skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is my impression that when I was a child, I was allowed to fish alone by myself.. and often did.
Air Zimbabwe UK | Air Zimbabwe Flights | Air Zimbabwe
I hate to break it too you, but it has always been the case that a permit has been required to sell food to the public for your entire life. The rules may have been selectively applied more frequently in the past, but the laws are not new.
fantastic article...
Swim Lessons New York NY
Another reminder of why I stopped reading Techcrunch:

"And how exactly is YouTube going to tweak the site’s user experience as it looks to shift users from funny cat videos toward these shows (which advertisers will be able to more effectively monetize)?"

Really, funny cat videos? When was the last time this writer visited YouTube?
If you think preparing lemonade is at all comparable to preforming colonoscopies, I fear you have a rather disturbing idea of what lemonade is.
> "Hollywood" has been innovating, creating economic growth and, most of all, been the center of creativity for the most creative industries there are for some time.

Some examples would be nice.

Desi Arnez invented the three-camera technique for filming TV. James Cameron invented a 3d viewing system. Disney invented the multi-plane camera.

But, by and large Hollywood hasn't invented much beyond creative accounting and lame story lines. It didn't even invent much of the technology that it uses.

For example, Hollywood didn't invent TV. It didn't invent movies. It didn't invent the DVD or CD.
Americans driving fewest miles since 2003
Afraid not. However:

* There's a whirlwind introduction in my TEDx talk (http://mappin.es/TEDx), and I've published a survey paper on the topic (http://personal.lse.ac.uk/mackerro/happiness35000ft.pdf).

* I'd highly recommend the transcripts of 3 lectures by Richard Layard from 2003 (http://www2.lse.ac.uk/publicEvents/events/2003/20030106t1439...). They're what got me interested in the area.
To be honest, I can understand why, as C++98 and C99 are (aside from some trivial features) mostly different and incompatible extensions to C90.
I've known companies to do this to get around Google slap issues with products, yes. Typically, in the affiliate world.

In that space, once you've found a winning product (ie. tons of sales), it makes sense to replicate under a different brand/imagery - not to compete, but to actually advertise on Adsense (for example) without 'duplicate content' penalties.

I don't have to like it, but it is a winning strategy in that space.
Huh. The "free(code)" wordmark actually feels rather nice. It's imperative. Free your code! In marked contrast, "freecode" just feels... cheap.
Well, you could also perform CAS using AtomicReference -- the examples in Maurice Herlihy's The Art of Multiprocessor Programming [1] and Brian Goetz' Java Concurrency In Practice [2] do that. So you don't really need to use sun.misc.Unsafe in your own code (of course, you need CAS to implement AtomicReference in the first place).

You're also completely correct about placement new: I am working on a cleaned up version of this class, this was essentially a first pass to get myself more familiar with concurrency in c++0x. What complicates things a bit is that allocators are (much like all else in STL) meant to be used as class template arguments, which makes main separate compilation impossible -- hence the need of an adapter from an STL-style allocator to a pure virtual class. Separate compilation is why I also made a void* version of this initially.

I have a much cleaned up version in the work that will handle more than void . There's an implementation I call it ConcurrentLinkedQueueImpl that handles just void , that is compiled separately -- and there is generic version ConcurrentLinkedQueue that is specialized for void * (ends up just proxying the calls to ConcurrentLinkedQueueImpl), with the generic version (in turn) using ConcurrentLinkedQueue<void *> and placement new to hold any type.

Once again, the version posted there was a rough pass to get myself familiar with 0x concurrency constructs and hazard pointers -- the code is fairly messy.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Art-Multiprocessor-Programming-Maurice...
[2] Everyone should read this book cover to cover -- http://jcip.net/
I'm currently trying to decide between two names and tried a little AdWords campaign to see if there was a significant difference in click-through rate just based on the name. (result so far: there's a little one but not huge)

I started to wonder what effects launching both names could have. But I'm by myself for now, so this is pretty much out of the question.

I also realize that a name doesn't make or break a product/company. But since I need to pick a name, I started to think about that.
Bayesianism is in the empiricist tradition where it's focussed on how to update ideas in response to evidence, but it doesn't actually provide guidance for how to deal with non-empirical ideas that can't be judged by evidence.

This (empiricism) has driven philosophers to things like positivism (where they declare everything non-empirical to be worthless or even meaningless). It's a problematic tradition.

The problems are made worse because it turns out that the large majority of ideas are assessed in a non-empirical way (not due to people being idiots; this is correct). Using evidence is the less common case (though it is quite important when relevant).

In _The Fabric of Reality_ by David Deutsch, he gives an example of the theory that eating a kilogram of grass will cure the common cold. This, he points out, should not be empirically tested, and will not be. Rather it is rejected without evidence because it is a bad explanation. Only good explanations are worth testing. (This does not make us miss out on any truths. If it really was true, someone could figure out some explanation of how it works, and then we'd test it.)

