skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I disagree. The statement that this article claims to be disproving is quite clear - that "Wine is a complicated elixir, full of subtle flavors only an expert can truly distinguish, and experienced tasters are impervious to deception.".

The truth is that real experts can distinguish these differences - many trainees many not be able to, but that that's a different matter.

And as I've mentioned, I've been able to tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi even when all environmental clues (my order, my expectation, the type of glass) have told me that it's the other one. Again, it's highly likely that these environmental clues often influence people a lot more than they realise, but that doesn't equate to the claim that experts can't see through these either.
Yes and there is a fix in a cyanogen modded version.
I think this guy should have just kept quiet. There is something called the right to remain silent. The more you talk the more they want.
In other words, the reactions?
Yeah, that is the point I never really understood. If you get people to fill up their own gas, that is one thing since it makes sense from a business perspective.

But why have a $200 lawyer do admin work? That makes no sense whatsoever.
Yes, but the 'joke' doesn't say that, it suggests that women have a lesser understanding of programming concepts, which is outright discrimination.
Extra Cash - for you FREE
A Month with Chef
Could it be true also for the some parts of Europe ? When i was in Belgium ( Brugge ) and Germany ( Nürnberg, Berlin ) i used google maps a lot. And i realised some streets, not all, looks longer or shorter than others on the map.
The title is editorializing and incorrect. The people being mocked are not homeowners, but people who would have been homeowners had they lived up to their obligations.
The Buddha is saying not to follow something on the basis of externals, but rather on one's own self testing. That the Buddha arrived at the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path through such testing is of importance.

If we return to the Pali scriptures, we can see that although the Buddha states that the question of God/gods is in the realm of "unanswerable questions," that even if they did exist they would ultimately undergo death and rebirth, albeit perhaps in an unimaginably long time frame from the perspective of humans. He considers debates over deities pointless, _because even they are subject to the truths he espouses_. Is this not a truth claim that contradicts most theistic religions? Is this not a truth claim to the supersession of Buddhist truth over others? (Forgive me, but my copy is in another location so I can't give an exact reference.)

Although the view of deities in Buddhism differs between schools, the general understanding of Buddhism is that such belief is not conducive to enlightenment. This is indeed an exclusivist truth claim to the superiority of the Buddhist practice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Buddhism
It just hit me that the person doing the minutes could have been replaced with a dictaphone and you could have it typed in India at a few dollars and still have the beautiful minutes.
I found one thing interesting. While I wouldn't be surprised my expectations often affect my perceptions in much the way this article described, I noticed one exception, namely the last example given: movies.

In fact the build up of expectations seems to usually result in me thinking the movie is worse, and vice versa. I wonder if this is just some weird reverse psychology or if something more interesting is going on.
It's not about Americans spreading their unhealthy way of life. It's about non-Americans claiming that life (more or less) as their own.
An accidental experiment in America shows how evolution happens
i don't think it's unique to China

take a look at this POI on 4sq:
http://4sq.com/rArZMj

It starts with a street view. If you zoom in a little, turns out the bar is out in the water! When you switch to Satellite view, the bar is where it is supposed to be, on the shore.
Making fun of/uttering/referencing prejudices targeting women == Sexist.

Using prejudices targeting men == Witty and Feminist.

I am a man. I am not a rapist looking for victim. I am not a bumbling buffoon who can't change a light bulb without falling off a ladder. I do not beat children and women.

I work hard, I go and do risky and unpleasant shit (digging through human excrement to unclog the sewage, etc.) so the rest of my family doesn't have to.

I also make more than I spend and generally try to make myself as useful as possible. I also like kids, though I don't have any of my own yet, I like to hang out with other peoples kids.

And I am sick to tears of my gender being portrayed as monsters preying for our next victim.
Android is Apache licensed, Amazon won't have to share any of their custom code.
What is it that you do for a living?
Than he also knows how hostile and anti-American his coreligionist can be. To bad he only focusus on a response on that, as if that is not a problem to repond to.
Not the fun parts.
Sciatic Nerve Pain in Kids | Sciatic Nerve Pain
There's a couple of regulations for selling GPS enabled devices in China (I am a software guy on a major PND manufacturer with products being sold in China).

- The map data is scrambled (GPS coordinates are encrypted).
- To correlate a GPS position with the map data, you plug the HW position through an encryption library (which you have to compile in a specific government building in Beijing).
- Border drawing is strongly regulated: no border line between Mainland China and Taiwan, Tibet is of course China, South East Asia Islands can't have border lines drawn and Kashmir is a big thing also with border lines.
- You can't show pure GPS coordinates
- You can't include a number or POIs in your map (mostly government buildings/facilities).

As a note, India as a certain degree of insanity as well: You can't export a map. Launching a PND there involved shipping a bunch of map technicians there to actually make sure we never got a map outside of India...

