skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you're transferring domains, I'd go with NameCheap. Use coupon code BYEBYEGD for $7.99 transfers.
HostGator is pretty standard for basic hosting and good support. They have a discount, 50% off first month using coupon code NOSOPA: http://blog.hostgator.com/2011/12/22/sopa-must-die/
It could be the case that having Google as the default in Firefox will pay for itself through advertising.

Of course it will, easily

(Seriously - people should understand that Google's business is search (and advertising), and they want to commoditize its complements - browsers and phones with browsers on them).

Google does roughly 1 billion searches a day[1], and makes conservatively $0.08 per search[2]. Firefox has roughly 25% market share.

$0.08 * 1,000,000,000 * 0.25 = $20,000,000 per day.

Yearly revenue = $7,300,000,000 = $7.3 billion

Reasonableness check: Google's yearly revenue = $29.3 billion. $29/4 (ie, Firefox at 25%) = $7.25 billion, which seems roughly right.

[1] http://www.jeffbullas.com/2011/05/16/50-amazing-facts-and-fi...

[2] http://www.quora.com/How-much-revenue-does-Google-make-per-q...
Hi Matt,

You're absolutely right, it's not a failure of the US immigration system. We looked into all our options, and we were working with a very good and well respected immigration lawyer to apply for H1B visas. Unfortunately, they ran out of visas on the quota for the year just before we applied. So, we never even applied for a visa, and we certainly weren't rejected visas or kicked out of the country, so it's not a failure of the immigration system. I do think perhaps the system could cater a little better to people in our situation who were very keen to stick around in the US and hire US citizens to build our company. Nevermind though, we'll hopefully be back soon enough to do exactly that.

I'm glad you saw me speak at NottTuesday just over a year ago. That's right after I launched Buffer, and at that point it was me by myself and just a few paying users and perhaps 100 users in total. I was still learning a huge deal at that point, and quite frankly I'm still making all sorts of mistakes to this day, but I think that will always be the case. I do like to think that now with over 1400 paying customers (85,000 users in total) and a $200,000 annual revenue run rate, we did sell Buffer from the UK, we did sell Buffer from the US, and I'm confident we'll continue on our non-linear growth path whilst we are based in Hong Kong.

As for needing to be in the US, that's an interesting point to ponder. Shortly after the NottTuesday talk I brought on board a co-founder. Then, a few months later, being in the US enabled us to gain a place on AngelPad and with the investment hire our first employee much faster than we would have otherwise been able to. I still advocate bootstrapping, and indeed Buffer was bootstrapped for 9 months to profitability before we thought about funding. Without a previous track record, having that kind of traction is essential in my mind. We're a US company.

We're having a great time travelling the world, but we're also working pretty damn hard. In my mind, I truly believe both need to go hand in hand to be truly successful.
Money: the only vote that matters!

We're not consumers, we're investors. Investing in socially irresponsible corporations such as GoDaddy is no longer acceptable, and as a community we need to perfect the art of boycotting.

I would love to see a corporate "social-responsibility" wiki that let's people track corporate behavior. If we can make it easy to see what causes we support as consumers, the quicker we can rid the market of these parasites.
Fair enough. Afraid I don't know the answer.
Darn it, you're right. http://mechanicalintegrator.com/2009/solar-system-center-of-...
Buy Silver Michael Jackson Beats From Monster dr. dre Studio Headpho for Sale
The fact that Cheezburger didn't dump GoDaddy over any of the scandals in the past, from their rampant sexism to elephant slaughter, bothers me.

I'm glad to see them taking this sort-of-a-stand right now, but they're not actually dumping GoDaddy over SOPA, they're only threatening to unless GoDaddy recants their support.

GoDaddy has already done the damage. If they were to recant their support now, the Congressmen in favor of SOPA could just dismiss it as folding under economic pressure, and still cite GoDaddy's original support as relevant.

I'd much rather see Cheezburger just dump them and be done with it.
This is very wrong. Google cares deeply if Chrome wins. You are being way too narrow in your focus.

