemicals work? I doubt it. Mandatory schooling is (to an extent) useful. We just need to tweak it.
Actually, yeah, Coffeescript is actually bootstrapped using Jison (a javascript implementation of Bison), and implemented in Coffeescript! :)

I should note that i think what's being done with Sproutcore now is pretty awesome. People like Yehuda Katz have done a good job of turning Sproutcore into a tech that has a solid conceptual foundation, and is aiming for ease of use for developing non-trivial javascript apps.

So, what do you worry about (and i mean that in a non-stern, genuinely curious way)? Web applications really are going to be the solid basis upon which a lot of future technology is built. A lot of pretty complex technology is going to be written in javascript (or things that compile to javascript). It really is a necessary step to see how to make javascript development more efficient and principled, so that there is a common basis for getting stuff done.
I think it was probably a weak certification in this case. They paid for core concerns to be covered, not necessarily the entire toolchain (which TBH is where the problems were - X working with Y properly). In fact I think it was that linker that fluffed stuff. I should modify my comment really.
I agree. We've been subsidizing some pretty cancerous behaviors in banking. People with real character don't get rewarded the way they used to. Its sort of incompatible with a culture now focused on figuring out ways to assign risk to the taxpayer.
Thanks. I really enjoyed reading that fanfic, but I don't think it will appeal as much as a teaching aid. My current plan is to go through the 'How To Actually Change Your Mind' sequence on Less Wrong ( http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/How_To_Actually_Change_Your_M... ), and distil that for my daughter. I want something that's systematic, a canonical list, if there is such a thing.
I think they mean that you can't set multiple prototypes, and there's no way to capture calls to "obj.something_undefined" values or methods, so you have to copy the interfaces of anything you wish to mix in. Which means breaking prototypical inheritance with your mixins - they can't change, because anything set up by such copying won't get updated.

Specific quote my reasoning is based on: ... changes to the mixin affect objects that have already been extended.

edit: well... you could. By making mixin objects that propagate changes to themselves to instances of things which include them - pass each instance to the mixin, and keep a list. But that'd end up making your entire program into one big memory leak, unless you want to go down the constructor/destructor and manual memory management route in JS. I doubt it's worth it.
Some thoughts on this:

A. Spending on customer acquisition is building real barriers to entry.

I tend to agree with DHH that the barriers to entry will never be high enough in the daily deal area. Also, as Groupon seeks to stay ahead of daily deal competitors, it cannibalizes its own business model – namely, the artificial scarcity and urgency of daily bargains reverts to more and more on-demand variety. We see this already.

B. Spending on direct sales is building a valuable collection of local merchants.

Others have built directories of local businesses before. The Yellow Pages, Yahoo are examples. Yelp, etc. are more modern examples. Can Groupon unlock a profitable business model from their collection?

C. Spending on marketing is building enough public goodwill to transcend value propositions altogether.

Groupon is a great brand name, so far. Public goodwill is damn fickle, though. I'd like to think that consumers require a real value proposition from their favorite brands, but I'm not sure that they always do.

When it comes to daily deals, I doubt consumers will chose Groupon over a better deal, just because of the Groupon name.
The funny thing is that until quite recently in the UK - and I'm sure other countries - this was pretty much how paying university tuition fees worked. Except that you might end up paying up to 40% of your earning. Sound bad? Well it got worse, you now have to pay for the privilege to enter the scheme.

So what is this scheme exactly? It's called Society Reaps the Benefit from Taxing Students Who Can Make a Greater Economic Contribution Because of Their Education. Or more succinctly Higher Education and Income Tax.
While I appreciate your experience, you basically are saying that it would be hellish because of two features. Haskell and/or OCaml have many incredible benefits, and many of them do not rely on laziness to work. Sure it allows you to write some incredibly elegant, generic solutions - but I don't think it is necessary to have it as the default.