Cheers,
R
One of the early comments says that women don't study engineering because of stuff like this. While I agree this attitude is a problem and the joke was tasteless, is that really the reason? I just can't see a young person rejecting a field because it's too sexist. It could be a reason for switching to a different field, though. I wonder what percentage of women who start in an engineering discipline end up somewhere else.
How do you propose a world will look, where we have gone so far, that offending other people is made taboo?

I honestly propose that some people should realize, that life is not all unicorns and cute puppies.

Or as it goes: If you think that I have an attitude problem, perhaps you should check that you don't have a perception problem.
>> Why don't we invent technologies that let us spend more time with friends and family and less time worrying about the production of good and services ?

Those things aren't achieved by technology. In the 18/19 century , peasants in Russia worked all summer , and in the whole winter they rested in the house with family.

Those things are achieved by a decent social order combined with frugal mentality by individuals and societies.
> Which kind of sucks if you think about it.

Yeah, it totally sucked that the tractor came along and eliminated all those coveted farm hand jobs. Software is the tractor of our time.

> Pretty much any consumer product will create jobs.

Such as the iTunes store that overnight closed pretty much every single brick-and-mortar music store in the world (mild, but only mild, hyperbole)?

> Examples of programming that creates jobs:

Games doesn't automate a physical task, but it's silly to assume that they haven't displaced other kinds of entertainment, say, perhaps, comic books. (I consume neither games nor comic books, so I'm speculating)

Whether an iPhone app has destroyed or created jobs depends on the app, after all it's just a computer program like any other. Take magazines and newspapers: There is NOTHING these businesses would like better than to shut down their printers and distribution divisions. Those are, if anything ever was, pure cost centres. Also, any app that lets you do something from your phone that you otherwise had to call a call centre to do probably isn't exactly a job creator.

I don't know how todo-lists earned a spot on the list, but there is no reason to believe that they (and any other "productivity" app, say, a good e-mail client or calendar app) don't, on the margin, raise the barrier to needing a personal assistant/secretary.

Advertising online is just one example of the lower-barriers-to-everything that the Internet has facilitated. Whether the Internet is a job creator probably depends on who you ask: A self-taught Rails dev or a Borders employee.

EDIT: My point, which took a little while to crystallise, is that at businesses the things being automated away are larger and have individual accounts, so savings/consequences are very visible. When you download NYT to your iPad, they don't fire three guys in the printshop, they need a small fraction of one of them less. When you send an e-mail to your mother, a fraction of a person in the mail- or greeting cards industry is less needed. Etc.
Buffalo Bills vs Washington Redskins live stream
Buffalo Bills vs Washington Redskins
Match schedule:
Week 8 NFL Regular season
Date: SUN, OCT 30 2011
TIME :4:05 PM (ET)
Venu:Rogers Centre
watch and enjoy Buffalo Bills vs Washington Redskins live streaming
and also watch NFL full season live streaming online here.
Are you crazy?

No

Should anyone doing design for the web (in all it's flavors) be familiar with HTML and CSS?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Even if they're not wizards with it, they should have a core understanding of the medium, it's limitations, and how to work within them on a basic level.

Javascript, maybe not so much - understand what it is, why it's needed, and where it should be applied, but it shouldn't be "required" so long as they have a developer on the team who can work with them to implement javascript / "ajax" functionality into their design properly.
The baggers are faster than you only in the rare scenario that you are the only customer in line. Self-service checkouts are, at least in theory, always available. Not only do grocery stores rarely keep all checkout aisles staffed, but they don't even set complete elimination of lines as a goal: If there's ten counters, three are open, and each of the three has three people in line, that's just fine from the store's perspective. They'd rather you spend your time waiting than have their counter staff waiting around when customer volumes are low.

Self-checkout works because it's cheaper not only cheaper indirectly (through lower prices) but directly as well: The customer is given the choice of waiting in line for a human or doing it themselves, and they can ponder all of the economic variables, like their preference for not doing manual labor versus the value of their time.
Men don't generally spend their entire lives being told that they're less able to do a job, so jokes targeted at men are generally less offensive. Women in the technology industry have generally spent a significant part of their career being told that women are less good at it, and so perpetuating that perception (by implying that women are, in general, less capable of understanding technical subjects than men) is offensive.

Argument to symmetry is only effective if both groups are equal. That's clearly not the case here. If you want symmetry, ask male nurses whether they think they find jokes about them having somehow given up their masculinity for their career are amusing.
> When I first started talking about my project in 2003, people thought I was insane. Why would anyone tell everyone what he was doing at all times? Why would anyone want to share a photo of every place he visited? Now eight years later, more than 800 million people do the same thing I’ve been doing each time they update their status or post an image or poke someone on Facebook.

