skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ah, the inevitable "bad GPL analogies" portion of any GPL discussion thread.

I personally don't feel I'm under any ethical obligation to give away my source code. Sometimes I don't release it at all, at least not unless you're paying for it. Other times I license it under a permissive license, usually when it's something smallish.

And other times I choose to GPL or AGPL it. I see the latter case as a quid pro quo: you can use my code as long as you let me use yours. Unlike in the ham sandwich example, it's not some arbitrary restriction imposed out of taste or spite, but a proposal of what seems to me to be a fair exchange. In return for using my code, you let me use your code, pretty simple and symmetric.

If you don't like the idea of a reciprocal code exchange, we could agree on a different exchange, like you paying me money for a license, or we could fail to reach an agreement and no exchange happens. But I don't feel particularly obligated to give you unrestricted free use of my code with no reciprocation. I could choose to do that out of charity or idealism, but I don't think I'm obligated to.
Peter Thiel Recap: Startups, Competition, Capitalism, Bubbles
Cool. It would be great to have a quick phone or Skype chat with you to learn from your experience as an agent. Can we touch base via email at obaid[at]tourzap.com -- thanks
Ask HN: What are the best real estate blogs or other sites to visit?
Ask HN: What are the best real estate blogs or other sites to visit?

I recognize that this question won't make it to the front page of HN and that it seems out of place, but I'm looking for some new sites and I figured if anyone know of a great one, they would be on HN.

Thanks in advance for any help!
As if it costs no energy to make a new computer? If you want to minimize total energy costs, you have to consider manufacturing energy costs. The case for just getting a new computer gets even worse if you put all of your old computer's energy costs as a sunk cost. This study shows that amongst the early 2000s generation of laptops that even if you use a laptop for 7 years [1] (you have to squint at the first graph), manufacturing still accounts for ~50% of energy costs. Even assuming that manufacturing efficiency increased even more than operating efficiency since then, the answer is still not clear cut.

Now obviously at some point, it becomes better to get a new computer period, and most P4s may already be in that range, but as a generalized statement, should be taken carefully.

[1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652611...
That's why I hate the 0-10 scale for skill level.

Some folks consider a 10 to be the guy who invented the language/technology. Linus, DHH, etc. Almost no one is a 10 on that scale.

Others consider a 10 to be "I'm an expert in any of the tasks you're going to be asking me to perform with this tech". That's the scale that's more important to me.

Then, of course, you get the brand new grad who says they're an 8 in a language despite never making anything that's not a basic class project in it...
They launched Feb 28th at Superconf.net so, they haven't been open for very long. I do know they have multiple monetization systems for people, but, I think most of their early beta testers are doing the per minute/per half hour/block of time.
This article, while well written and trying to think ahead, forgets something very important: cars are such a symbol because they appeal to one of the core aspects of human nature. The freedom of movement, the ability to choose where you go, the notion of being unrestricted and able to move about freely. Being herded on a bus is not in our nature.

Furthermore, to some degree, cars are actually more efficient from a personal perspective as an individual. If you live in the typical USA sprawl, you don't really want to take a bus somewhere. For example, one of my co-founders had to take the bus home from his office yesterday. The commute is normal about 20 minutes in traffic...the bus took almost two hours.

The issue facing the US is that our space utilization is far less compact in most places, which makes public transport highly inefficient. I'm all for more railroads and other means of getting people around, but the only cities with truly effective public transport are:

- NYC area

- Chicago

- Pittsburgh

...I'm trying to think of others, but I'm drawing a blank. Also, bear in mind I'm distinguishing between places that have transport vs. where it is effective.

As for flying cars and all those goodies, they won't happen. The reason is quite simple: if something fails, they fall and you die. The average joe is not able to properly handle a flying craft with that level of risk - and if it falls, it may land on someone.

The most promising advance so far is driverless cars. I do believe they will become commonplace soon as technology advances and they become able to handle regular driving. I personally wouldn't use them, but they would make the rest of the driving public much happier and I do expect that to be the next car revolution.

Sadly, in the US at least, public transport and flying cars are not in our future.
I don't think that most people understand the GPL. Everybody understands the basic spirit of it, but there are lots of details spread throughout that huge document. The preamble is longer than many permissive licenses. .That there is a preamble at all speaks to the complexity. It's too much for a small group or individual without access to a lawyer, and I don't think people in these cases are going to use a license that they don't fully understand.
I miss when I was a kid. If you made something cool and wanted to share it you'd just give it away as freeware on a BBS or magazine cover disk or something. You might include the source as well in case anyone wanted to hack on it. As comms technology evolved and two-way comms became more viable, a lot of people would publish an e-mail address, and if someone was interested enough to ask about how the author had achieved a certain effect or what sort of tools they used then they were often happy to start a discussion or share their code. No-one gave a damn about "licences" and "copyleft" or "freedom", we just hacked on code because it was fun and we shared it with fellow hackers because it felt good and we liked the healthy karma. The graphics/audio demo scene worked this way. Game modding communities worked this way. All kinds of useful little tools that helped the guy who wrote them and later helped other people as well got discovered and used this way.

