skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Fuck you! ... Pay me.

http://weblog.muledesign.com/2011/04/creative_mornings.php

It's the one time I've seen it work well.
Why do you consider this complicated?
An even better solution would be to just allow the market to take its course. Thinking up ways to allow to big too fail institutions to keep existing is counterproductive. Just allow it to fail and people will stop doing those things. If your bank doesn't exist you can't very well collect a bonus from it.

I bet you if the big money families started losing big chunks of their fortunes that there would be serious reform. Same with retirees and their pensions.

How do you think the prosecution of bankers would go if bankers put the DOJ pension at risk?
Typosquatting: The Ad Frontier
There's another great interview with Joel as part of the Chow.com Obsessives series (all of which are worth a look for themselves):

http://www.chow.com/videos#!/show/obsessives/55121/obsessive...
Testing bulk mailers in Rails
That would work if we wanted to stop banks from transferring losses to shareholders - the real problem is that they transfer losses to taxpayers. Pre-IPO Goldman Sachs was probably considered "systemically important" enough for their losses to have been covered in the event of a large trading loss.
Ah, like what happened in 2008.
Ask PG: Do you every track down successful YC rejects to improve selection?
Over the past few years, YC has rejected thousands of teams. Statistically most will end up failing or having mediocre success, but a few may end up being successful. When you learn of a successful YC reject do you go back and review their application to learn if there is a way to improve the selection process?

Conversely, do you re-review the applications of those team you did accept but turn out to be disappointing to learn to pick up on warning signs that were in the application, but you guys didn't notice the first time around?
Application/Compositor Synchronization
A Conspiracy of Hogs: The McRib as Pork Arbitrage
The idea here doesn't seem to be helping newspapers succeed, but helping newspapers transform into entirely new businesses. It seems like a reasonable way to make money, I just don't think it has a lot of relevance to the troubles facing the newspaper industry.

There is a difference between "journalism" and "newspapers". In a sense, journalism (hard news, soft news, tech news, whatever) is this wide idea, and newspapers are just one implementation. In the past, scarcity of information combined with advertising helped support the business end (see also: TV, Facebook, everything, etc.). It worked so well, in fact, that it could overcome the ridiculous costs of actually making this physical thing to put the journalism in and carry it to peoples' homes. Not anymore. There are examples of journalism succeeding outside of newspapers, but trying to build a physical, for-profit business around journalism seems to be a losing battle [1].

The nice thing about leaning on advertising for your revenue is that it pretty much scales with your readership which pretty much scales with the quality of your journalism and ease of access to it. The not nice thing is that the internet and Craigslist provide basically the same quality of information for free, so this once comfortable equation is suddenly completely failing newspapers. But the equation itself really hasn't changed, so it's not like newspapers can just throw away their journalism.

So the OP suggests newspapers add "digital marketing" to their sales pitch? Sure, okay, that could be very lucrative for newspapers. How does that relate to being a newspaper? If the digital marketing strategy pans out, what incentive is there for newspapers to keep providing that sillly, unprofitable journalism thing?

[1] This is old information now, but I think the basic idea still stands: http://www.mint.com/blog/trends/the-death-of-the-newspaper/?...
So Young... So Naughty
It was intentional, but not to allow for "delay". It just recognizes that many forms of "software distribution" are to parties who don't want the source code. The point is you have to give it when asked; there's no grace period in the license.
I wasn't at all aware of the market being allowed to take its course in 2008. (Save for LB/BS)
Why is it that if someone dislikes swearing in some regard they're considered to be on a high horse? It seems like having some view points simply isn't allowed . . which I usually find amusing as those who are against people with view points like this are usually in support of some modern, disruptive cause. ;)

It kind of reminds me of in high school where the kids who studying were told effectively to get off their high horses and the others would proudly proclaim they will not do their homework as they please.
He's at -9 karma, I imagine he doesn't care.
Startup Pancake.io Hosts Websites Using Dropbox
But it can only go as far below 0 as the amount in salary you sacrificed in exchange for a potential bonus.
Seems that wrapping it in several layers of foil and tossing it in a waste cntainer would be enough to keep 'em busy for awhile. After some handling the foil would likely come off and they could retrieve their toy: "Why are we following a garbage truck, now?" No fun digging though the city dump though.
The police do not need probable cause to surveil a vehicle driving on public streets.

If they did, I would understand the argument that warrantless telemetry was scary. They'd be using technology to bypass a check/balance that already exists. But they don't. The police can follow you for no reason. They can follow you because they don't like the look of your haircut.

I do not think the police should have 24x7 access to telemetry from all vehicles. I think the process needs to start with, "Subject K of this investigation is known to drive this late motel Honda Civic, and we are now commencing GPS surveillance".

