skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can point you to two places:

1. http://pythonmentors.com/
This will solve the mentor-ship problem you have. Folks in the core and around who are mentors will listen to your problems and can help you on the way. Although they are very nice with newbies, please make sure that you try to be as clear and professional in your approach/questions as possible.

2. http://openhatch.org/
This website gives you small, medium and tough level of bugs in most of the prominent opensource projects.

Hope this helps.
I use a tall Fermob bistro table with a laptop.

It's $315 and is much classier than the cheap drafting desks. I also use it outside on the deck in the summer.

http://www.frenchbistrofurniture.com/product/F-0250/Fermob-F...

Also, a four-drawer dresser is about the same height as the table above. They are very easy to find at flea markets or estate sales for next to nothing, and are perfect for standing with a laptop.
I don't know what's incredible about it. That a company that copies things might infringe patents?

Do I realize that Apple infringes patents? Yes. Are you aware that Apple doesn't cry about how it's the end of the world and we're all going to have to pay more for the next iphone because they had to write Nokia a check for Nokia's previous and substantial innovations to mobile?
Now imagine if they had the Americafuckyeah patent system...
Perhaps this is an unfair caricature, but it has been my observation that the vast majority of "pro-software patent" supporters are misguided fans of either Microsoft or Apple. They seldom have anything to do with software development, and their perspective is seldom enlightened or nuanced.

Strawman, unfair, bigotry, whatever -- I would love to be proven wrong. I have yet to hear a pro-software patent argument that isn't littered with corporate partisan nonsense.
Rookie Blue Season 2 Episode 7 
Rookie Blue Season 2 Episode 7
Pandoc does that already http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/

Pandoc is written in haskell but there's c bindings to it https://github.com/toyvo/libpandoc so you can use it from anywhere.
Was .NET All a Mistake?
I get the sense that Google plays chess while most companies play checkers. The cellular auction with Verizon comes to mind. I hope you're right!
The problem with this is that prior to the introduction of the iPhone, android was designed to look like and work on phones like the blackberry. It was a better feature phone OS. After the iPhone came out, Google changed courses and counterfeited the iPhone.

If google wanted to compete, they could have spent 7 years investing in fundamental innovations-- like Apple did with touch-- to create their own new UI. Maybe they could have done a voice driven phone. OR, if touch was inevitable, they could have done their own, innovative take on touch UIs.

They did not. They turned around and cloned the iPhone and then gave the OS away for free. They were able to do this because the patent system requires Apple to publicly disclose their inventions. In exchange for this disclosure, Apple gets a monopoly on the use of their inventions. If you don't like this, that's fine, amend the constitution, and take it up with your congressman.

Google is now claiming that the government should step in and use force-- that is, decrees backed by men with guns and the threat of violence-- to allow google to steal other companies innovations and get away with it.

Think about that. Google cannot compete fair and square, so they steal their competitors technology. When this is pointed out, they call for the use of violence to let them get away with it! Talk about Doing Evil!

Apple learned their lesson last time around. They relied on copyright and license agreements to protect the invention of the GUI. The government did not have their back when Microsoft stole their invention, so this time, Apple made sure to patent their inventions.

This is not "anti-competitive", this the very definition of competition. Apple made a better widget to break into the fiercely competitive mobile phone market.

People only say "anti-competitive" when someone is competing successfully and they don't like it.

If justice prevails, Google will become the wholly owned search and advertising subsidiary of Apple. If corruption prevails, Apple will be prevented in succeeding against google in court. We'll see how it turns out.

Either way, Once again, Apple-- the only company in Silicon Valley with a track record of genuine innovation-- is being attacked by counterfeiters who can't be bothered to spend any R&D on coming up with something new themselves, and once again, the thieves are claiming that they're just "competing."

If you hope to ever profit form doing something innovative... and not get squashed by a company like google ripping you off... you really should be on Apple's side on this. They have always been the underdog that stuck to their guns and innovated really hard. That they've been successful at this shows that the underdog can sometimes win.

