skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: What tools do you use to save interesting UI/UX you find on-line? 
Do you use any tool like LittleSnapper to save interesting UI/UX solutions or images for your next project? Do you save them on your desktop or in the cloud?
I am under the impression that laid off employees are going out with a good severance package. If it is true that there is no severance for laid off employees, then it is brutal
Kids are cool to have? Nah, I have too much emotional burden to even become a father figure. It is a lot of responsibility, and I bet the joy of having kids is priceless. Cool? not so much.
I think another big factor is probably a white background vs. a black background. Bill Watterson said he avoided making strips with dark backgrounds too often because the human eye is drawn away from dark to light.

I would like to see an A/B test of the same basic artwork on a black background vs. the white one.
As much as I like the design, I think Google should first aim at making them look as inconspicuous as possible by making it look like a normal piece of eyewear.

There are very few visible pieces of technology that we carry and display in public (probably only glasses and watches). Visible wearable technology has a long history of being either geeky or douchebaggish (bluetooth headsets). I'm suspecting the current incarnation of Google's glasses would elicit both perceptions.
When your boss is your shareholders, the seat of your pants accounting doesn't really cut it.
PostGIS 2.0 Released
While not exactly the same. Bitbills attempts something like what you are describing for bitcoin - http://bitbills.com/
IE- there is another??? good to hear.
Nope. CVPR doesn't have too much biology in it (it does have a little). It tries to do a bit of cogsci, but it's mostly ML applied to vision. It generally doesn't use applications in the medical field either (there are bigger conferences for medical imaging).
In C++, proper scoping with RAII (similar to CL's with-blah idioms) would alleviate that issue as do_something in the code below won't compile.

struct WithOpenFile {
FILE *fp;
WithOpenFile(const char *fileName) : fp(fopen(fileName, "w")) {}
~WithOpenFile() { fclose(fp); }
};

int do_something(FILE *f)
{
fprintf(f, "This should work if you know what you're doing");
}

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
{
WithOpenFile file("outfile");
}
do_something(file.fp);
return 0;
}

But Lisps will happily accept this:

(defun do-something (foo)
(1+ foo))

(with-open-file (file "outfile")
(do-something file))
Siri is great. Almost 90% of iPhone 4S users use Siri once a month.

http://www.macnews.com/2012/03/26/87-iphone-4s-owners-use-si...

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/03/26/90-percent-siri-user...

Siri isn't perfect, but it's a great start. Apple will almost certainly improve Siri in the next iteration of iOS.
In theory, every "bargain" mechanism is doomed to failure as companies learn how to game it, returns diminish, and consumers fall out of favor with it.
Download Torrent Files 10 Time Faster
It's about 40mg of sodium (which is about 100mg of salt) per 12-oz can, which is 355ml.

It doesn't really make much difference. It's a small amount of salt for any reasonable level of consumption unless you are really watching your salt intake.
Ask HN: Does Pandora Store Plaintext passwords?
If you check out your account on pandora.com, you can see your plaintext password in the password box (value="MY_PASSWORD").

I don't think Pandora would store it as plaintext... rather I hope they wouldn't. My guess is that they may encrypt it, but not hash it? Or it's potentially saved from the POST and not kept in their database?

Is there ever a good case to encrypt a password instead of storing a hash? Anyone know if Pandora encrypts it, stores it as plaintext, or is just capturing the POST? If they are capturing the POST, again, why? Is there any reason to do that, UI or otherwise?
I remember hearing about how this company ran, and figuring it was nothing but a giant boiler room sales pit and a gimmick. I am not surprised.
If the DCPU has only 64KB of RAM, encoding strings using UCS-2 or UTF-16 seems rather wasteful.
Yes, one thing I notice is that when I have a tab with a lot of images in it, and I switch to another tab, browse a little and switch back, I have to wait for the images to 'reload'. I guess it stores them compressed in memory and they have to be decompressed again. I have memory to spare and sometimes it does this when I'm quickly switching tabs for comparing something for example. This is annoying.

