skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
One thing comes to mind: if you eliminate lowball pricing, would that not get rid of the very reason most freelance sites exist? What I mean is if I'm willing to pay leading market rate for site design work, wouldn't it be likely that I can find a handful of leading designers that I could choose from?

Ditto for programming and so on. Once freelance sites solve the problem of "I can't find anybody", most devolve into a race to the bottom where it's unlikely that you'll find quality even if you're willing to pay leading market rates.
Yup, immediately reminded me of Jef's son Aza's work on the Enso and Ubiquity projects.
We’re hiring a Tech Lead at Groove - 135K salary + meaningful equity
The Hacker Top program
Good news for Wikipedia, though to be fair he did not donate (the source says he promised to), and it's not Facebook for Russia as such (a separate social network which copies Facebook functionality and features similar UI).
Pedophobia Meaning, Pedophobia Symptoms, Pedophobia Treatment
Hold down option and click the volume icon in the menu bar, select "Use Audio Port for: Input"
Or scramble them altogether. Every write to the filesystem through Truecrypt's driver results in a completely random (but still valid) ctime/atime for that file.

I can't readily think of any Windows processes this would break.
Why is Facebook censoring torrent links?
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Search-Engines/Googles-Brin-Wife-Fl...
I appreciate that the adversarial method of trial has given rise to that and other threads of argument on behalf of defendants; I'm just not buying it in this case.

It's an absurdly low bar for "active participation." He's not being asked to compute the AES decryption on 3x5 cards, or help the prosecution find the spot where the laptop is buried in the woods. When you're caught, you're forced to empty your pockets. If your 'pockets' include 1TB of incriminating data, that's your bad.

Is one also actively participating in his own prosecution when he fails to resist arrest? How about when he agrees not to leave the country as a condition for posting bail? After all, he's had that vacation to [insert non-extradition country here] for months! Why should he change his plans to benefit the prosecution?
Not really a mirror but webupd8 host a quote and a video :

http://www.webupd8.org/2012/01/hud-ubuntus-new-smart-menus-a...

I'm still not sold, I found the UL-Corner positioning greatly aggressive. I'd put it in the bottom personally but I'm used to the Unix 'bottom command line' habit.

Otherwise it's one step closer to a contemporary desktop command line, in the video the guy even typed 'undo' in inkscape, made me smile. I guess having this common iterative search of nested menus will greatly help users, as it helped many of us in the shell or emacs (or any system providing this idea)
Do you have cash in the bank? Are you running neck and neck with competitors? Are you leaving growth on the table? Could you survive 100% loss for a few months?

When you take outside money, there is an implicit commitment to growth and risk. If you're playing it safe and your competitors are outpacing you, it's fair for you investor to push. But at 30% growth MONTHLY (which is insanely good), you can probably comfortably push back. But if there are obvious investments that could accelerate growth, you should consider making them at the expense of month to month profit (if you have the cash to do it). If you don't have the cash, you should consider raising money (at good terms) so that you have the ability to make this choice.

Good read on startups and profitability here: http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2011/12/27/should-startup...
Trouble Tickets: Annoying, but Useful
In the U.S. we have the Corporation for Public Broadcasting created by an act of Congress. Funds are entirely tax-based and not optional (not even in theory). Americans largely don't have a problem with this due to the high quality of the programming, although there's an outcry of protest every so often.
Lobbyists are further proof that shipping code wins and they know this. We can discuss this all we want in the blogosphere, but so long as they are the ones implementing the laws, those are the implementations and architectural decisions we're going to have to live with. Congress is a commit generator, and most of the "code" put in front of them for review are written by lobbyists.

From my understanding, it isn't Congressmen that write the laws most of the time. AFAIK, many laws are written by industry and then handed to Congressmen read and modify, and such bills are handed with explanations and arguments to why they are needed. Such a process with always result in laws that move in the interest of lobbying powers due to the very nature of how negotiation works. In every negotiation, you have an "anchoring" effect, where the final outcome will be near the starting point. With that in mind, lobbyists define the starting point and therefore where the anchor is hooked on every debate.

The only solution I can come up with to this is a requirement that every single bill needs to be drafted in the open with a commit history of who made each and every commit to a bill. Only with this in place would we be able to see how much of the laws are written not by government but by industry. It would also give the people (specifically active concerned citizens) a voice early on in the process so that the position on which the "anchor gets hooked" is more balanced and representative.