If its taken away from them, it will not be justice, and it will not be moral.
Look for useful but poorly managed open-source projects. Compete with them.
Hulu Teams With Morgan Spurlock For First Original Long-Form Show – Deadline.com
"These citizens then loaded a bomb onto the rocket and launched it at a neighbor (Japan, India, Russia) take your pick.
What would happen?"

Possible outcome:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War
The incredible irony is one of the major benefits of patents is "openness" and public disclosure of techniques.

The alternative to patents is massive secrecy, sorta like Google's search algorithm.
My main language is C, and my go-to language for quick programs to get some job done used to be Java. Until I learned Python and realized how nice it is. Now I write all my scripts and tools in Python, it's a superb language. I enjoy C because of its bare-bones simplicity, but I like working in Python just as much.
Instagram: 150 million photos
So if the ethical position is also strategic, it is no longer ethical? That's a pretty high standard for what constitutes ethical behavior.

>If they thought patents were more strategic for them, they wouldn't be anti-patent.

This needs a gigantic [citation needed] next to it.
Sorry, what is untrue by inspection?

It is a fact that nearly all software infringes at least some patents. I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free. As a result, I would say that I believe every software company is "willfully infringing patents". After all, they chose to ship software instead of spending years and thousands of dollars in a combination of patent discovery and crippling their software to avoid patents.

As far as walking over patents -- Google is being sued less than many other major players at this point:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5061246255_45a015568b.jp...
The thing about Intellectual Ventures is there seems to be a fine or maybe non-existent line between companies-investing-in-IV and companies-strong-armed by IV.

I'd agree it would be even better if Google never gave a dime to patent trolls but there's a little more to the story than just Google investing in IV.

See: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_27/b3991401....
just because nobody did the survey does not mean it is not true
Watch,friends with benefits,online free,megavideo
watch,friends with benefits,online free,megavideo
Land: Dylan (Justin Timberlake) and Jamie (Mila Kunis), I think it's easy to add the simple act of sex for their friendship, despite what Hollywood romantic comedies should believe them
Perhaps because there's multiple 'markdown-ruby's and they all want to be distributed as RubyGems. More importantly, I rather like many of the names!
Besides the technicalities, _targeting_ feels like the uncanny valley, it may get personal, but it's not a human doing the selling, like in a real coffee shop or grocery
Randi Zuckerberg Runs in the Wrong Direction on Pseudonymity Online
Who has Apple sued using the Nortel or Novell patents?
Those questions were reasonable. It is supposed to test your strategic thinking skills. The attitude seems a little cold, according to your description in the article.

I used to work for Google in Sales.
Whatever minor factual flaws the blog post had, Heroku is on the right track. Deployment is a pain, and putting together a language-agnostic way of solving it is much needed. Not that I'm happy with that way involving someone else's servers, but fundamentally, too much effort has been wasted on language-specific products. I applaud Heroku's efforts and hope the general focus on building pan-language frameworks continues.
> they've been in the wrong place

Er, no, the blind spot is the responsibility of the one whose vehicle has a blind spot.

Yes, it's useful for you to be aware of their blind spot, and try to stay out of it, but at no point does that give the driver with a blind spot the right to blindly invade your completely legal road space.
Complaint Seeks Punishment for Classification of Documents
Sorry to be a little picky but it's not England, it's the United Kingdom. Of all of the member nations of the United Kingdom, England is the only one unrepresented in government. Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales all have devolved governments of their own. England has no such government.

