skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think you're misreading my reply ;-)

First: I don't focus on weight. I focus on fitness, and on body composition.

The sections of the article referencing article fail to distinguish at all between cardio and strength training. There's no mention of "strength" or "weight training" at all.

Your burlesque dancing is probably great cardio, and may do something for basic leg and core strength (you've probably got great adductors). You've probably got better rythm and prioprioception than me. And it's likely a hell of a lot of fun (not to be discounted). But if you look into strength training principles, you'll find that in order to develop strength (or size, or endurance), you've got to train in specific modalities. See Wikipedia for a good overview:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strength_training

You won't build muscle if you don't push its limits.

Another fave for women is Stumptuous:
http://www.stumptuous.com/

I also never said I'd given up on cardio. These days it's more often rowing (indoors and out), and I manage a 2k indoor erg time that has me top-25 ranked worldwide (no, I haven't entered) for my age range (I've got a few on you, and sing the praises of healthy living as well). Remember: I'm coming at this from the perspective of a life-long cardio junkie and heavy-iron disdainer.

tl;dr: It's diet, strength, cardio (HIIT, LSD, NEPA), and other fitness modalities. Don't emphasize one modality to the exception of all others.
ive created 2 simple 2D games and they give me some nice profit so im working on something 3D now.
im using power of mogade :)
@latch - your service is great
->
http://wp7-games.com
I agree with what you're saying, but since the nature of your objection is semantic...it depends on what one means by evil. I'd say killing me to make paperclips from my atoms is evil.
There are 3 main methods used to stonewall the saving of images from online content.

1. embed in flash/pdf

2. javascript to interrupt right clicking

3. overlaying a transparent image to capture the click

I say 'stonewall' because as a general rule: If the user can see/hear it then the user can save it. Most often in the pristine format supplied.

Content providers should be aware of this already and simply not make commercially-useful content available online. (E.g. by using low resolution/overly compressed or watermarked images.)

Where degraded quality is acceptable: Consider that even the least technical person you know is able to pickup a camera and point it at their screen.
Bill Gates Hauled Into Court To Answer Serious Questions
I for one am tired of this "I am the 99%" buzz phrase. It seems like most who dogmatically repeat this phrase have no direction in terms of what they are trying to convey.

The ironic thing about this is that it seems very very closed in terms of sharing which I believe is a step backward.
to be fair, distributed consensus is essentially impossible. iMessage is definitely an improvement on SMS, though.

read up on the 'two generals problem'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Generals%27_Problem

"Because acknowledgement of message receipt can be lost as easily as the original message, a potentially infinite series of messages is required to come to consensus."
You might find this video interesting as well.

Sugar: The Bitter Truth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
While modern JVM languages leverage Java to overcome the 'library problem', the traffic tends to be one-way. So while there are 'clojurely' ways to call Java libraries, calling Clojure from Java is ugly and non-idiomatic, despite what the article claims. How does one even call Scala from Clojure?

Presuming that, for the most part, developers migrate from Java to a different JVM language, then inevitably these languages will fragment code written for the JVM, devaluing the very foundation used to hoist the languages into usefulness in the first place. The tower of Babel will rise higher with competing idiomatic implementations of various libraries. This is not a bad thing--rather it has to be this way because introducing new language features (such as STM in Clojure's case) demands it. We're living in a gold rush on Java to mine it for its libraries. After this will come a period of settlement as each JVM language builds its own community, with civic structures that perform the same duties, but look different, in every town square.
> It would be unethical if a company properly secured their servers.

My guess is that this is the root. It's unethical for you to walk into my house and read my mail regardless of whether I locked the door that morning or not.

