skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Bada Bing, Bada Boom: Culture inside Bing
You can be polite and say, "they're not really my thing, but it's awesome that you find such joy from their music, because that's what music is all about, right?"
> "My point is that "access to a full kitchen" is not part of the federal government's definition of poverty"

But it contributes directly to the definition, despite not explicitly being named. Because the definition is tied to CPI, which is tied to housing costs, which are more likely to include the cost of a full kitchen now than in the past especially for people near the bottom. I would argue that for someone in that position, having a full kitchen is better than not. Yet the CPI-based measure treats the cost of having a full kitchen as a negative (inflation), without treating the benefit of the full kitchen as a positive!

You keep misrepresenting my position (and asking questions that depend on your misrepresentation). I'm not saying that people now are not poor. I'm not saying the CPI-adjusted threshold is "wrong" for defining who is poor. What I'm saying is that people who are poor now and people who were poor in the past are not directly, numbers-to-numbers comparable. It's meaningless to say that 1.2% more people are poor now than then, because there are meaningful, relevant differences in conditions between now and then that account for far more than a 1.2% difference. The noise washes out the signal.
The test itself was misleading, and has now been updated to better reflect reality.

In your analogy, it would be as if pupils were given tests with some irrelevant questions, and the tests later revised to focus just on proper subject material.
The exact mechanism is still being studied for sure, but the phenomenon is well documented and continually researched (article a couple years back: http://www.pnas.org/content/105/44/17046.short).

The most widely cited example in humans is "Dutch Hunger Winter"
I explicitly support Brendan's arguments. Programming languages are a STANDARD to help people COMMUNICATE units of functionality. If we frequently invent new languages that just mainly give us a new "style" to do things (and of course some will do this better, and others will do that better), we get an unnecessary chaos of different codebases that will be incompatible to each other but yet do basically the same. (1)
Language design implies even more responsibility in versioning and adaptation to new programming paradigms than API design.
Let me again cite Atwood's Law: "Any application that can be written in JavaScript, will eventually be written in JavaScript." (see http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2009/08/all-programming-is-... )
It doesn't matter that much in which language a program is written, as long as the language level fits the level of your module / application and portabiliy (1) is high.
I would even vote against a separate module type and other experiments that complicate JS sytax. But this is, of course, another discussion. What I like and heavily use is CoffeeScript.
Thank you Brandon for keeping things in order!
How does using an object database exclude transactions? Transactions make as much sense for rows in a database as they do for objects in a database or even objects in memory. Atomic object graph mutations are an essential feature of any concurrent system. It just won't work any other way.

The reason to use an ORM instead of an object database is twofold. One, it's safer to use a working database and put some libraries on top of it than it is to write your own database. Do you want to write unit tests for the deadlock detection algorithm? Two, sometimes you're writing an online transaction processing application (99% of web applications) with fixed domain objects, but you want the flexibility to slice-and-dice the data in the future. In that case, an ORM makes your relational database look like an object store to the application (which is exactly what it wants), but it also lets you play with the data in Excel if you want to. The key is not that the data is relational, but that it's in a standard format that other software understands.

Ultimately, there are three kinds of applications that you can write. One is what most software is; the user interacts with the application and generates state along the way and you want to record that state and act upon it. In that case, an object database is perfect; the state is meaningless without the application, so there's no reason to encode the state so as to be meaningful to other applications. The next case is something like this but where the data might be useful outside the application (auditing, reporting, other features). In that case, ORM is exactly what you need. Your application wants objects, but the other things that need the data want it in a database. So you compromise and store it in a database, using an ORM to make the relational database look like an object store to your application. The third case is an application that is not particularly interactive (think credit-card processing network), and you don't need any app-specific state to be preserved. In that case, raw database access is perfect; if all you are doing is INSERT INTO transactions VALUES ('jrockway', 'amazon.com', '19.95'), the ORM is just going to waste your time.
Last month Khan and Vi Hart made some very interesting videos on Benford's Law:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KmeGpjeLZ0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZUDoEdjTzg
I thought the point of the Acid tests weren't to reflect reality but to encourage web developers to support useful but unsupported parts of the standards.
I shouldn't have said 'reality', sorry. I should have said, 'relevant standards'. Acid3 used to include some deprecated standards that are no longer relevant, and has finally been updated to remove those things.
@ig1: Please create an about page with info about yourself and the site. There's no way I'm going to give some random site access to my data without some background.

Also, a privacy policy is required by CA law.
"If he had stuck with BASIC, he might not have had the protocols he needed to write what he wanted."

Perhaps, but today, you can likely call out to the shell for anything which your language doesn't provide. Need a webpage? Use cURL. That's what I will do, if I decide to use this new language that I recently discovered.

http://agena.sourceforge.net

"C was nothing like BASIC. It was far more exciting and looked much cooler with all its obscure syntax and low level semantics."