The sad fact is that the British parliament could pass a law, which can then be overturned in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland leaving England screwed. Furthermore, MPs from those countries all get to vote in the British parliament, then their devolved equivalents can vote against it locally (except in England as there's no English parliament). This happened most recently with tuition fees but can apply to almost anything.
Because ultimately Android is still controlled by an arch enemy? And there is still Apple's iOS rake in all the dough?
So. Your job sucks. Your sister is dead. You get paid jack shit. And you're the one in control of delivering goods to everyone. And somehow you're thick enough to think that driving like a douche is the answer to your problems? Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

I remember when I was a kid, french truck drivers (hundreds of them) blocked the roads because they were pissed off. They did this for days. Guess what? They got (mostly) what they wanted in the end.

If, as this article implies, there is something wrong with the trucking industry, then you should take proper and responsible action. Protest. Park a truck in front of the white house. Whatever.

But driving like a dickwad, breaking laws that are meant to keep others save & endangering lives is not acceptable. Especially not for a shitty wage.
Character sheet resume
How algorithms mold our cities
Given the press Randi Zuckerberg has produced lately, I wonder if "working on her own startup" is the new "spending more time with her family."
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn
> What's obvious and trivial to professionals may not be trivial at all in common sense.

And should not the professionals in this case - software engineers - be the right people to make that determination?

> What's obvious and trivial after the fact may not be trivial at all before someone come up with it in the first place.

Yes. But in practice, no one reads patent filings. So the act of filing patents doesn't spread information that makes an idea seem trivial later on. Of course the act of making a successful product might do that.

> The question remains to what extend do we protect IP so the system yields net benefit to the society, not the opposite?

That's a tough question. But it is clear that suing over trivial patents is detrimental to innovation. Software patents of actual substance, on the other hand, are a debatable issue.

None of the patents being sued over in the mobile space so far appear to have any substance.

Note that I don't count the Java patents here - Oracle isn't a mobile company, and the patents aren't mobile in particular. Oracle's lawsuit against Google isn't of the same category as the other anti-Android lawsuits. The other ones come from competitors in the mobile space.

Regarding the Java patents themselves, I haven't read any, so I can't say I have an opinion.
I'm a software developer and have been working at startups for 20 years. I am pro-patent because I've seen it successfully used to protect a startup from an evil corporation-- in this case Microsoft.

I know the anti-patent people like to pretend that all programmers are anti-patent. I find it shameful to see how shoddy the thinking is when anti-patent people are confronted with pro-patent arguments.

I'm an HN member and have been participating in this website since 2006 or 2007 (though I got the boot for having a minority opinion.)

Patents are not anti-competitive. They actually force competition-- and they give a leg up to all of your competitors by quickly bringing them up to speed on the state of the art.

If the patent system didn't exist, and Apple didn't reveal its inventions, android would be 7 years behind the iPhone. In fact, android phones wouldn't exist. They'd still be at the drawing board trying to figure out how to make multi-touch work.

Its not like Apple just had this idea and then 7 months later introduced the iPhone!

I think people who are anti-patent don't actually understand what it takes to be innovative. It isn't easy, and it is silly to think that android would exist if Apple hadn't revealed its secrets as part of the patent process.

The thing is, in exchange for this revelation, google is required to come up with something new using this knowledge, not just copy it and sell it.
I like the color, but it doesn't look very sturdy. Maybe the photo doesn't do it justice though. I was thinking of this one, what do you think?

http://www.amazon.com/Alvin-Folding-Drafting-Woodgrain-Round...
State of the Web (Summer 2011)
Computer scientist calls for Web search shake-up
You might consider adding another option:

Yes - but I use the AdBlock preference which still shows Ads on Google Search Results Pages
You Will Survive Doomsday
In the shower... sometimes I take a shower when I dont need to, just to relax and come up with more ideas..
Skype goes VP8, embraces open video codec
Ideas just pop in, but what do you mean by cool?

cool like this: http://venturecrapital.us/index.html
or
cool like this: http://lal.com/home

Your future boss may just want to see some little tool that gets his company a little buzz. He's probably not expecting you to solve a huge problem.