I'm not losing any sleep over this particular leak, just saying, what I quoted is probably their beef.
You described that beautifully. I've known people who use that sort of flashy pseudo-honesty who intend to be shocking and get a reaction out of people, and while it does work for some, I'm usually inclined to point out what they're doing in hopes that they'd stop and I could never find which words to say. It irritates me.
(My take) There's a subtle difference between constructive criticism and nonconstructive criticism. Constructive criticism involves advice that builds off the idea that the thing being criticized is fixable, whereas nonconstructive criticism assumes that it's not fixable and contains traces of strong, sometimes insulting, disgust of or not liking the idea without advice.

If the purpose of criticism is to prevent the person from making the same mistakes twice, then it is constructive criticism, even if the advice is 'I didn't enjoy the way you sang that song.' and doesn't suggest how to fix it or suggests the idea is not fixable. This type of criticism implies that criticizer did not like the idea (or in this case, song,) but does not imply that the person is "horrible" nor that anyone who hears the song will dislike it.

"Your singing is horrible.' is nonconstructive criticism; so is "That code is shitty, don't become a programmer"

"Did someone vomit out that design?" is nonconstructive criticism that, although points out a possible problem, doesn't suggest any advice and is too strong to be helpful.

tmcw's comment "Is it just me or is this design kind of awesomely baller?" is constructive (albeit not critical criticism) and also opens a path for discussion of the site's design instead of immediately and quite strongly crying out that the site is fundamentally right or wrong.
I find it notable that Perl is invulnerable to this type of attack.
Please Stop Saying "Hard Problems"
Just stop it. Unless you startup is working on academically difficult problems that nobody has a solution for in the wild, just stop it.

Building a website in Node.js or setting up Redis cluster is not a "Hard Problem". You just sound like an idiot.
Www dvd und com
www dvd und com
www dvd und com Carroll Spinney portrays two of the most recognizable characters on kamera foto com www kamera foto com www kamera foto com
No.

It's harder.

There does appear to be a "fat memory" (there's also a muscle memory -- those who've done strength training in their youth will make faster, bigger gains when resuming training later on).

But, absent some underlying organic cause or insult (injury, genetic propensity, illness), the same principles that work for those who have little trouble losing weight work for those who are obese. Perhaps a little more time and effort are involved.

The lesson that's been instructive to me as I travel through the decades has been to watch those who were typically thin as they hit their 30s and 40s. If they aren't practicing good nutrition and activity practices, even they tend towards girth, though it's usually a potbelly rather than an all-encompassing growth.

Nobody gets a free ride on this one.
I was using my OG Droid on a regular basis until I got a Galaxy Nexus. I was running the latest Gingerbread and a super-tuned fast kernel from http://www.peteralfonso.com/ on it. When the manufacturers drop the ball, the community jumps on it. Far better than an iPhone of similar vintage (the OG Droid came out in late 2009.)
Ironically, ycombinator uses flash for its photos.
The average acquisition pays 676% profit to company investors
> In the end, don't parts manufacturers need Android more than vice versa?

No, as far as parts go Android phones are run-of-the-mill smartphones (as are pretty much all others), it does not matter what OS they run the parts are the same.

Parts manufacturers only need smartphones being built, and that won't stop, Android or not.
Easy there ... I'm mostly agreeing with you.
Anyone thought through the advantages of using Parse vs. iCloud for sync? For a multi-platform app, Parse seems to be the way to go. The only disadvantage I can see is that I ( as a service provider ) have to pay the storage costs of parse, while Apple handles the storage costs for iCloud (including collecting expenses from users who opt for more than the free 5gb).
Interesting and quite dense post. Singularity related articles and worries about "good" AI building makes me a bit uneasy when the performance of machines on many important tasks, e.g. object recognition, is dismal. So we have quite a way to go.

The usual rebuttal to the above is the "intelligence explosion" argument: once AIs can improve themselves, their progress will be exponential. As a tl;dr for the post, consider the Dewey summary of the argument:

1. Hardware and software are improving, there are no signs that we will stop this,
2. and human biology and biases indicate that we are far below the upper limit on intelligence.
3. Economic arguments indicate that most AIs would act to become more intelligent.
4. Therefore, intelligence explosion is very likely.

