skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Sure nobody is really running any PHP sites on Windows boxes, but they're sure as hell developing on them.

First part is somewhat false. Second part is very true.

Having developed, provided, and commercialized a WAMP server that was started in 2003 (http://www.devside.net/server/webdeveloper) I've gain some knowledge of who uses PHP on Windows.

Everyone. In all kinds of situations. There is absolutely nothing lost between hosting Wordpress on Windows vs. Linux. Security, performance, maintainability, etc.

I've also found that around 2009, half of the Apache, MySQL, and PHP downloads from their official sites where for the Windows builds.

These numbers have only gone up since then.

The Windows platform for PHP is critical to the health of PHP. Loose it, and you've lost half of the developers and about 30% of the production deployments.
It is not just the tax dodging though. The greek people are, at least in Europe, known for being lazy and many of them are in government positions where they get paid a lot but don't work a lot. That they dodge taxes on top of that is just icing on the cake.

The other issue is that Greece couldn't keep up with exports in terms of cost with other EU member states. It isn't able to keep up with other high export countries for the same goods.
Thanks for mentioning Reed's Law. TIL.

According to that, the network value to an individual grows like 2^N - N - 1, which is the number of all possible subsets minus two obviously "useless" ones, The singletons (N) and the empty set (1). In the case of Facebook this seems to ignore plenty of other useless subsets, overestimating the value of the social network.

Simple example. Think about 2 of my friends that don't like each other. I would be better off with two networks, one for each. Every division I can think of leads to a new circle, so the value of a network offering circles grows more like C (2^(N-C)). This looks like its smaller than Reed's Law, (more circles even makes it look worse!) but is actually more achievable. My Facebook network value is really more like 2^("max number of friends with no issues"). In the worst case this leas you to a network value of N^2 which is well-served by email.

I'm sure somebody has thought of a more refined analysis.
The link to this post is a word document exported to html.

<meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document>
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12">
<meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 12">
"Very bold or very dumb": data caps don't apply to ISP's own movie service
I guess that's a matter of definition. If humans are the only example of "intelligence" that we know of, then it seems natural that artificial intelligence would concern emulating humans.
As I understand it, Americans actually get/take far less vacation than Europeans. Couple that with comparatively no social services and this should start to make sense.
Controlling the World, on Your iPhone
Hey, thanks for the response. If you want some feedback:

Yeah, I think you should add something to not show our own profiles (I never forget who I am!). This actually reminds me of my friend's dumbphone. When he goes into his Sent Mail folder, and selects a message, and tries to add a contact (the person he send the message to), the phone tries to add his own number. While it makes sense logically, in the context it's not very useful.

Two other issues I have with it are on a design level for the new Compose profiles. At least in the classic theme, now the white Rapportive appears over the blue gmail send. I'm not sure how much of that you can manipulate, but shifting the blue over to the left (kind of like what's done with reply) would be preferable.

Also, on Reply, there's an alignment problem with the Share Rapportive link up top - it's slightly shifted to the right, so that it doesn't seem to align.

Lastly, I found a minor bug. Your Share Rapportive button appears fine, but I'm guessing you got rid of it (or Gmail automatically does) if the window is minimized small enough. The problem is, that it doesn't re-appear, even if you change screens. I haven't done any heavy testing on this, but the first two brief tests seem to give these results.

Sorry if I'm wasting your time - hopefully this helps. Send me an email if you're not sure what I mean and I'll give you some screenshots when I get home.

Edit: Claiming makes sense. I forget I send emails from my Gmail as more than one address. Though, can you use the emails to check via LinkedIn or something, to see if the sent user email corresponds to the same account as the original email, and if so, display the sender 1 up? Not sure how efficient that is - just brainstorming solutions since I doubt the majority of people will think to claim their emails.
The Slicehost Story
If you have access to their new facebook mail stuff, is it sent from an @facebook.com email address?
Thanks! I found it really well done and interesting.
This update is primarily in response to the PDF exploits (how JailBreakMe.com works)
Feld Thoughts: Competition
Ask HN: What are the current best options for faxing?
I'm looking to get rid of our in-house fax server and just use some service to fulfill our faxing needs but we send a lot of faxes, mostly bills to clients or reservations for rooms. Can anyone recommend reliable providers for a good price? Anything that beats eFax's 10 cents a page?
Check your inbox. ;)
Maybe they filter apps by devices connected to your account that can install it?
google won't allow users to install this without jumping through hoops.

Well, one hoop. Settings -> Applications, click the "Unknown sources" box. I think this just disables signature checking on .apk's or something.
This has caused our purchases to fall from doing very well to almost getting no purchases at all.