Advertising is not their product, it's their revenue stream. Their product is _everything_ that sits between a user and monetizing an ad. Just look at what they have done from an engineering, offensive and defensive position here. It's all about that ethereal space between users and monetization. That's the battlefield, and they want all of it.

They need FF because when Chrome dominates, FF needs to be a viable competitor. With Bing, it would be worse off.
I was extremely alarmed to see our firm, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, on that list and immediately emailed my attorney (a partner) about it.

Turns out two of their attorneys agreed to lend their names AS PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS and made it clear their support was in no way representative of the views of the firm. Despite that, DWT got added to the list.

Incredibly dirty move on the part of Rep. Smith.

DWT has tweeted about it (http://twitter.com/#!/DWTLaw/status/150019649130606592) and tell me they are working to get their name removed from the list.

Edit: fix link
Not sure how this counts as bait? It's coverage of the announcement, and naturally that was also covered on our company blog? We do have a free offer, listed on our pricing page: http://context.io/pricing
Best Tumblr... Evar?
When was the last time you saw a top quark? Yet you surely believe in them because other people "have done the work" to prove they are there.

There is no doubt faith is different than science, but I think this particular example doesn't capture the real difference. Honestly, I'm not sure how I would qualify that difference, beyond (good) science will change in the light of new evidence. Faith often requires modifying how one interprets evidence so it fits within one's religious views.

I've also met people whose faith stands parallel to science. In that case, changing understanding of the physical world doesn't impact the spiritual world. That is where I try to be.
This controversy to me seems eerily similar to the so-called "SCO Wars" when the SCO Group defended her intellectual property rights against looters like IBM and Novell. This act will help to prevent tragedies such as what happened to SCO from occuring in the future, by making it more difficult to pirate other people's code. I do not see why some people think that is a bad thing. Darl McBride was right. He might have lost the suit, but I think history will vindicate him, and SOPA is part of that vindication.
The couple of times domain company thread appeared on HN, name.com was suggested. I moved from GoDaddy there a couple months ago and found their interface far simpler and easier to use.
Dear GoDaddy, it it no longer okay to not know how the internet works.
It's good to see a company clearly state that it wishes to prevent counterfeit goods from harming end users, but that SOPA is not the way to address that problem.

Most of the talk from supporters plays up the "counterfeit" angle, dragging in firemen, soldiers, etc. as examples of who could be harmed by these knockoffs, but all of the push is coming from groups who want to shut down piracy at the expense of the internet and who have nothing physical to protect. It's an ugly bait-and-switch. Fortunately, this dodge no longer seems to be working.
So... what does Go Daddy have to gain from SOPA? Is there really that much money to be made in facilitating this ham fisted ban hammer?
Kind of curious: what is mozilla spending (or plan to) all of this cash on? Wikipedia says the MozCo has ~600 employees. Even if they are paying average $200k per person and spending another 80 million on rent, hosting, equipment, etc. that still leaves ~$100mil. Executive compensation? Rainy day fund?
It's a great option to consider, but:
* What matters is not just default placement, but actual share. How many would not switch to Google? Say hypothetically half which I think is generous.
* That leaves them with the kind of share that Bing had prior to the yahoo deal. And bing was losing over a billion a year.
* That still doesn't actually create a business model, because now they have create a search ad network to compete with AdWords. That's another tough problem - especially without scale.

So all in all I don't doubt they could raise some money, but chances of success would be extremely slim.

I don't think that Mozilla has a BATNA to Bing/Google which is why the economics are so different in each round. It's entirely based on Google and Bing bidding against each other.
The poster didn't sound like he's in such bad shape and doesn't deserve to be labeled as diseased. If he decides he needs that, sure, it should be taken dead seriously. He may not. Just let the man live his life and decide what he can or cannot say
I did exceptions in LoseThos. I did not investigate how they are normally implemented. There is no limit of frames. They are not on the stack, but heap chained to task record.

I did not like having to make a type for exceptions. Instead you have a throw(...) function.
with 1000 domains, it has to be an empty threat, it's a pain in the ass to move one domain at a time, I can just imagine doing that 1000 times.

