skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wonder if there is a good way to explain that the nature of these problems is to find any and all exact solutions to the puzzle and that the 95% solution which is vastly easier and entirely sufficient for any practical application (in terms of the given examples) is NOT interesting.

E.g.: Travelling sales-person: In terms of P/NP, she doesn't care if she can as much as if there is any possible route she might take that is even an inch shorter than the one she can fairly trivially plan out.
Intel Aims For Open-Source OpenGL 3.0 Driver By Year's End
Right before that question from the interviewer Dawkins quoted a statistic that 40% of Americans think that Genesis is a true story and went on to say that 'they probably believe' that Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt.

You may be right that he's only talking about creationists directly but I still think name calling isn't the way to go. It's a bit like calling someone with a mental impairment 'retarded'. Doesn't help.
Imagine if javascript engines were browser plugins. We'd have competition at the js engine level, not just the browser level. Good ideas in a js engine could more easily make the rounds to all browsers, without having to upgrade an entire browser.
Actually, the author of the article is missing the point of CSS gradients. They are not for sophisticated shapes or "anything useful like that". That's exactly what SVG or raster images are for.

Someone could as well write a post entitled "Farewell to border-style" and use very similar reasoning.
Dawkins' treatment of religion seems to me to a bit shallow. He seems to argue far too much about how true religious dogma is or isn't, but that can only give a superficial treatment of religion.

It might seem, especially to a scientist, that a religion is based on its core beliefs. But it is easy, especially for trained theologians, to get to whatever conclusion they want from some dogmatic starting point. Religion is not mathematics, where starting from an axiom will inevitably lead to a particular conclusion. So arguing about the untruth of the religious axioms is missing the point.
Why should that matter for cloud hosting? If you wanted to be able to install OpenSolaris on random hardware it might matter. But this is a closed environment where you never see the underlying hardware.
Google's own statement on what happens is just barely vague enough that I consider it subject to change at yesterday's moment's notice.
How To Install Oracle Java 7 (JDK) In Ubuntu
Yeah, companies that are paying customers, not just for the apps but for the ads themselves! Google should be copying Amazon and learn to care for customers, but instead they choose to imitate Facebook.
30+ Free PSD Website Buttons
If you are lacking time and have to design a professional and complete website……then PSD website template and buttons are your tool!! Buttons are the main element use in any website. If buttons are cool, good and attractive then it increases the number of visitor on your website.
Text editors again
Yes, and that is the way it is supposed to go.

But here is another quote to illustrate the counterpart:

"Die Wahrheit triumphiert nie, ihre Gegner sterben nur aus."

Rough translation: The truth never triumphs, its opponents simply die out.

That's by Max Planck.
I guess that Lamby means that one should not use "weight" instead of "mass", the two being two very different concepts.
At the risk of speaking for someone else...

> You may not actually mind talking to me normally, if we met across the street.

He didn't say anything about you personally, just the posting.

> And one of us is refusing to read & discuss the portion of the post that is actually interesting for an engineer.

Your post says a lot about what you need, but nothing about what your company actually uses or what your stack looks like. There's nothing about why I would want to join you (well, except the fact that you can afford five pizzas, I guess).

> Since we are on the subject of countries, I hope you are not from the US. Because, my friends there have an awesome HQ (hint: they actually laugh heartily watching Colbert Report and Daily Show).

I don't understand what this means. (EDIT: From another answer, I realize that by HQ you mean IQ, not headquarters, so it's just an insult).

> You have a fertile imagination, I agree, but in the eagerness to call me names, you've let a word slip: s/imaginary/imagery

I'm guessing the parent edited that? Still, he didn't call you any names anywhere that I saw.
What do you call someone who continues to believe a falsehood in the face of all evidence, reason and logic? "Stupid" seems pretty spot on to me.
The part this article is criticising him for is a little out of context;

I care that people are being misled by those stupid people, because I think children deserve to know what is true and wonderful about the world into which they have been born, and it really is a shame that they are denied that; by ignorant and stupid adults, as you've described them.

The last part does hedge a little on if he would originally have actually chosen that definition. And still, it is certainly not an indefensible position to say that religious beliefs are quite stupid.
Key Step To Success Online
your claim that a 95% solution is entirely sufficient only applies to numerical optimization problems. every numerical optimization problem has a corresponding decision problem, and an algorithm that could solve these decision problems would be tremendously useful. think about circuit satisfiablility; if you're building an airplane, you want to know if the circuits for the airplane could ever cause the engines to shut off mid-flight. the concept of an approximation algorithm is meaningless here; either you know the answer, or you don't.
Show HN: Let’s Make a 3D Game: the Map Editor
Another handy tool for CSS gradients: http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Graphics/CSSGradientBackgr...