In his recent book, _The Beginning of Infinity_, Deutsch further explains that there's no point in testing any theory for which its details can easily be changed around in an ad hoc way, because you can never refute such things with evidence since they will just revise themselves endlessly. The only thing that can refute that sort of approach is philosophical criticism. Only ideas which survive some philosophical criticism and are therefore of higher quality are worthwhile to empirically test.

What makes it hard to change a theory around, ad hoc, to avoid refutation, is if there is some actual connection between the content of the theory and the problem it's trying to solve, so most changes to it would make it no longer address the problem as well.

Deutsch calls that quality "hard to vary" and says it is what makes explanations good. His books expand on this, and offer a version of Popperian epistemology with (relatively small) improvements.

Popperian epistemology, focussed on criticism not justification (which is impossible), and which applies to all types of knowledge without difficulty rather than being narrowly focussed on empiricism, is the solution.

One of the Popperian ideas is that because we are fallible and make lots of mistakes, and need to improve on them (by criticism), irrationality has to do with anything that hampers this process of correcting errors. So that's why I regard difficulty error-correcting priors as irrational. Deutsch even proposes that hampering the correction of mistakes is the most important criterion of immorality.
I think everyone is confusing Youtube's definition of "channel." This isn't 24 hour live streaming video: http://www.youtube.com/channels

Looking at the list of new "channels" I would say this qualifies as non-news.
The main idea is really about learning. Whatever is the minimal you can do while still learning something valuable is what you should do. If releasing your MVP won't help validate your core business assumptions then it probably isn't worth the cost of releasing it.

However do you have to build the MVA to at least somewhat validate it?

If people don't get it... Are you sure you get your customer base? It's all just about rapidly learning about your market.
> Don't defend broken analogies. And yes, it is broken.

Since apple isn't claiming a law violation, the only remaining difference is that some people don't know about chipping cars. Is that a serious problem?
A patchy, but useful overview of several important points. I can recommend that tech people know more about bookkeeping ideas and principles to avoid trouble further down the line. It's not rocket science, and it has its interesting points.

It 's good, for example, to see mentioned the difference between cash accounting and accrual accounting, another gotcha that's worth knowing.
Youtube Adds 100 YouTube Channels of Original Professional Content
Is the quest for power wrong? Not if you want to live longer...
Similar move was "ColdStorage" to "SourceForge".
> Because mass production generally leads to decreased costs, which has the potential for profit from initial loss on sales.

Reread the original "As far as I can tell, they sold each one for a loss and even then weren't able to produce enough to meet demand." That assumes that they could have made and sold more but choose not to.

Maybe that would have led to lower price and profit, but if it wasn't going to, selling more is a bad idea.
Cyborg R.A.T 9 gaming mouse- the most customizable mouse ever
I have thought this to be a good idea in markets where there are many competitors (monopolistic competition). Assume you are one player in space with 5 others that customers choose basically randomly from, you'd get 20% market share. But introduce a clone to yourself, and you share goes up to 33%. That's the theory at least; I've never tried it for myself.
If that is the case we should congratulate them, not sic men with guns on them.

What is wrong with people?
That sounds a little like steganography, or an IOCCC entry.
Despite the questionability of this guy's reputation and the outlandishness of some of his claims, this is actually a decent article about time management. I've worked with a lot of people in both academia and startup land who would do well to read this. Here are my thoughts on some of his best points.

"Every activity has an opportunity cost."

I'm dumbfounded by the number of entrepreneurs and engineers I run into who don't understand the concept of opportunity cost. If you aren't consciously aware that every month you spend doing X is a month you didn't spend doing Y, then you're going to be very inefficient. A startup is a race against the clock (your diminishing bank account), so inefficiency can mean death.

"Work all the time you work."

One of the unofficial mottos of MIT was "work hard, play hard". In other words, when you're working, work, and when you're not, don't. The most miserable students were those who attempted to study while hanging out, watching movies, etc. They'd spend entire days in a half-work half-play state, which of course results in no work getting done, and less-than-satisfactory entertainment as well. I should know -- that was me for a year. There are some pretty good techniques for breaking this habit, but first you have to be consciously aware that you actually have this problem.

"People who succeed also fail a great deal."

This is cliche, I know. But it's some of the most misunderstood advice of all time. People only think of it on a macro level, because the examples are always of the form, "Person X failed at starting 3 companies before he created SuperSuccessfulMegaCorp!" But I think it's more important to understand this advice on a micro level. For example, I used to be an incredibly shitty web designer, but now I'd say I'm pretty good at it. What changed?