The author makes an important point earlier in the article and here contradicts himself: he says that he intentionally presents the information in a disorganized way. This is a problem that Facebook and social networks in general solve. So don't think that because everyone has a Facebook and is therefore flooding the market with information about them it's no longer useful to intelligence gatherers be them governmental or private interests. That's actually the problem of a platform like Facebook where privacy is concerned.
Caida De Cabellos
What on earth are you talking about? At which technical conference were such accusations or jokes about men? Where in the technical community are men characterized as buffoons or monsters to general feminist approval?
Flat Stomach Exercise: How to Lose Fat and Gain Abs
Are you suggesting that slighting the intellect of women and doing likewise in respect of the fashion sense of a (minority/majority?) of men are equatable wrongs?

And if you are (p.s. they're not), then what relevance does it have to this topic?

Should the original author not have taken offence the 'joke' she heard during a work conference because at various points history an unspecified number of women laughed at the shirt you were wearing?

As an aside, would you be cool with this sort of advertising in 2011: http://www.oddee.com/_media/imgs/articles2/a96674_ifyourhusb...

http://www.oddee.com/_media/imgs/articles2/a96674_Blowher.jp...

Or do you accept that the world has moved on from these sort of visuals in advertising, and thus it is not unreasonable to expect the same to apply to the telling of [____]ist jokes in professional/work settings?
"it's just a joke!"

Nope. It's joke after joke after joke, and also inappropriate behavior in the workplace, in conferences, in pubs. Day after day. What is just one post in HN for us happens constantly to a lot of women in our industry.

Such bringers of the future we are.
Is it the right link?
Assertions that take the form "X is like religion" are not enlightening. When it is prefaced with "get the facts straight" then of course it's going to get downvoted. There is nothing being "peddled" here, there is no hidden agenda by "esteemed scientists".

We have experimentally demonstrated that the universe is a really, really weird place. Time and space can bend. Whoah. But hey, we proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt. Then there's quantum mechanics. Wave functions! Entanglement! Turns out the universe really works that way. Then the universe starts looking really non-deterministic. Then we figured out that the simplest interpretation of QM implies Many Worlds, that the universe splits and splits and splits into a bazillion near-copies. The quantum events just look non-deterministic from our perspective. Do we know everything? Hell no. But we know that QM is true and that it uses some form of Many Worlds. We know that the world is deterministic. We don't know for sure how the universe came into being (but we are sure the universe is expanding). We don't know if there really is such a thing as the multiverse, but as we figure out more about the big bang, about background radiation, about black holes and dark matter and the shape of our universe there's a good chance we'll figure it all out eventually.

Physics is treading on the domain of philosophy because we're getting better at physics. Philosophers debated since the dawn of time about free will and didn't get anywhere. Now we know that non-reductionist or dualistic world views make little sense. Philosophers debated for ages about morality. Now neuroscience is starting to deliver concrete answers. Philosophers debated for ages about religion and heaven/hell. And elementary Bayesian math shows the questions are just nonsensical.

Philosophy is about reasoning about topics we don't really understand. As our understanding of physics, math, neuroscience and biology grows philosophy has to make way.
Ha. In this "future" of theirs people still go on business meetings with planes, stay in hotels and get there with a taxi.

No they won't they will get eaten by leaner companies who waste a lot less time with the occasional 30 min Skype meeting.

But of course they can't fathom it because it is so far from the world they live in that it would never occour to them.
So let me get this right. Adam originally titled a slide "Explain it to a woman" and got criticism for it being sexist, so he changed it. So in front of a convention audience he decided to tell everyone this anecdote and was too stupid to predict how this would go over. Wow.

If you tell 10 people and you get enough shit that you have to change a title. Don't tell 1000 and expect a better response. I don't think the big news here is that this guy is sexist, because I honestly doubt he is. I think the big news is that this guy is a fucking idiot.

Here's a heads up to everyone who doesn't know "why the women are offended". It's not that he made the joke, it's that people laughed. Sexism isn't offensive, it's the culture that's offensive. 1 guy thinking women are stupid is just pathetic, it's that people agree with him and think there's nothing wrong with it.

Every time I hear of incidents like this all I can think is that these are pathetic little men who haven't grown up socially since middle school. It's that they've allowed themselves to be so socially isolated that in their group they get away with sexism.

I work in construction, it's a 99% male industry and yes sexist jokes get made between the guys. What happens though when a woman comes along who can do the job is that they get 10 times the respect. Why? Because when you physically are the weaker sex, it takes a lot of character to balls up and get the job done. I like when women come into the industry because they actually want to learn and work. I don't like when guys come into the industry because they're lazy idiots looking for enough cash to buy more drugs or to work enough time to get on unemployment for another 6 months.

