skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is imprecise. OK, let's say that liquidity has gone up in the long run, thanks to automation (and to some extent, regulation). This reference http://www.tau.ac.il/~azibenr/Liquidity_BKW.pdf shows that more liquidity has not helped: "...the effect of each unit of liquidity on returns has declined over the years." So one cannot flatly assert that HFT has led to improved liquidity and that this benefits everyone. And still one cannot discount the effect of decreased volume: this indicates that retail investors have left.

Here's what that incontrovertible reference, the Wikipedia, states:

Another elegant definition of liquidity is the probability that the next trade is executed at a price equal to the last one.

The Wikipedia also "confuses" liquidity with volume: The liquidity of a product can be measured as how often it is bought and sold; this is known as volume. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_liquidity
If you find the 10 year rule absurd, take a look at this paper:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/freakonomics/pdf/D...
The trouble goes deeper than that. Prototypal inheritance in itself probably wouldn't be all that confusing for these people — it's actually a simpler concept than classical inheritance. The issue with JavaScript's object system is that it's downright convoluted.

AFAIK, Self is the progenitor of prototype-based OO. In Self, the way you create a new object is just `someObject copy`. You can dynamically change its prototype later if you want, too. But in traditional JavaScript, you can't do that. You want an object? You need a constructor. Instead of just cloning a prototype, you have to do the whole `function Foo() { blah blah.prototype = someObject blah blah }; myFoo = new Foo()` rigamarole, and there is no standard way to access an object's prototype.

JavaScript has finally got the equivalent of Self's object creation with Object.create, but that is pretty new — and the actual object system still has the whole wonky prototype/constructor/__proto__ mess behind the scenes.
How Do You Know An Autonomous Vehicle Has Seen You?
An employee, whose last name is Null, kills our employee lookup app
How to recover your Amazon AWS EBS volume from an EBS Snapshot [ScreenCast]
Oracle Releases Java Development Kits for OS X
True, but it requires extreme circumstances. Unfortunately, the kind of harassment women usually experience is not counted at that. I'll bet money that no jury will consider bikini pictures extreme harassment.
Thinking about scraping this data and calculating performance-to-€ ratio to identify good deals/unclaimed bargains etc. Perhaps even calculate the mean average price a given server spec sells for etc.

If they have an affiliate scheme that would make s nice side project
Plus the fact that the majority of the Android experience has been out of the hands of Google from the beginning. The smartphone manufacturers and the carriers have more control over the install of Android on their devices than Google ever has. Google seems fine with that arrangement so far so I'm guessing it's working for them.
I don't think so.

3554 Amun [1]

Estimated Diameter = 2500 m
Estimated Mass = 16,000,000,000,000 kg

For comparison,

International Space Station [2]

Longest Dimension = 109 m
Mass = 450,000 kg

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3554_Amun
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station
I use and prefer zsh, but a lot of developers who use OSX don't realize that they're using a version of bash that's roughly 5 years out of date - from when GNU switched over from GPLv2 to GPLv3, which Apple can't use any code from.

Bash has come a long way since then and it's just a "brew install bash" away. There's absolutely no good reason to stick with the version that ships with OSX for your personal shell.

I'm not sure which zsh OSX ships with, but it should be much more up to date since it uses a BSD-like license.
There is no possible way that a member of Congress could understand everything that they are passing laws on, so they rely on their staff members, constituents, and special interests to educate them.

In this case, unlike SOPA, there were quite a few people who do understand Internet technology who supported the bill.
Top 3 iOS App Store Optimization tricks
I'd add that it's too easy to pollute the global scope accidentally, because a simple anonymous block structure (e.g. braces) to scope variables is not allowed. Best workaround is to wrap most all code in an anonymous function that is then immediately executed (function() {<your code here}}).(), but that's ugly and easy to forget.
I think Coffeescript does this by default for all blocks of code, which IMO is one of the principal reasons for preferring it to original javascript.
My number 1 reason to be an entrepreneur is freedom, and money is the means to freedom ...
The problem with Javascript's prototype system is that it's not a real prototype system - it's a chimera that's halfway between a traditional prototype system like Self and a class system like Java.

The result is a system that is fit for neither paradigm. Trying to do work in either one requires a lot of extremely counter-intuitive lines of code that 'you just have to learn'. Unless you want your code to get bogged down such lines, you end up using libraries that allow you to write something that looks more like either Self or Java.

So, the problem isn't that people haven't bothered to learn 'the right way' to do protoclasses in Javascript. The problem is that 'the right way' is stupid. Either make a real prototype system or a real class system (or both!). But the reason that everyone is so unhappy with the state of things is because it sucks.
The point, as always, is that intelligent people find other intelligent people to hire by asking questions that aren't uniform or one-size-fits-all, or which only require regurgitation of facts, but rather by probing how and why a candidate thinks a certain way.