I'm also one of those users that leaves 100's of tabs open in the background, and sometimes I think they, or javascript (userscripts?) in them keep using CPU somehow, and it slows down everything. It would be cool if firefox could set a low CPU priority to these tabs, or freeze them if possible, ala BarTab extension.
Many CPUs with branch prediction carry a penalty of a least one cycle for mispredicted branches as the fetch stage(s) of the pipeline must be invalidated. From wikipedia:

The time that is wasted in case of a branch misprediction is equal to the number of stages in the pipeline from the fetch stage to the execute stage. Modern microprocessors tend to have quite long pipelines so that the misprediction delay is between 10 and 20 clock cycles. The longer the pipeline the higher the need for a good branch predictor.

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

EDIT: the inclusion of this is somewhat interesting as there's not much of a point in simulating a pipelined processor unless you care about hardware details. My best guess is they're adding this "feature" to make compilation to assembly MORE difficult and increase the advantages of hand-compiled assembly. Branch prediction is a tricky thing to do right in compilers.
They should have unloaded this fraud on Google when there was a $6 billion cash offer sitting on the table (assuming that was true).

The fact that Google even offered that much leads me to believe that they have jumped the shark with that offer.

Anybody who knows anything about retail would have studied the business model and realized that this was not sustainable. Obvious red flags:
1. Heavy reliance on field sales (the largest expense), which is NOT scalable
2. Exclusive reliance on repeat sales as the key driver of sustainability: this being the obvious case, did Google not do its due diligence and actually surveyed past Groupon customers? Such a siimple survey would have easily revealed the issues of this "local deals" model.
3. Heavy reliance on "small business" owners as the driver of revenue. This is a sensitive and fickle market, where even slight movements in the general economy will cause huge moves in spending patterns.

These 3 points were readily available to anybody with some insight into this segment; Google with all its money must be surrounded by "yes" men, nothing else could explain it's willingness to part with $6 billion so quickly.
Maybe in Asia, this "taking care of elderly" mentality is strong. Here in States, I actually think that you are on your own is more true. You can't depend on your kids to take care of you. If you do, you can still end up being on the street.

In my view, kids are not investment. They take out much resources from you, and you do so willingly because you love them. As they get older, they may or may not show appreciation, depends on your relationship with them.
Seriously. It's honestly one of the primary reasons I can't stand reading his stuff; each little hashmark is a reminder that the writer thinks his thoughts are so important you will want to quote them by chapter and verse, like a holy text.
Nothing in Opera 11.62
The question we have to answer to properly understand what went wrong is where did the argument originate. If it's being generated inside function A that then calls function B with it, a test of A should fail when it calls B with the wrong argument. In any case, I would imagine the test coverage in the A-B system is lower than it should.
Hold Your Hand Up to Play Some Music
How Facebook’s Winning The War Against Yahoo, Patent By Patent
Pet Projects and Hiring Decisions
If Google is smart, they would keep this for themselves, and sell the hardware themselves for a nice Apple-like profit. From the way it looks, I'm sure people will be more than happy to pay a bit extra - especially if it takes a few years for others to catch-up, like it happened versus the iPhone.

Also, I assume this is going to work with a data plan as well? Well at least this time I really hope Google will not give in to carriers, and compromise on nothing. Don't give carriers the power Google. When this product becomes extremely successful, as I believe it will become, they will be begging you to sell it on their network. Although I'd probably prefer something like the former Nexus store, that intended to commoditize carriers, rather than give them exclusives.
I think one common problem with estimates is the assumption that all estimates are equal. We all know they're not, unless it's an estimate for something where the developer has solved a similar problem several times before.

