skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks for the invite as well.

Been using Asana about a week now so here's some comparisons:

* I like that less is happening on hove compared to Asana—I find the over-reliance on hovers and background changes (cf. new Twitter) very distracting

* the notes idea is cool

* You have the same issue Asana has with "groups"—can't drag a group together

* I prefer Asana's ability to rely on the keyboard heavily

* You should add drag/drop for file uploads, at least using the right pane as the target. I work on a 10yo application so I know why we don't have it but with apps like this it's a no-brainer. It would also improve the upload flow which I dislike, though Google Docs integration is great.
How hard is it to output /dev/audio to a file instead of hardware? For example, to capture the output of streaming audio.
渋谷の出会い
Your point actually illustrates the argument against free markets quite well. When you don't consider the whole of what gravity actually does it sounds like it would be a lot simpler to build an airplane. The unfortunate reality of the situation is that the fantasy land doesn't actually work because of the many unintended consequences of eliminating gravity. Like the many unintended consequences that happen when you let people lend risk free.

For your example just considering the airplane, the air would have no reason to stay near the earth, nor would there be any reason for the matter in the earth to coalesce.

The sun would also almost immediately explode because of the immense pressures required to produce nuclear fusion.
Man, Bret Victor seems to have some of the most consistently interesting and inspiring articles I've seen.

I suppose he's just pointing out one area of the future to think about, but I wish he'd mentioned other ideas. I think voice and language, in particular, have some of the most room to grow to make interfaces more intuitive.

edit to add: Along this line, I've often wondered if it'd be worth learning Lojban to interact with the computer more easily. Supposedly the language is perfectly regular and well suited to that sort of thing, but I don't know for sure.

It could be easier to teach humans Lojban than computers English (or however many other languages).
> microsoft spends more $ per loc on security than any other organization on Earth so if this slipped through their process, similar bugs probably slip through your processes too

I agree in principle, but this is hardly the most accurate way to measure this
How about the use of "impactful" ? (I swear by The Fates, the FSM's Noodly Appendage, and the Holy Handgrenade of Antioch that actual English speaking human beings used that word)

On the few occasions that I hear someone using the word "impactful", I'm tempted to ask "Do you mean 'effective'?"
Who is Bryn Youngblut?
I dont really get your point.

He was an UX engineer at Apple. He probably was involved with the "goddamn ipad". He is not critizicing the Interface Method perse, since it is probably the best we can do right now given the size constraints and technological capabilities we have right now.

What he says however is that the long run, pictures behind the glass cannot be the solution. Or better said: shouldnt be.
Beneficios y Desventajas de la Vasectom�a
We've been working on that ever since we picked up comprehend.com = )
Cynical-me thinks "And that theory has worked so well against the RIAA's blackmail tactics..."
Well done. :)
Lego are mass produced and they just don’t break. They are basically forever. I played with Lego through all my childhood and I broke maybe a handful of blocks.

“Mass produced” is just a bad heuristic for quality.
Some sort of XDCC mechanism will be compatible with all modern clients.
I was involved on some contract work with effectively the same type of technology that Raystream is touting. We didn't hit the kind of compression ratios that Raystream are talking about, but we were able to compress video drastically while still maintaining video quality. That is, the technology is possible, and I've seen it with my own eyes. With that said, the company I was contracting to, could have easily spun the marketing to suggest we were getting 90% compression. To me, it looks like Raystream are making a lot of claims that are half-truths.

Looking at the uncompressed vs Raystream videos, it's difficult to tell if it's doing anything more than h264, x264, or neither. The conclusion being made by the OP may be true, it may not; likely they're exaggerating their marketing to look better than they truly are.

One of the marketing tricks they're using to make their technology look better than it is, is by not showing the videos side by side. Viewing them side by side, it's easy to see that Raystream's video lose quality in their color complexity, image sharpness, and some artifacting shows up if you know what to look for (I can do up some comparison images if anyone is interested.)

When we were testing our compression technology we would run our video through acid tests (difficult video to test the limits of the encoders.) We had a variety of acid tests, and depending upon encoder settings we could tweak each video to look good - however the problem was getting all of the acid test videos to look good at the same settings.

So while Raystream may be able to encode a promotional video that has very low complexity scenes, that doesn't mean this tech is any good at high complexity scenes. In fact, most of the scenes in the promo video our encoders would have had no trouble doing. Things like sports, live concerts, trees, or complex water (the surfer wasn't nearly complex enough, and the original quality of the humming bird wasn't good enough to produce a noticeable difference) were what we used to test our encoders.

I also notice they've got a "Live Streaming" section on their site. On demand content is easy to do, relative to live streaming. For on demand content you have no bounds like cpu, or ram, the biggest barrier is disk io and time to encode. Whereas live streaming is extremely complex. They claim they can do 1.7 Mbs live streaming; we were able to do 1.5 Mbs and less, but at that point the quality suffers significantly, and the video would infrequently go blocky for a frame or two. The only use case is for TVs that no one is going to get close to.