This should be obvious by now. Standard CV reviews, colleges and references say nothing about how efficiently a candidate is able to think through new problems or how elegant their solutions will be. Nor does that mean that formal training and real-world skill exist in an inverse relationship as a lot of self-taught coders (myself included) like to pretend it does. They simply aren't co-related, at least not as far as we can tell from most leading posts about hiring on HN.

So if the goal is efficiency, why not just hire people based on their IQ? What else is there that qualifies people for positions where their bosses 2 levels up have no idea how they're actually executing the work that's put in front of them, and rely completely on them to come to the best logical solutions to new problems creatively, quickly and every single time? The only other standard you might want to look for is trustworthiness, but you can't measure that in an interview.

Anyway, it doesn't matter if someone with 140+ IQ has ever coded before. It's probably worth paying to train them. So let's just cut to the chase. You need people with brains and integrity, and the rest of it is just huff and puff nonsense from HR people who don't have a clue, and couldn't do the job their hirees do.
Hi Mike, do you have any experience building 3G or 4G enabled CDMA/GSM devices? Ideally this would be an FCC certified module that would be dead easy to interface with. I have no antenna design skills to speak of so that's a concern too. Thanks!
Yes, absolutely. There's a lot of money on the line, right?
My experience has been very different however I work in a place that does care about the burden placed on people by compliance. I am also heavily involved with compliance, drafting policies and the implementation of those policies. When someone wants a new policy implemented I have a rule that they are the first ones I hold to the new policy.

One example was a change to the password complexity requirements for our organization (health care); since this was approved by senior leadership I changed the passwords for senior leadership first and did not allow any exceptions to the new policy. This ensured that the people who initiated the policy and are in a position to change the policy are the first ones impacted by it. If something was horribly wrong I would only change the policy or provide an exception if anyone who met the same criteria was also to be given the exception. If the exception is by job title or position I would require that they explicitly put that in the policy; that has never been requested though.

When there is a process to communicate issues and a culture that actually cares, compliance isn't as bad. For example we instituted a stricter change management process about a year ago.

We got people together to figure out what we thought a good balance was between the compliance needs, operational needs and the problems we were attempting to solve. As we were using the new process we gathered information from people then reviewed the entire thing at around six months. Based upon the feedback we made changes to the process, loosening somethings and tightening other parts. We have another meeting to review this in a few weeks since there have been some new proposals for how to streamline the process.

As far as management learning the rules, I tend to not have too much issue with that. If they don't follow the rules and are unwilling to comply their access to all systems will be shut off; the IT security group reports to me. :) Once people know you will go so far as to shut off their access for not cooperating it is amazing how quickly they work with you when an issue arises.

For us there is always a process to get exceptions with any policy; but the person performing the action may not be authorized to give themselves an exception arbitrarily.
20 Hilarious Quotes From Shit Entrepreneurs Say Videos
Not a general solution for your problem, but you could use GNU parallel anytime you'd use xargs (they use the same API).
It's not as hard as it looks. What I do is stick the chip in place with tape, then tack down pins on opposite corners, then remove the tape and just go at it like crazy, letting the pins bridge as they will. Once it's all done and there's solder everywhere, I go back over it with solder braid to suck up the excess. A magnifying glass is nice but you can totally just do it by hand. Just embrace the mess!
Conversely, what better way for a non-coder to show genuine appreciation for a technical individuals talents, than by showing that he/she is an engaged student of their craft?

I'm a non-technical co-founder, but I'm learning to code. Along with all the other obvious advantages already shared in this thread, there is an intangible benefit that my technical co-founder appreciates.

It's hard to measure, but my interest in coding communicates a deep level of respect for him and his contributions. Contrast this with the classic "Whartonite Seeks Code Monkey" type. Which type do you want to work with?

Learning to code should be celebrated and encouraged. Nobody loses.
Amazon, Texas Reach Deal to Settle Sales-Tax Spat
Supporting a major new operating system is not a new feature for any software?
Klouchebag: It's like Klout but for measuring asshattery online
I'm really uncomfortable with the term 'learning to code', because when I read it makes me think that the company wants its employees to know in what circumstances you should and shouldn't use semicolons in Javascript, or what methods are available to strings in Python.

I don't think those things are useful unless you're actually writing code.

What is useful is understanding how software (and, for a lot of people, web software in particular) fits together. That means understanding what might make something computationally expensive, or understanding the advantages/disadvantages of loosely coupled components (etc etc).

This isn't to say that people 'learning to code' isn't a step in the right direction, but I don't think it's an end in itself, and for most people, writing code is only a doorway to that understanding if they have the time to take on projects that involve those problems.