I think you missed this line. Presumably they were doing quite well for themselves, got nailed by some change Google made, and now are not recouping any costs due to all the lost sales.

Sadly, bryanlarsen is correct about Google's culture, especially when it comes to the code they've written: the search code is doing what we told it to and there won't be any reconsideration of decisions made about code.
Google+ delivers 1 billion items a day as closed software, it's not even open to the public yet.
You've hit one of the biggest issues on the head and that is the greek do not pay enough taxes yet each time they are more than willing to vote for tax increases and increases of social services made available to them.

One of the things that the greece government has to do is cut back on those social services and ACTUALLY start collecting taxes it is owed to make up for that debt.

The greek people are unhappy to cut social services and are not willing to pay taxes... that doesn't work.
I'd not be upset if "Fail" was added to a submission title filter.
Using the Page Visibility API
Then they won't mind relinquishing their claim on it, then! And British peacekeepers can withdraw at last.
>The grammar reference section states that the only constructs allowed within a Block are Statement constructs, and that a FunctionDeclaration isn’t a Statement.

Huh! Never knew that. I wonder what their reasoning was when they decided that. Behavior in this case is all over the map in other languages: C and Python both consider function declarations and definitions as statements, but C allows you to provide a forward declaration of a function that you define later, after invoking the function, while Python doesn't. Perl allows forward references to subroutines without a preemptive declaration; Java considers method declarations as separate grammatical entities from statements but doesn't care what order you put them in within a class; Ruby behaves similarly to Perl.

PHP (as always) is a total odd-man-out: it considers a function declaration to be a statement, doesn't allow forward references to functions, and it exposes nested function definitions to the current namespace as soon as the parent function has been executed once. That is, if you define a function foo() and inside its body define bar(), you can access bar() from outside of foo(), but only once you have invoked foo().
Newspaper Club API: Generate newspapers programatically
> The student is asking his or her brain to expend lots of energy (from a biological perspective, studying for an orgo exam is an expensive thing to do).

I have wondered for some time: is there research that can put a number on how much caloric energy the brain (just the brain) uses when it's being worked/stressed (as the article suggests, studying for an organic chemistry exam) compared to when it's relatively relaxed or even asleep? Some cursory searching hasn't gotten me past "the brain uses about 20-25% of consumed energy a day," but that doesn't really answer my question. I acknowledge it is difficult to define when the brain is "relaxed," because it's always doing something, but I suppose what I'd like to know is if there is a truly significant difference in energy expenditure due to intense activity or if comparatively it's just background noise because the brain is always working hard.

To take it to an extreme/absurd point, could thinking hard help you lose weight?

p.s. thanks for posting the article due to the 503
My thinking as well...
The difference is that our Unlocker is #2 in the paid category, but our main application is basically off the charts. Almost all of our sales come from the free application -> Users who use Out of Milk and then decide to go Pro.

As for the first part of your reply, trust me, I completely agree. We have done nothing for the past week except tweak our market text, change our name to various things, and so forth to figure out how to work with the new system. We are not just watching it idly and going "OH WOE IS ME!".

The problem is that it is not a level playing field. Extremely popular apps, not just ours, are appearing hundreds of results away while other extremely popular applications are staying right up in the front. It really seems kind of random. Why are some extremely popular apps in the first results, then hundreds of crappy / average apps, then more exceptional applications? It doesn't make a lot of sense.

My post is a bit of a rant, I admit, but it is also meant to be informative so that other developers can see what it means to play in the market.
Swap to iOS. People pay for things there and there are developer support people you can talk to.

Swap to Win7Phone. You may be the only person in your category still. The developer outreach is hilariously good (Shout out to Atlanta's Glenn Gordon [Microsoft] for treating the community right).
Jquery and html5 experiments
Thanks for jumping in to pointlessly defend some giant institution. "they did good things too!" is so simplistic it makes me want to tear my hair out. Why spend time defending the Empire as some unquestionable whole? The point is to analyze institutional structure so you can tease out the rules that have positive consequences from the ones that have negative consequences.

Having a desire to spread sanitation and education: good. Binding the possibility of sanitation and education to an economic mode of production that leaves the newly sanitized and educated with underdeveloped infrastructure and in debt cycles: bad. I'm not interested in the illusion that they are inherently paired operations.

Oh, and we still have slave trade and the cult of england today, so your starry eyed tone is quite unearned.
I don't think that's a sensible claim at all. "Proof that humans are not artificial intelligences" doesn't even seem to be a coherent idea.

I'm going to go ahead and assume you've misunderstood what this person was talking about, as the alternative is to say that you're sitting on proof of the impossibility of a very quickly moving field with extremely deep implications for the future of humanity, and I've never once heard of it.