There comes a certain point with this type of technology where you can't stuff a 100 pieces of data, into a container that only holds 10 pieces of data. It doesn't matter how good your compression algorithm is.
>selling your work provides you two things- validation when other people like your work, and money //

The knife maker in the video actually stated that one reason he targeted the professional kitchen workers was that he wanted his products to be used and not just stuffed in a show case some where. You could add this in to "validation" but I think it misses the point here, given that he was equally encouraged that people loved his knives even if they bought them to be show pieces.

Making something that helps someone else to be productive is a great thing.
A system that's based on infallibility of a few large proxies is unstable to begin with.
Poles marmer murah poles marmer jakarta poles granite poles lantai teraso
I guess this is what came after the GapMinder acquisition a few years back -- this looks like the same style visualization Hans Rosling uses in his famous TED talks.
Building robust bulk mailers in Rails
SendWrite launches API for physical mail
And that's actually perfectly normal even back in period when things were handmade; "gents'" tools tended to be flashy and functional but not really intended to be used, per se. Your ivory handled plow plane (think the guy in the upper right on http://antiquesandthearts.com/Antiques/AuctionWatch/2008-04-...) was not intended to be used. I can testify from personal experience that most people using chef's knives today should not be using fantastic hand crafted things, because they respond very poorly to abuse.

Also the definition of "sharp" relevant in a kitchen is very different from the definition of "sharp" used in, say, a woodworking context; using a woodworking chisel on a tomato will actually squash it because the edge isn't serrated enough to tear the skin. But for certain applications precision and balance really matter and professionals will, in my experience, gravitate toward "good but replaceable" tools for that application and use them to death. As an example I know a butcher's daughter who waxes rhapsodic on her father's insistence on keeping his (carbon steel and meticulously prepared and put away) knives razor sharp at all times but especially right before he was about to make even the simplest cut. Said knives looked like bananas by the end of their lifespan, having been sharpened to the maximal extent.
Bret Victor has a longer essay from 2006 on user interface design, called "Magic Ink." It's similarly insightful and interesting.

http://worrydream.com/#!/MagicInk

I've submitted a HN story for it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3213535
You are taking that first bit out of context. H is pretty clear in the article what he means. He believes that pictures behind glass are a transitionary phase and not something we should work toward, because we already have them. The Dynabook was a vision of the iPad but it was a vision someone had 40 years ago. His point is that Alan Kay's vision truly was visionary in that he saw a future interface that did not come to pass for decades, but that Microsoft's vision here is not truly visionary because it basically shows you where we are today.
it isn't no, but ask yourself, "what more can I do?" fund academic research? fund industrial research? hire security consultants to do independent audits and assessments? develop a secure software development methodology? hire security professionals and have them interface with both my product developers and the security community? have professionals interface with the global security community and develop strong working relationships with "well known hackers", possibly even hiring some of them? invest in lots of applied research on making exploiting bugs in your software harder? invest in actually building the systems that the previously mentioned academic research theorized about to identify bugs in software that you write?

oh, you did all of that? and more? and there are still bugs in your code? somehow I think this says more about the craft of developing software than it does about your company and culture ...
The Kinect is a great example of using the most expressive form of interaction we have - our entire body. It's the right idea. The latest updates even do facial recognition (identify muscle movement). Too bad it doesn't scale to smaller devices/cramped objects. I wonder how small kinect-like tech has to get before it makes its way into smart phones, etc.

However, I think voice might be a more expressive medium there, even better than touch. Imagine being able to detect sarcasm, inflection, accent, etc!
Chrome has over 31,000 open issues. http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list
There are plenty of people still ready for it now.
That's because they tried it, saw the global financial system freeze like a deer in headlights, and decided to backpedal.
It's hardly organic when SalesForce probably put down a giant chunk of change for it.
Banks did not beat the regulation directly. They spent ~50 years chipping away until the regulations changed then another ~15 before things got really crazy. Personally if we can put the next crash off for ~65+ years before the next crash I think we will have done a great job.
Cheap Lebron 8 Shoes
How the "Rhianna" Facebook spam works
I have a pet theory that this solution might work if the restricted stock was very long-term--say it vested quickly but you couldn't sell it for a mean time of 15 years. The idea is to get the stock to be longer lived than the bank's liabilities. To my knowledge this has never been tried, and you'd probably need to pay significantly larger amounts of stock to get people to go along, and anyway this is pure speculation from a non-expert.
It might just be that a pull saw is simpler to mass produce well, since it lends itself well to stamping - it mainly needs tensile strength, which I think is much easier than compressive rigidity.
Not if it's a UK company.
DARPA's Cyber Fast Track: How to get your security idea funded
RepublicWireless Website skills So-So (site down)
Google+ : No Official Extension For Other Browsers
Thanks for giving us @hall the mention
Where is this located?
"...Swearing says more about your abilities as a speaker then it does your content... that's the problem."