For IE9 there's a SVG gradient maker:
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Graphics/SVGGradientBackgr...
Analogies are useful because they are analogous, not because they perfectly mirror the concept beig analogized. The argument seems to he whether we are at that point of technological ubiquity where being generally algorate is a benefit to society.

However, I believe I agree with you that technology is not at that point. (literacy, numeracy, and "algorithmacy"[?] are equally beneficial to society - technology is not the reason for this though)

If technology becomes ubiquitous enough around the world (perhaps a touch device for 80% of the world?), many someones will be making the devices more accessible to the less algorate and you're back to "who needs to be algorate?" I don't see technology as the drive to make people more algorate.
If you were confused by the logo's use of a coffee cop in the initial 'Q', that's a reference to espresso (each individual espresso is called "a shot"). A drink with four espressos would be considered very strong indeed, and probably make you go fast.
Good point. Still, this relies heavily on the use of palettes, which we haven't seen in Metro. Maybe they'll have some UI elements like that in Metro, I don't know.
My blog entry explains some of the technical background of this launch, with links to much more in depth material from both me and other Joyent engineers:

http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2011/09/15/standing-up-smartdatacenter/
Having never questioned an indoctrination, religious or otherwise, is naive at best - stupid is a perfectly reasonable description, IMHO.
How about unscientific?

You're still going to run into problems applying and adjective to people, since they can think scientifically in one area and unscientifically in another.

For example, Dawkins, presumably thinks scientifically in genetics. However, when it comes to religion being a cause of wars and other violence versus a pretense for wars and violence, Dawkins hangs onto the "cause" hypothesis despite data pointing to the "pretense" hypothesis.

The difference is important. If you get rid of a cause, you solve the problem. If you get rid of a pretense, people find another pretense. Robert Pape's data is consistent with the pretense hypothesis. Nonetheless, Dawkins devotes himself wholeheartedly to propagating the cause hypothesis. If he took a scientific approach, he would devote himself wholeheartedly to testing his hypothesis instead.

It's Dawkins "who doesn't see presented/available evidence and just think that no matter what, their beliefs are true."
Actually yes and no.

True you dont need Google. We would all love their traffic but having played with the tool for the past 24 hours. I have noticed the changes in inventory state and they are doing exactly what we could have expected them to do.

Sadly that is also the downside - they did exactly what we expected them to do. A mediocre job that is fast and of course "good enough".

A small team can (and has) replicated what Google has done. In fact there are many of them. But Google does not provide Trust and in my reasonably jaundiced view - this is another rearranging of the deck chairs.

The issues are now out in the open. The core infrastructure of search is REALLY hard if you work on the same premise as Google. If you change the basics then there is a different answer.

Will the basics change?
I believe the answer has to be yes because otherwise the original premise of the first poster must logically be correct.

I believe not. I am working specifically to change that - if you are interested - then ping me.
Neither of the aforementioned points are government reasoning. Having servers in India does NOT prevents encrypted communication or gives some magical ability to intercept it. No one even claims that. It just makes the company operating in the country, makes answerable to Indian judicial system and laws (equivalent to the powers FBI enjoy in the US, over the websites operating in the US). eg. providing server access to the intelligence organizations of the country.
Unfortunately the proportion of people with that level of math skill is probably much lower than you think.

A study done in the UK a decade ago showed that "22 per cent of 16- to 19-year-olds are functionally innumerate" [1].

By "functionally innumerate" they probably mean "unable to manage daily living and employment tasks that require math skills beyond a basic level". (I've paraphrased the Wikipedia entry for "functionally illiterate" here.)

It's just a wild guess but this statistic probably means that only a small percentage of people can do maths to a high school level. So what proportion of people have the skills to write even the simplest useful computer programs?

[1] http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6042996
I've got a problem with that viewpoint. I'm not sure if I'm able to articulate it properly but consider that without Michael Faraday's fathers religion his son might not have been born at all, and if he was he might have followed a different path in life, becoming a carpenter or some other mundane profession.

You don't get to play the same universe twice over with different pieces with a claim to knowing how that universe would unfold. All this stuff is inter-related and if you change one thing you may change more than you think you do.

Science and religion are to some extent in competition, both strive to explain things, the one through the supernatural, the other through reasoning and rigorous experiments.