I think things like the record system could be fixed up with simply more eyes on the problem. Lets face it, the Haskell community and contributor base is relatively small. If it had the resources of say C++ or Java behind it - a lot of these small problems could be tackled.

But when it comes down to it these are minor details, not fundamental flaws of the platform such as the ones discussed with Java.

Also I do program solely in Haskell during my free time (ok, maybe some matlab on the side haha). While the learning curve has been incredibly intense - it is so damn rewarding that I keep coming back. The solutions are incredibly generic, elegant, testable, and even quite fast with a little performance optimization work (with experience the amount of effort required for this tends to go way down as with anything). I guess I would rather write the correct code first, and put a little time into optimization than write highly optimized incorrect code and spend a lot of time fixing bugs.

But far and away the largest problem that Haskell goes a long way towards solving is composability. Many may argue this point but I really believe this is the largest challenge we face today in software. So many issues boil down to this. The vast majority of bugs, re-writing, etc... comes from software that was not designed in a composable manner. Because let's face it - with the current tools like Java/C++ it is incredibly hard!
Unidentified Sounds
>"just because" is not viewed by most physicists as a permanent explanation

Why do you suppose this is any different for a Christian physicist, say, than for any other physicist? That aside I imagine that many physicists hold to a form of Anthropic Principle which almost fits the definition of "just because".

As an agnostic I always felt that God was the cop-out answer that replaced "we don't know". As a Christian not knowing everything still frustrates me but knowing now that within our current knowledge it is provable that not everything is knowable softens the blow of that somewhat (Godel, Church-Turing, etc.).

>religious thinking which offers conclusions in advance of, and regardless of, any empirical data

You suppose that religion is false to state your position, of course you do, but if you suspend your supposition then you see that religion 'offers truth in advance of reason'.

Christians generally, IME, don't say that God exists as the conclusion of a logical argument it's presuppositional in the same way as assumption of the validity of ones own sense data, or the assumption of ones actual self or of an external world.

Christians take that 'Christ died for our sins and was resurrected to heaven' and live by it and find that it works. Physicists take that 'c is constant for all observers' and live by it and find that it works. Obviously 'it works' means many different things both to the Christian and to the scientist (coherentism, instrumentalism, etc.).
"the general progress of AI"

Out of curiosity, what are you referring to here?
okay, I'll bite, would you care to explain how security does not exist?
"Free access to Microsoft technology (There’s a reason so few startups use M$ technology...)" - BizSpark, WebsiteSpark, Microsoft partnership programs, MSDN subscriptions - come on, there're plenty of ways to get MS' software free or on the cheap.
I don't understand what you're trying to say. First, the average MD isn't a PCP with generalist training. In fact, a lot of PCPs now are IM specialists. In fact, when talking about PCPs, there are many cases when no generalists come into the equation at all -- kids should see pediatricians as their PCP.
If he was staying under $200K per investment/company, it might be for legal reasons.
You can also avoid the duplicated key/sym names:

(fn [stats request]
(let [{:keys [statuses total]} stats
{:keys [state status]} @request]
...))
Cool, thanks for hanging in there with me. I found this very informative.
Attaching UI Enhancements to Websites with End Users
Guide to #startups on Freenode: don't ask questions, post cat pictures.
Have you looked at JEE6 ? They've really pared down a lot of the boilerplate you had to do, and the reference implementation Glassfish is a snappy customer.

ORMs, i feel, are a misguided adventure, and Java on the desktop (eg IDEs) are a really easy target. That said, a faster disk and gobs of memory make IDEs really fly.
I ran into the same confusion when trying to parse the title.
Should be faster for the developer and also good for HN's servers to not have so many independent apps scraping the forum.
It's really big.
Has someone written a crawler for the forum? If so, I can help with the ThriftDB setup.
It's a relationship. Managers shouldn't choose a date, they should come to an understanding with the engineer doing the work. The whole point of the discussion and the range is to discover what could go wrong and pro-actively look to mitigate that.