Otherwise, you might have only a general feel for the magnitude of the problem at first: this is a 6-12 month kind of project. Perhaps a few days of prototyping and proof-of-concept tests will narrow that down a bit, though: we'll do the work in three stages, likely to take 2-3 months, 2-3 months and 3-4 months respectively, putting us in a 7-10 month window. As each stage develops, the reliability of any estimate for remaining time tends to increase, and perhaps a clearer idea emerges for the later stages as well.

In short, an estimate isn't worth much without some indication of confidence attached to it.

FWIW, my personal preference is to aim for about four qualitative levels: very general magnitude from initial overview of the project, more systematic estimate after clarifying detailed requirements and probably a bit of prototyping or proof-of-concept work, definite target date unless unexpected major disruption or change of requirements happens, and very confident once the project is into the final stages and no major hurdles remain.
Both this assertion and the one that types are "a set of compiler-enforced contracts between pieces of code" are very wrong ways of thinking about types, and the reason why most statically typed languages are so poorly designed and get such a bad reputation.

Static typing in a programming language is a mechanism for making certain types of non-terminating computations impossible to express in that programming language. The understanding "non-terminating" here includes errors as well (the idea of bottom ⊥ that you'll find in some earlier texts on programming languages semantics, such as Allen's Anatomy of Lisp). Non-terminating computations are equivalent to paradoxes in formal logic (see Curry-Howard correspondence), and the first type system was developed to deal with Curry's paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%27s_paradox) in the first programming language (lambda calculus). Some type systems prevent more types of non-terminating computations, others less. But saying that run-time type assertions are equivalent to a typed programming language, or that types are like contracts or other things just leads to confusion.
Because they are trying to create a new reality....
I seriously doubt any such attempts to sidestep will succeed in a world where the problems is not just technical (you may be able to fool the sandbox enforcing system), but a matter of getting your app approved, not just once but with every update, small or large.

The added complication is that in this case LaTeX itself decides to spawn a few calls to various utilities it uses under the hood. Those attempts will simply be blocked by the OS inside the sandbox. So you won't be able to typeset successfully.
Guessing this may be the first technology I'll make fun of my kids for using. The mock-up looks pretty cool is any case.
I just want to lay on the beach this vacations, but my cellphone doesn't stop to ring, I'm attached to my job with my cellphone, and if I turn it off, it's just rude. This glasses are a real nightmare for me.
Urgent Fix for Zero-Day Mac Java Flaw
It looks like it's pulling characters from the paragraph to generate the "unique" paragraph ID. ID = First letter from the first 3 words in the first sentence in the paragraph + First letter from the first 3 words in the last sentence in the paragraph.

I wonder... for all the different articles on NYTimes, and the different configurations of words across paragraphs, is this unique enough such that you won't get duplicate paragraph IDs in any given article?
I'm sure right now someone somewhere is working on an FPGA implementation of the DCPU-16.
Yes, it was, and that's why it is nearly impossible to short. I've been paying 30-40% annualised to borrow the stock for shorting and the rate spiked to nearly 60% recently. Being short is more expensive that most people think.
Interesting, I guess it's more complicated than it sounds.

I wouldn't be surprised if many decades ago having a speedometer in a car was an expensive option. If HUDs catch on (and I hope they do), they'll become cheaper and who knows, maybe even standard equipment one day.
And this is what happens when inventors invest in a company they know noting about. This is what happens when you listen to the hype, and the street and NOT do your own due diligence. There's a reason why the big banks backed the IPO but didn't take a percentage.

When it all comes down in flames, (I think it's already begun - if you haven't gotten out, get out now) the only saving grace is that the CEO and board will be embattled in court for years. The investors might get a few pennies on the dollar.
> There has been at least one add-on HUD-type display for motorcycle helmets for a few years (http://www.gizmag.com/go/2430/). Last I read they weren't technically legal for road use in the US, not that I think anyone would be ticketing you for it.

Has this ever ship? I know there were a few companies looking to do this for motorcycles where there is a huge benefit to not having to look down to check your speed.