If you think about it, only (1) is a fact, the rest are assertions that are open to debate. For example, in (2) how do we define the "upper limits of intelligence", when even defining intelligence is problematic. Currently the human brain is the most complex and intelligent object we know. For (3), I don't know what sort of "economic arguments" are meant but as we all know becoming "more intelligent" is not a simple hill climbing process, in fact it's not clear how to go about it. Is Watson more intelligent than a person?

If you think about these facts for some time, you will find that AIs designing more intelligent AIs scenario has very little plausibility actually, let alone being highly probable.
It seems the same argument you're making about it being distasteful to release the emails without any a priori evidence of wrongdoing could have been applied to the HBGary Federal incident, although Anonymous was provoked in that case since Aaron Barr claimed to be able to expose the "leaders" of the movement.

Was it distasteful to leak the 44,000 emails acquired? If so, was the important information gleaned from the emails exposing all manner of shady dealings in the white hat industry[1] not enough to vindicate the attacks?

[1]http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110209/22340513034/leaked...
First you will have to explain why specificity is important to someone going from "untrained" to "some lean muscle mass."
> But the former is not true; Google has a stick just like Microsoft has a stick. It's a different stick, but it's a stick. They just choose not to use it.

What stick does Google have?
>Technically, there was no fraud. //

FWIW I didn't look at the specifics of this case I was merely responding to the parent comment which implied that there had been a fraud.

My query was with the suggestion that such fraud would only be unlawful/illegal if there was specific statute against fraudulently engaging an employee and that if there were not then such frauds would be of null legal consequence for the perpetrators.
It feels very fast and I really enjoy the color scheme. One thing I noticed: On small resolutions the top navigation bar wraps.
Sorry, I meant "bitch" simply in the generic sense of "to complain about x", not that your comment came across as bitchy.

I'm glad you did bring it up in public, and glad the issue was fixed, since I use ST a lot but this was a rather glaring omission for a Mac text editor.
The post was clear that they did not do this to prove the security flaws. They did it because they believe this information should be made public for the good of the public.

Nearly everyone in this forum opposes SOPA's attempt to shut down websites without a trial. Effectively subpoenaing private communication between suspected criminals without a court order and making those emails public requires much the same infringement of basic rights.

So you have to ask yourself, "Do I approve of private citizens and organizations taking actions such as these if they believe they're helping fight crime?" And then ask yourself whether you're talking about the release of these emails, or SOPA.
"it's just that the government isn't in the business of throwing money away"

In all seriousness, this is why they shouldn't be investing in startups. Early stage investing is all about "throwing away" a bunch of money and (hopefully) making even more back when a subset of your portfolio wins big. If you're micromanaging each dollar/transaction, then you're really, really doing it wrong.
That's quite possible (and not a bug) if she has more than one device - iMessage disabled on the phone (which would force phone number messages to be SMS) but the email address turned on for iMessage on another device. I had my iPhone/iPad set this way for a while to allow me to send messages from either device without getting replies back to both devices.
That was my reaction as well; the author obviously doesn't realize Flash helps photographers protect their work from Google and the right-clickers, which a lot of them actually do care about.

I was half-expecting a complaint about View Source, which would've made sense; I don't see what the gripe is here other than a word of warning to fellow photogs about Flash probably not working on the mobile phones of those who might hire them, and a general appeal to the use of Web standards. Unless I'm missing something.

As an aside, though, when I read this, I cringed:

"I know [Flash disappearing] is fairly unlikely, but even Adobe has pretty much dropped support for Flash in favor of HTML5."

Er, come again? Adobe is sunsetting Flash for mobile browsers. All other incarnations of Flash are still very much on the roadmap.