I know some vendors offer bulk domain transfer, but I'd imagine the complicated bit would still be there(i.e. confirming the authorization code and confirming domain ownership with the confirmation codes)

Or is that wrong and there is a way to move domains without confirming?
Show HN: Codecademy Labs, the easiest way to write, run, and share code online
KKR is basically a decentralized conglomerate. While GoDaddy is (sort of) a technology company, KKR is closer in spirit to the sort of companies that support SOPA. Which is why we're seeing the apparently anomalous sight of an Internet company that supports SOPA. It's not GoDaddy talking; it's KKR talking through GoDaddy.
$300M / (16*16 pixels) = ~$1M/pixel!
Given that Tor was originally developed by the US Naval Research Laboratory it wouldn't be surprising if they were still using it [1].

But I don't think the CIA would care about SOPA. They are quite able to use "illegal" technologies, and don't need the law changed to do it.

[1] https://www.torproject.org/about/torusers.html.en
It makes sense. Hunters are among the few who derive actual material benefit from sustainable animal populations.
To me, it is embarrassing that techies did not dump GoDaddy LONG ago, for their sophomoric and incredibly sexist advertising.

This backlash is long overdue.
In this specific context, Jesus was talking to Thomas - though the other apostles had told Thomas that Jesus had returned, Thomas did not believe until Jesus came to him personally. So the verse isn't promoting "blind faith," it's criticizing those who insist on a direct revelation before being willing to accept the truth. I don't think it really applies to science (at least not empirical science), and it is definitely not anti-science.
Take a look at Highcharts - http://www.highcharts.com/

Flexible, beautiful, and interactive. Free for non-commercial use.
That's a hell of a lot of cash. Even at $10k (1/10th of what you suggest), that's 538 critters * 10k = 5.38M of donations. At your level it would be $53.8M... just for one issue.

Your intention has merit, but I'm sure some financial wizard could create some structure that had a much better return or utilization for that kind of money.
There are 20 CUs, but it controls multiple sets of VLIW5/4 in parallel. AMD claims 1600 ALUs on the 5870, so 1600/5 = 320. I'm not sure how they are are factoring in the 4 deep pipeline for the barrel, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean there is only 80 actual ALUs.

The R700 Programming Manual seems to indicate my interpretation is correct, although if you can provide evidence that I'm misinterpreting it, I'm all ears.
I am a fan of Rational Wiki's definition of faith. Essentially, it is something that you can use to back up the belief in something. Evidence is also something that you use to back up a belief. You can more or less plug in either of them, but evidence has clear advantages.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Faith

This article explores thoughts on faith that I don't agree are useful, but the opening sentence is the most useful definition I've seen.
3.7.7.1 The Registered Name Holder shall provide to Registrar accurate and reliable contact details and promptly correct and update them during the term of the Registered Name registration, including: the full name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and fax number if available of the Registered Name Holder; name of authorized person for contact purposes in the case of an Registered Name Holder that is an organization, association, or corporation; and the data elements listed in Subsections 3.3.1.2, 3.3.1.7 and 3.3.1.8.

3.7.7.2 A Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable information, its willful failure promptly to update information provided to Registrar, or its failure to respond for over fifteen (15) calendar days to inquiries by Registrar concerning the accuracy of contact details associated with the Registered Name Holder's registration shall constitute a material breach of the Registered Name Holder-registrar contract and be a basis for cancellation of the Registered Name registration.

http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/ra-agreement-21may09-en.h...
True, but also, if Chrome wins, it means they don't have to care about these deals too much anymore.
Because right now is Firefox switches search engine, it's very bad for Google.
Chrome will never switch. So, yeah.

That and that they can use Chrome to lock people into Google services in the future.
'SOPASucks' gets you $6.99/transfer
Eliminated? For some kids, it's the one reliable meal they get a day.

When it comes to feeding hungry children, the invisible hand of the marketplace does not have a very good track record.
I moved about 90 domains from GoDaddy to NameCheap when Bob Parsons was reveling in elephant slaughter, and it was remarkably easy.

