skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
+100, I've been on the verge of writing something like this for months now. I dunno about Windows and OS X, but Linux doesn't have any native clients. I've been using https://github.com/agirbal/JMongoBrowser for my desktop mongodb query/admin/CRUD stuff, but it's horribly non-native, slow, a memory hog, and the interface is really lacking. But it does work and is pretty feature-rich.

MongoAdmin looks exactly like what I want, and I have a lot of experience with both django and bootstrap, so I'm especially happy that I'll be able to navigate my way below the surface without much issue.

Great work, thank you!
What do you mean? It's perfectly readable if you know APL.
What else is there to say now? He makes it very clear, shows how they value and respect both entrepreneurs and sets the record straight.

Very well done.
You can also think of randomness as a measure of predictability: given our knowledge prior to being presented with this number, how well could we predict this number?
http://www.cise.ufl.edu/research/revcomp/

You dumb fucks
PayPal "verified" accounts draw money from users bank account, which allows them to skip the credit card processing fees. That's a huge amount of money, and that's why they keep pushing users to "verify" their account through every way possible.
I think I made the point to say that random only applies to things being drawn from a distribution, but that's really the whole point of the theory: we _want_ to be able to talk about how random a number is! We just call it 'Kolmogorov random' now, and by luck or insight, numbers chosen uniformly at random are almost always Kolmogorov random.
I don't really believe that either.

Improved missiles are now able to shoot down the U2, and maybe get close to the SR-71. That makes these planes a liability now, when over developed territories such as the former USSR.

Both were formerly useful, and have been brought out of retirement, when required for tasks that a satellite could not perform, or was not in position for.

I wouldn't be surprised if the x37 mini-spaceplane was primarily useful as a surveillance platform.
Mountain Bike Handlebars
There is something wrong with a world that allows an investment of $250,000 to turn into $78,000,000 in such a short period.

Now before you downvote me, I'm not suggesting what these guys did was wrong, or that FB's money is dirty, or even that anyone directly suffered as a result of this transaction.

But capital is like a liquid, it ebbs and flows. The fact that so much of it can flow in such a small amount of time toward such a small group of people bothers me. Especially when you consider the impact that investment could have made in other places.

Ok now you can downvote me.
Couldn't disagree more, but this is probably because of my exposure to different national labs. Proximity to LBL or LLNL may be a help, but the real help comes from the larger community and the schools themselves. Most of the other national labs don't have the startup-friendly communities to back them up.

National labs are great at coming up with new technologies. They are absolutely horrid at commercializing them, which is caused mostly by heavy-handed government policies.
Key sentence: "Unless you know Linux users, you cannot get in-person help."

This is, I think, key to OS adoption. Would you have used MacOS way back when if you had been surrounded by Mac users? Of course.
Cheap Rams Jerseys
The Treasure Hunt of Increased Difficulty
Different investors approach this differently; it depends on the velocity of investments they make and on how hands-on they are.

For instance, SV Angel (Ron Conway's fund) has an explicit policy much like YC's: they will invest in competing companies, but that they won't reveal one company's private information to another (and they don't really get involved in the management of their portfolio companies). Both SV and YC are making a lot of small, early-stage investments, so this makes sense for them.