I do worry about the consequences of LEOs cherry-picking from a constant stream of everyone's telemetry data, so that for instance you might get harassed if you lived in nice neighborhood X and drove into bad neighborhood Y for a few minutes, and, whoops, now there's probable cause that you just went and bought drugs. That kind of stuff? Bad! A good reason why we shouldn't be OK with them getting all the OnStar data or whatnot.

But that's simply not what we're talking about here. As long as an LEO has to walk up to a car deliberately and attach a device (which again let's be honest probably costs way too much for them to throw away), I am fine with it.
Come on, now. Would this "Artur on SSDs" video be nearly as memorable (and therefore efficacious) without all the swearing?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7PJ1oeEyGg
Tweet from Hacker News [Chrome Extension]
Great post.

Has there been any interaction research done on using something like a stress ball as an interaction device for digital environment? In my imagination a ball would have standard accelerometers and gyroscopes, but in addition fine-grained sensing capabilities to sense different kind of grips. It could also provide tactile feedback.
I just watched the video, and typed my reactions, as I had them; no idea if this will be of interest.

* * *

People still travel for meetings?
By plane?

Wait, someone is driving the car?
Thats not very productive.

There are bellhops?
Why are there still bellhops in the future?
What do they do?

Why is the screen so small?
Why have a screen, if you have those perfect augmented reality glasses?

'Creating reply interface'? We still have to wait for computers?

There's still global poverty, and benefit concerts? When these people have all that fancy tech?
Damn it.

Copy and Paste is still around?

Kids are still taught long division? Why? Why do they use a pencil?

Also, won't the future be one of neural interfaces? Isn't there something wrong with interfacing two electrical signal processing machines (brain + computer) via all these muscles and optical sensors and so on?
I know there's a lot of science to be solved first; but surely the future of interfaces is that they are invisible, and built in to us?
By "crutch," I assume you mean that it can be worked around, but it's easier for most people to use it. The words "I", "that" and "the" are also crutches in this sense. Arbitrary limitations can help you develop your creativity, but you shouldn't then conclude that the things arbitrarily disallowed are somehow bad in and of themselves.
"Fuck" isn't cute or particularly clever, but like "bullshit" it does make for more effective communication in appropriate contexts.

Many years ago, one of mentors offered "You can't fuck scared and you can't sell broke," as the first rule of sales...and I only needed to hear it once for it to stick.

And at times the word "fuck" is a necessary component of the concept, e.g. nothing adequately describes fuck you money except "fuck you money."
I'm not offended by vulgarity in presentations, it's just a personal turn-off. It puts little "this person has an attitude problem" ideas in my head.
If it is done well, they should understand it better.

Think of a progression from the most abstract interface ("C:\>") to the most concrete (hold hammer, hit things). It's implicit in the article that future visions should be moving further along that progression.
Ah, I see. Maybe I did read it wrong. Sorry about that.

Still I would think that credibility and trust is hampered by lack of information about the people behind it. I don't doubt there is more to the plan/idea than is represented on the site, but unfortunately when it's a flat website of "Coming Soon" you can't really find answers to your questions. I probably would have stated on the front page that more information is coming soon. Like someone else said I had the impression that it was already established and operational and I had only just heard about it. The copy is definitely written in this way. Like most people I clicked through the tabs for more information and was disappointed seven times in a row.

Anyway, </whine>. Good luck with it! I'll keep an eye on it to see the details that come out. :)
Insightful.

It seems to me that the touchscreen, because of the reconfigurability you point out, is the lowest common denominator of input. It makes a lot of sense for a highly portable device, because you can pack many configurations into a small device.

I guess what I lament is the richness or input resolution you give up. And if general computing trends more toward this lowest common denominator, we're faced with an input paradigm that's impoverished in every vector.

Which, as I've stated before, only really affects the input part of it, and not the consumption part.
Berlin, Germany is awesome, very vibrant scene, quite cheap compared to London, not big in bioinformatics though
"Documentation is smurfing important."

Interesting. You might want to modify your regex so it won't tell people to smurf their hard drive. They might take that wrongly.
Sure. I would assume it would be very similar to the pre-screening credit card companies do (which does not negatively affect a person's credit); however, if you look at the common components of a person's FICO score, a number of factors _could_ be adversely affected depending on how these things are done (closing of revolving accounts, length of credit history, credit searches, etc.). People are asking questions because it's a complex subject...and while people want to believe they won't be adversely affected, that doesn't mean it won't happen. Simply due dilligence I think.
Who is running this and how is it in any way a good idea? If you're willing to give up control of your company for a measly few thousand, why not just take on some credit card debt?
Note the abstract for the actual paper is at http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/11/03/1102895108.abst...
And some graphs from the paper are at http://www.blognome.be/2011/11/08/age-dynamics-in-scientific...
Pancake.io: Publish using a simple text file from Dropbox
To save you some time in deciding whether to read, you should know that this hyperbolic post title is a hypothesis and not a report of any new facts.
We've been talking about gloves with accelerometers in them at work, but now that you mention it I expect that has much the same problem as Kinect, though I suppose you could add some feromagnetic material to the gloves and give at least subtle resistance and feedback through electromagnets or something...
Do note that those laws don't apply to the entire world.
OK thanks for the constructive feedback. I consider the overall feedback from HN to have been extremely positive and will incorporate all of the suggestions.