I view the rise of EULAs and "terms and conditions" pages and all that junk to be one of the biggest retrograde steps in technological history, because most of the things in these documents are legal weasel words that don't have much to do with technology at all, or even with regular users who just want to use the software in a normal way for that matter. By playing the legal game, unfortunately the FSF has essential stolen the old embrace/extend/extinguish model from big business and applied it to hobbyist software development, legalificationalising it so that lots of people who just want to hack on code and share their results with anyone interested are now divided among fragmented communities and might not even know what they can and can't do any more. Way more time and effort gets spent worrying about licence agreements and how stuff can be used than anyone used to care about, and are we really any better off for it? I don't think we are.

It never seems to occur to anyone today that the reason things used to work well wasn't that hackers shared code because someone forced them to. It was that they shared code because they enjoyed it and other people often shared their own code in return for the same reason, without any formal obligation or having legalese bullshit plastered all over the top of every source file. I suspect if the only two licence agreements supported by law were "no copying without payment/permission" and "copy freely but give fair credit" no great harm would be done and a lot of people would waste a lot less time worrying about things other than building cool stuff with code. (Edit: Of course this is a simplification, but you get the idea.)
Church numerals in Python
Yup. It does take discipline... but it's one worth acquiring I think :-)

People need to switch from thinking "dumb user" (very bad) or "I suck at design" (bad) to "yay - I learned something". Adding more people into the testing loop is possibly good for objectivity - but really bad for lengthening the feedback loop and making it much less communicative.

It fits in with your general point that we don't talk enough about failure enough. Failure is normal in the design process. I expect the first few iterations to be complete fk ups in one way or another. That's just the way life is. People are complicated.

Be open about it. Test early and often. Learn and improve.
5. Candidate likely has a pretty good sense of humour.
It would be nice to cover Ruby/RVM under Cygwin as well in addition to RailsInstaller. As long as the right Cygwin packages are installed (git, readline, wget, patch, make, gcc, libsqlite3-devel, libxml2-devel, libxslt-devel) RVM installs just fine and then the reader will be able to follow all the remaining examples in the book directly.

You could add something like this:

Ruby with Cygwin (Windows)

Another option on Windows is install Ruby under Cygwin. If you are already using Cygwin then installing RVM and Ruby is done the same way you would do it on Linux/OSX. If you do go the Cygwin route then throughout the rest of the book just follow the Linux/OSX examples. Here are the steps:

First, make sure you have the following Cygwin packages installed: git, readline, wget, patch, make, gcc, libsqlite3-devel, libxml2-devel, libxslt-devel.

Then install RVM:
curl -L get.rvm.io | bash

Then just follow the steps listed in the next section to install Ruby.
I like this, but I don't understand it. How you can end up with Number of days without work since 1979: 0

Isn't the reality more like the fact that you have to constantly obtain new skills, thus making you only "hireable" part of the time?

In 2001 you learn you don't have what folks are looking for so you go and "retrain", get a couple years solid experience[%] in that skill, and then have a decent run until 2009 when the whole thing rinses & repeats?

To me, senarios like these, make the case for actually having a CS degree -- that way you have a chance of obtaining a "zero" in number of days without work since 1979.

1979
Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your COBOL?"
CS Graduate: "10."
Recruiter: "Great! I have tons of work for you."

1983
Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your data base?"
CS Graduate: "4. But during my days at MIT, we did cover database theory quite intensely;
I'm sure I could adapt to your needs very quickly"
Recruiter: "Oh, MIT 'eh, I'm sure you could, when can you start?"

... and so on...

[%] I know a solid programmer can pick up new skills pretty quickly, but recruiters have a funny way of always insisting on a certain number of years of experience in a particular skill, don't they...

P.S. I don't have a CS a degree.
I work at a reasonably large (20+K) well respected consulting firm that has a significant number of software developers or ex software developers. Honestly, they do a lot of web development work and keep up with the latest things but really C# and SharePoint really are the best solutions for most of these projects.

Advertising supported websites care a lot about scale on the cheap because serving banner advertising to 10 thousand people a day does not pay the rent even if the servers where free. But, when your actually selling stuff or managing internal projects it's all about manpower costs and .Net projects take less time to build. When a small project costs 10,000$ a day in manpower and needs 2-20k worth of server and say 100k worth of software it's still almost meaningless next to manpower costs.
The "let's get rid or substantially reduce cars" crowd often is comprised of those who live in cities, and have no understanding of the indispensability of cars in rural areas. Work, shopping, some level of school, advanced medical, are often in one of the next towns 10-15 miles over, with your town having one of those as an anchor.