Query their api and make the desktop background change to an si swimsuit model when certain datapoints are triggered. :)

Take it easy, there is no pressure on you! :)
tell me more about your hosts file.
Actually, British patent law used to be super fucking screwy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Monopolies
I'd say the dynamic is more complicated, many small businesses are highly reliant on IP protections. Innovators are pro-IP, followers are contra-IP.
The citation for that line is a wordspy.com entry that distilled it down from several longer citations that, in context, make it clear the above definition alone is not sufficient.
Operation Shady RAT: five-year hack attack hit 14 countries
I agree that patents are a problem. And, I saw Google's offer today for a free Android phone with a 2-year contract.

I would love a deal on a phone, but I think it is unethical to bundle products in this way. I would rather have the opportunity to switch carriers anytime I want.

I love mobile devices and mobile services, but the market conditions are too restrictive. I'd like to be able to (for example):

o Have multiple devices from different vendors on the same carrier plan
o Have multiple carriers for each of my devices, so I can use whoever has the best service at any particular location
o Pay a fair price for the data I send and receive to/from each carrier, and not pay for what I do not use
o Sign up only for internet service from a carrier, without anything else bundled in that I do not want, such as voice service, SMS plans, etc. Only internet protocol, thank you.
o Use my phone, which I bought, on any compatible carrier, in any country in the world, for a fair price.

If Google offers an android phone with these terms on their main search page, I will gladly pay a fair price for it.
Wonderful reply, thank you! Glad to know about PBKDF2. It seems like the right fit.

In this application, I'm actually generating strong passwords and assigning them to users — it's a unique case where that's not a usability concern, and the data is very rarely accessed. My thought with this setup is that I could assign, say, a 64-bit password, which I'd then use to generate longer keys for AES with a purposefully slow algorithm. I'd prefer not to assign users 128-bit AES keys directly because it will be harder for them to deal with the longer string.

In thinking about the code length, I'm trying to form an estimate with rough numbers like so:
- I'd like to be able to generate the AES key in 10 microseconds (I lowered that based on your DDoS concern)
- I'd like a brute-force attack to take 100 years
- An adversary could devote 10,000 times my computing power to cracking (really not sure how to estimate this though... botnets, gpus...)

Given those numbers, my keys need log2(100 years * 10,000 / 10 microseconds) = 62 bits of entropy. So I'd assume 64-bit keys would be secure, if I generate them correctly.

Basically I'm trading off computation time on my server for giving users shorter keys.

I do want to rely on this. Most of the user data should be visible only to the user, although I'll keep some parts (account info) in plaintext or encrypted with a master key. I don't know of a way of avoiding the front-end risk other than making sure to secure it, because the key has to come from the user; only they have it.

Any thoughts on my estimate of the key length and the feasibility of this system?
You'd better believe that Google and Netflix have scientists who work hard every day trying to "bend the curve" towards O(N) in all of those applications.
Blitz.io Python api client
It would really be great to have "shared circles". It would re-cast the "groups" concept in a social manner. I believe this is the next logical step... only question is when Google+ will be ready for it, and how well implemented it is.

I think the Circles concept that Google is pushing is very powerful and easy to visualize.
I find Google's stance here ingenuous. They're attempting to portray themselves as the persecuted innovator, but their behaviour in the market in question doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.

While the patents Apple are using to attack Android with seem dubious, the motivation for this tactic is obvious. Google extremely blatantly cloned the look and feel of the iPhone and have pursued a strategy of dumping Android in an attempt to reduce smartphones to a commodity. Of course Apple will try every trick in the book to prevent them doing this.

As a strategy for Google this makes perfect sense, but playing the wounded party as they do in this post is ridiculous, whichever horse you have in the smartphone OS race.
The mistake wasn't in offering .NET. The mistake was in letting C++ rot for 10 years. They are suffering now because of the lack of an efficient and modern native code development tool.
Under "Declaring Branch Bankruptcy", why does the author throw in a "git reset" as the last step in the example.
Can we settle for "anti bogus patents" and say that the vast majority of the software patents out there, and especially of the cases going to the courts, are about "bogus patents"?
I have yet to hear an anti-patent argument that wasn't just repetition of the "patents are wrong" ideology.