I don't remember the details of the situation, but I do remember NameCheap being incredibly helpful in making it as painless as possible.
An even more recent example is Francis Collins [1], who directed the Human Genome Project.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins
Codecademy Launches ‘Labs,’ A Web-Based Code Editor
Naive to say the least. Mell Watt, one of congressmen present at the first hearing admitted to not knowing what a dividend was, and voted to allow banks to gamble on chaotic markets causing the 2008 crash. Now he's admitting to "not knowing anything about this technology" and saying "im no nerd, but..." and then continues to say that Issa was just wrong, and his experts are wrong, experts which include google. If you don't understand what you're voting on you're supposed to abstain.
That estimate seems pretty far off.

First, I think it's only fair to attribute ~1/2 of their revenue to search. You've got to give a lot to web ads, gmail ads, etc.

Second, I'm not sure it's quite fair to give FF 25% of their total search. It may be 25% of their desktop search, but mobile search is getting bigger and bigger. I'd say 25% is at best an upper bound.

Third, I think a large number of FF users would use Google search even if that required changing the default. I'd guess that it's on the order of 50%. The value of the deal is only the value of the searches they gain.

That said, even if you divide by 10, spending $300M to making $700M and get goodwill with developers is a great deal.
Mozilla is not your traditional corporation.
Money always comes second. Openess and such values always come first. Always.

There is no share holder. No one has to be worried, except people who support Mozilla's point of view.

That's why it's a company worth supporting. If you support it, you win. If you don't, well, they might eventually die, and there aren't really many (read: any) replacement.
It's pretty atypical.
Hard to even count the ways in which this statement is wrong.

Also, GoDaddy needs to hire an editor who can spell "complementary".

Maybe their editors are all too busy staring blankly at breasts, like in their ads.
1) I registered most of my domain names 5 or 6 ago and haven't bothered switching. I never had a problem with them personally and so I continued to use them. (I use them as a registrar, not as a host.)

2) I am not the most avid follower of HN and either never saw these stories or saw them and my eyes just glazed past them. I'm not interested in most stories here, not even about services that I use. Analogously, I use Gmail and don't read the horror stories about them anymore, but if Google were supporting SOPA I would probably switch from Gmail. I use AirBNB, didn't care about the silly meth head vandalism scandal that made every single top news story here, or various other criticisms, but would probably never use them again if they supported SOPA. etc.

3) Even if you don't buy the above, it still seems perfectly reasonable to be more offended by the support of SOPA than by the run-of-the-mill corporate incomptence that underlies most horror stories.

4) Complaining about downvotes is pretty lame, and I really can't tell if you're trolling or not, especially with a temporary account.

5) I can understand the sentiment that a self-fueling moralizing crowd is a distasteful thing to behold. But that's not an excuse to never agree with a boycott or take place in a collective action. Anyway, I don't think my original comment was particularly moralizing.

There, I took 200 seconds or so.
Investors don't invest if there are no shares to get.
And, there are no shares to get. And that's the whole point of Mozilla's existence.

Thus, there's only such deals and donations. An investor would therefore need to donate, to support Mozilla.
They provide other services besides domain hosting.

For example, domain registration.
Historically pro-copyright Heritage Foundation opposes SOPA
Data Protection Regulation and the Politics of Interoperability
Even though I prefer Google's search results to Bing's, I feel the "open web" might be a better place if Mozilla unseated Google's search monopoly by signing with Bing. Mozilla does have a search deal with Microsoft, but it's for second place on the list. If Bing was Firefox's default search engine, Google would have some healthy search competition.
NoDaddy lets you pledge to boycott Go Daddy for its stance on SOPA
Or just Candy.... on Twitpic
If more get caught in orbit than we thought, then are we gradually learning that the cloud of asteroids around us may not be uniformly distributed anymore?

As an extreme example, if the cloud of asteroids was entirely concentrated in the earth's orbit that would increase the odds of a collision. So wouldn't discovering that there's always one increase the odds (by a lot less)?

The number of pieces on a chessboard matters very little. You could be winning or losing based on their arrangement.