It just kills me to see how confused so many people seem to be about Flash, what it's good for, what it's not so good for, and what Adobe's future plans are for it. Certainly Adobe is to blame for a lot of this, but the "Flash vs. HTML5" theme of 2011 certainly didn't help clarify how different the two really are.
Great, then you know who not to work for.

I agree that 'magic code' and obfuscation is pretty much ego stroking, but this doesn't seem like a good argument against the whole idea of using weakly typed languages.
Everyone: stop referring to Javascript as Java.
I mean, that's an interesting question, right?

I've copied the information in your mail to myself without harming the original. If I burned your letter, I've absolutely committed a wrong, but I didn't do that.

If you fail to lock your door, you are in effect allowing this possibility. If you communicate over a "clear" channel, without taking steps to encrypt that data, you are again allowing this. That's why I don't view this as a valid moral claim.
"More laws!! Think of the children!"
Parse does a lot more than iCloud. You can manage users and share data between users, facebook integration and push notification services.
The Posterous team really needs to get their Twitter/Facebook login working for comments on iOS devices. Tried both to leave a comment on the page but kept getting a "we think this is spam" error. Guys, if I'm giving you an email address and two different oauth logins that are validated, it's probably not spam.

Anyway, here's the comment:

Flash does absolutely nothing to prevent someone from saving copies of images. With basic knowledge of using the developer tools built into any modern browser, it's easy to see the urls being loaded for any resource on a page.

Some photographers have this fear of their images being copied. They spend way too much time concentrating on it. What any successful photographer can tell you is that most of your time is spent being a business person, not snapping the shutter. You make money by marketing yourself and growing your business, not policing the entire internet for errant copies of a photo.
> Drivers aren't the issue, though.

Drivers are most definitely the major issue as far as ChrisLTD's suggestion goes.

> Most Android phone boards lean relatively close to their SoC's reference design, and while building board support for each device certainly isn't trivial, it's far from a difficult task

Nobody (least of all me) says it's a difficult task. But it's not a task Google can achieve, from Android, by bundling every single SoC driver under the sun.

I'm not sure what you're trying to reply to, but it does not seem to be my comment.

> The common bottleneck [...] Samsung [...] that device.

This paragraph has nothing to do with this sub-thread (let alone my comment).

> Google could certainly introduce rules surrounding upgrades and integrator customizations which would alleviate the upgrade issue

They could introduce whatever rule they want, the question is: would anybody care? Google has no power over OEMs, short of making android "not open-source anymore".
> Let me state the point very concisely and maybe you'll find you actually agree with me:

> The GoDaddy stories have become repetitive and unproductive. The stories have been polluted with misinformation and false assumptions. We've said all there is to say and this is distracting us from stopping this bill from passing. Boycotting them is a great way to protest but let's talk about some other things we can do like we had been doing before the GoDaddy story broke.

I somewhat agree. But the reason I was nitpicking is because those details matter.

GoDaddy isn't blameless. In fact, while they didn't write specific exemptions for themselves they did tweak it for their own good (undoubtedly). If they merely get spanked a bit they'll be back to business as usual in a few weeks and will continue supporting SOPA even if quietly. If they get put out of business and every employee above janitorial is black-listed unless they specifically renounce SOPA and the GoDaddy leaders then future companies will be less willing to try this and future employees will be more willing to leave instead of trotting out "but then who'd feed my kids?" excuses. That sort of fear might actually change things.

In fact, I think we don't stand a chance in hell of stopping SOPA in the big picture. If we do stop this specific bill they'll reintroduce it with a kiddy-porn focus and we'll all be monsters for daring to speak out against it.

In the end our only hope is uncensorable technologies because as long as any group is in control of communications technologies they'll find a need to censor and limit them. Fighting SOPA seems to me like as much of a waste of time as fighting GoDaddy does to you.

But if we could exact real, lasting, damage to some of its supporters it would be harder for this sort of thing to be done again.

> Hasn't the GoDaddy story played itself out?

Does the CEO still get paid? If so, no.