There is another company that does similar things for skiing goggles that looks really interesting. http://www.reconinstruments.com/shop
Yahoo's research divisions do great work that basically never makes it out into the wider company past the prototype stage. It is an awesome, wonderful waste of money.
I created a subreddit for this interesting aspect of 0x10c if anyone is interested:

http://www.reddit.com/r/dcpu_16_programming/
The 6 Performance Tuning Mistakes You Don't Want to Make
what does your barista do? dev ops? do you ever get your dev ops and sysadmin mixed up? how many fixies do you have?
It'd be really nice if you had a demo UI available to check out.
I can see a great use of this for technical work on hardware that requires huge amounts of documentation (say aircraft maintenance).

The glasses the way they're designed are smart, not in between but rather in a fixed spot and only a part of the field of view. I definitely wouldn't want a computer screen between my eyes and 'the real world' in normal day to day life. Believing what my eyes see is important to me and with another layer in between you'll never know whether you are reacting to an overlay or the real thing. Especially if the images are created with input from a remote source which opens all kinds of interesting possibilities. Superimpose a picture of a traffic accident on the glasses of someone that is driving and you could very well end up with the real thing.

Seeing is believing they say and the response to visual input can be very reflexive. Audio alone can be distracting enough.

So google seems to have that part done right, it'd be great to play around with these.
For what it's worth, I just bought a new car for $35k. Came with a 5 year interest free loan with nothing down. If you can get that type of loan, you don't want to pay it off quickly.
The compiler will happily compile that because C's standard library thinks it's a fantastic idea to just throw type-safety out the window. Even C libraries can protect themselves from this via strong typing instead of overloading what FILE* effectively means.
Fine. But now you'll have to accept both files and network sockets. What do you do?
In Windows Safari, text still sees the anti-aliased rendering that its Mac brethren enjoy in all browsers. That's what the parent is referring to.
To be honest, the glasses look way more minimalistic than I was thinking. I was expecting something like full sunglasses - maybe even ones that are bit bulkier. So from what point of view I'm very impressed.

But I agree that if they got this far already, they can probably make them even more minimalistic in version 2.0 or 3.0. But really, they look very modern already. Kind of like some of the best looking bluetooth headsets out there - just longer.
The ANSI C library is quite small. It originates in an era when 128KB of RAM was reasonably roomy. To this day, there are C libraries designed to fit comfortably within that size.

Most of the library code will never even be present anyway. Your (statically-linked) binary will simply contain those functions actually used, which is likely to be a small subset of what is available.
Here's why I'm interested. The most important thing in making good software is to eschew unnecessary complexity. A program's size is the best measure of its complexity. Therefore we should try to write shorter programs. Much, much shorter programs. (See Alan Kay's VPRI project etc. etc.)

It's easy enough to measure the size of a program: LOC or something like it. But how do we define what a program is? Surprisingly, that's not obvious. As you say, how one carves it up seems arbitrary. The conclusion you came to is also one I've come to: you end up having to measure the total size of all the code that's running. But that seems absurd. (Unless you're a Forth person.) It means I can't measure my program's size without measuring, say, Linux's.

So to stave off the apparently absurd, we need a simple way to distinguish programs or systems from one another. That's my question.

If A and B both call each other, surely they are part of the same system. But what if A calls B, but B doesn't know about A? Does that make them separate? Sometimes one would say yes, for example if B is Linux. Can we always say yes? That would be convenient. But there are lots of such As and Bs in any complex program. That doesn't mean there are lots of programs.

I wonder if like so many other things in programming, this is in the end a social question and not a technical one. That's the trouble with referring to "reuse": it depends on how many people know about B and like it well enough to use it. It seems weird to say that A (or the system it belongs to) gets less complex depending on how many other programs use B. That would mean that a system's codebase could get more or less complex without a line of its code actually changing. Again - not an impossible view, but seems absurd.