A traditional VC, though, is very hands-on (usually a partner takes a board seat after an investment) and thus often has a policy of not investing in competing companies--it would just be too hard to not share information, at least implicitly, when you are sitting on the board and actively helping manage the company. Andreessen-Horowitz is a VC firm, and this seems to be their approach as well. It makes sense when you're making fewer, larger, later-stage investments.
Just as in real-life, look for common interests. OS, language, toolkit, API, program... many of each of these categories has fora, IRC channels and mailing lists that will let you get to know people. Then you can figure out if you want to work with them.
LIDE - Loosely Integrated Development Environment
See my answer to "yabbadabbadoo". It's just too hard to not share information, at least implicitly, when a VC takes a board seat on competing companies. So most VCs have a policy like Andreessen's.
Reflections on Design, My first year as a software engineer
I think the fact that this system doesn't take account age into account is problematic. My PayPal account is who knows how old, but somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 years. I'm just now hitting that limit after years and years of small transactions. This is probably going to make me stop using them because I don't trust them with my bank account and I don't need any credit. This seems like a really stupid way to lose a long time customer.
Dotcss - tweak the web (based on dotjs)
No specs on these specs?
There's also services like GeekSquad and the Genius Bar, as well as others, to bail out users...that's more along the lines of what I meant by that sentence.
This whole talk of efficiency surprises me. if that is what we are looking for, then in my mind you are either writing too much code or aren't thinking the problem through. In my experience, coding takes up less time because you get better at it.
> the well-established fact that research-active faculty make better teachers

Does anyone have a citation for this well established fact?
All I know is this...this is the kind of support I want from the people I work with. A16Z consistently show me they're the kind of people I want to be working with.
That snippet is showing a comparison of JavaScript and Dart as native languages. To get the Dart sample to work in browsers without native Dart, just add this tag:

<script src="http://dart.googlecode.com/svn/branches/bleeding_edge/dart/client/dart.js"></script>

Try dropping the FUD.
I do think it's a bit strange, but I think the VC/tech world isn't that big a part of the strangeness, at least unless it gets to 1999 proportions again. Instagram is pretty much an outlier, and most of the other "big" multipliers, like Google and Apple, have huge R&D behind them. Even this post, written by a VC, considers a two-year billion-dollar exit to be an outlier that you won't see again.

Finance is where the pervasive ebbs and flows are more obvious, imo. Once you have flows that are gigantic, it becomes more profitable to try to skim a little tiny percentage off the top of them than to do lots of other kinds of work. You could spend your whole life building up a $5m small business (a perfectly respectable, successful thing to do!) and make less money at it than finding a way to skim 0.001% off a $10 billion transaction a few times in your career. So if you're motivated mainly by money, rather than figuring out how to build up that business, it might be better to start boning up on how to maneuver yourself into a position to take tiny percentages from large flows. There are lots of opportunities in the dense web of management fees, M&A deals, etc.
Anyone who thinks you can use the same desktop metaphor for a tablet device as for a PC ought not be allowed anywhere near a UI.
Since maximizing return is in the interest of the LPs, as a VC wouldn't you at least have a conversation with PicPlz about investing in an additional round with a competitor? Especially:

Dalton later pivoted out of PicPlz and is now building an exciting new service called App.Net.

If the App.Net concept was on the alternative idea list (likely considering the generalist nature of the entrepreneur [music, photos, whatever app.net does]), maybe the pivot would have happened sooner.
Give it a few more weeks, we are almost there
Keep in mind that although $78,000,000 is 312x the investment, it's likely that more than 312 investments of $250,000 turn out making absolutely nothing. That's why the rewards are so high: the risks are even higher.
Cara Pemesanan Trica Jus
Cara Pemesanan Trica Jus<p>Terimakasih atas kepercayaan anda terhadap kami sebagai cara pemesanan trica jus terbesar yang mengutamakan keamaan dan kenyamanan anda dalam cara melakukkan pemesanan trica jus secara online.<p>Format cara pemesanan trica jus<p>TRICA-L : Jumlah pemesanan : Nama lengkap : Alamat lengkap : No tlp rumah/hp
kirim ke 0853 2272 5302 Atau 0813 2304 4111<p>Contoh : TRICA-L : 1 BOX : Angga bagja : Jl. Tawang 52 RT2/8 Tawang kota Tasikmalaya : 0813.200x.xxx kirim ke 085322725302 Atau 081323044111
My experience is that they tend to be negatively correlated with a good number of outliers.
I don't understand why you said that random numbers are non-sense, what about Chaitin's Omega number? The approach here is incompresibility. You don't even need probability to define randomness, just Turing Machines. What exactly means that randomness implies probability in math terms? Have you read Kolmogorov axioms on probability? One of its success -not failure- is that it doesn't need a definition of randomness to build its theory.
Netflix? Well, your reputation is driving people away. Check out glassdoor.com reviews
HN 2001 - An iFrame Odyssey
A couple of things I thought about while reading this, unrelated to the ethics...

