skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
By branding do you mean for your parent company or for the specific app? For example the branding for Microsoft is a different type of project than say branding Office. And by branding are you thinking on a big scale (everything from coming up with the name to the marketing) or on a small scale (i.e. an icon for an app)?

My advice to you as a designer is that you should start small, take baby steps and keep your budget low. I'd also advise you to work with a local designer (if you can find a good one) who can meet with you face to face.

By the way I did a quick google search and found this studio after some hunting: http://www.holbeinruiz.com
Details on Wunderkit
Whenever you login they put refreshers of previous exercises at the top which I love. I know if I don't use it I'll lose it but it has been a lot of fun learning there.
It's a giant flamewar about names.
There’s something “Human” to Social Engineering
That depends on how the databases are architected and tiered.

If they're proper slaves / replications of one another, then yes.

If, as is commonly the case especially for marketing data, periodic cuts or dumps of the data are made at various points in time, and there's no mechanism for propagating deletions throughout the chain, then no, you're not assured of deletion. This isn't likely to be the case for a site's primary database, but could very well be the case for derived datasets. I can think of instances with, say, credit bureau reports in which erroneous data must be repeatedly deleted because it keeps getting re-injected into the system.

Facebook's September, 2010 outage in which cached data were being re-injected into the system exhibited a similar problem of cache coherence.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=431441338919
Isn't it lovely there is always some volunteer Microsoft astroturfer ready to downvote every comment critical of any material favorable to Microsoft?
Isn't it required to be at least 13 years old to have a google account? How does this affect the kids who want to use khanacademy? Are they forced to have a facebook account?

EDIT: Actually, facebook also has a minimum age requirement of 13 (https://www.facebook.com/help/?faq=210644045634222). Can't see how khanacademy missed that. I think this is a major flaw in their signup system. Should they (khanacademy) really be blocking every kid younger then 13?

EDIT2: It seems like they address it here (http://www.khanacademy.org/about/getting-started) but their solution is having the parents create an account for the kids.

I don't really think this is actually acceptable by facebook's terms of service though, not sure about google.
See point 4 in https://www.facebook.com/terms.php
If you require whistleblower-level anonymity, Google properties are the last place you want to post anyway. Drop your docs in a file sharing service over Tor and send the link to some journalists. No service can be everything to everybody.
with most of your points I do agree. I think for most people its about just browsing facebook/twitter, taking pictures, reading a few news sites, checking email/calendar, and call/text. I hardly think most of HN is representative of general population.

For movement between phone and desktop I use ChromeToPhone and dropbox. ChromeToPhone is probably the most seamless way.
Full disclosure I use my real name on Gmail and G+
Working With Design Patterns(CSS)
They've been saying for a while that pseudonyms were a "feature" that wasn't yet supported in the early release. They've always planned to eventually allow them. http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2011/07/google-plus-pseudonyms.html
I'd add:

- bad factoring

- overly complex or overly simplistic object model

- not extensible (although this itself is not strictly bad, as spec changes are pretty hard to predict, but sometimes it is requires more effort to make something not extensible than it is to make it extensible these cases are a problem unless there is a good reason for it).

- abstractions that introduce more effort (factory factories...)
What you give to someone else may not be code -- it might just be the code's output.
Top of the stack?
I think it was said best here http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/10/eff-declares-premature-victo...
I think he's missing a distinction here.

There's people's right not to have their name associated with stuff in public. Either because they've established a pseudonym they want to be associated with or they want to speak freely without risking harm to their career, family, etc... That's what I consider pseudonymity and that might take a while to implement.

Then there's straight up privacy. That's what he's talking about. The right for you not to be forced to share your name with Google when using a Google sponsored service.

I can understand why a person would be concerned with both but I consider both to be different things
1. Create great stories about your startup and product.

