skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can simply type them in (at least in the Plan 9 version of troff).
Given the development of the startup scene in all three towns, the decision is hardly surprising.
If you look more closely, he actually called it "memcopy", not "memcpy".
I strongly disagree with the purpose of this. It still has precisely the same problem that regular git has: you need to understand the language behind it.

Just learn regular Git rather than re-inventing the language.
The Changing Landscape of the Lower Ninth Ward
If I'm not mistaken, one way of seeing GIT is just as a reductio ad absurdum on the idea that truth is just that which is proved.

Perhaps you should consider that talking about ontology clouds the water here, this explanation might have some analogical value, but isn't 'simpler'.
wtf, you put in cobol and visual basic but forget to add Go?
I think we're hitting into a possible issue with these book recommendations.

Recommendations on learning/understanding something logically, and recommending a book based on how to learn how to do something can be very different.

I've read all of these art books (except Vilppu's), and I DON'T think the best text on how to learn how to draw is a copy of Preston Blair's books.

For me personally, I got the most advancement through Loomis' Figure Drawing For What It's Worth. I spent a lot time going over diagrams in the book. It transformed the way I approached drawing Other people, (especially people who get into art with no prior experience) swear by Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain.

In this case, a lot of what you think the best text would be depends on which way you prefer to draw. I like figure drawing mostly, so I learn towards Loomis and Hogarth. Someone who likes general life/possibly painting would prefer Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain. Someone who prefers animation, would definitely love Preston Blair's books (and possibly Fun with a Pencil).

I think not only a good book recommendation is useful, but a good useful explanation needs to go hand in hand with it.
And I'd like to add that more than just providing external stimuli in service of some other goal, education is a goal in and of itself. It truly does broaden one's horizons, makes one able to look at the world from different perspectives (if one's smart enough). It can make you a deeper person, which is an experience much more pleasurable than many so called "achievements".
What do you do then?

If the answer is "panic", note that exceptions are superior here, since exceptions let you "panic" without having to litter your code with those calls.

If the answer is some form of "log an error message", exceptions are superior, since you can group multiple related calls into one try-catch block and avoid having to check at the site of each and every call.

If the answer is some form of "return a different error code to your caller", exceptions are superior, because you can catch many different types of exceptions in one try-catch block and re-throw a different exception.
Ever since they made Google Checkout, Google has been very lazy with it. I understand that maybe they still couldn't have beaten Paypal by now, seeing how they are the market leader and all, but I still find it inexcusable how slow they've been moving with Google Checkout over the years. It's still not working like Paypal in many countries, and perhaps even more importantly not too many people use it right now.

This has come back to haunt them for their mistake, now that they have Android, because they could've really used a larger Checkout userbase with Android, to help both users and developers to buy and sell apps, and also for other of their services.
Yes, but I didn't knew the define trick, so Googling and going to the first result (always Wikipedia) is "consulting the dictionary" these days.
So how did he end up subscribed to this in the first place?
I assume he must have signed up in the small print by signing upto some other service.

If this was not the case then I would expect this to be much more prevalent , if you could start charing people so much money by simply sending an SMS then everyone and his dog would be at it.
(2008)

...not that things have gotten slower since then.
Incremental and clarifying progress is always beneficial.

Only if everyone increments with it. If you have half a team using one set of terminology and half the other then it's going to end in an unholy mess.
It's great that you put a lot of thought into this (maybe, or it could be just as easy as seeing what in front of you, who knows right? some people think for the long-term some people thought they think for the long-term based on a recent, possibly anomaly, trend).

If you can be successful one day that's great. Having said that, I'm a little bit ... sad for the upcoming generation of people in the IT industry (yes, I'm putting you in IT field in general). Less barrier to enter means commoditization. Soon enough people of your kind will be pay lower and lower and lower.

Let me play the devil's advocate: Why should I pay people like you big dollars if anybody, dime a dozen, can do it?

Good luck to you.
This looks like a good introduction to the core of Perl programming, however I would recommend "Modern Perl" by Chromatic. It's free (and legal) for the PDF version.

Why do I recommend "Modern Perl" instead? Because it:
(1) contains new language features added to Perl in the last 9 years
(2) covers how to use Moose for OOP
(3) shows how to use new Perl 6 features in Perl 5
(4) clearly explains the right way to do things
(5) covers how to write tests
(6) demonstrates that the Perl language continues to evolve and is a modern and effective programming language

And in the end, "Modern Perl" shows you how to write maintainable and effective Perl code. Great book, and you can get the PDF for free here: http://onyxneon.com/books/modern_perl/
Trending in science: searching arXiv corpus for term frequencies
I just did the exact same thing. One of our lines had a $9.95 subscription on it, got it refunded and all four of our lines are also blocked now.