1- If he's able to assign a precise value to the investment outcome, that implies that Facebook assigned an explicit value to their stock involved in the transaction. I don't know if that had to be the case or not, maybe it did. But what it makes me curious about is...what valuation did they use? The current second market valuation? Something else? The $100 billion bandied about isn't an official valuation is it?

2- What Facebook bought was an open social graph, as opposed to their current private one. Now that makes a lot of sense as something worth a lot of money, specifically to Facebook that otherwise has no way to make their private graph public, at least not in any way that doesn't piss off their users. Of course, now they have some verrrrrry tricky waters to navigate.
> There is something wrong with a world that allows an investment of $250,000 to turn into $78,000,000 in such a short period.

What about a world where 30 million people can have the ability to express the mundane quotidian and interesting occasional aspects of their lives with a little bit of personal flair?

For some users, Instagram is the equivalent of a Kodak(tm) moment.[1]

[1] Mad Men, "The Carousel" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suRDUFpsHus
Haha! Well, one can hope, I suppose. Except, this time of the year, the Philippines' hiring scene gets to be pretty sucky. Fogeys like me get to "compete" with boatload after boatload of fresh grads with nothing but two months of Visual Basic experience, an ignorance the impossible, and a hankering for a paycheck (regardless of the number of zeroes). Companies figure they can train these chumps and overwork them, then reap the profits.

The fogeys come in afterwards, to clean up the mess (if we're lucky).

But, while it'd be nice to get offers because of this, I'm more interested in the lessons. Plus, I suppose there's a feeling of betrayal, because, as I mentioned earlier, I know one of the people running the company. (To get this out of the way, there are reasons, which I can't discuss, as to why I can't simply walk up to them and tell them to either pay up or take my resumé down.)
Here's the TED talk version of this article: "Connected, But Alone?"

http://www.ted.com/talks/sherry_turkle_alone_together.html
Learning as an Adversarial Game
True, but most of them are confined to their own tab.
Congratulations on the investment. The return is nothing short of spectacular. It's a truly excellent example of execution and timing.

But the point that keeps resurfacing in my mind is SpaceX. SpaceX, from nothing, created a low-earth orbit delivery system that is revolutionizing satellite launches and (soon) the cost of getting men into space... for less than the price that a bunch of people can send photos to each other with cheesy filters [1].

It would be difficult to overstate the impact Elon Musk has had, is having and will have on humanity (and no this isn't hyperbole) through SpaceX (and maybe even Tesla). And it didn't even require, relate to or is connected with some bullshit social network.

I'm also reminded of Steve Yegge's OSCON talk [2] from some months back. The computer power we have available now is stunning. used for the right purposes it could fundamentally change humanity for the good, whether that be in bioinformatics or whatever, is hard to overstate.

Yet we're using all this power and the brightest minds on the planet... to send cat pictures. It's actually reached the point that when I get unsolicited recruitment email or read about some new startup on HN that I tune out as soon as I see the word "social".

There's something astoundingly depressing about all this.

EDIt: I should add that my issue isn't that the founders and investors sought wealth. I don't begrudge them that at all. Not by any means am I anti-capitalist. Bill Gates, as one example, is doing huge amounts of good with his accrued wealth.

The issue is more on what society values.

[1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3857904

[2]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKmQW_Nkfk8
Been there. I can't express how I hate those meetings. The problem is deep. I mean they would have to change the culture, and therefore have to fire off a lot of top managers. Of course, that is never going to happen.
You're thinking like a Bayesian - I avoided using those terms, but that's essentially the latter approach. The prior knowledge is built into the model with our choice of the functions and the weights that we assign those functions.