2. Develop a list of media contacts.

3. Follow what the contacts on your list write about.

4. Look for connections between their stories and your stories.

5. When you find these connections, pitch the story.

If you've done steps 1-4 correctly, you'll find step 5 easy.
Good point. Being overly attached to a language means you end up choosing the wrong tool for the job at some point.
That—and I always figured it was a bit of a joke. The iPad was the first device to ship with the A4 chip. The iPad is a sort of digital ...pad of paper. And what's the smallest standard size of paper that fully covers an iPad? (Basically, the kind of envelope you'd buy to put an iPad into?) A4.
When the service I'm using does not clearly state what info they are using and how, than that's not really being public is it, it's just me having my info appropriated by technology without my knowledge.
Conferences burned by Paypal
It has nothing on Nokia, 'Nokia' is synonymous for 'cell phone' in many countries

I live in Australia, where this used to be true. It is no longer the case.

How do you think Symbian is still pushing so many sales?

Because it runs on very low-end hardware, which makes it cheap. That advantage is slowly dying as low-end mobile chipsets get more powerful (eg, Android phones are down to $80 here, with no contract)
Interesting, and I am on Android. But the reason I keep it on vibrate is to stop it making noise every time I get a low-priority notification. What I want is for it to ring for calls and text messages, but only vibrate for emails and facebook notifications.

There's probably some way of doing that, I guess.
I'd be much more impressed it these (or at least a part of them) were paying customers.
I like the idea of finding out what you might not know. Search as we know it assumes we know what we're looking for. Good luck to MC and his team. Not a big fan of the name WireDoo, though.
Do it Yourself Home Security Reviews
Agree, KhanAcademy style is less distracting. A voice that addresses to one person is enough for a personal touch for the listener.
Outsourceing MVP...
What do you guys think about the idea of outsourcing your minimum viable product?

I'll explain. So, I have an idea I've been working on (design, mockup, survey potential customers, etc.) and I'm at a standstill (sort of, I am always reaching out to potential customers) until I get a technical co-founder.

I know that the end goal is having a technical co-founder with me through everything. However, it's very hard (seemingly impossible thus far) to get anyone on board without some traction, i.e. MVP and some customers.

So, it's a catch 22. I need a tech co-founder to help create the MVP, but they don't want to come on board unless one is already created!

I've been contemplating outsourcing the MVP to try and gain traction. I have a very detailed mockup already, so hopefully there wouldn't need to be much guesswork on the part of whoever I hired. Is it worth it?

The negatives:

I am out a few thousand dollars (trying to cap it at 5k).
I still have no tech co-founder

The positives:

I have a minimum viable product
I have something to show customers
I have something that can gain traction
All of the above make it easier to find a quality tech co-founder (still won't be easy, but I assume far easier than without the MVP)

What do you guys think? Is it worthwhile? Or am I thinking about this all wrong? Any and all help is appreciated. Thanks!
Makes me wonder why they'd be bothering with throwing these advertising dollars around if the N9 ecosystem is pretty much doomed anyway.

They need to sell high-end phones to try to prop-up their revenue until the Windows phones are ready. It's pretty consumer-hostile, though.
The Apple stores putting up curtains and temporarily closing is just so lovely and classy. What a beautiful aspect of the memorial.
Strange how nobody here has mentioned http://clixpy.com

Although it's more strange that the site's down atm.
1. I've had this setup at home for 6+ years, and 80% of the people who walk into our home end up doing the same thing within weeks. It's shocking how few people realize that this is possible.

Amazon cordless phone listings for all phones that support Bluetooth pairing:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=sr_nr_scat_172614_ln?rh=...

We just set our phones down when we come in the front door, or even leave them in the car, and never have to worry about missing a call or finding our phones. Most all of these support pairing to two phones and a few support 4 or more phones.