I just sent a brief email to some family and friends noting my experience, pointing them to the NYTimes article, and telling them that on AT&T they probably want to investigate 'Purchase Blocker'.

It's especially annoying to me because I give AT&T over $300/mo. At that level of revenue, you'd think they could have the decency to default to protecting me. And somebody at AT&T will likely be shocked that I have no brand loyalty towards them, at all.
I'm surprised more companies haven't chosen Berlin. Big startup scene, desirable location, great transit links... seems to be obvious to me. I must be missing something.
I'm not sure I'm ready to get on the Anti-College bandwagon. There's been a rash of Anti-College sentiment around this place lately and while part of me agrees another part of me mourns for all of these students leaving college. I know it may be an unpopular opinion but I doubt most people can get the tools they need for success in many fields (Even software) without a college degree.

I'm in no way making the claim that someone can't be a very very good programmer without college, the best programmer I've ever met left college after 1.5 years, but there's a very real risk of having holes. Some of these holes, despite what people might like to believe, simply aren't going to be filled in the future.

A few holes I've seen in the awesome unschooled programmers I've worked with:

1) Inability to finish. This is a biggy.

2) Deficiency in the "science" part of Computer Science (Algorithms and Theory)

3) A lack of knowledge where the "Liberal Arts" are concerned.

(And Others)

Maybe all of these things aren't important and maybe some of them can be learned later. However, I think people who skip college will be less likely to spend the time and energy necessary to learn these things (In the same way people who put off school for a job are less likely to attend school).

It also seems that the Theory needs to be paired with the Liberal Arts and the competent programmer in order to make a really exceptional programmer.

All that said, I think this backlash is really just the front end of a massive paradigm shift in the way the western world views / does education so we'll just have to wait and see.

EDIT: It seem that leaving college early could be indicative of either a) Already getting everything you could out of it or b) an inability to finish.
Love seeing shout-outs to Simple.Data- I know the author. Great guy, awesome library.
"It has absolutely nothing to do with the limits of rational thought."

One implication of GIT is that there are true sentences that cannot be proved.

I'm sorry, but I can't manage to see how "It has absolutely nothing to do with the limits of rational thought."

It saddens me that I am the first one that had to point this out on this comment that is over 15 hours old. On HN. :-(
First off, I wanted to say congratulations to your fast growth and determination to succeed. I've personally decided to skip college myself and have never looked back. I'm going to share my thoughts with you, feel free to let me know what you think:

Three years have past and I've gone from having a $700 limit on my credit card to a 7-figure/yr marketing business. I'm not saying this to show off, but to show you that it doesn't take a college education to become "successful" in this lifetime. However, I'm not saying that you can sit pretty without a degree and still become a success; you've seriously gotta work your ass off. It's probably a lot harder for us, since we're not accepted in society as a person with a Bachelor's would be, but this is where resourcefulness and persistence kicks in.

There's a certain stigma around dropping out, as I've seen the past three years. People look at you differently and treat you differently, until you prove to them otherwise. I suppose it could be due to the fact that we've been encouraged and pushed to do well in school and to graduate; it's the "normal" way of doing things. I look at all of the YC founders and most are graduates or undergraduates of prestigious universities like Stanford or MIT. This didn't faze me one bit. I'm used to this kind of competition and I'm ready to prove to PG that I'm worth his attention. Come with this attitude and you can't lose, most people don't expect this from someone who has dropped out. Be unexpected.

Good luck to you and your ventures, looking forward to seeing some more good things from you soon, Josh.
People keep mentioning this horizon broadening effect, I'm not sure where this comes from.

My most horizon broadening experience at college was from learning to look after myself and become more independent but that was not from the college itself.

Most of our classes were learning something about Java or about some algorithm etc.

Sure, some of it was interesting stuff that made you think but I don't think there was any extra value because I had taken a class vs having read a good book on the subject or participated in online discussion.

Most of college was people fretting over how much work they had to do for some individual class to avoid taking their average down.

The deep philosophical debates that everyone imagines happening at college seemed quite rare from what I experienced. I went to quite a good college too but most people were more interested in football, drink and women.
I have a feeling you're going to get a bunch of type theorists instead of programmers who get things done if you ask about Java's syntax for use-site contravariance.
I agree that both doing and telling are important, but I disagree they are equally important. In addition, I don't think that lack of self-promotion is such a widespread phenomenon that it warrants a blog post to raise awareness of the problem.
another example:
http://www.curebit.com/

http://500friends.com/
It's good to have a quick reference and this is the best one available for CL.

For a CL hacker, it's also invaluable to learn how to parse the full CL spec.
>But computers can only work with recursively ennumerable axiom systems. Humans do not have this limitation.