His "About Me" says that he loves simplicity, yet his choice of language seems to have been due solely to being seduced by flash. A tremendous amount of bad code has resulted from decisions made in such an impetuous and shallow manner.
This Is My Next Podcast on Windows 8
Somebody wrote that the English "His work is quite sound, actually" may be equivalent to or exceed the American "His work sets the standard we all aspire to." The fellow writing was a dean at Virginia Tech; I remember the name of the book as _To Rise Above Principle_.
Nice release, Craig.
The #1 SEO Training announces even more AFFORDABLE prices
The 'Method' method of creating & nurturing amazing corporate culture
This is a really gorgeous simulation.

the Navier-Stokes equations are a bit over my head but the results sure do look nice.

Interesting how the fluid simulation wraps around the texture. If anyone out there is knowledgeable in these things, is it easy to create continuous textures using this sort of equation or is this some clever voodoo?
networking and account management is what makes XP more pro-business than pro-consumer. And all the servers - Windows 2000 to 2008 are based on the same kernel basically.
I am crazy excited about this. With the growing number of Objective-C libraries, this will make things so much better.
Interesting. I guess that means that he drove one of my favorite Macs, the IIfx, £5,000+ of sheer power, 100x better than the equivalent PC, if you could afford one.

NuBus, color QuickDraw, opening up the Mac, etc.

He must have badly missed having a Tim Cook to drive down production costs and scale up. That really was one of the keys after Steve Jobs returned.
To fully pass the test you need to get 100/100, and for the animation to be smooth and the generated image to have the proper appearance. It is a little confusing that the test doesn't automatically check the other two things.
It's on my todo list. But it comes down to: I'm not going to do anything evil with your analytics data and it'll only be used for generating the reports.

Essentially it does come down to whether you trust me or not.
This is a poorly researched article that takes a few anecdotes from him, his observations about his friends, and choice quotes from random articles that support his viewpoint.

I would wager that from a data point of view, facebook page views and retention is likely to be stronger than ever.
>>I think the separation was driven by Steve being in a real funk because the Macintosh, which he developed, was failing in early 1985. His vision was ahead of its time, the power of the microprocessor wasn't enough to do what he wanted to do and Mac sales were falling off.

We were still very dependent on the profits of Apple II. I felt we had to push profits of Apple II and Steve wanted to lower the price of the Mac to get sales up. We went to the board to decide.

The board made a decision and they asked Steve to step down as head of the Macintosh division. He still remained as chairman of the board.

But that was an incredible blow to the man who created the product, he was extremely hurt and pained by it.

To me, coming from corporate America, I was used to people being moved from job to job, because that's how it worked. Professional executives were reassigned, terminated, promoted all the time.

That's not what you do with founders of companies.
<<

Emphasis on the "That's not what you do with founders of companies. "
Anyone have a link to the study referenced in here which says people prefer bing results to google's when logos are reversed? This seems like something MSFT's marketing department would be trumpeting at every opportunity...

EDIT: The closest I've found is this - http://blindsearch.fejus.com/ which lets users vote up anonymous result sets. However, the last reported numbers (from 2009) show Google in the lead. Oh well.
Yeah, go for it. I have a fairly busy semester, but I'm trying to find time to work on something like this anyway.

I forgot to add Objective-C/iOS above, but I've never deployed a full app.
Boring isn't bad - for me. My yahoo email address still works and Facebook still serves more or less the same purpose.

Like Yahoo, Facebook has accumulated a large base of average users. These are the people who aren't early adopters, who aren't concerned with "vision" and who dig in their heels against change.

Facebook has the choice to alienate these folks by adding "new exciting features" or keep these folks and stay what it is. Whatever "vision" is involved, Facebook will likely make a choice halfway between these results and wind-up satisfying no one and so indeed sink to the "status" of Yahoo.

But it seems like this whole process comes because "boringness" makes operators no money even when serves end-users purposes perfectly. Look at craiglist - the most boring, most successful-at-fulfilling-a-need and the least-profitable-relative-to-traffic commercial website in the world.
Independent of the post, does anybody else find the OCCASIONAL BOLD PHRASES very distracting? I can't make up my mind whether to READ THEM WITH EMHPASIS, as one might hear in verbal speech, or try to find a CLEVER HIDDEN MESSAGE from the author.
This is really a no-brainer. If you are offering API you want to make it as easy as possible to adopt and implement. However, perhaps it is advisable to go even one more step beyond providing "starter projects" and suggest actual use cases. They could be implemented in those starter projects (best case) or simply illustrate the utility / value of the API. Don't just rely on 3rd party developers to figure out what to do with your API - provide guidance of what you might want to see them do with it.
Ah, gotcha. That makes more sense.