I'm actually neutral on patents in the sense of "what would be best in an ideal world". But the bottom line is this- my work is not free unless I choose to donate it. Thus in exchange for giving you my work, I'm going to require a license. If you steal it, you've stolen it, just as if you stole a car.

But wait-- if you steal my car I don't have it anymore, you say, but if you steal my technology, I still have it, you say.

And yes, that's true, but it is irrelevant. If you want my technology enough to steal it, then my technology has value, and it is property, just as anything else I might build with my own hands is property. It isn't that technology can be replicated-- after all, I don't hear you saying software shouldn't be copyrighted or sold-- it is whether you can get your copy without paying me for my work or not.

Just because software or a patent can be replicated, doesn't mean it isn't property and isn't valuable.

Am I knocking down a straw man? Well, you didn't actually make any argument-- you just disparaged people who have a different point of view. So, that forced me to guess what your argument was, and then respond.

I do this so you understand that I am capable of making an argument... I just find the anti-patent people rarely give actual arguments to rebut.
I additionally run Google Sharing

[ http://googlesharing.net/ ]
[ http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1062495 ]
مشاهدة مباراة السعودية وجواتيمالا بث مباشر كاس العالم للشباب
مدونة يلا جول الرياضية تقوم ببث واذاعة مباراة السعودية وجواتيمالا بث مباشر فى الجولة الاولى من كاس العالم للشباب تحت 21/20 سنة ( عام ) فى كولومبيا اليوم الاربعاء بتاريخ 3/8/2011 وموعدها الساعة 24:00 بتوقيت القاهرة لو بدك او عايز تتفرج على الماتش ادخل و وشاهد المباراة على النت بدون تقطيع اون لاين
I know those drafting tables well, as I once was a wannabe illustrator. They are ok, but you are paying a premium for the ability to adjust it into a non-flat drawing surface. There's also a lot of extra space that you don't need if you're just using it as a laptop. Honestly, if it didn't have the adjustable top, it should cost about $30 at IKEA. They are easy to find on craigslist in big cities, though.

Regarding the bistro table, I would say it's about 20% more stable than you would expect.
Pretty good for a laptop. I wouldn't put a 27" iMac on it, though.
The guy I talked to didn't elaborate on what he means by 'cool', so I imagine he just meant that I should do something that I think is cool. I think data is awesome!
Even more ironic: Stanford got a significant amount of shares from Google for allowing Google exclusive license.

Also, it is a mathematical algorithm in every sense of the word. A lot of patents aren't.
The "Top Idea in Your Mind" is a great essay by Paul Graham that somewhat addresses how ideas happen. Thing is here he talks about only one Idea in your head receives that kind of attention. My humble opinion would be to find an issue, problem, or interesting concept loosely related to your end goal (Analytics Company Internship) and find something to work on, in the scope of the other comments. With the research and finding of that alone, some things might come to mind.
The way I've sometimes come up with my ideas is through writing. Not an essay per se, but just write down your idea, problem, anything. Use it to brainstorm, connect, categorize, or anything. Play around. Hope that helps.
I did not say anything about size of business.

I think a better framing of your latter point would be - incumbents are pro-IP newcomers are contra-IP. Just being first in a field does not mean that you are innovating in it currently.
No one will believe security experts who warn about cyber warfare
No, I think I owe something for the free services and content I use, nothing is free, I'm aware of the tech aspects of it and I'm not concerned by any privacy implications. I'm also generally not bothered by ads and use Readability or equivalent for cases when I am.
"I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free."

Well that's a different claim then you made earlier. At any rate as I said above I don't think Google is just infringing on silly, obvious and clearly invalid patents. I think they willfully infringe on clear, major innovations.
Google, patents and Android