I don't think this is true, at least not in the way you put it. I for one surely cannot work with the True Arithmetic system, because I cannot distinguish axioms from non-axioms. Maybe you could expand it a bit?
I went though the UK university system, which AFAIK is similar to the Dutch system. Despite wanting to become a developer, I chose History and Politics. It's a topic that fascinates me, and I had a great three years. I also learnt a lot about debating, teamwork, meeting deadlines, etc. etc. etc.

Then I graduated and started working as a developer. I don't regret my choice.
As a high school student, the article was engaging and inspiring, as I have been also debating whether not to go, take an off year, or just go.

One thing I worry about for people who don't go is the lack of fundamentals that going to college can give you - about algorithms, low level languages, etc. The only way I've thought to solve that problem is to take (religiously) MIT OpenCourseWare courses, coursera, or some equivalent for 2 to 3 years.

But like others have said, you can always learn as you go and then go to college later if you feel like you need it. There are so many options -- it's a fascinating and difficult decision (and I've even left out the problem of societal pressure).
I've never been to a city with more Hackerspaces than Berlin. There is just a lot of free space to go and meet people and collaborate. It's also very cheap.
Backbone-relational: Get and set model relations (1-to-1, 1-to-many, many-to-1)
It remains to be seen whether (a) they will provide a comprehensive CS track or (b) if their offerings will remain free. Neither of those is satisfied right now.
Everyone 'a dime a dozen' can't do it. I want to be the best. There's only a small percentile of people that have a strong design sense and can also program, and do it well. That is my goal.
It remains to be seen whether (a) they will provide a comprehensive CS track or (b) if their offerings will remain free. Neither of those is guaranteed right now.
Could anyone make a solid recommendation on a calculus book? Im currently using Calculus a Complete Course by Robert Adams and Chris Essex.
Well done. I am in the same boat that you find yourself. I've made great success for myself basically doing what I love (writing code) without a college degree.

It's very much as the second commenter (on your site) said, (though I've used this phrase all along and have never heard anyone say it's equivalent):

"Education gets you the interview, skill and experience get you the job."
>There's been a rash of Anti-College sentiment around this place lately

It's no different than the general anti-intellectual sentiment growing in the US. The feeling that you can learn it all on your own without anyone telling or anyone's help is what is driving so many peoples thought processes recently.

That people looked at and treat higher education as just job training and nothing more doesn't help either.
You've made a decision to shut yourself off from knowledge and insight that are hard to come by any other way. Spending a few years in college is the easiest, shortest route to some pretty profound insights, and you say, "nah".

I'm not saying that you won't have a fulfilling life, and I'm certainly not saying that going to college could influence its outcome. I'm just saying that you've made your decisions based on some very stupid assumptions. It would have been better to say, "I'm not going to college because I don't feel like it, and I want to see where life takes me". I can actually respect that. But making such a decision, or any decision for that matter, based on false assumptions - actually, criminally negligent and outrageously stupid assumptions - is just... dumb.

Actually, you know what? It probably wouldn't have made a difference. You look at life from such a practical point of view - jobs, "achievements", "lessons" etc. - that it would have been hard for you to really gain much at college, and maybe most people are the same way, even if they do go to college. I can only pity them, because successful as they may become, they lead a pitiful life: the life of the willfully blind.
Interesting, I didn't catch from the article that this three-year bump model had been tested on multiple incidents and found to correlate. It mentions in the third paragraph their methodology used "a pattern that, in Atlanta, indicated cheating in multiple schools". It seems Atlanta was the only place they are claiming there was a correlation, but even of this single data point they offer no specific evidence beyond the red dot in their graph. I did find it interesting that the biggest recent case where there was systematic corruption within a system was in Atlanta, and the newspaper here trying to show that cheating is common throughout the rest of the US and not just something special in Atlanta is Atlanta's leading newspaper.

Recent analyses of data on 18,000 teachers in New Yock City has shown that year to year testing results are not as consistent as one would assume.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/03/07/data-analysis-of-valu...

> Gary Rubinstein has been analyzing the data at his site, and he’s found some incredible results. First, he found that there’s almost no correlation among teachers year-over-year in the data. A teacher is likely to be judged as effective one year and ineffective the next. The average change in performance was a relatively large 25 points, and it did not fit with commonly accepted beliefs that teachers improve performance over time, particularly between the first and second year.

http://garyrubinstein.teachforus.org/2012/02/26/analyzing-re...

> Looking over the data, I found that 50% of the teachers had a 21 point ‘swing’ one way or the other. There were even teachers who had gone up or down as much as 80 points. The average change was 25 points. I also noticed that 49% of the teachers got lower value-added in 2010 than they did in 2009, contrary to my experience that most teachers improve from year to year.