And notice I said "one of the next towns over". Stuff isn't necessarily concentrated in an "economic zone" like it is in cities. Work could be 8 miles east, the high school in your town, and the elementary school 10 miles north. Mass transit just wouldn't cut it.
مشاهدة مباراة برشلونة وريال مدريد بث مباشر
so who had the balls to take the name?

http://registrar.schlund.info these fine people, apparently.
10 mistakes i did on my first startup, from media darling to having to sell off
sharing my own mistakes i did on my first startup, feel free to share
Even though he's a Google employee, we still don't know that he just knows lua because he plays World of Warcraft, or is otherwise a suitable operating system designer.

I figure it's best to just let the project stand on it's own ground.
How to Get Comments too Your Blog-My Idea for a Blog Commenting Service
We all struggle at the beginning to get comments to our blog. Here is a great idea for a new network free of charge.
I think the key is to make sure the driver software is mature at the time of purchase (no room for optimism when it comes to your data). I've had a Crucial m225 for 2 years, perfect performance and reliability so far. The speed is not setting any records but just about maxes out my SATA II bus anyway.
You are right, my claim that this is moderator specific is misleading. It is a meme of the current active SO community.

My general claim is merely that the closing of these questions is not implacably imposed by the software, but is instead a community choice.

I don't think we disagree on this being a 'religious' issue. I am clearly an SO apostate.
Show HN: I built a small math jit compiler
Who’s using your own data?
try to fix bugs in linux. have a kernel dev insult your mother. learn and iterate.
The rise of the "opinions are not wanted here" attitude on SO is disappointing - I understand the motive but they may be kicking out the baby with the bath water.
From my limited experience the right answer is always 7. It's a BS question so yes there is a right answer.

Here's why: When I see resumes, the only people who put 10s are recent college graduates. They put a 10 for Java and then don't know what a hashCode is. This demonstrates more about the question than about the candidate

I've also interviewed at a few places, been asked the 0-10 question on a set of languages and been told that 5 "wasn't what they were looking for" and they wanted "10s only." This demonstrates more about the company than about the question.

The right answer is 7. It says "I'm good, but not Linus Torvalds" and if anyone asks a follow just say "I'm never really sure what to say there." It doesn't matter if your answer means anything because the question doesn't
Knowing that the median household income in the US is $44k, I am continually shocked at the amount of money spent on cars.

"Slightly less than one-third of households said they had one personal vehicle1 available for use in 2001. A little more than one-third of households (40 million out of 107 million households) had 2 vehicles and slightly less than one-quarter had 3 or more vehicles available."[0]

This is an unimaginable number of cars. Given that a car costs, on average, $28,400[1] - and lasts around 8 years[2] - holy shit.

That doesn't even take into account the cost of running and fueling a car. At an average of ~15k miles per year, the total cost PER CAR is around $8,776 per year.[3] To our 'median household', which is more likely than not to have one or two cars, that's either 20% or 40% of their income. Since average spending on housing is 30%, that doesn't leave a whole lot left. No wonder we're all in so much debt.

The worst part is, US urban planning means that people are likely unable to work without access to a car.

Imagine a 20% increase in income tax, with the money being used to subsidize an outdated and damaging industry. That's what this is. It is holding back the US economy.

[0]http://www.bts.gov/publications/transportation_statistics_an...
[1]http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut11.shtm
[2]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12040753/ns/business-consumer_ne...
[3]http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandreviews/overdrive/2011/04/...
Couldn't disagree more.

There will always be more people, and more need for people, writing high level application code, glue code, and "spit-and-polish" code than people writing deep, difficult systems code. Always.

Here's the thing, in computing the advances in tooling and performance continue to pile up at an amazing rate. In 2016 it will be even easier to roll out a product built by a couple "web guys" with little in-depth technical knowledge that does an amazing amount of business and has a profound impact on the tech world. Indeed, in time it will be possible to run ventures which support billions of active users per day on incredibly cheap hardware and with a rather modest amount of dev-hours behind them.

Imagining that the future is only for hard-headed systems programming is the time honored ego-stroke of the hard-headed systems programmer who sees all of these "dilettante" "web guys" doing amazing work in the real world and making an impact and money doing so. But that's just a fantasy. The truth is that software is art. It's often a thousand times more valuable to write software which communicates with users and evokes in them strong feelings and strong connections than to write software which is technically pure and strong, but sterile, impersonal, and useless.
They are doing this. When you send this crap (and non e-waste) crap to China, people are going out and making a living extracting whatever they can. They are pulling out the copper and gold and aluminum and all the good stuff. You send them plastics? They'll tear it apart, melt it down, and resell it. There are entire villages who live in piles of our crap, and making their living off it, while slowing killing themselves.