Good thing he is talking about speaking instead of writing.

EDIT: That is in the opening paragraph, and this is in the closing paragraph:

"...The minute you drop that F-bomb, that's when you lose me. If you don't care enough to flex the language at your disposal, why should I give a fuck about what you have to say?"

Irony? :-) (replace say with write)
30 Days to Learn HTML & CSS
C# is a nice language, too bad about its owner. PHP is a pretty ugly, but it's widely used.

Are you just looking for a way to make money, or do you think that software might be your calling? Dice is giving you an accurate view of a large segment of the labor market, one that has plenty of entry-level, dead-end opportunity. You could advance your career for maybe five years, and then you will either stagnate or switch to management. At that stagnation point, you'll be making a comfortable living, and that might be satisfactory for you.

For entry-level jobs with career-growth prospects, you don't need years of experience with any particular language. C would be fine, as long as you can use it well for 30-minute exercises under pressure on the whiteboard. What kind of exercises? Expect to see the sorts of questions TopCoder asks in its algorithm competitions, or the ones Google asks for Code Jam.

Finally, I'd suggest that you consider the community around the language you pick. The culture around Ruby is much different from the culture around .NET. Which group of people do you want to work with every day?
ラサーナ
>> In the third paragraph, he says it's impossible for a government to promise not to bail out banks.

I read the article.

The solution is still to not bail out corrupt and reckless private institutions.

This idea should not be obscured by concerns about what is politically viable.

I'm not talking about what is politically viable. I'm talking about right versus wrong.
I think the economics is pretty timeless, actually. A lot of the regulation was aimed at preventing catastrophic bank failures, before the idea of Too Big To Fail was invented. Glass-Steagall contains the idea that a commercial bank, which gets major regulatory freebies by virtue of being a commercial bank (FDIC, Fed access, &c), shouldn't have access to unfettered financial markets. And so on.
Yes, because buying something from a non-fair-trade coffee farm is "kinda like" beating up an employee. In fact, for each dollar you spend on any non-fair-trade coffee farm, the owner not only whips an employee, he makes fun of the employee's daughter and calls her ugly. They'd all be better off if you didn't spend any money on coffee at all. Also this is true of every coffee farm everywhere in the world, except those few saintly coffee farms certified by the experts at Fair Trade, who always thoroughly research and monitor every operation and all sales of fair trade coffee to make sure that there's never any abuse or fraud ever.

... Sorry. Cause-and-effect doesn't actually work that way. A facile equation of non-fair-trade spending and employee abuse does not meaningfully contribute to understanding or remediation of the many and varied problems facing the many and varied nations of the developing world today.

Please. Can't you come up with a more meaningful, nuanced critique? The third world deserves it.
rdf technology is coming on strong in late 2011; the tools are getting better fast -- we will be able to represent the social graph in more detail, and correlate it with the 'semantic graph' that shared human experience is coded in.

yes, RDF has taken a while to mature, but look at the time lag between Codd's paper and the commercial release of Oracle. 1000 flowers have been blooming for years and we know a lot about what works and what doesn't.

the trouble with foaf and other 'distributed social graph' is that muggles like Facebook the way it is... they don't care about data portability or privacy; unless a distributed system can provide a better user experience, it's got no hope.
Badges aside, I have a problem with the business model. Sure, Wordpress/Simple etc are looking for these badges, but not a lot of other places are. What is to prevent someone from getting an account and just downloading all the videos? The value is mostly in the education, not the other stuff you offer. Hopefully this doesn't sound too harsh...
Cheap Nike Dunk High Batman and Robin Batman Logo Pattern for sale
At least two bugs: the test should compare vdst to vsrc, not * vdst to * vsrc, and in the first branch you're copying vsrc[n] which is out of range (and skipping vsrc[0]).
a bit of an odd place(?) to get funded but congrats!
Could someone explain to me how I could convey not only the content of my message but also the tone of my feelings more concisely than:

What the fuck is all this fuss about?
How To Have More Common Sense
You cannot control payment to employees like that, companies just find a way around those kinds of laws.

Better to regulate the institutions themselves so that they dont get 'to big to fail', don't get to combine access to cheap money with access to the financial markets, don't get to insure themselves and so forth.
Instead, it’s time for a fundamental reform: Any person who works for a company that, regardless of its current financial health, would require a taxpayer-financed bailout if it failed should not get a bonus, ever. In fact, all pay at systemically important financial institutions — big banks, but also some insurance companies and even huge hedge funds — should be strictly regulated.

I'd really like to see someone attempt to express such a condition in the type of legalese that appears in legislation.