Politicians, and especially lobbyists, today say things to the effect that it is difficult to draft laws and discuss things out in the open. What those that complain about this fail to understand is that that is the very essence of democracy. Democracy starts at the beginning of the discussion of public policy, not at the point at which policy comes to a vote.

Dodd, during his speech where he remarked that SOPA was a watershed moment, even said, "the white noise has made it impossible to have a conversation about this. We've gotta find a better way to have that conversation than we have in the last two weeks." This attitude is a clear sign of someone that doesn't understand what a democracy is. That white noise is democracy in action and the best thing we can do is make sure that democracy is happening at the inception of every idea that evolves into a law.

We basically need a super easy, useable git for laws accessible by everyone.
Others aren't really interested in your credentials. University is a personal achievement thing. As long as you feel the education you received is equal or greater than what you would have received in a brick and mortar institution, you should be happy with that, no?

With that said, most people do place a lot of value in the connections they made during their time in school. I'm not sure those connections can be built by online institutions. That may have a dramatic effect on opportunities one has later in life.

On an unrelated note, I had a teacher in high school several years ago that figured universities were already obsolete at that time. It's interesting it is a topic still in debate. Perhaps he was a man ahead of his time; he teaching style certainly was.
In Macs it’s directly wired to the camera. If the camera receives power the LED also receives power.
I'm going to crib from my own post from two days ago:

Donations don't literally buy votes, but what they do literally buy is face time. That is, people in Congress will hold fundraisers, and lobbyists pay to attend those fundraisers. The understanding is that the lobbyists who attend those fundraisers will have time to talk to the politician about the issues their clients care about.

This episode of Planet Money clearly demonstrates this: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/11/01/141913370/the-tues...

Edit: I remove the SOPA specific stuff, and didn't realize that in doing so, I removed the punchline. The implication of the above is that politicians' agenda becomes set by those who have the money to pay lobbyists. When you spend a lot of time talking to a bunch of people with an agenda, you will start to think about that agenda a lot. It's a natural consequence of the circumstances and the incentives.

I've harped on this point several times in the last few days. My reason is simple: we must understand the real problem before we can fix it. And the real problem is not "Vote for x and I'll give you money." That is illegal. What I described above is legal, and while it is not illegal corruption, it is a corruption of how we want the system to work.

And I stole that last sentiment from Lawrence Lessig: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ik1AK56FtVc Someone else here linked to that a few days ago, and it's worth watching.
You got me--I speculated. However, there is a difference between writing a speculative comment and writing a speculative headline. Everything has its place.

I could have said "Since they behaved like criminals in the past, they will continue to be criminals" but that would a) assume their guilt and b) rule out the ability for people to change their ways.
Note: please read this all the way through before down/up voting. I'm not defending any actors here, I'm just trying to present an "all sides considered" view of the situation.

I think there's a fair amount of "projecting" going on here. More and more, I see the intellectual property discussion being couched in the language of "looters, moochers, and parasites" (aptly borrowing from Ayn Rand).

It's undeniable that the RIAA/MPAA are leveraging government to protect their business model (Randian looter behavior), but how you perceive this action has a lot to do with which side of the fence you're on. If you're on the outside looking to get in, the RIAA/MPAA are looters. If you're on the inside looking to control who gets in, those on the outside are moochers.

Those with an objectivist viewpoint won't be able to see this scenario in any other way. The RIAA/MPAA are easy villains, and play the part of the looter very well. They don't even appear to try and compete in the market. They just run to the government for cover. That doesn't, in and of itself, validate the "Megabox disruption" theory.

The RIAA/MPAA don't view their actions any differently than a business owner who calls the police when someone steals a product from the shelf in their store. Yes, I'm completely aware of the difference. It has been discussed ad nauseum in plenty of places. Digital goods can't be stolen, blah blah blah. I get it. I agree to some extent, but I'm asking you to set aside those views for a moment and consider this chess board from both players' perspectives.

The fundamental debate is really about fair use and free speech.

Fair use - To what extent are we allowed to use copyrighted material without compensation of the rights-holder?

Free speech - What is the obligation of a website operator to police the users of said website?

There's an old saying about fundamental rights that goes something like this: The right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. In matters of intellectual property, things are not as plain as the nose on your face (ta-dum-tss!).
Don't get me wrong. It is possible, the community website provides an accurate walkthrough[1] of how to do so and it looks totally scriptable. Mint just doesnt seem to have the "fire and forget" option ubuntu has. Their justification is that there is a risk of data loss/system corruption (see section E1 in link) :

> The only advantage Ubuntu offers is that it makes the process trivial and fully automated. Though, considering the risks and the way it upgrades your system, this should be considered dangerous.