What we need isn't lots of people who can do 'hello world'. It is people who are technologically literate. That needs to be the focus and goal.
Ninjas and Robots: just increased my following by 335% in 7 days
I am still waiting for them to discover the Bozon, the carrier of the Bozo force.
me too for a couple months now - there are a lot of rough edges - any tips? i have serious prompt issues, i have intermittently malformed colors. is your configuration on github?

turns out i'm willing to tolerate a lot of pain to have emacs operations in a shell buffer, haha
http://www.moock.org/lectures/troublewithjs/actionscript-cod...

Off topic, but what font is that?
In prototype-based OO, a constructor is just a function that builds an object.
If you like, you can give that function a starting point for building its objects
(the prototype), but in the end, it's just a function that builds an object.

Isn't this called pseudo-classical inheritance?

In purely prototypical inheritance one object inherits from another object, there is no need for constructors whatsoever,
instead you are just setting __proto__ link so that it points to the object from which you want to inherit.

This way you have much more freedom - you could add initializer method that sets up variables in a similar fashion to constructor, but you could also easily implement singleton or mixin patterns.

Ideally, prototypical inheritance would be done like in the code below, but I doubt we will ever see this supported by JS:

obj1 = {
__proto__: Object.prototype,

init: function() {
}
}

obj2 = {
__proto__: obj1,

init: function() {
super.init()
}
}

obj3 = {}
obj3.__proto__ = obj2
obj3.init()
Stylmee Launches 3D Social Shopping Game On The Web
Ask HN: Does doing what your users say they want ultimately end in betrayal?
You know the story. You listen to your users and do exactly what they say they want. You implement the features they want and you always keep their input in the process. From polls to surveys to comments - everything you make goes by the user. Sounds good in the surface, right?

That is until some company who completely ignores their user and does what they think is correct comes along (say Apple). Now the users you've been taking care of since the beginning have left your products in droves.

What happened? Why did they leave? You did everything they said but they still left. What's going on here?
See also: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3899140
Partaking in expensive management fads is, perhaps, God's way of telling you you've got more funding than you need.
> Prototypes are simply more complicated than classes.

[citation needed]

I'd argue the opposite: "Prototypes are simply more _intuitive_ than classes."

OO-design says that X is-a Y is-a Z, with inheritance providing the main form of structure.

Prototypical-design says that X is-like-a Y, but with these differences. This NPC (specific, X) is like any other NPC (general, perhaps the original NPC prototype), but with the name Fred and this custom AI code.

They're different ways of thinking, but prototypes are certainly not more complicated than classes in the general case.

----

As for the syntax, though, I totally agree with you.
"because it's interesting and fun and challenging and sometimes disappointing and a fantastic learning experience and you might get rich or go broke while experiencing the full, unfiltered range of human emotions and potential"

This is one of the best articulations of why I'm an entrepreneur that I've read. Thanks.
Here's the PS1:

PS1="\[\e[32;1m\]\[\e[37;1m\]\`if [ \$? = 0 ]; then echo \[\e[33m\] :\)\[\e[0m\]; else echo \[\e[31m\] X\(\[\e[0m\]; fi\`\[\e[32;1m\] \[\e[32;1m\](\[\e[37;1m\]\h:\u\[\e[32;1m\])-(\[\e[37;1m\]\j\[\e[32;1m\])-(\[\e[37;1m\]\w\[\e[32;1m\])\n\[\e[0m\]"

Here's how it appears:

:) (seas456:narayana)-(0)-(~/personal)
[this line is where your cursor blinks; notice no symbol at the start of this line]

You can't see the colors here. The smiley face turns into a bright red frowny face if the exit code of the last job is nonzero.
> I'm not a formally schooled developer. I don't know a <strong>heap</strong> about traditional computer science.

Well you sure do talk the talk. ;)

Ba-dum---Crash!
It might not be their fault, but it sure is their responsibility now.
Not really related but I wonder about this all the time. Most of well known companies (Microsoft, Amazon, Yahoo, Google, Facebook etc) have a lot of data structures and sorting algorithm related problems as part of their interviews. They might require you to explain the algorithm or write code for a given data structure problem. Do these companies use data structures like binary trees (with all the variations) and sorting algorithms a lot ?