> With a correlation coefficient of .35, the scatter plot shows that teachers are not consistent from year to year ... nor do a good number of them go up

These sorts of results where the data is available to the public for analysis makes me skeptical that testing results are actually consistent from year to year and that inconsistencies are evidence of cheating.

I contrast these findings to the AJC article's claim that "Experts say student learning doesn’t typically jump backwards." The article does not state which experts they refer to, what their qualifications are, or what exactly they have said. That is suspicious to me, especially since the article has many quotes where they are no so shy about identifying their sources. Shouldn't it be even more critical to identify specific sources when using an appeal to authority argument citing "experts"? Especially when in cases where we have actual data, such as the study I cite above, scores did in fact jump backwards 49% of the time. This difference between empirical data and vague assertions by unnamed experts is suspicious. I must wonder who are these experts.

Mind you, I think there is cheating. I am highly skeptical that the AJC's method has been shown to be a valid way to identify where it is happening.
This reminds me of this part from 'The Count of Monte Cristo' when Dantes met abbe Faria for the first time:

"I had nearly five thousand volumes in my library at Rome; but after reading them over many times, I found out that with one hundred and fifty well-chosen books a man possesses, if not a complete summary of all human knowledge, at least all that a man need really know. I devoted three years of my life to reading and studying these one hundred and fifty volumes, till I knew them nearly by heart; so that since I have been in prison, a very slight effort of memory has enabled me to recall their contents as readily as though the pages were open before me. I could recite you the whole of Thucydides, Xenophon, Plutarch, Titus Livius, Tacitus, Strada, Jornandes, Dante, Montaigne, Shakespeare, Spinoza, Machiavelli, and Bossuet. I name only the most important." -- Abbe Faria, Chapter 16. A Learned Italian.
Thing is, outside of the US how many computer science people will get a chance to study "the liberal arts" at college?

In the UK the idea is that you do all of your academic exploration in the 16-18 bracket and once you start college you already know what you want to do.

If you take a CS degree you will get the chance to do maybe 2 outside-of-CS modules in year 3 and most likely these will be something about IT management from the business school.
(psst ... don't click the back button to edit your comment - use the edit link above your comment)
Although presumably, like Google and Facebook, it will still claim that it has no substantial presence in Germany and all it's Eu revenue is generated in Eire and so pay no tax.
It comes from literature classes; history classes; philosophy classes. Obviously not from data-structures class, although there's a lot to learn there, too.
He wrote two influential Lisp books, invented Bayesian spam filtering, did Arc, wrote essays (where the doing == the telling) and he had the Yahoo exit.

Then he started YC.

This doesn't disprove your primary point (that fame can precede the 'doing'), but I'd say that pg shouldn't be on the above list. You make a good point about 37signals, though. And I'll add Steve Yegge to that list too (Amazon -> Google)
It would be fun to execute this against a mobile device, where storage is expensive. 2GB might be all that is required to choke the device.
A neat client-side DDoS :)
But regardless of whether they actually have grounds, I guess my question is still: why do they need to backpedal publicly? That is, why can't they just say "we're going to sue" and then not? Is that just a faux pas in the legal community, or is there a legal reason why?
Robert Howsare's Drawing Apparatus
I think your comparison misses an important point. If you pick in every step a sentence that is non-provable from your current axioms, but not contradictory with them either, after infinitely many steps[1] you will have picked all of them, and get a system called True Arithmetic, in which every true sentence is provable, essentially by definition. The reason why Goedel's incompleteness theorem does not work here is that your set of axioms is not recursively enumerable, and this is a necessary assumption of GIT.

[1] - If "after infinitely many steps" sounds fishy to anyone, please keep in mind that you start with an infinite list of axioms anyway -- first order Peano arithmetic theory has an induction axiom schema Ind that basically says that for every sentence f, Ind(f) (the sentence you get by substituting every occurrence of a single free variable in Ind with f) is an axiom of PA.
High five for HTML5 canvas tool to generate this drawing with tweakable parameters!
Post-Jobs Apple 'has nobody to say no'
I see the biggest problem as being one that you will never force everyone to care about politics, and if you are in a state where someone doesn't care, you need to provide them the means to maximize their representation while minimizing the work they do.

If we were voting on every issue collectively, not only would that be mob rule, but we would never be able to break convention. Some things, like ending prohibition on marijuana would pass because they are a majority opinion, but things like gay marriage still poll below 50% and unless you turn everyones opinion in favor (and it is amazingly hard to sway childhood imbued prejudice) you would have an endless cycle of human rights violations.

When you have people, who you know as your neighbor, but also know they are smart / wise / worthy of being your representative, they can put in the time and should care about the process enough to do the research and understand implications. It is a huge time commitment to understand the breadth of political topics in enough depth to have a reasonable opinion on them. It is the kind of thing best dealt with through employment.