The problem as you've put it, is the health and safety issues. Which returns to why we send it to China to begin with. They don't care about health and safety, so it's dirt cheap. Extracting gold with acid baths? Guess which one is cheaper, the open pools of acid on the ground, or the one in a processing facility with fume hoods, safety equipment, proper monitoring and disposal?
Ping Engineering
I find if you're good at applying logic you'll do just fine programming. Math really helps when trying to prove why good logic is right. Plus most math used in CS is just powers of two and basic algebra... nothing fancy.
And that's the case in large part because your environment is optimized for driving. For me to get a car, I'd have to pay a fair bit more in rent to have somewhere to park, and I still wouldn't be able to drive to work (there's nowhere to park). And even if I could I'd have to pay £9 a day to enter the city. (Congestion charge zone, in London). But all of central, and lots of not-so-central London is within an hour's tube ride. And as far as cycling goes, there's a lot within a 60 minutes cycling radius from here.

Of course, housing prices are atrocious, but that's an entirely separate discussion.
Pi day magic revealed...
http://ow.ly/8AAHQ
MVP and Customer development problems in mobile
http://ow.ly/8AAHQ
there's been an ongoing problem getting enough people into computer science programs (in large part because of the broad fears of "outsourcing"),

Then what fields are these people going into? Law? I hope not: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2010/10/a_ca... . Medicine has its own problems too. Are they majoring in the humanities? Getting bogus business degrees?: http://www.amazon.com/The-Marketplace-Ideas-Resistance-Unive... ?

It might just be that undergrads have serious information asymmetry problems, of the sort I tried, probably futilely, to correct here: http://jseliger.com/2012/04/17/how-to-think-about-science-an... , but I wonder how these kinds of asymmetries can really persist.
Stack Overflow has a vigorous moderating policy. That's usually a good thing. It helps form a community, and keeps stuff out.

The problem comes with a huge site like SO, because there are so many "not welcome here" topics which get closed, with no suggestions about where to put those questions, and without great explanations about why those topics aren't welcome.

It's not as thoroughly toxic as some[1] aspects of wikipedia are, but it's not pleasant for some people.

[1] for various values of some, including "all" for a few users.
> Need to build up an intermediate list and then discard it? Easy! No worries!

In Haskell efforts are under way to have your cake and eat it, too. Stream fusion (and more general deforestation techniques) allow you to have intermediate data structures at the level of source code logic, without them ever showing up in the compiler's output. Such tight loops don't produce any garbage.
If more work places had showers, that might be a workable solution.

Also: "I drive 40 minutes each way" 1hr20min of driving is not going to translate into 1hr30min of biking, with the only possible exception being if you spent the entire car ride in gridlock or parking lots.

And: "I couldn't find a job here, but I could find a job there". That you can find a job within 20 miles does not help him.

"You are supposed to spend that 40 minutes of driving concentrating on driving. Not talking on cell phones, not texting, not talking, not even listening to music but DRIVING."

Yeah, and I'm not supposed to eat pizza or drink so much...
How to start your project home improvement
Think of it as the message. What does it say about you or your company / product. What does it show your values to be. Etc.
Yes, that's definitely a problem. For our use-case where we want to follow SW engineering best practices like versioning, continuous integration, etc. we thought reuse of git as a repository and them to user will be a good thing.
The usefulness of each movement isn't that they're right in themselves. It's that when the hype has faded, and they wash out again, the landscape they leave is different. If they're successful, half of what they advocated is seen as hyperbole, and half of it is taken as common sense.
Lets do the actual math here....

I will use my commute since i know more of the details. Its close to the OP of your reply....

I travel 50 miles per day to work, round trip. This takes me about 65 minutes total on average. That is an average speed o 54 mph.

If i were to bike that with an average speed of 16mph it would take me 3.125 hours.

If i workout for an hour a day, which is a very considerable workout to do daily that puts me at 2.08 hours per day with driving verses 3.125 hours per day for biking. So by driving instead of biking i can still get plenty of exercise to stay healthy and save an hour per day to do other things i enjoy. Family time, cooking, programming, reading, etc.

At this point i would say i will stick to driving. Don't get me wrong, i can't wait for driverless car technology... would love to have yet another hour back per day. the train and bus stuff doesn't work out well in rural pennsylvania. cars are pretty convenient here. the economics of cars works, and has for a long time, and in a capitalist based society, thats a large part of the equation. a lot depends on your measuring stick.
"A future without cars" looks like some of those cities and those city's problems - in particular, really expensive housing...

NYC would be a lot cheaper if you could buy up some old brownstones, give the tenants end of lease + 6 months to find a new place, tear them down and build an apartment building. It would be very simple to fit a lot more people on manhattan if we just built taller buildings.

It's politics that makes dense cities expensive, not something intrinsic to the cities themselves.