The concept has a few chicken/egg issues with ramp up, but why let that get in the way :)
An initial round for the class is typically between $250K and $500K, so between $2500 and $5000 per company.

So there would be 100 teams in a class (a team can be single person). Calculating from validation, say a classmate is giving up 10% (ceiling value suggested by YC) for $5000, that is 50000 in valuation. I wonder what pg would think on this.
Extracting Patterns from Location History
I know it's brand new and all, but there seems to be a lack of "normal" irc functionality/usability. Nickserv has no 'help' functionality, nicks apparently have to be universally unique across all of Grove (better hope someone doesn't use my name in a different organization?), there's no chanserv. The help page is concise but should probably be printed in MOTD or some other way for non-Web clients (I was confused that I had to identify before joining a channel... it created a 'ghost' channel for me instead of booting me and telling me to identify, like most irc servers). And when you add a member to the org, they immediately are joined to the channel - even if they're not connected to a client? How do you know they're available to respond to a question?

Also, since it appears to be a new & custom irc server, i'd not really be willing to trust corporate communication on a platform known for attracting hackers.
I think by-default strip searching is a terrible consequence of our piss-poor infrastructure for detaining people. Obviously I think it's a terrible policy (my understanding is also that that policy is starting to meet resistance in the courts) and would love to see it outlawed, but

(a) it's a symptom of a larger problem, and

(b) the larger problem isn't "law enforcement is in the long term just a system for allowing a couple thousand people unlimited access to anal cavity searches on arbitrary citizens".
A. Why have we editorialized in the title? If the author thought "Fucking Your Way Out" was an appropriate title, it should be the title here on HN, should it not?

(I don't think the title is appropriate or elegant, and maybe there's a meta-policy on HN to avoid putting "fuck" on the home page, which there are good reasons to avoid, having to do with brand and overzealous filtering software and whatnot. But I think it's kind of misleading, especially for an essay like this one, to advertise one title and put another one on the essay itself!)

B. If there is one fucking thing that will cause me to reconsider my personal policy of avoiding the use of the word "fuck" online, especially in public writing, it's the phrase "F-bomb", which is just fucking awful.

If you're trying to avoid the word for the sake of young children, or for the sake of avoiding the emotional impact of a real "fuck", you obviously need to say "effing" (in speech) or "fscking" (in print) or any of the hundred thousand other classic euphemisms, because "F-bomb" is not a substitute for "fuck". It just doesn't work, grammatically.

If, on the other hand, you're discussing the word from a literary standpoint, let me introduce you to a little concept called scare quotes: You can say "fuck" and not mean it! The safety is on!

I think my real problem with "F-bomb" may be that it's obviously a word for conducting a meta-discussion of the word "fuck" in front of young children. Perhaps my reaction would be much the same if you addressed me in baby talk and ended every sentence by patting me on the head. I'm not convinced that such a word needs to exist – If the audience doesn't understand "fuck" well enough to safely read it, why are you discussing the word? But when you absolutely need such a word, try the simple phrase "the F-word". You will sound like a schoolmarm, but then again it's not as if you were going to avoid that.
If we consider the end product to be "the hole that is dug," then its value is composed of all the labor that went into it. However, we have to consider 2 additional things:

1. Marx says that this must be the "socially necessary" labor; that is, the labor required on average to dig a hole. In an area where mini-excavators are available, this would probably be factored in as capital input for digging holes.
2. Marx says that value is constantly changing, such as due to changes in efficiency (mini-excavators).

As such, Marx would agree that there is a difference between using an excavator and using a bunch of people, whether they have shovels or spoons (and shovels vs spoons would be a difference in capital input, also). Furthermore, this increase in efficiency causes the value of the hole to decrease, which is why you'd probably just rent an excavator as opposed to having a bunch of people try and dig through asphalt.

To return to your example of Excel vs DNF, consider the following from Capital: "The value of a commodity, therefore, varies directly as the quantity, and inversely as the productiveness, of the labor incorporated in it." While spreadsheet programs and first person shooters are different commodities, I think we can all agree that DNF did not receive the most productive labor! On the other hand, the excavator both decreases the labor involved and increases productivity. Yes, the excavator had to be designed and built, which required labor, but even with that the labor savings over time for a reproducible capital input are greater than if we had every hole in the world being dug by groups of people.