I know which side my bread is buttered on but I'd never stake a claim on editing the past and saying that 'x or y not being religious' would have been good for science or the opposite. That's something that would be very hard to prove.
"Right before that question from the interviewer Dawkins quoted a statistic that 40% of Americans think that Genesis is a true story"

And did he then go on to say that he considers those 40% to be stupid? Or is it more likely that he considers those 40% to be the unfortunate childhood victims of the 'stupid' people? I think you're reading your own prejudices into his statement.
I think that only females and homosexual males would be able to answer the question "correctly", so this might be reverse-sexist :P
Looks like the most dramatic changes will be in writing Metro style Apps:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/br23030...
Really? Going a bit far, I'd say. Logging in on the web is a fairly trivial task, and I'd argue that there's a good business reason to gauge interest in a consumer API before dumping a ton of man hours into building it.
Vaishno devi helicopter
vaishno devi:- We offer vaishno devi helicopter with KashmirParadise.com, get vaishno devi live darshan, vaishno devi temple, vaishnodevi, vaishno devi trip, vaishno devi weather, mata vaishno devi, vaishno devi helicopter booking and Vaishno Devi Darshan.
> Microsoft did not and will not need to kill Adobe's Flash. Steve Jobs already did.

The jury is very much still out on that one.

Plenty of web sites are still Flash-based at least in part, and big companies are still throwing serious money behind them, and this is several generations of iDevice-without-Flash later.

Meanwhile, subjectively it seems like the number of complaints from people using iDevices when they can't use a site for this reason has been growing a little, at least on the forums I follow.

The difficulty for Flash, though, isn't just that it has the issues that come with being a plug-in. It also has the issues that come with its development environment and underlying programming language, which have many of the same strengths and weaknesses as other tools these days, so there is nothing you need Flash to do any more. I doubt Apple can kill Flash alone, but a combination of HTML5, JavaScript, better distribution systems for native executables, new JVM languages running as applets, and any number of other technologies might well do it in the longer term.

I imagine Adobe are well aware of this, as they have been promoting a lot of alternative (and potentially much better) approaches to their traditionally Flash-owned territory lately.
Should we call them rationally impaired?

For Dawkins to continue with the conversation, there had to be a way to refer to the collective and the interviewer already used the word, "stupid". Why stop the discussion just to reassign the group to a new word? In the context of the interview, those people are considered to be stupid and for clarity, they should be called stupid. They may be smart in other areas, but their willingness to not see evidence makes them stupid in this particular arena.
The next question immediately after that was the one that brought up the word stupid (as posted on my blog). You may be correct that I am influenced by my own prejudices. It wouldn't be the first time.
i guess the article is currently being edited, but at the moment it isn't so clear what is common and what different between the two groups. i think it would be better if the motivation came earlier:

solving a problem is sometimes harder than checking you have the right answer.
for example, it is easy to check that you have the secret key to a code. you
can decode a message and see the original text. but it is hard to find the key
if you do not know it.

so the problem of finding the key to a code is much harder than checking whether a
key is correct. other problems can be easy to solve and to check. for example,
adding 2 and 2 is both easy to solve and to check.

this difference can be used to divide problems into two groups. these groups are
called P and NP. it is easy to check the answers for problems in both groups,
but only problems in group P are easy to solve.

the problem of adding two numbers is in P, because it is easy to solve and to
check. the problem finding a secret key to a code is in NP because is is easy to
check but hard to solve.

i know my writing isn't simple enough here, but an approach like the above makes it easier to understand the relationship between them. in particular, the commonality between the two groups is emphasised.
Thermal underwear
Two problems with this article. First, the primary critic they quote, and the only individual named, is the creator of JavaScript. Naturally, with his emotional and intellectual investment in JavaScript he is going to oppose anything that may replace it.

Second is their criticism of Google designing the initial version of Dart "behind closed doors" as a betrayal of open source. Generally, all open source programs start privately then are opened when they reach an adequate level of functionality that people can start hacking on them. Mozilla almost died when it was open-sourced because it wasn't ready for most hackers to work on.
You may like G+ or not, but these numbers are pretty much meaningless, and the title completely misleading.

Did they measure a 41% decrease of public posts? No! They measured a drop in public posts PER USER.

Moreover, this is only measured with users of manageflitter, which can hardly be considered a representative sample, so, where does all this excitement come from?
Your'e right... I'll work on this as soon as I can!
Changing your online life just to use Google+ is not worth it, is it?
And this is the truth. No matter how much people want it to be the HTML5/JS/CSS3 combination is not on the same level as Flash right now. Plugins are a pain but it feels like we are moving sideways and not up. I use to be a web standards fan but in recent years not as much.I guess the grass is always greener....
This. It's a really great example, but you never make the full connection by explaining that it's easy to check that 2 towers have the same mass.
If you're not going to completely leave, then I would recommend leaving your G+ account intact, and just don't use it anymore. Delete your posts and pictures if you like, but don't delete the account itself.

I believe I recall reading Google itself saying that if you delete your G+ account, that has the same effect as if Google had suspended your account (whatever that means from day to day).

So I believe, whether you self-terminate or suffer suspension) that you lose partial functionality on Picasa. You can still store photos, but anything related to sharing is dead. Don't know if that affects pictures on Blogger.

For Reader, I think you can still use it, but you can't share posts.