Unless you'd like to explain it :)
Yeah, it is probably only a SEO issue. Study why other apps are showing first. Adding shopping list in the end of the name and in the description of the app will probably fix it.
no prior experience in 4 weeks. nothing is impossible. having said that, 'maybe' leaning heavily towards 'no'.
It's about two hours... If I didn't already work 6 days a week between three jobs, is be down for the road trip... But a man's gotta sleep sometime
Exactly right.

And all OpenID providers have different attribute exchange protocol extensions. If you use them, you can effectively allow only those you have tested.
So will Chrome's built in developer tools. No bloated browser or third party tools required.
Adding a person to multiple circles is easy. Click the name and you should get an option for circles that gives you a list of checkboxes. Check the appropriate circles.
They really ought to have a different policy based on the significance of the page on their site. Isn't a page with 40,000 likes worth requiring the complainant to provide some documentation about their infringed trademark? Sure, someone complains about a band with 1500 friends, take it down and let them battle it out. But a company with 40,000 users on your website ought to be treated with a little discretion. The number of times that companies with that many fans are the cause of a dispute cannot be so overwhelming that they can't do a tiny bit more due diligence.
"Deep procrastination usually strikes students later in their college career, when the difficulty of their courses ratchets up. At this stage, their work load gets harder and harder, and at some point some powerful part of their brain says “no more!”"

My mileage definitely varied. I found that after my second (Sophomore in the US) year in college I rarely procrastinated. It was getting through the required classes the first two years, where the why at the end of a long chain of questions was "because you have to to graduate from MIT." That's not as motivating as it sounds.

Eventually I was taking only classes I wanted to be in. And if I didnt want to do an assignment and wasnt going to destroy my GPA I just didnt do it.

Fast-forward to the real world and it returns. Deadlines from bosses help to avoid procrastination but if the work isn't too challenging and expectations are low enough you can still do some deep procrastinating.

But then again, maybe the reasoning my work isn't challenging enough is because I didn't get the most amazing job in the world because I didn't just push through those assignments in college that I really didn't want to do. Hmmm...that's some meta-circular evaluation right there[1].

[1] No it isnt.
It's common courtesy to at least give the vendor a chance to fix the bug before you go public.

I don't use Skype, and I'm no fan of Microsoft, but this security advisory is just shameless (and harmful) self promotion.
Here's the official Google Games logo, thanks to Google+ source code
First off, the author misrepresents the idea of patriarchy as a "conspiracy of men to subjugate women". That's not how I've heard how it's been defined. Patriarchy/kyriarchy, roughly put, is a series of assumptions and privileges provided to a segment of the population, often at the expense of everyone else.

It's not, as far as I can see, a conspiracy -- i.e. a secret plan hatched by a clandestine group that goes against a larger society's interests. You can have a pat/kyriarchy where each member acts on their own best interests, and yet the results of that unfairly disadvantage certain groups.

A good example of the kind of decentralised, mass-action that disenfranchises a particular social group or class can be found in Michael Young's coining of the word "meritocracy", and how, through the collective action of a group of self-interested actors, a particular social group can be disenfranchised or demoralised. It doesn't require secrets, it doesn't require conspiracies, as a matter of fact it just requires everyone acting to their own best interests.

Secondly, the author doesn't make a convincing argument that the fact that the reason why men get all the risk and all the reward is because of something innate, instead of a self-perpetuating social system that actively encourages one gender to risk it all and reap the rewards, while holding back the other gender to mediocrity and risk-free existences. The possibility is raised for a few sentences, and discarded, as if it's ridiculous, and it's obvious that the reasons are inherent.

Since the arguments in the rest of the post requires me to buy the above premise without conclusively eliminating social mores and non-innate possibilities, I didn't bother reading the rest of the article.

Incidentally, as a member of a nation that was born out of British Colonialism, the statement "the British Empire did a lot more good than harm" is a disgusting, privileged statement that really doesn't elicit much more than pitying contempt from me. Since of course we wouldn't have known what our lives would have been without John Company coming down to "civilise" our barbarian asses, obviously the only feelings we should be having is gratitude, especially since we owe our broken conception of race and ethnicity, our de-facto one-party rule since we gained independence from our Magnanimous Masters, our police force, more intent in beating down dissent and enforcing "public order" that is beneficial to only the ruling class and no one else, to organisations, concepts and social structures derived from British rule.

That's right; it was this or barbarism. Yeah, I hope it helps you sleep at night too, jerk.
How is it spam? Seen that we will only send sms ads to those who were willing. I'm thinking of a max of 3 ads per person per day.
Now we know how Panda determined low quality sites. They looked at the click through rate and cpc rates for adsense ads. If the market didn't click on the ads google served, then they mustn't have been relevant to the content (or more importantly, the content isn't relevant to the ad. IE it's low quality. Furthermore, if the market wasn't prepare d to pay much for the ad, it must be for content that's low value.