And no landline required.
This is a wish list. They're wishing for a PayPal wrapper when they should be wishing for a PayPal competitor that does stuff like international payments. (Side note: Stripe doesn't currently but promises international support is coming soon.)
Lytro:Worlds first light field camera @$399(Capture evrythng n focus later)
Wonga, Algorithm money lending, No prejudice
Program counter?
Ask HN: Value of a Highly Visual Advocate
I'm working on a consumer based early stage web app which has received interest from a highly visual TV/Athlete (2+ million Facebook followers and within our demographic) to help advocate our product...for a price(cash or equity). I am confident we can grow our business to the point at which we won't need that type of endorsement but checking to see if anyone else has worked out agreements with such advocates? Almost as though Ashton Kutcher wanted to invest in us.
As long as they allow pseudonyms, that is in fact a victory in the "Nymwars", which were always more about pseudonymity than anonymity. Again, if you require strong anonymity, there are far better places to publish. From what I've seen, Google requires you to enter a phone number when you create an account in the US and some other countries. You can still get a prepaid phone in cash, but the point of sale and cell tower pings can still geolocate you to a city, possibly even a few blocks, so for strong anonymity, you're better off using a service that doesn't require phone / SMS confirmation.
I thought brainteaser trivia interviews were left back at Microsoft in 2002.
Why? Khan Academy is a non profit organization. They are not looking to make money. They are trying to change the world of education.

I am impressed by these numbers because it means that more people are now aware that there is a quality free resource where they can educate themselves.
I once dealt with code that looked like this pattern (sorry for the giant vertical size of this post):

DO_F() {
A;
B;
C;
D;
B;
C;
D;
E;
F;
A;
B;
C;
D;
G;
H;
I;
J;
A;
B;
C;
H;
I;
// a bunch more
}

So I suggested, "hey perhaps you should break this into functions" and got back:

DO_F() {
A;
B;
C;
D;
B;
C;
D;
E;
F;
A;
state.a = a;
state.b = b;
// ... for other state
return DO_F2(state)
}
DO_F2(state);
B;
C;
D;
G;
H;
I;
state.a = a;
//...
return DO_F3(state);
}
DO_F3();
J;
A;
B;
C;
G;
H;
I;
// a bunch more
}

When I suggested blocks such as B; C; D; or G; H; I; could be functions, and perhaps a loop could be useful too, the guy looked at me like I was trying to do voodoo and got really defensive about how that couldn't possibly work.

I think that is what the OP meant by bulldozer code...
I'll bet they still require you to register with your "real" name, but then they'll graciously allow you to have a linked nickname or two,

I agree, and I think this is probably the right thing for them to do. (Well, probably stop kicking people off, too.) And I think they're probably doing this in an attempt to allow people to better represent themselves in the ways that they choose, and more in line with how they can offline. I just wrote this today: http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/11670022371/intimacy-is-perfo...

meaning they're still fully prepared to roll over on you to authoritarian governments or advertisers at the drop of a hat.

I'm not sure what the suggestion is here. They should be prepared to flout the law? Or just not gather any of the information in the first place? What purpose would this have for them, in that case?

Seems fairly obvious that anyone who's really worried about authoritarian governments or advertisers shouldn't be using google products.
from observation of my more overweight friends and their friends and habits: a huuuuge factor is motivation.

and this guy is a trainer. he can flip a switch in his head and be back on the proper diet and exercise routine. that step is by far the hardest thing anybody has to deal with.

not that I'm belittling what he's doing here in any way. just pointing out that he has an unfair advantage :)
> That's what I consider pseudonymity

But that's not what pretty much everyone pushing pseudonymity in this fight considers pseudonymity, so your distinction is not very helpful.
Solution: Don't use Google+ to speak out against your authoritarian government. "Fuck those guys" is a pretty strong response to people who've decided their product isn't for you.
And so this is flamewar about the namewar about the flamewar about names.

What should we call it?