I'm looking for a principle here because this way of thinking about complexity is a big part of how I work and because I want to have an entire company that thinks this way.
200k miles is nothing. Over 8 billion vehicle miles are spent per DAY in the US. One person is killed for every 75 million miles driven. 200k miles isn't enough to test every terrain, under every weather condition, in every lighting, etc. There's too many variables in the equation.

The Google car won't be truly safe until it has logged 1000x miles.
If only there was a way to travel autonomously without needing to monitor the environment visually.

Back to the drawing board, Google.

</>
Interesting that, in the demo video, he "shares to his circles" rather than to a specific circle. Even in the Google+ future, it's easier to share with everyone than to segment everyone endlessly.
From the article:

There are reportedly dozens of other shapes and variations of the glasses in the works, some of which can sit over a person’s normal eyeglasses.
"Have you considered creating a bit of javascript that any site can embed on their site that would allow a visitor to annotate?"

Yes, we have. It's there on the front page if you scroll down! http://annotateit.org/#develop

"Also, have you considered making it anonymous to start like github:gist?"

Well, you can certainly try out Annotator using the demo at http://okfnlabs.org/annotator/demo/
Marketing costs are not supposed to appear on balance sheet.

I don't really watch this company but if I remember correctly, their way of doing accounting was to show all received money from customers as income instead of liabilities since they were collecting half of it on behalf of vendors.

They were simply inflating their revenue but it's not like it matters, because profit (loss) would be always the same regardless.
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." ;)

http://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ip...
It seems like everyone and their mother are trying for IPO. If the rumor about an offer from google was true, they should have taken the money and ran
For you and I it is, but we are not its target audience.
Anecdotally, the first generation of sales rep have nothing but depressing things to say about this entire market segment now. The first year sales numbers were gangbusters, until their clients called back complaining, swearing never to do another Groupon deal, ever again.

It's not just Groupon, this entire business model is unsustainable: asking a retailer to discount his products for a fee in the hopes that he will attract new "local deal" customers willing to pay full retail next time, when the ONLY reason these customers came in the first place was because of the discount.
Talk with competitors
I think the news is personalized :)
StatsPro for Battlefield 3
If you run a website and enable annotator on your site you can allow anonymous annotations. However, for the bookmarklet you have to sign up. If you just wanted to try it out you could do so at http://okfnlabs.org/annotator/demo/.
There are so many free blog systems, some of which might be regarded as "standard", with reliable hosting histories and a lot of credibility.

If you want to create a service that you can charge for, you might:

1. Find a really specific blogging niche for whom existing solutions really cannot work, and as if that weren't difficult enough, you need a low cost way to acquire customers within the niche. or,

2. Do something other than a blog platform. Ditto what I wrote in (1) above, just cross out the word "blogging". My bet is that it will be slightly easier.
That quote is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this site.
No More Attachments: Edit Team Documents With Revisu
I am really glad someone else has noticed this and feels the same way.

This quote from that thread pissed me off all morning: "If you told the common man any time in history other than the baby boomer generation, that the way to get rich was 'hard work' and 'Budgeting' they would die of laughter."

Every day I feel more and more alienated by the victim mentality on Reddit. It seems to be the only tangible by-product of the Occupy Wall Street protests.

I don't even know why I visit Reddit anymore.
Puma Motorsport
You have to include it with the browser, before it's going to work. Everyone has created their own service or JS bookmarklet, and social isn't going to change that. There's also no point in annotating things, if the service shuts down. I guess a Dropbox-based service could get around this, though, but then it gets tricky on mobile - which is too big a demographic to ignore.

Maybe we should start working on a standard that browsers could implement instead. I wouldn't be surprised if Opera started looking into this, but as much as I prefer them over all the other vendours, the web version of Opera Link (bookmark sync) has not worked for me in around two years or more. Hence the need for a standardized, browser-agnostic approach.
Johnnie ended Walk’era