Managers help manage, the discovery of risks and issues that I talk about in the article are where the manager comes in. The identification of the risks, inter-dependencies, unknowns and so on inherent in the task comes primarily from the person doing the work. I believe this is part of the "solve problems" that you talk of.

Engineers should have no concern working through an estimate with their peers or their manager (be it direct line or part of the project).

Neither engineers nor managers should be asked to deal with unrealistic or overtly broad indications of a date. In the article I talk about a range and a confidence. If there are strong unknowns, that can't be determined, then that is risk that is carried within the task. That is part of the problem that needs to be solved.

I don't believe I talked about commitment, flogging or anything else. I am talking about planning and discovery.
Yes. Do you have a conclusion to that thought or more to add? I'd like to read it.

Alternative logical axioms are something I find interesting but I've only really studied a couple of alternative axiomatic systems of arithmetic (Peano - limited as it is by Godel's incompleteness theorem, Robinson, ZFC, can't think of any others of the top of my head).
I think the operative words in that article are, "requiring passion." And to that, I would add, "work smarter, not harder."

When I was in my early twenties, I lived in NYC and London. My motto was the typical, "word hard, play hard." I worked 12+ hour days fairly regularly. The work was interesting, the people were cool, and I was learning a lot. I remember leaving work one morning as people were coming in; their day was starting as my day was ending.

On the weekends (and sometimes weekdays), my friends and I would go bar-hopping, catch a movie, attend a festival, etc. While in London, we'd also take weekend excursions to another city or country. I also remember sky diving & bungee jumping trips.

Now that I'm in my thirties, I don't work as many hours, though my work output hasn't decreased. Instead, I like to think that I work smarter now, not harder. I still really enjoy my work - and oftentimes don't even feel like I'm "working." But if I spend too much time on something, instead of slogging through it, I'll stop and look for a more efficient solution. I've learned that time is too valuable for brute force.

On the surface, it may not seem like I'm working as much. I work anywhere from 8-12 hours a day now, but in aggregate, I get much more done. And none of those hours really feels like work.

I attribute this to having passion for what I do, and learning how to work smart.
Different levels of US public schools date from different periods, and have different purposes. Grade school, grades 1-8: learn to read well enough to read the Bible, do simple sums so as to be able to do simple mechanical things on farms, and keep from getting ripped off by city-slicker store owners.

Kindergarten is a much later add on. It's supposed to prepare children for grade school, I guess.

High school: prepare the bulk of the people to do factory work. Why else would you have rigid "shift work" style classes? Showing up on time is also heavily emphasized, so that graduates never question punching a time card.

The US higher education system pre-dates grade school and high school. Harvard pre-dates the US Government. Borrowed from the English, with German-style reasearch institutes (technical universities) tacked on top.

As far as history being all lies: I agree. But very narrow-minded lies. I believe that public schools as organized in the US educate to what standards the loudest complainers allow them to. History (or "Social Studies" as it is called) ends up being some pious lies told to students to paper over the tragic mistakes and abuses of the past. Would you like to be reminded that within historical times, your ancestors committed a continent-scale genocide?
500 internal server error. Is it because i didn't let you have my google account email?
"In the study performed by Susanne M. Jaeggi et. al., study subjects practiced the dual n-back test for about 20 minutes a day for up to 19 days. At the end of that time, the subjects were shown to have increased intelligences (as measured by gF)."

An improvement in intelligence that becomes apparent after only 19 days smells too good to be true. Correct me if I'm wrong, but surely someone that practices IQ test problems will appear to be more intelligent the next time they are evaluated. It seems like something like that might be what they're seeing here, but I don't know enough about this training to say that.
"The negative carpet-bomb article style, something I'm certainly guilty of, is something that I hope dissolves as we move forward."

I think the larger problem is that it's generally impossible to know if anything you read in the newspaper is true or not, it's just that these sorts of articles tend to make that more salient.