How about "Harry"?
"We're a not-for-profit with the goal of changing education for the better by providing a free world-class education to anyone anywhere." http://www.khanacademy.org/about
This may not be a realistic expectation now, but I think that as the general population becomes more technologically literate, for the average person, the presence of such a button should indicate "this website has some kind of relationship with facebook/reddit/google - if I care about what data they are sharing, I should probably check their privacy policy." And I think that 99% of people won't care. My admittedly idealistic belief is that the solution to this "controversy" is for everyone to recognize that we shouldn't try to apply pre-internet expectations and beliefs about privacy to the modern world.
Not quite. Popular culture "can only deal with" things that can be put on a simple number line, because they collectively like to be able to say definitively "this person is smarter than that other person", when the reality is (of course) far more complicated than that.

As far as I know, the scientific community agrees that IQ is not a strong predictor of true "intelligence"...
I find it hard to believe that a startup has the funds to engage in protracted litigation or that you've found a competent attorney/firm who's willing to undertake that on a contingency basis.

Even if you do have the funds to pay for ongoing litigation (I would not be shocked to hear of bills in tens, of not hundreds of thousands per month) do you also have funds to continue operating your business until a resolution is reached?

If you've only got 9 months in on this thing, walk away and find something else. This has been a cheap lesson for you so far.
For sharing sessions between my N900, my Debian and my Mac, Firefox Sync.
How do you get a two letter .io domain?
It doesn't remove it, it just moves it to a later time, just like you do with white balance and exposure when shooting raw and then developing (with limitations, but I'm sure this has limitations too).

My thought here is that the finished work would always be a picture, not the fancy widget, otherwise the comparison would not even stand.
> > meaning they're still fully prepared to roll over on you

> I'm not sure what the suggestion is here. They should be prepared to flout the law?

Why would you draw that inference? JWZ seems to be presuming the opposite, i.e. that Google plans to comply with the law---and since they will have carefully collected legal names to go with every account, they can be maximally helpful to the authoritarian governments who want to track users down.

> Or just not gather any of the information in the first place?

This one. Or at least, if not "any of the information", maybe not gather all of the information. Permit users to associate their account with their established pseudonym and provide exactly as many RL details as they feel comfortable providing.
Everyone is also missing the bigger point that Google's idea of a valid real name is incredibly north american and anglo centric. There are plenty of cases of people using their real names, be in European, or African or what ever and google still kicking them off.

Google's policies do not work, and are verging on racist.

I know some people who would be better off using a fake anglo name than their real name to keep using google+.
That is defective.
A normal camera is much deeper than a cellphone. At least one I'd like to carry with me ;-)

Nokia once had a cellphone with the camera on the side, mounted in the clamshell hinge. With smaller lenses it could be a side-facing camera.
No, that's where the metaphor breaks down. I don't think there's a good equivalent of "public" in the facebook tracking situation. Instead, I would say that you are on someone else's virtual property, and that they are perfectly within their rights to watch and record whatever you do there and share that information with whoever they like.

It does happen without the knowledge of many people today, and the surprise when they find out what's really going on has led to a lot of backlash, but the solution to that is to educate people better about technology and what it can do, not to limit technology so that it can only do things the average person can conceive of.
Yeah, I'd consider it. Feel free to shoot an email to my username at gmail if you have any questions.
I wonder how the author feels about tablets. Because this seems related to recent discussions about consumption:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3113192
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3047786
I don't hate my smartphone, but I do think I've become horribly codependant with it.

Maybe it's time for a 30 day smartphone fast: http://www.addictionandsubtraction.com/30-day-smartphone-fas...
Million ASP.Net web sites affected with mass SQL injection attack ~ THN
I've been using Google pretty regularly for the past 11 years, and have had a gmail account since soon after it was announced. However with the release of Plus and the revelation of their policies on "real names", I've come to realize that I no longer trust google.

Gmail accounts can be effectively anonymous. Yet plus accounts cannot be?