> What I'm saying is that it seems like we're focusing so narrowly on one SOPA related story and missing the larger picture.

Some of us, yes. Others, no. Why don't you stop exhorting others to do what you want, stop contributing to the noise, and go attack the bigger picture in your own way. Then you'd have something to post to HN and you might win supporters away from the GoDaddy hate-fest where you could never chase them away.
New Year’s Resolutions Are Garbage; Setting Goals Is Not
It's pointless, causing a lot of people a lot of trouble with no clear upside. Even the Pastebin admits that Stratfor doesn't seem to be involved in anything shady, but they're going to release all their e-mails anyway just in case. It's a witch hunt.

There is no best case scenario from releasing this data. The point that even security companies can't guarantee security has been made, all that releasing the data can do is turn public sentiment against Antisec and towards "whatever it takes to stop this kind of thing".
Unfortunately things are generally getting worse in Europe with ACTA and data retention laws passing EU legislation and subsequently beeing forced into national laws.
Could the same not be said for having windows made of glass? You did not build your entire house of steel and deadbolt locks, so you have allowed this possibility and therefore I am entitled to come into your house.
One other point I'd been meaning to make. Not specific to your comments, but this is as good a place as any to add it.

Diet, strength training, cardio, sleep, and stress management are largely tools for influencing the endocrine system endogenously (by stimulating natural endocrine responses), rather than exogenously (through direct hormone supplementation).

Through diet, you can regulate your insulin/glucagon and leptin/ghrelin cycles, as well as the longer-term IGF cycle. Short-term, insulin is anabolic (which is why you eat carbs after strength training), long-term, it's lipogenic. This will have strong impacts especially on body fat, but also (timed correctly) on muscle development.

Through strength training you can influence testosterone and HGH production. The latter particularly if you're getting sufficient sleep, generally over 8 hours/night. Adequate sleep will also reduce cortisol (stress hormone) production, as will other stress-management techniques (avoidance, acceptance, meditation), which again affects body fat and muscle catabolism (breakdown).

Cardio activity also has influences on insulin and stress levels.

The five methods give you a pretty good means to adjust, again, endogenously, some very powerful influencers of your body's regulatory mechanisms.

The other side of physical activity is that it's strongly trained into your neurological system. It's nerves that carry the impulses to move muscles, and both heavy lifting and fine motor control will exercise different parts of the nervous system, with carryover in both cases to improved brain function. Strength training, music playing, painting, dance, ballet, gymnastics, balancing a 12" racing shell, learning foreign languages, problem-solving: all work different parts of your neurological system. Done for too long, any can be fatiguing, but as a regular exercise, they'll expand your capacity to do similar activity, and add improved resiliance all around.
Adverbios en ingles
Uso correcto de los adverbios en ingles. Formas y posición de los adverbios en ingles
I know it well, good one. Thanks for posting.
I guess the issue is how likely you think a hard takeoff/FOOM scenario is: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Intelligence_explosion

"Sure a human level computer AI gets 'free' speed doubling every 18 months, but so does the intelligence that surrounds an augmented human. Just look at how much more intelligence we have available to us now as compared to 20 years ago."

A motivated human-level AI could get free speed doubling a lot more quickly than every 18 months -- it could acquire more resources that already exist, it could increase the speed of progress in hardware improvements, and, perhaps most importantly, it might be able to improve itself to achieve a qualitatively superhuman intelligence rather than just quantitatively. Sections 3: "Underestimating the power of intelligence" and 7: "Rates of intelligence increase" of the Yudkowsky paper I linked before, "AI as a Negative and Positive Factor in Global Risk", address this well. http://singinst.org/upload/artificial-intelligence-risk.pdf

I think it's a mistake to compare an AI superintelligence to anything on earth currently, like market forces. An AI superintelligence could probably improve itself a lot faster than any market could.
With respect, it's an awful question. Awful because some politician might read it and think - yes, what can I do to prevent it?