Other than that, my #1 piece of feedback is that after pressing the large red button on the homepage, the user is expecting to see his or her mobilized site. Instead, the user sees a message saying: "Thank you very much for trying us. Your submission will be reviewed, and should be added shortly if accepted..."

I recommend checking out dudamobile.com for a good example of this flow.

Second, asking the user to solve a captcha right after pressing the large red button is not a good experience. I recommend including the captcha as part of the form, or not including it at all.
I can't think of any browser facility that would be able to verify the animation and final generated appearance. How would you do that?
When I saw Bada Bing, I thought there was going to be some Samsung/Microsoft partnership about to be announced.
perhaps a little distracting, but all together it was very well-written
From the post: Yet the same people who led the 30-person MSN Search team retained key leadership positions in the 3,000-person Bing team. How, exactly, does this happen?

I would say, more often than not when you work in large corporations where either teams have grown uncontrollably, or where certain people who happened to be present in key positions early, has enough clout organizationally to warrant the same position even when the team grows or its responsibilities grow.

I have seen where consulting firms at Client organizations, where the Team Lead on the first client project who is managing three developers end up being the Program manager years later overseeing 40-50 consultants, with no real leadership experience.
Chrome dev channel appears to get 100/100. There are a few odd things that flicker as it goes. It would be cool to see a play by play of the whole test.
I wonder why the author didn't go for the obvious pun, Cocoabeans?

Oh, wait, I think I know why. :)
This author claims that "lax patent laws on the web" allow Facebook to copy features from Twitter and Google, but the article he cites (by Farhad Manjoo on Slate) doesn't ascribe this to patent laws so much as the behavior of these particular companies.

Mentioning "lax patent laws" seems misleading, or am I missing something here?
Apologies for the lack of clarity. When I said 20,000 protein-coding genes are not enough, I was referring specifically to the traditional view that one gene codes for one protein. It's pretty well understood now that this is not the case, and my point was moreso that 20,000 genes in and of themselves fail to code for every different trait/behavior in a reductive model. I think epigenetics provides the powerful toolbox to illuminating on the unlimited # of interactions/permutations of genes that you describe.

But what I find most fascinating about epigenetics is its ability to explain environmental vs biological effects on our traits/behavior, not intrinsically described by our genes. As the DNA-methylation described in epigenetics determines which genes are on/off, it is external stimuli that often affect the methylation of epigenetics in the first place. (a Nature brief on the topic in mice: http://njc.rockefeller.edu/PDF_BN08/topic%202-FrancisEpigene...) It's a fascinating way of understanding how our environment affects us on a biological level.
Sure, this is why the young kids with no family and no life outside work make buckets of money: they spend almost all their time in the office.

A salaried position is nice, but even then some industries put the salary low and give bonuses to "dedicated" people like that.

I'm not going to sugar coat it for myself, or for anyone else either. It's really hard for everyone in this economy, but especially for young folks like me who don't already own (or at least partly own) houses.
I seem to remember an article awhile back where someone from Mozilla wrote that they didn't care to make up the last X% of the test because (if I recall correctly) they didn't agree with the interpretation of the standards that made up the tiny bit they were failing on. They felt they were keeping true to the actual spec and that the Acid was incorrect and thus it was silly to conform just to get that 100/100. I may be mistaken but perhaps the Acid test has now come into line with whatever spec items they were disputing. IF this is the case then my kudos to the Mozilla team for not "conforming" just to conform.

Edit: found the link: http://limi.net/articles/firefox-acid3/ So it was not wanting to put in partial implementations when a final spec wasn't complete yet just to pass a test.

Edit again: Even Firefox 3.6 now scores a 99/100
At around a 40% increase in the money supply in the coming year, it isn't so much an insignificant 'trickle'.
> Facebook jumped the shark when all those horrible, ugly apps started polluting the thing with idiocy.

Flickr and MySpace come to mind, too.

Generally, don't let a user pollute other users' posts/streams/walls with ugly invitations, apps, or animated glitter.

Many people have no taste or lack the ability to judiciously use such features. If you let them, your site will quickly become garbage.
Google's new sign-in page
Firefox's arguments for not really bothering with the remaining parts of Acid3 was that it seemed like it they weren't testing particularly relevant standards and that the implementations of the other browsers for those standards were mostly to pass Acid3 and not particularly useful either. See http://limi.net/articles/firefox-acid3/ for more info.

That seems like valid reasoning to me. I've also seen Hixie make comments that seem to indicate him wanting to avoid these issues for any potential Acid4:

When we do Acid4 (probably around the time we have at least three major browsers shipping Acid3-passing browsers), I think we'll have to focus on testing fewer, more critical things. Acid3 tests a lot of critical stuff, but also checks a lot of less important stuff at the same time, and it's in those areas that we've had the most problems with specs changing under us.