Google does not need anyone's real name in order to track and advertise to them. I'm fine with google tracking and advertising to me. Assign me some arbitrary UID and give me a 20 year cookie you refresh whenever I load a page with adwords or visit plus or login to gmail. I've been fine with that, all along.

But requiring a real name, tells me that google doesn't just want to track me to advertise to me. They want to correlate my online activities with my offline identity.

I consider that a violation of my privacy.

And so, I'm removing myself from google. I'm setting up mail services elsewhere, I'm migrating my Google Apps and App Engine accounts to other services. I've stopped using Plus, and as I move things elsewhere I'm deleting them from google.

For me, they've gone too far, and I no longer trust them.

Hell, even their search results have been in steep decline lately, so DuckDuckGo, here I come!

PS-- I agree with jwz. The only reason that it would take months to implement is because they're using some authoritative method - maybe ISP customer info, or government supplied info- to correlate users to reveal real identity. I don't see this recent change as google actually relenting on the issue.
Its actually 100% leverage of his investment.
I just don't get what the big deal is. Here we've got a platform that would be so much better with a more diverse user base, and Google is wasting time on petty stuff like what name you use. In my opinion, as long as you are producing content your circles enjoy, who cares what name you go by?

I understand they have identity plans. But as a user, I want the service to become more interesting, and I don't think they are doing us any favors.
There's no way of knowing just yet. This offering is still in progress.
At the hardware level it's called the program counter, which is a register containing the address of the current operation the processor is running. After the operation is finished, it increments itself and moves to the next step in the program.

Edit: just realized I didn't really answer the question, I believe what your actually talking about is a statement.

I usually jump at the chance to talk about stuff from my old EE days :)
Hilarious to me that "that" post was on G+.

I have not created a G+ to prevent me from having to deal with the the forth coming !merge/!multiple accounts fiasco.
Much better link here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/roslyn
The german Raytrix lightfield cameras* have ~1/4 effective resolution. If the Lytro is comparable, then its "11 Megarays" could mean about 2.75 Megapixel.

* http://www.raytrix.de/index.php/RX_en.html
While I don't know what their plans are, I think it's reasonable to require you declare whether your the name you use is your real name or a pseudonym, which is a non trivial change.
I don't agree with this at all. The main points seem to boil down to: "I want my smartphone to be a desktop computer." If you try to use your smartphone for the same purposes as a laptop, yeah, then you'll probably hate it, but if you approach it as a different device and explore new and different uses, the phone becomes a lot more powerful.
It was actually that people love Cocoa so much that we wanted to built it on the web. As a result, Objective-J was born, since it makes a lot of sense in the context of Cocoa.
اسعار البورصة المصرية
I meant what was his suggestion to correct this. That they should flout the law?

This one. Or at least, if not "any of the information", maybe not gather all of the information. Permit users to associate their account with their established pseudonym and provide exactly as many RL details as they feel comfortable providing.

Use a fake but real sounding name. Then use a pseudonym attached to it. Then provide exactly as many RL details as you feel comfortable. Why does it matter that the pseudonym is somehow canonical?
Silver Lake, Microsoft and Canada Pension Plan Mulling Bid for Yahoo
From http://www.khanacademy.org/about/getting-started

-----------------------

If your students are under 13:

You currently have two options: you can sign your school up for Google Apps for Education, which will help you provide each student with a Google account that can be used with Khan Academy, or you can have your students' parents individually create accounts for each student on either Google or Facebook. We are constantly working to improve this situation, but that's the best we've got at the moment (sorry!).

If you already have Google Apps for Education accounts but aren't able to use them to sign in on the Khan Academy, you might need to upgrade your account.
You are not suing Twitter, I hope.

Court fights can be very taxing emotionally and financially. Someone I know spent 13 years fighting a case. Led to years of alcoholism and missed opportunities.
HT is p(1-p), and TH is also p(1-p), so HT/TH (i.e. either of these) is 2p(1-p).