Shit, this could be alarming. I'm gonna research this more. (Anybody here see Melancholia?)
My representative is also Schiff. Did you write him an email or a physical letter? I'm considering personally delivering it to his LA office (I have a friend who works there). There doesn't seem to be much awareness about SOPA here in the Los Angeles area and it feels like this is ground zero for the whole thing. Is there anything we can do, as LA residents, to hit them where it hurts?
We don't need anything to observe the effect of 'mass'. We may need a multi-billion dollar machine to observe a tiny little thing happening at the middle of the effect so that we can better understand it.

What you're saying is like "if this watch gear is too small for me to touch, it's too small to matter".
Why do you bring "fairness" into this discussion?

YC has a fiduciary responsibility as well.

Corporations that are pro-SOPA don't make PR statements saying, "We are pro-SOPA because it will make us money."

Instead they say, "SOPA is good for America! Anyone opposed is a misinformed basement dweller!"

When pg says, "Anyone pro-SOPA is stupid" why don't you interpret it as pg discharging his fiduciary duty?

Why do you apologize for sociopathic lies in large corporations, but then criticize self-interested statements from small corporations?

I'm questioning the basic assumptions you take toward this issue. I find your attitude here baffling and, honestly, horrifying.

If corporations are supposed to tell PR-friendly lies to benefit their bottom line, shouldn't Paul Graham be telling PR-friendly lies to benefit his bottom line?

By extension, when you write that, are you telling PR-friendly lies? Which fiduciary duty are you discharging when you write that? Does SOPA benefit your bottom-line?

If SOPA benefits your bottom-line, shouldn't you be going around telling sociopathic lies to stop it? That's what the CEO of Pfizer is doing... you are your own CEO and you have a fiduciary duty to yourself.

If it's socially acceptable for corporations to tell profit-motived sociopathic lies, then it must be made socially acceptable for individuals to tell profit-motived sociopathic lies, and any appeal to "you're not being fair!" must be recognized as pure rhetoric designed to fool the gullible.

"Guuuuyyyys! Be nice to the SOPA supporters! They're only acting like Democracy-destroying sociopaths for their own personal profit! It's just not fair if you call them mean names!"
As a big dmr fan, I'm happy his death was noticed in at least some small part by the non-geek media. I didn't love this obit though, mostly because (while Google is far from perfect) I think the swipe that equates them with Apple in terms of mobile device control weakens the piece.

Contrary to what the article says, vendors are free to make handsets that run Android without any Google approval, they just don't get all the userland Google apps stuff. Also, Google is hardly in the same league of gatekeeping that Apple is when it comes to their app store, both because they lean towards easy approval of anything not harmful, and because in the standard OS distribution you're free to install your own APKs, other competing app stores (eg. Amazon), etc. Equating that situation to Apple's App Store where that's all you get unless you're going to jailbreak the phone is so much of a simplification of the truth that it is basically a lie.
Not even Los Angeles residents (who've heard of SOPA) support SOPA. I haven't met a single SOPA supporter here and I have friends in the entertainment industry (some signed to major labels).
This isn't about Hollywood... Its about Wikileaks and everyone else who wants to use their first ammendment right. thats my $.02
I'm not sure whether it was the HN posting, but it seems Tumblr is not coping with the amount of traffic. Whilst that isn't all that interesting, I just wanted to say kudos for having a link to charity on the error page:

We're very sorry
Our servers are over capacity and certain pages may be temporarily unavailable.
We're working quickly to resolve the issue.

In the meantime, please consider donating to the Red Cross
to help those in Japan who are in need of support.

Unfortunately, the link provided is broken:

http://www.ifrc.org/en/get-involved/donate/donation-japan

Anyone from Tumblr watching?
This is really cool. Can't wait for the Python lessons to come out!
Apps Are For Android, Games For the iPhone
I think nl was suggesting that investors could raise money to buy Firefox's search spot and then create a search engine. Imagine if some VC firm raised $301M to outbid Google and then signed a deal with DuckDuckGo.
CSS stands for Cascading Style Sheets so what does a generic style pattern concept have to do with 3D and animated slideshows?