When I first started, I would make a design, it would suck, and I'd say, "I suck." Then I would release my shitty design and move on to something else. Nowadays when I make a design, it still sucks... but instead of releasing it, I start tinkering with it. It continues to suck. I fail for hours and hours. At some point, I usually lose confidence in myself. But I keep working and, on a consistent basis, I always manage to "stumble upon" a great-looking design. So learning to fail is, in essence, learning to be a perfectionist. I think this is a useful skill for any creative profession (writing, coding, designing, etc).
I liked the original Freshmeat too. It feels a bit too generic now.
Whole House Humidifier
What is Covariance and Contravariance Anyways?
First thing is double check you did not screw up the release. Like setting your deployment targeting to a lower SDK than your code supports normaly. It could be as simple as changing a drop down in Xcode.

Next check you did not start using a new method or function in the update that does not exist in the base SDK version you may be targeting. For instance there is no arc4random_uniform below 4.3 and will cause a crash. Look at some diffs from your earlier versions (you are using source control right) and see if you added any functions you are not really familiar with. Look for __OSX_AVAILABLE_STARTING in the headers where those suspect functions are defined or just double check the SDK docs.

Finally if your app needs specific phone features like front/rear facing cameras make sure non supported devices have been excluded correctly. That's the low hanging fruit that I would start with. Beyond that try and get your hands on one of your users crash dumps or a friends older device. Friends with jail broken devices tend to not update the os very often. Also, other iOS developers will horde older devices for testing so ask around at your local iOS meetup. Good luck.
They should sell energy, not that power plant. You don't sell duck that lays golden eggs. Obvious scam.
For hackers maybe, but apparently their target market is larger.

"...while numerous sales teams have struggled to position the freshmeat brand appropriately among potential sponsors in the United States. Outside of our very own small niche of the Web, people have all sorts of associations with the name freshmeat, most of which have nothing to do with a free, open source software directory."

Eg, no more accidentally mistaking the brand for butcher shops or child porn.
I think the connection is that one reason to scan containers for radiation is to prevent a nuclear bomb from being smuggled in. Detecting a nuclear bomb after it's already on the loading dock is too late. I assume they mentioned the US simply because Wired is US-centric.
It's not Cloud, STUPID : Reaction to moving out of cloud posts
There is a keen difference between "on the books it is illegal" and "there are actually men with guns walking around that will enforce this"
Thank you, I just signed up! I was in a desperate place last night trying to somehow make paypal IPN work with my site and I was just about ready to give up. If we ever meet in person I owe you a hug!
I'll add in that I expect 90% of enterprise programming is maintaining someone else's code. It isn't making small CRUD apps, it isn't innovating, it isn't bringing costs down, it isn't bringing profits up.

It is simply maintaining the behemoth they spent a fortune on N years ago which was over-, under- and poorly designed all at the same time. It is just keeping it working well enough that it can continue being used because as long as it is working there's no reason to rewrite it. The words "rewrite" to an executive mean, "do a lot of work and spend a lot of money to make something we already have."

And there will have been non-FizzBuzz programmers working on that project before you.
I feel like you also need to factor in Charisma and Constitution bonuses there.
Interesting he knows everything about me.
This is done in consumerland. I remember 30 years ago when my first child was born, I looked into diaper services. There were dozens, but when I dug deeper they were all fronts for one or two firms. If you look at laundry detergent, they all come from a small number of firms.

It might even work on the consumer side of the internet, e.g. generic dating site, dating site for jews, christians, academics, CS (good for girls looking for intelligent hard working husbands, not so good for guys ;-).

However it wouldnt work so well for technical/business products. Can you imagine doing a technical evaluation for several products only to find the only difference among them was the logos.
From time to time when I'm looking for an application for some particular task, I search freshmeat. The last time I checked it I was looking for an Ascii drawing tool, and found several such good tools.
Startup School 2011 Live Stream
Student Loans: Know Before You Owe
One of the Greatest speeches.
The theory is, if someone acts white, they are going to flee the neighbourhood the minute they finish school, so you shouldn't waste any energy making friends with them.

Interestingly, the prejudice against "acting white" is much lower in black schools, and very high in schools with 20% blacks.

Also, Hispanics are much worse off - African Americans are respected for a GPA of 3.5, but start losing friends if they get anything more. Hispanics seem to lose friends once their GPA goes over 2.5.

see http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/files/fryer_t...
Surprisingly it's hard to track down. The Wiki article linked abode has one or two mentions of a "Mexico incident", but that's it. Here are some others:

http://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/01/science/nuclear-spill-at-j...
$2.99 Joomla hosting | 25% OFF at HostASP
Does anyone have a PDF copy of this? The slideshare download is broken for this presentation.
Really? They remind me more of Bose.
DARPA would not make the test pubic at all. Rossi is using DARPA-speculation via one word "colonel" to create buzz and legitimacy
Does anyone have a recommendation for an intro book for experienced programmers (not C++ programmers) that teaches C++ using a "good" C++11 style?
I envision a world where, due to technology and science, everyone stops aging after 25.