(It should be noted that the Bayesian approach doesn't guarantee a defined answer - we can easily have a divide-by-zero/undefined value in that school of thought as well. However, the frequentist approach always leads to an undefined outcome in this question, because it follows from the definition of probability itself, whereas in the Bayesian approach, it follows from insufficient information in the model specification.)
Here's my experience working at McDonald's back when I was in high school:

There were two types of managers. Those who really cared about the customer experience, and those who just want to get paid. I was lucky enough to work under a manager who really, really cared. The manager was not the store manager but the assistant manager. Store managers would move into our McDonald's, and 6 months later they'll be promoted, all because of the effort of the assistant manager. Sometimes I would make a salad, tossing all the ingredients inside, the assistant manager would look at it and say: "That looks like shit. I know it's really busy right now but the customer paid EIGHT DOLLARS for it. Go take your time and make another one. I'll come around to help while you're doing that". He spends a lot of time trying to make the restaurant as good as possible, and follows all guidelines to the letter. He really worked us hard, but I loved it.

One day, he finally got promoted, and left our store. The managers after that did not care. Using wrong gloves? Go ahead. Really busy and the food looks like crap? Who cares. You want free food? Take it. Oh and don't worry about cleaning the back of the grill today, I want to go home early.

I quit soon after.

I was trying to make a point of McDonald's being different to Microsoft, but they now seem to me more same than different...
What's a reasonable return on $250,000?

How will the $78,000,000 be invested?

What should Facebook have bought instead with their stock?

What investments should should Facebook's investors have made instead of Facebook?

What investments should Facebook's investors' clients have made instead?
Do you feel the same way about $5 in lottery tickets turning into hundreds of millions of dollars? I suspect not, because you think of lottery winnings in terms of all the "losers". There are plenty of losing investments, firms, etc.
Looking for Great Developer
I am looking for a technical co-founder or paid programmer for a start-up called Nudge.
The beta was luanched with strong positive feedback, and alot of traction in Steve
Blank's lean start-up course.

It was featured at SXSW, and several mentors and leading Bay Area VCs are on board to help take it to the next level. Looking for someone with experience in A.I and algorithms.

> This is the preliminary http://blooming-water-9486.herokuapp.com/
and the facebook page can be found on Nudge 4.0.
Happy and open to chat with anyone interested
DC Comics wins dispute over ManofSteel.com domain name
I'm not sure why so many people are up-voting this. It isn't constructive or useful. It seems to be a guy who has a vested interest in Eclipse and Java trying to downplay a possible future competitor to a framework and environment he is comfortable with...
Please elaborate on your exposure to different labs for the benefit of the OP.

Thanks.
Oh they do, just not in the way that's beneficial to mankind, case in point: FDA and Monsanto, The ever-present revolving door between political office and Corporate boardrooms in practice.

They in turn position themselves to approve and legally hold patent seeds in order to monopolize agriculture and acquisition the competition by land seizures.

You can keep your vile 'meat,' I won't consume it for the same reasons I wouldn't eat a skin graft--which is essentially what this is. (Simplified overview: isolated tissue grown in the presence of certain growth factors and culture medium.)

For all of you thinking this is a 'Greener' or a 'less morally taxing' way to consume meat think again; many cultures used in bio-tech contain animal byproducts like blood to maintain and first create viable cell cultures/libraries which require extensive man-hours and expensive equipment that require constant energy use.

Found in the comment section; SiriusCybernetics:

As someone who has done a great deal of tissue culture in the past, I would say even if the finite number of replications problem is solved (you could just grow HeLa cells - cancer cells that divide indefinitely) a much bigger problem is cost. Most mammalian cells are grown in media using FBS, Fetal Bovine Serum, which is around U.S. $1,000/liter. Non-serum media is only about U.S. $400/liter. Feed the cells twice daily with that until you have your 3,000 pellets of cells and you will have one hell of an expensive miniature steak on your plate, $10,000+/pound before labor and processing. It can be done, but nature does it so much better. And yes, Fetal Bovine Serum is what it sounds like, serum squashed out of cattle fetuses. How that works out as better for the animal world escapes me somehow.