[1]http://community.linuxmint.com/tutorial/view/2
I see alot of HTML5 games, some really very good ones on many lists, but what i still dont see is many multi-player versions of the same games, or just multiplayer games ,period.

I know that with the advent of architectures like Node.js this is a very real possibility so i'm very surprised i havent seen more in this space. I would have thought this is a market that's getting ready to explode(?)
CBS and other companies are what we call "old money".
And when it comes to things like Websites and social networks, they just don't have the mindset that they should have when it comes to it.
That said, their servers are greatly under managed, and the people working in those areas are unable to keep up because when they first started, they where still writing "the book". Also, Anon is made up of more than just bored 18 year olds (As the media greatly dramatizes.)but rather "disgruntled" and "fed up" masters who want to retaliate in any way possible.
I guess it would also become more difficult raising money via the markets without diluting employee stake.
It's not the same as their unity dock? oh.
Don't mind him. When we initially tried to engage with the debate, his side figuratively stuck their fingers in their ears and said "na-na-na I can't hear you!" He's not interested in having a debate, he just wants to treat us like children (and have the government spy on our every move to make sure we're not doing anything the MPAA disapproves of.)
Show HN: My First iPhone Game, Bodily.
Wow. Thank you for the insights.. I've added your suggestion to this ever-growing list of to-do.. eventually, the app should get polished up well with these quirks.

The issue with quality of projects is quite a complicated problem. There were quite a few ways to tackle this problem, but in the end I decided to leave it open and follow the flow with a live app in the wild. Just off the top of my head, these came to mind:

- Pre-qualify all projects
- Pre-quality all freelancers before signing up
- Create a must-use middle man on all projects started with a project manager assigned to it

Even with the list of just those three, the cause and effect of implementing each pigeon holes the business model a lot. Although; doing any of those three or anything else is not out of the question either.

At the end of the day; I guess what I am trying to say is I decided to leave the system completely open and eventually find Freelancify's "calling" and path and follow that to transform into a service that fills the hole (the exact problem you described) that neither Elance, oDesk, etc. fills right now. I think by listening to users, it'll eventually get there. And by Freelancify being a startup and not huge like the others, it has the luxury to pivot and move.
Not saying that's how it happened, but improper website takedowns by the US government are not exactly new.
Can you provide a link to the S.I. itself on the page? I'd like to read the damn thing before calling my TD's.
Thanks, mental note taken. I answered bdg's response above I think you may be able to relate to.
work my ass. get creative. then repeat.
And how is making most of the bribery cases legal helping? At least then you'd know bribery when you see it. Now, almost all types of bribery can be done in a legal way.

US doesn't have too many bribery prosecutions not because there's so little corruption, but because it's all legal.
>But that's not a counterargument. Your simply restating your own point, which I disagree with. It's pretty obvious that someone who would score well in an artificial testing environment A would score well in such an environment B if B is a followup of A. That doesn't disprove the point that grades are a fundamentally flawed concept in education.

The main problem with his argument is not that the "testing environment" is flawed. He is talking about learning as if it were a race, and suggesting that only the hares should be allowed to run it.

Often those who do extremely well in math classes have a pretty good head start, due to circumstances that are not a result of their abilities, or even their own choices. And, of course, such students will do better later; they can maintain a more comfortable pace than those who are racing behind b/c they are trying to make up for their late start.

It also disfavors those who are distracted not by parties and social scenes, but distracted from the main course by branches of the subject under study which catch their interest. That is, it favors the compliant student who is after good grades, and disfavors those who desire knowledge, skill and understanding for their own sake, or for any purpose not foreseen by those who designed the "course".

The great benefit to these on-line study programs is that it serves the interests of all of these kinds of students. Neither necessity, influence, affluence nor preference need induce the educators to favor one over the others.
> Let me present you with my anecdotal experience as a student myself: Next to no one but a core group of good students will sit through any physical lecture unless it's absolutely mandatory to attend, either.

Really? I give non-compulsory lectures, and get > 80% attendance rates. I also encourage audience participation, and get it. I think my lectures would be less useful via the internet. Not useless of course, but not as useful.
That blog post will definitely be next!
HUD: new official Unity feature for Ubuntu
Ask HN: Salary Raise after MS degree
I'm asking this question on behalf of a friend who works in cybersecurity for a large-ish technology firm. I know HN may not be the ideal place to ask this, given it's purpose, but I know a lot of people here would have some wisdom to contribute to this.