How do you ban something based on a hypothetical possibility? How do you write this condition down?
I am now a Productive Member Of Society, which means two things: I have a macbook air (from my job), and I have little free time. In the past, seeing a release like this would mean picking the least-used partition on my computer, doing a full install, and using it for a week before deciding what I had before was better, or not doing that.

This time around, here was my experience:

1. Download the ISO

2. Open up VMWare (oh shit, there's a new version! oh shit, you have to pay again...forget it)

3. Make a new VM, boot the ISO

4. GNOME 3 won't work. Hmm, well I probably need VMWare Tools installed.

5. Try to install VMWare Tools. CD tray's locked. Guess I have to do a full install first.

6. Do the install (defaults everywhere).

7. Reboot into system. GNOME 3 won't work, of course.

8. Click "Install VMWare Tools". A window pops up with a tar.gz. That's silly, okay, extract it, see a folder with a perl script called "something install something".

9. Open a terminal, sudo perl whatever-installer.pl.

10. Hit enter a bunch of times. I have to run some config script, would I like it launched for me? Sure.

11. Can't install, I need make and gcc. WTF?

12. sudo yum install make gcc. Nope, the package manager's locked.

13. Where's update manager? Maybe I can kill it. Nope, that opened it, ok, 35 updates. It just got released, what the hell? Okay don't do that yet.

14. How about Add/Remove Programs? Hmm, there's a Programming category. Click it. Window goes gray.

15. Flip over to a web browser. Browse for a bit. Send an email.

16. Back to Fedora. Still gray.

17. Close window, delete VM, delete ISO, remove from torrents. My ratio's only 18%. Oh well.

18. Write stupid comment on HN.

19. Dinner time.
I mean the product was organic. It wasn't, as pg wrote, a big company going "let's make a product called cool.com!", it was them buying a product, reworking it then changing it's name to cool.com
Actually in the 30s we did exactly what we're doing now, deflating our currency, passing a bunch of legislation to prevent competition, disallowing people from holding solid investments, paying people to be unproductive, a massive expansion of government predicated upon a weird interpretation of the commerce clause, and surprise surprise, it's having the same effect it did in the 30s.

Keep in mind that the economy 'failed' in 28, but it wasn't until FDR that things really got bad.
Banking hasn't changed so much since the 1930s.
Sadly, there is no way to do this. We may roll this out in the future -- but you're the first person to bring it up. If we see a higher demand, we'll definitely consider it.
Gov regulations did little to promote sub prime lending. The simple fact was once investors started to buy loans banks where free to make loans as fast as they could repackage and sell those loans. This inundated the housing market with cheap loans and drove up prices creating the bubble in the first place. Computer models built in the middle of a housing bubble without much historical data where easy to trick into thinking housing loans where overly safe investment which let people churn loans until the only people left where those least able to afford them.

Toss in late night infomercials promoting get rich quick house flipping and the pump was primed with people willing to fudge the paper work. And loan servicing companies willing to look the other flip crap loans with little downside. The only thing that really hurt many of these company's is they ended up with to large a loan inventory, if they been a little leaner far fewer companies would have been at risk.
Thanks for the congratulations. I never expected to apply for a grant from DARPA. Defense contracting makes my head spin. But this program reduces this friction so individuals with good ideas can apply and get funded. It's a really neat opportunity.
I can't help but think that the success of the iPhone and iPad has caused a big step back in usability among devices that try to copy them.

Two similar examples:

Garmin's newer aircraft GPS units have touch screens instead of knobs and buttons. The iPad has proven very popular among pilots. I can see why Garmin would decide that "touch is the future." But, while I'm flying an airplane, for my money I'd rather have knobs to grab and twist, and buttons to push and feel.

Tesla's new Model S uses one huge touch screen for its in-dash interface. Surely, if you want to change your music's volume or turn on air conditioning while driving, it's harder to hit touch targets that are Pictures Under Glass than to grab and twist a knob.
Canada believes in allowing only a few, highly regulated banks. Since there are only a handful of banks, it makes it very easy to regulate them.

But this model does hurt the little guys. Since Canadian banks form an oligopoly, they charge you for lending them money; account maintenance fees are standard. This hurts the smallest savers the most. Similarly, there is minimal competition in setting interest rates. Finally, financial innovation, done right, does help people---think Vanguard, index funds, ETFs, etc. All much more limited and much more expensive in Canada (I think).

In contrast to Canada, I think we would be better off with many small institutions, lightly regulated. Then they can compete for your business and do not need taxpayer support when they fail. When they become too big, break them up.
Their computers are still extremely popular and premium priced - and Apple sells a lot of them. Even just in its computer range, Apple commands mindshare among the public like no other company. The difference is palpable I think; at my university it almost seems like there is a class gap between those who have new Macbooks (~65%) and those who have Windows machines.