As for this particular style of article, there seems to be some sort of freudian conflict within each of us between how internal or external our locus of control should be. The stuff that becomes the most popular on social news sites tends to be highly masturbatory, and creating a mythology around the 'correct' locus is the all time #1 way of masturbatorifying content. That's why every popular movie ever starts out with the main character waking up and discovering that they're 'different' and they have some sort of destiny. And it's why HN articles alternate between portraying life like an XYZ quest versus articles like these.[1]

[1] Go to X, kill Y, take Z. Possibly attributable to Ralph Koster.
Java the language is OK. The only downside to it (in my opinion) is forcing OOP on everyone. Other than that, it's fine.

Java the virtual machine (JVM) is what I dislike more. It's a platform (like Windows) and within its virtual world, things are just not real. It's all pretend and I guess I should expect that from a "virtual machine".

Both the language and the JVM are mainstream and used heavily now... mostly in big, corporate environments. Devs can make a good, safe living writing Java, and there's nothing wrong with that.

If you hate Java or the JVM, do your hobby projects in a language you enjoy more. If you have no hobby projects or strong feelings (one way or the other), I'd argue that you're in the wrong business.
Lulzsec.com registered at Dreamhost (check whois). Stupid mistake? Diversion? Domain squatters?
A lot of what we perceive as obvious common sense relies on a huge amount of background knowledge that we don't really think about when performing them. Take for example the seemingly simple action of pouring a glass of water. This relies on knowing the glass has to be oriented the right way up, that liquid is subject to gravity, the general behaviour of liquids, viscosity and lots of little things that we take for granted.

For some good writing on the subject have look at Douglas B. Lenat's essays about knowledge pumps and Cyc.
That would be amazing! I think there have been at least a couple crawlers written for it. (One being SearchYC's.) I'll let you know when I find something more concrete.

Is there anything else that would help make the ThriftDB setup go more smoothly?
For Some, Blogs Also Pay the Bills [with a survey of ad companies]
NAP has long been a leader in on-line publishing.
I've been playing around with Haskell recently (actually have been for years, off and on) and have been thinking about doing a real production system in it in the near future.

What is going to be so hellish? Space leaks? That doesn't seem like the worst thing in the world to me. Lots of scripting languages tend to bloat over time and the usual answer is to kill and restart the process every now and then. Even Apache does this to its children.

If I have to kill some daemons every now and then, but I get the robustness that Haskell seems to offer, it sounds like a great tradeoff to me.

I don't think laziness by default is all that useful in practice, but neither does it seem to be a fatal problem.

I'm not all that impressed with the web platforms for Haskell, but I'm thinking of doing Haskell in the backend, and Python in the frontend.

So... go ahead, pop my bubble; tell me how I'm being stupid...
Sounds pretty cool although the project's homepage doesn't give a hint of a publicly available version: http://dub.washington.edu/projects/reform

The main innovations seem to be the example-based scraper and the focus on having end users decide where to apply the transformations. (What are some similar projects?)
Yeah, I may have overstated the case for Java a bit. You don't need to be a Java expert, but you should know enough Java to be able to create your own classes, and make simple little programs with multiple classes.

Really though, you should know how to browse javadocs, and the java ecosystem.

It is true that you can use clojure wrappers around java libs (and its nicer too) but a lot of them don't expose the full functionality of their java counterparts, and clojure's young enough that to understand how they work you'll have to dive heavily into their java interop.
Historically, compiler certification is a bad joke. It amounts to concerted testing at best, and wishful thinking in most cases. Few (remotely useful) compilers have been verified in any mathematical sense, and even then there is generally a wide gulf between what is proved and what we would intuitively expect a truly correct compiler to do.
What's the negative? He's teaching them that not only do you need to call people out when they're wrong, but especially when they have something on the line, or because they might be offended.
That is interesting, but I imagine -- in this case -- that pg didn't care to remove comment scores because the signal/noise ratio is so high that it didn't make sense to spend any time removing it.
Does anyone here have any loyalty to one group-based buying service over another? I certainly don't.