Women coming into IT should be exalted, because when they're the 1% it means that 99% of them got into the business to try to become great. When you're 99% of the people in the industry, it means 98% of you are simply there to earn a pay check.
I certainly understand how frustrated you are with the fact that it seems OK to bash men, however I think you're missing the point in this case. Would it be fair to say that you'd prefer not to be portrayed as a "bumbling buffoon"?

Just because some see it as an acceptable practice to portray men as idiots, doesn't give men the right stereotypes to other groups.

The comment in this case was unacceptable, the response, in my opinion, is warranted. It is far too common and accepted that a comment like this about women is OK. How men are stereotyped has no bearing on whether it is right or wrong.
What it means to be non-blocking in node.js
Anonymous hackers threatening a Mexican drug cartel ~ THN : The Hacker News
There's a pretty strong distinction between generally offending people in a social situation and specifically offending a minority in a professional situation. Life's not all unicorns and cute puppies. But when someone goes to a professional event, they shouldn't be told that some aspect of their biology makes them less capable in that field.
>They just want it to be simple, and work.

And yet, this isn't orthogonal to still keeping it extensible, transparent and open for learning. Yes, most users might not want or need this. But there might be some who get drawn into it. Never block anyone from learning.

>Most users aren't carpenters, they have no interest in crafting their own tools, they just want a decent looking coffee table that doesn't require them to hand build it.

You misunderstood the analogy, I think. Everyone is a carpenter in some way. The OS isn't the table, it's the tool.

>They aren't equals, have you met most users?

Yet again, you misunderstood. "Equals" means to stop treating users like they are generally unable (and unwilling) to learn. Worse, Ubuntu/Unity (actively or passively) hinders people who are willing to learn.

I'm not saying you should force people to learn. I'm saying you should give them sane defaults, and the option to learn how to change them if they chose to do so (and ideally, with an easy and obvious way to restore the defaults).
The comment the speaker made was in poor taste and it was inappropriate. Simple as that.

The speaker should recognize that and simply say as much.
Not a lot more needs to be said. There's no way to defend or explain the comment.

And as for @DuncanIdaho who thinks this is vilifying all men. No, it's just calling out a recurring trend at tech conferences to do things which make women feel unwelcome. That's wrong and needs to stop.
I noticed it because the first voice you hear sounded like gibberish, and a second later my brain recognized it as Afrikaans and I understood it. It's crazy how what is at one moment unintelligible noise can suddenly have a meaning.
Big Camping Tents
C�mo Puedo Detener La Ca�da Del Cabello
it seems to me that you need something else that i didn't see described in the article (perhaps i missed it?):

the output disruptor has to be able to recognise and discard duplicate requests for output. otherwise, when you replay the input to a new logic processor (after the old one died) you're going to get repeat outputs.

is that right or have i misunderstood something else? it seems like it places additional constraints on the design (the output ring buffer must be large enough to store sufficient old data, perhaps?). thanks.

alternatively, the systems that the output talks to could be idempotent (more exactly, the operations triggered by the messages to the systems are idempotent), but i suspect that is not (always?) possible.
Though the situation is quite bad in the industry, and female developers might be feeling alienated but in this particular scenario, I feel that the speaker is been bashed out on proportion. The speaker is reported to have publicly apologized at talk and later of twitter. Still continuously and personally blaming/quoting him as done by Shifra and later commentators on the linked thread seems unnecessary.
Quotes like "Weasel talk, +Adam Bien." really make the conversation less friendly and less fruitful.

Incidentally, one measure of how offensive it is, is to replace the group in question with the most "politically incorrect" group you can. So had the phrase been "explain it to a black man" would it be funny? I think perhaps not.
"Explain it to Java Programmers" or "Explain it to your mom/dad" are acceptable and are used quite often. The former is considered a really amusing anecdote and used really frequently at Python Conferences. Now, I was a Java developer sitting in a Python conference who was already familiar and decently comfortable with the fundamentals being presented on stage - the presenter was not a Java developer (so not a self deprecating joke) and still if I stand up and make the person apologize and then repeatedly blame him of languagism (?), it would not be welcomed by both Java or Python developers!

[edit: typos]
The amount of "Power users shouldn't use Ubuntu" comments on here are fairly indicative of why those outside the power user/dev community view us the way they do. It's just elitist whining at the end of the day. Who the hell are "we" to decide what people should and shouldn't use based on their ability? It's just this sort of thing that turns the lay person away from wanting to know more.

Fact of the matter is, if you don't like Unity don't bloody use it. I've never found a single thing I couldn't do in Ubuntu that would force me over to another distro. I mean sure, we could all build our own Gentoo installs from the ground up but who the hell has that sort of time on their hands?

To indicate that Ubuntu is inherently a newbie only system because of eye candy smacks of both arrogance and a complete lack of understanding. It's like calling a mansion a shack because you don't like the colour of the window frames.