Private livestock husbandry, by contrast, is exponentially greater at achieving both aims as it coincides and is regulated by a living and breathing ecosystem found in Nature. The same goes for animal cloning, its far beyond my mind to find reason in the practice other than to create a greater financial black hole (often tax funded) and call it 'progress.'

How many will be swept by nationalist fervor when the NIH successfully fund the creation of the first batch of 'Dolly Steaks'?
The Billion Dollar Mind Trick
Last I heard, LSU and Nebraska were the only two schools with athletic programs that were both financially and nominally self-sufficient. This was in 2009, I think. This link gives some financial stats on athletics programs starting with the 2004-2005 academic and ending with the 2009-2010 academic year.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ncaa-finances.htm
That is an interesting way of framing it.

But are the risks that high? If you took an average sample of investments at $250k would you expect the rate of failure to be 311 for every 312 investments?
On the contrary, I think we are very lucky to live in an era where value creation can be realized so quickly and efficiently. Most seed investments are lost entirely; Instagram rose from the ashes and captivated millions of people. Why shouldn't they be rewarded accordingly?
Very bad title. Should be "How some scientists failed...".
An awesome Techcrunch Social Sharing Widget For Blogger
So if you don't care about it, then why build it? I think that thing you don't care about should not even be built.

I think the author talks more about things that are more like supporting features, than core features.

But let's be honest, if you are in a startup, and you are doing supporting features, then you are doing it wrong.

If you have stuff you feel is not a priority, then re-evaluate the value proposition of those items.

This doesn't mean I am against outsourcing. I am actually for it, and I think using outsourcing is great as long as you find a partner that fits in your team. In my experience outsourcing works specially when testing out ideas, before even building the team. Moving forward your outsourcing team can become your actual team.
Yes I do feel the same way about lottery tickets.
> he problem with Java is the sheer amount of 'bad' code written in it

java was designed to influence code towards solving all problems with classes. the "bad code" you speak of is idiomatic java code.

Jane Street wrote about how they migrated core systems to java, abandoned it because "But somehow when coding in Java we built up a nest of classes that left people scratching their heads when they wanted to understand just what piece of code was actually being invoked when a given method was called"[1]. then, the same team moved to a functional language to great success.

Writing "good code" in java takes discipline and expertise to overcome Java's gravity towards classes. Without discipline and expertise, teams end up at the natural equlibrium you read about on thedailywtf.com. java did an awesome job of replacing C++ for the last 15 years, but there's something inherent about the design of java that doesn't scale well with the bigger, higher complexity problems we face today.

[1] http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2038036 ~10 paragraphs in
Intel's Ivy Bridge chips launch using '3D transistors'
Well I sure assumed wrong...
Probably, but not in the Minneapolis area as far as I can tell. I found one place, but it's a 20 minute drive from where I live, which nullifies a lot of the benefit. This yelp add sums up the situation quite well:

http://www.yelp.com/topic/minneapolis-laundry-service-2
Something bugs me about this, and I'm having a hard time putting my finger on it. The first thing that sticks out is that you kind of imply that there is no difference between work and not work. 'Working hard' is something you do for financial independence, which implies the earning of money. And yet, even after you earn enough, you say that it's okay to continue earning even more money through work? It seems to me that if one takes the dictum "don't work too hard" seriously that you'd stop earning money through work once you've earned enough. Otherwise the temptation to define work as something that you just want to do is too great, which would then render the dictum "don't work too much" meaningless.

Sorry if that's a little rushed, but there's a surprising amount to unpack about a seemingly simple statement.
Check out Akka Actor framework in scala. It does actors very well. Asynchronous and highly vertically scalable.
frankly I could never understand all this sports obsession with US universities. universities are there to teach science, sports deserve their own and separate institutions.
Ethical and transparent -- two phenomenal qualities in a VC.