In terms of "wealth creation," Marx notes that there is a difference between the value of a commodity in use (its utility) and the value of a commodity in trade, and that these values are generally not the same. That is why Marx talks about labor in the first place: if utility is not the connecting factor whereby different commodities are traded for one another, then what connects them? He claims that the only thing left outside of utility (a commodities physical properties) is the labor input involved.
Reading local files in JavaScript (HTML5)
I like irccloud.com quite a lot. A bit different of a product, but still very nice.
As if you have a spare hour: So here's Zuckerberg on Charlie Rose, "Streamlined"
> Rob Hague responded with the “Apple would never dare…” defence:

>> developers, designers, and those who see themselves as power users … must still be a significant source of profit for Apple, and so they’d need a good reason to abandon them.

> A locked-down OS X would not be an abandonment of those users, but Apple already ask $99 a year for the privilege of being a developer.

Developers and designers aren't necessarily developing and designing OS X apps. I'm a developer, and I love OS X to do my job, but I have never written a mac app, and I probably never will.

Quite a few people buy their hardware and software because it makes development so much easier. Take away root access, and half of the advantages go away - Apple isn't that stupid.
I have rarely gone wrong in being a consumer of someone passionate about what they are doing or in doing something I feel passionate about.
I would agree with you if we're considering English. I'm not sure the same conclusions can be drawn for other languages (German springs to mind).
Giving up a small percentage does not constitute giving up control. If it doesn't sound like a good deal to you then you should not apply.
consider the troll nature of Rob's composition
I'm not sure that the benefit of making things intuitive or easy to learn is worth the cost of limiting the technology.

Calculus is less intuitive, harder to learn than arithmetic, but it's much more powerful.

Can't we reboot our interfaces, start with a large but consistent vocabulary, and remove limits instead of imposing more of them upon the altar of immediate and complete understanding?

http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/9325300749/a-different-kind-o...
The relevance for newspapers is that they can take their current strengths and relationships and find a new source of revenue that's relevant to their current considerable customer base. Most journalistic enterprises are running short of cash today. They're far more likely to be killed by standing still than trying new things.

If the danger is that newspapers become too successful at selling online services such that they no longer feel the need to pay for quality journalism, I'd consider that to be an extremely premature concern on the order of worrying about looking too strong on your first trip to the gym.
Ways To Make Money From Home
Floating-point quiz
That's logic that says your carry-ons can't be searched before boarding a plane --- not "you can be radioactively strip searched" but that no search is reasonable without compelling suspicion.

My point is, there are always competing interests at play, and the question is where we draw the line, and you probably can't draw the line at "a judge has to sign a piece of paper before an LEO can lay a hand on any of your personal property".
I'd feel claustrophobic if I didn't have root on my Mac.
Eight Years After Being Declared Dead, IDS and IPS Keep on Kicking
If we are doing things as intended, the value add by Dandelion will more than justify the overall valuation being close to PG's recommended ceiling. And a founder can always request slightly different terms. It's not about the terms at this phase, one just wants to avoid doing anything that will hinder future investment.
For some reason I thought the "F-bomb" was going to be Facebook. Oh silly me.
Excellent point on the skeuomorphism, though I'm not sure what the alternative is. He mainly focuses on all these things we don't have to learn to know how to use, but for any kind of sophisticated functionality I think some learning will be required and it's more about making it flexible and easy to learn, and utilizing additional channels for information in both directions.
How would I update my PRL? And what would I update it to? I had no idea that these caveats existed on Sprint's network, I had just (naviely?) assumed all Sprint-based service was "the same"
With the technique under discussion (using Google to search for the MD5 hash), it doesn't really matter what the computational cost of finding a plaintext for the every possible hash value is -- you're not brute forcing a collision, you're doing a search using someone else's enormous resources. That's always going to be O(1) from your point of view (with a lot of overhead, of course).
Neither does modern Linux, sadly. The older SunOS-style audio devices still exist in the kernel as an emulation, but aren't loaded by default (and tend to have weird behavior vs. other parts of your distro's audio stack). The ALSA framework is the modern equivalent. It's much more featureful, but its device API is frustratingly opaque. So much so that the only "supported" interface to the driver is the libasound userspace library. This, too, is low level and opaque. So you're really supposed to use the pulseaudio middleware to actually play and mix your audio stream. And even then, the pulse API is basically PCM-only, and your stream is probably sourced from something encoded. So you really want to be using gstreamer to generate your stream and take advantage of existing codec plugins (and hardware acceleration, etc...). And even then gstreamer is opaque, so all the toolkits have wrapper APIs.

Sigh. The days of being able to spit sounds to a char device are basically over. We have more powerful software now with far more capability. And that kind of sucks, sometimes.