From http://ln.hixie.ch/?count=1&start=1215829569
In my experience, that's how many Microsofties compose their email, to emphasize the important bits of a document that few readers will bother to fully read.

And why not? What better way to take advantage of the MS-Word Rich Text Editor in Outlook than to bold random phrases.
Yeah, I don't think it's possible. But it is confusing that it isn't possible and therefore isn't done in this test.
unless Google, like most of Microsoft’s previous competitors, summarily shoots itself via a series of disastrous decisions

It's possible. Corporations change. The difference in quality is slight, but google has been making some ludicrous mistakes lately (IMHO, obviously):

1. Google instant. This is such shit I can hardly believe it. Yeah, I can turn it off, but the average person is going to be charmed by the gimmick of it without realizing how awful it is. On unfamiliar computers, I go to bing automatically.

2. The disinclusion of search terms. This happened all the time pre-google, and now it's happening at google with every query. You have to affix a plus sign on every term if you want it actually searched. Again, normal people are unaware.

3. The debasement of the brand. I'm talking about the non-stop cutesy-pie logos. What if Coke did this?

4. Very public flops outside their area of expertise. Google+, etc.

...these four things aren't going to hurt google too much, but they tell me that the lunatics are now in charge.
I think they were internal studies, from the way it read in the article.
ARM already has that strategy in place. They don't stop licensing the A8 core when the A9 MPCore hits the market. They're perfectly willing to let you produce an A8 on 22nm silicon if that's what provides the power/performance balance you want. You should take a look at the full list of cores offered by ARM; there's a lot you won't have heard of if you only pay attention to the flagship phones and tablets.
One of the strengths of Steve Mk II was not getting into markets early. So many hits have come from executing so well in areas only after making sure the tech and supply were in a position for success
There are already package managers that have been developed for years (ie: hard problems solved and bugs ironed out), can track dependencies across languages/runtimes, and have large cross-language communities.

Cocoapods isn't even cross-platform. It's only for iOS libraries, which means it only works on macs, which means it won't offer much beyond mac package managers. So use macports, or fink, or homebrew, or nyx.
Robo Defense: Adictivo juego defendiendo tu torre
Sorry, your return is too high for us
I think that's exactly what they used to do with many founders of companies. Over time though, the conventional wisdom on founders has started to change:

<< The conventional wisdom says a startup CEO should make way for a professional CEO once the company has achieved product-market fit. In this post, I describe why we prefer to fund companies whose founder will run the company as its CEO. >>

http://bhorowitz.com/2010/04/28/why-we-prefer-founding-ceos/

I think the Parable of Steve Jobs has actually had a lot to do with that reversal.
TechCrunch has become a clown show, and I totally love it
That is a nice apartment. Maybe rent is just really cheap in Canada, but to my limey eyes that place looks distinctly lavish.
I don't particularly like Google Instant, but I'm curious why you hate it so much. How is it so awful?
He seems like a really thoughtful and honest guy. I have no idea what he was like back then... but at least he didn't get old (71) without acquiring some wisdom.
Vice Guide to Congo: Where Your Bloody Gadgets Came From
I personally find it awful in Chrome because they don't handle the autocomplete experience correctly, and I always end up searching for what they complete instead of what I wanted which happened to be a prefix of it.
The court library allowed free access. He did the equivalent of revisiting the grocery store's free sample kiosk over and over again. The FBI knew he did it and could prove it. You think they're going to shy away from an easy conviction after they spent money on the investigation? They just came to the realization that what he did probably wasn't a criminal act.
Inserts are not at all necessarily optimal in ORMs. Inserts can be just as complex as select queries, since they can include arbitrary select queries. A trivial case of that being.

INSERT INTO a SELECT * FROM b;

I personally have not felt the need to use and ORM yet. But then I have not built a CRUD heavy app either. Instead most of my time spent on database work is centered around reporting and other complex queries where no ORM I have seen yet helps much.
I have an air-to-air missile and a minigun firing 20mm rounds at 6,000 rpm that beg to differ.

Regardless of pressure, you could turn the entire aircraft into swiss-cheese or blow a hole in it so large you could fly a jet through it in seconds.
That seems to be the whole point is to provide a specialized manger For libraries on a Mac. Some people don't want a general solution to a specific problem.
> ...these four things aren't going to hurt google too much, but they tell me that the lunatics are now in charge.

Well, considering that Larry was put in charge recently, things may be changing for the better.
It'd get blown around by the wind in the mountains too much to be practical. Most LTA aircraft usually pick a general direction and "head that way", their ability to remain in a single position is limited because it would require a large number of jet powered thrusters mounted at various locations in order for it to be able to fight the wind and hold still.

I don't envy the programmer that has to code the heuristics to keep a zeppelin still in the presence of 60 mph winds.
Complexity and air fare pricing: Houston, we have a problem.
Maternity Hospital Gowns