Basically, google has redirected traffic from low paying adsense pages to high paying adsense pages for those keywords.

Our site was hit hard with the last panda update, losing 30 percent of our traffic. We have two main types of pages that are quite similar which constitute our site.

Which pages were hit? Only one had google ads on it. Those pages were hit, the others were untouched.

So in their efforts to steal revenue from their partners the corollary is now true:

Put google ads on your site and run the risk of getting deranked.
I think the best path would be to learn HTML, CSS and Javascript and then you can use apperlerator software to create iphone app. I am sure this could be done in 4 weeks.
Agreed, and I hope I didn't come off harshly- no apologies required!
Quantified Self on a Budget
so, a complete waste of $150?
>>> idea is dangerously embedded in society now, and it risks creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of barbarism. <<<

That's something I don't understand.

What does a paradigm useful for understanding biological systems have in common with human society? I'm not saying that human society isn't a biological system. I'm saying that extending an abstraction suited for understanding and explaining how and why genetic evolution works, to the complex intricacies and dances of human society is like trying to use ohm's law (a very useful, proven and beautiful abstraction) to make a video game.

Sure, you can predict how the amount of current flowing per unit potential difference will change as the wires get thinner, and you can understand how transistors work to a certain point, but you won't see what that processor actually is and does. You'll miss the several layers sandwiched between this abstraction that video game. Layers built on top of each other, creating a richer set of knowledge, tools in the process.

I think that we have jumped the gun several times in this regard. Take the entire glorious soviet communism vs. Ayn Rand-ian capitalism. They are in fact different from the predecessors in the idea that they separate the producers and the consumers using something called the market, but they differ on how that market should be run. Before you launch a debate, I'm not saying that one is better than the other. It's just that both of them are economic theories talking about different ways to run a market. What on earth do they have to do with raising children? Or, our actions as human beings?

So, yes Dawkins is right and so was Price, but they explained how biological systems worked. Not how human society ought to, and must be forced to, work. If people were indeed such beings then the financial crisis wouldn't have happened. This article wouldn't have been written.

I might be wrong over here, but I really think that this born from a mistake of finding ways for humans to be perfect. I really think that this search to portray humans as rational beings, or beings that are genetic machines (note the implicit association with precise perfection we have in our mental models) is a product of human chauvinism. This is in a bizarre way the product of our quest to make ourselves special.

We aren't that special. We're flawed and it's okay, and I think that it's about time we as a species moved on.
Disagree strongly.

Every time I get passed a github URL, it plonks me in a daunting page full of source code. If you scroll down a page or 2 sometimes you can see a text README file that tells you WTF the project is about.

On Google code, you get a nice UI, telling you about the project, bug tracker, discussions, binaries, AND IF YOU WANT IT the source code.

I think github is built for developers, whereas google code is built for developers and users.
You fail to provide a compelling defense of your argument. One of the major points of the article was in direct opposition to your first sentence. It was supported by arguing that biology forces women to be more important for reproduction and then showing how this can lead to the circumstances we have today.

Your disagreement is predicated on certain traits not being linked to femininity or masculinity and economic forces. You wave your hand over the entire article and then rail against women's role in the past. The argument is a classic strawman. You failed to invalidate any of the article's points and instead talk about narrow definitions of women's social behaviors as if the entire article had said women are only good in one-on-one relationships. The article merely posits that women have more stake in maintaining a few intimate relationships than a large number of shallow relationships. This point is arguable but, rather than argue against it, you claim that the article insinuates women should /only/ focus on intimate relationships for the survival of our species, and then say this is clearly ridiculous. I agree with your logic here, but it is rather irrelevant to the topic at hand. The discourse is about why women are better/worse/different than men, not whether women should be allowed to live in the "public sphere".

The closing of your argument goes even further afield and tries to elicit empathy from men by attempting to justify women's historically subservient economic position and then forming a weak thought experiment based on outdated female stereotypes. Your penultimate statement is that "women are people" which is followed by the "The old ways were awful." None of this contributes to the discussion nor does it it reveal any interesting insight.
Bring em on! Most of the work on the site is bringing some needed aspects to the fore, but the success of the + launch has spawned some really interesting ideas on how we can help users of the site share aspects of their projects to +.
SMS verification is useless. Spammers have just as easy (if not easier) access to numbers as ordinary users.

That, and most people don't want to share their numbers with some site. For all they know, you are just collecting the numbers and reselling them.