A clock will be constantly visible on your forearm and time will be the only commodity in the world, in which you'll get paid and make payments in.

After the age of 25, you'll get 1 to 75 years of "time" deposited in your account. The clock on your arm will decrement by default as time passes, and increase/decrease as you earn/spend.

When your time expires (the clock reaches zero), you die.

Most people will live day-to-day, only having 24 hours of time in any given moment. Others will have millions of years on their clocks.
Fair point. How about, git spawned a revolution in how the masses think of version control?

I've never used monotone, but my vague impression is it was indeed influential / ahead of its time, but didn't have enough of a focus on performance to really catch on. But that's totally uniformed speculation on my part :)

(And certainly kernels existed long before Linux... ;)
You are aware that ESP still remains a subject of research?

Some recent meta-analyses:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=746UdU4...
Ganzfeld experiments
http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/library/HonortonFerrari.pdf
Random number generators
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2006-08436-001

The recent feeling the future experiments:
http://caps.ucsf.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/be... - original article
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/100/3/426/ - reply by Wagenmachers et al
http://dbem.ws/ResponsetoWagenmakers.pdf -reply to the comment by Bem and Utts (a statistician who's researched widely into psi).
http://www.ruudwetzels.com/articles/ClarificationsForBemUtts... - another reply from Wagenmacher

Original articles (most of them better run) showing the same results as Bem et al
http://scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_18_2_radin.pdf
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.169... - more commentary on this potential retrocausal influence.

Now, these should be added to the 100 years plus research into all of this. Either all of the scientists involved in this research were deluded or lying, or there exist parts of the human mind that may influence the world outside themselves. Now, I suspect that these effects are quite small, but they are nonetheless interesting.

Again, I note that this is extremely controversial, but arguing that ESP has been conclusively demonstrated not to exist (which would, in any case, be impossible) it might be worthwhile to figure out what the hell is going on with these experiments.

There was also a meta analysis on the sense of being stared at which has never been refuted, link below.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/00071260477395244...

I actually ran an experiment on this (for my undergrad thesis) but didn't demonstrate significance (my first harsh intitiation into the importance of statistical power).

On your more general point about testing ideas, no matter how crazy they seem, I totally agree, and i am saddened by the closed minded approach to many subjects displayed by scientists. I do understand though, the incentives are all wrong for this kind of unexpected research.

When I was running the aforementioned experiments, I was told by most of my lecturers that I should never publish or write about this, as it would lead to me never getting a job, which is a really sad state of affairs for a science.
Yes, and Google has access to admin's data!
I use them for occasional code surfing.
I've always been put off by the many-worlds interpretation.

They take something that's perfectly explainable with a probability wave, and turn it into fantasy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_packet
Moderate growth, yes. Scaling, no. There is a very definite limit on the size of a baby bird.

A scaling metaphor from nature would be something like a tree seed becoming a forest.

Hope that hat's tasty.
No. Milgram did his experiment to show how the impression of authority, which in his case was scientific authority, could lead to unsound decisions like applying an electric shock to a stranger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
can you add more test codes, thnx
From smartphones to televisions, how Apple will avoid the fate of RCA
The main arrogance, I think, is his claim that journals are just blog posts with more elitism, combined with a strange sort of anger towards academia (which doesn't seem to be based on knowledge of how academia works; it's not much of an ivory-tower fairy land, but really quite industry-like, with professors as managers in charge of running moderate-sized organizations, which they need to do PR, mentorship, and management for, along with generating revenue streams to keep the lab provisioned and grad students / postdocs paid).

As for journals, I like blogging, and hope to see academic publishing move towards a more online, networked open model, but I simply don't think we're anywhere near that. A typical blog post and a typical journal article are miles apart, today, and very few novel scientific results are produced in blog posts. So if your goal is to advance science, you're probably going to be part of academic culture in one way or another, and probably going to publish your results in conferences or journals. That's also possible to do outside academia or an industrial research lab, but relatively few people outside those kinds of settings actually manage to get the time to do so, since their local incentives don't reward it. In some cases they actively hinder it; I've been working with some game-industry people who hope to publish some of their AI techniques in venues like (http://www.aiide.org/aiide11/), but publishing is often vetoed by their management.
This plot doesn't make any sense.
I'd like to suggest that git growth, enhanced by the network effect of github, might also be down to the the ease of entry into using version control provided by the excellent freely available documentation and tutorials.

I'm a one man team, by no means a guru but a competent coder, and git was the first version control system where I could make it past the documentation and get to actually using it day to day. I knew I should be using something, git was the something that made learning and implementing it very low cost.
Some thoughts on Steve Jobs and Agile