The question is how much of a raise should she expect (and ask) after receiving a MS degree in computer science. She got the degree in Summer 2010, and goes in for the performance review this week. 10% seems reasonable for the degree itself, but not including the normal increase. So does asking for/expecting something like a 13%-18% raise seem reasonable? Low-balled or high-balled? I've heard her group's budget has been increased 5% since the previous year.

Thanks for any input!
thanks Josh!! it was the hardest/easiest thing I've ever learned to do..
If you really want to easily bridge websocket in the front-end with a backend using ZeroMQ, please take a look at Mongrel2. You get that plus a wonderful webserver.

Mongrel2: http://www.mongrel2.org
Jailbreaking should be compared to "rooting" in android world. And only fraction of users who rooted their phone install CyanogenMod.

What do other users, who rooted their phone? I, for example, installed OpenVPN. I had to have "su" access in order to do that. But I do not plan to install CyanogenMod any time soon simply because of lack of the time.

So... 1 million of Cyanogen users is pretty significant number in fact.
we need a way that we can vote against InfoGraphicsChartJunk
Perhaps, but taking it down now is certainly no coincidence.
Why not skip the middle and just field our own candidates?

Viral marketing > any other marketing known to man.
Well, the article says:

"CyanogenMOD, the third-party, fully-open, bloatware-free port of Android, has recently passed a million installs."

I don't see it going that much further, and the number (which is obviously worldwide) is almost insignificant.

Hell, there are hardcore geek-oriented programming tools / frameworks etc that have had that many downloads or even more. For example, Eclipse Europa, a single release of the Eclipse Java IDE, had announced 2.8 million downloads.

So I see it more as a curiosity for hackers and tinkerers that is near its peak, than an actual platform that is on the rise and will have any impact on the market.

Even Linux never conquered the desktops of the great masses, and Linux has had even more benefits to it, especially being totally free as in beer to use, while with CyanogenMOD you still need to pay for your contract.
> The wealthiest countries in the world have large governments

The largest governments: Soviet Union, Third Reich, North Korea, etc.
Students innovate the digital page flip
HTTP Errors for civilisations
Does something like this exist for Safari or Firefox?
Please do not editorialize the title.
His comparison is apt. When "just a hack" has more downloads in much less time that a "complete replacement operating system", the numbers are not in your favor.
Seo Analysis - Plattform für Informationen über Neo-Nazis und ihre Strukturen.
> Should someone who takes 5 years to get a degree be considered lesser than someone else who does the same degree in 2? Assuming they get the same marks awarded.

To be honest, I think they should (unless they are taking the degree part time).

If it takes you over twice as long to learn something, that means we can probably expect you to take twice as long to learn new things?

In practice, I have never seen a student who took 5 years (and therefore repeated 2 years on a 3 year degree) who ended up getting a good final grade (although I am sure there exist exceptions somewhere).
thanks for the list.. getting small quirks like this fixed is my goal for this week.
That's not what the Citizens United decision says at all. It allows Super PACs to collect unlimited donations to run campaign ads supporting or opposing specific candidates. That may open the door to corruption in a certain sense, but it doesn't allow quid pro quo on active legislation.
Yes, there was a false dichotomy, but it was on your side; I was just objecting to it.

Me: People should be able to tell with confidence (not perfect 100% confidence) whether they're breaking the law, yet today, nobody can have anything close to this.

You: That's an impossible ideal, the law performs about as well as it can be expected to.

Me: It's unreasonable to expect better? So everywhere people have been that uncertain of having violated the law?

You: False dichotomy! You prove I was right all along!

Me: Um ...?
Actually, reduction in power is precisely how our Founders (continuing a trend begun in England) rendered governments less corrupt.

An absolute monarch, or more likely, his ministers, can get away with almost anything, because they easily find some basis to kill off anyone objects. Corruption under Roman emperors make our worst corporations look like public philanthropies.

The Founders put paid to all this excitement by 1) insisting all power be exercised by elected or appointed officials and 2) splitting up government power so much it just wasn't fun any more.

Today, "smaller" == "less corrupt" because "smaller" reduces returns on political investment. Congress currently manages, through spending or regulation, something like two-thirds of our economy. If they managed something like one-third, the friendship of a Congressman would be dramatically less valuable. And smaller == more transparent, because it's easier to to observe and distinguish the activities within a smaller, less complicated enterprise.

EDIT:
Can't find a rebuttal on Wikipedia? Go read some books.
Nodebits - Bits of inspiration to keep the node spirit alive
lmao.. fixed.