Or something.
He could have said "I don't think they're stupid, but to me they are irrational and dangerous".
If you want another use look at d3.js http://mbostock.github.com/d3/
Does github provide rest api's to browse a repo? like list all files in one dir in a repo, or get the content of an actual file etc
So I use emacs with viper and it's great. I have no idea how to really edit text in emacs without vi mode and I can't open a file in vim without :q and running it again with a different argument. Yet I can edit text vi style and use superior (to vim) and convenient emacs features like modes, tramp, buffer management, org-mode…
would be great to build out this (already awesome) concept a little more. any ideas for expanding it? adding on some partnerships?
Big thanks for reminding me, I just found this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6308425/ios-5-best-practi...
Here's an interview with Jeff Moriarty, the Boston Globe’s vice president of digital products.
http://emediavitals.com/content/bostonglobecom-future-web-de...
Yeah I've been thinking about what I can do with this, but a location based chat has been done before. I was thinking of keeping it simple. A mobile version maybe, I use CSS3 Media Queries to show different "versions" of the app on different devices but I was thinking of doing dedicated mobile app... When I find the time of course lol
it looks really good! seems like they did a great job editing existing tumblr code also
Collins has written a book called "The Language of God" (referring to DNA) in which he explains how he reconciles his beliefs with his scientific understanding.

In it, he tells his own story and explains why he thinks Christians should accept evolution and why scientists should not be hostile to faith.
This is just further proof that any know it all can set up a blog, throw out logic, state a poorly formed opinion, and someone will jump on their band wagon.
Yes, Professor Alister McGrath (Oxford) has come to similar conclusions. Dawkins et al had an expectation that religion would be swept away within their lifetime, and as this has not been achieved he has moved on to be much more direct and blunt as if to try to force it to happen.

McGrath writes about this in his book 'Why God Won't Go Away: Is the New Atheism Running on Empty?' http://www.amazon.com/Why-God-Wont-Go-Away/dp/084994645X

Here is a review of the book to give you a flavour of what conclusions he reaches http://mcdanell99reviews.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-god-wont-g...
259 Best Online Marketing Strategies, Techniques And Tips
"one of the last "mainstream" movements violently opposed to human rights and democracy"

I have been trying to figure out what you mean by this, to no success. Does the violence against blacks in the US during the mid-1900s Civil Rights movement, to say nothing of slavery in the 1800s, carried out often by pious Christians certain of the morality of what they were doing, not serve as an example of a "mainstream movement violently opposed to human rights and democracy" within the Christian faith?

I also point out the numerous dictatorships in Central and South America, in devoutly Catholic countries, held by force of arms. The estimated 30,000 desaparecidos of Argentina are certainly due to nothing other than "violent opposition to human rights and democracy", and the actions of the government was certainly influenced by the conservative Catholic views of the leaders - the leader Oganía dedicated the country to the "protection and intercession of the Immaculate Heart of Mary."

The third largest religious group, after Christianity and Islam, is Hinduism. I honestly have no idea how the tenants of that religion affect, say, caste violence in India. Since it's one of the mainstream movements you mentioned, perhaps you can say something about it?
Because using G+ at all is vaguely risky to a vague subset of your Google services. People who have followed the rules to the letter have been suspended. Sure you can appeal. Maybe most people who do so win their appeal. But there is risk.
Very nice. I tried it out, and liked it.

I'd pay for it, if you added other useful reports.

One small thing: on the Search Term Analysis, keywords that did not appear last month show a blank instead of a zero, which makes the "Diff" field show up as NaN. Not a problem, exactly, but I think it would be more useful to show 0, and the difference from zero.
If it will be a closed platform, it doesn't matter.

I had a lot of experience with Solaris (x86 only - people tried to run Informix/Oracle on a cheap hardware) starting from Solaris 7 and onwards. It was always a problem even to install it. And lack of working compiler makes things even worse.

Starting from Solaris 10 they did a lot of work to improve the overall experience, but too late - everyone migrated to Linux to run the same crap.

And I must say, that after it was installed and tuned it was running quite stable as a database server and it can deal with heavy loads, while similar Linux instances failed now and then. But it was 5 years ago. Modern Linux kernels can handle everything quite well.
For me it's always The Underdog by Spoon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1hZVDLkJDc

I've never heard a song that better sums up the feeling of building something incredible.
Faith in UBS Goes Rogue
> I use their lowest paid plan, $5/year, so I've set up Thunderbird to download messages immediately, so as not to bust my storage limit... I have my own domain, and I just point my domain to fastmail now instead of gmail.

The plan descriptions on the fastmail.fm web site make it sound like you have to sign up for their $40/year "Enhanced" plan before you can use your own domain. It's still a good deal, obviously, but not as good as $5/year.
Real Name. That sounds very much like Real Player, and seems destined to share some of the stink.
Anatomy of a Scam Investigation: Chapter One