I'm asking this because, the companies I work for are mostly tier-2 companies which hardly use any of this stuff and generally get away by using proper libraries. So when ever I have to prepare for attending interviews of the tier-1 companies, I'm forced to re-learn most of this stuff - because knowledge fades when you don't use it.
Note that you are not always forced to be in someone's contact list to contact him. It's a user configurable setting. I wonder if call-blocking for incoming calls from persons not in contact list is done at server level or client level.
> "I think you know what it is: it’s to change the world"

This article is disguised as a buzzkill for people who have startup dreams, but turns out to be an even bigger opiate.
Startup Eulogy
This isn't correct in my experience. Interviewers do typically insist on more than simply being able to write code and it is common for them to try to hire someone who groks as much of their stack and codebase as possible from day one.

edit: but maybe it is not the same in Silicon Valley?
I was talking more about hacking in the "doing something clever" sense that has popped up like crazy: hack your taxes! hack your wife! hack the stock market! etc.
Perhaps a dumb question, but why would you use an IDE? I'm learning Python (my first language), and have found about the only thing useful to me in IDLE (the IDE for python) is the autotab function.

Am I missing something? Or are IDE's a waste of time? (I usually just use gedit, fyi, on my ubuntu box)
Under the hood: Data diving with Scuba
Photos from 100 years ago tell vivid story of gritty New York City
I hear you, but to take your apt analogy, I think the only way to understand software development is to go through the door of writing working code in some particular language. The goals may be bigger, but for people to get to them and understand them, they have to start by writing something, even if it's just "alert('hello world!')".
They are starting with engines. The rest of their ideas are simply concepts at this stage. It's a small company.

The problem is that plenty of people have tried and failed to produce a successful air-breathing rocket engine. Nobody wants to invest any money in Reaction Engines until they can prove that the core concept that the company is built on works. And proving this costs a certain amount of cash. Some of this is being financed by the ESA, in very much the same way that NASA is financing new commercial spaceflight efforts.

In the next year or two we're either going to see them succeed and garner lots of investment, or fail and fade into obscurity.
Not sure why people are surprised by this.. what did you think P2P meant?
Asimov:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martian_Way.

Not exactly what you asked for, but pretty close. Deals with bringing water to Earth.

Edit: Added very brief description
Using cardinal directions really isn't a strong feature of the language though is it? It's secondary to the language itself and any culture could do that with their own language because it isn't a central feature of the language. It isn't in the grammar. Which makes it not an example of strong Sapir-Whorf but an example of weak Sapir-Whorf. The former is all token adult claimed and the latter is something that is, I think, more accepted.
Reincarnation
We are simply a site dedicated to bringing you the viewer amazing past life and reincarnation stories from real everyday people. These stories are authentic and will shock your reality, leading you to question what’s really possible. This site is divided into four main sections; Famous Reincarnation Cases, Child Reincarnation Cases, Adult Reincarnation Cases and Facts and Myths about Reincarnation.
Check out additional info on:- http://www.reincarnation-stories.com/
Changing the world doesn't necessarily mean you're going to somehow rid the world of broke, sick, and starving people. But I agree, this guy is taking himself way too seriously. I guess he gave the world a new way of taking notes, but come on.
Can you say more about the testing configuration you are using? With OS X 10.6.8, xterm 251, bash 3.2.48(1), and with no .bashrc, and after trying to set my PS1 to match yours (failing, as the lightning bolt came up as an o with an umlaut), I get the following behavior for the same test:

saurik ~ ö bob
saurik ~ ö cat
^C
saurik ~ ö
Collision of gambling and social gaming now 'inevitable'
Even if they were doing so, the situation was very different. You couldn't easily copy movies, and either way, people in general weren't as dependent on Hollywood entertainment as they are now.
As an ex-Actionscript, now-JS programmer a lot of this resonates with me.

After the move, I missed a lot of things - mostly the productivity stuff like type-safe renaming; intellisense; clickable function names. Also the presence of a real module system, and the fact that the compiler would catch my typos.

However, after comparing my two codebases (the original one in Actionscript and the new on in Javascript), I can't help but be amazed at all the damn boilerplate that's in my Actionscript. I ended up spending an enormous amount of time specifying interfaces and careful inheritance chains so that all of my type annotations would be compatible and safe. Did I need to do all that? Probably not, but the design of the language certainly encouraged me to do so. I can't help but wonder what I could have done with that time - especially considering the fact that my JS codebase doesn't seem to have more bugs or worse stability.

Would I switch back if I could? I'm not sure.

I can't help but think that there's a real opportunity for a Coffeescript-like language with a module system, clean class syntax, and some Go-like features such as Go interfaces and type inference, plus manual type annotations when necessary.
Climate change affecting corn prices
Turntable.fm for Android "pretty soon"
What I'm thoroughly confused about is the notion that mining asteroids is that lucrative. The minerals/metals they're mining (example: Platinum) are worth 1,500 due to supply and demand. Only a few hundred tons of platinum are mined on earth every year, restricting supply, thus driving the price up. If thousands of tons of platinum were "imported" from an asteroid, wouldn't this flood the market with supply and collapse the price?

What am I missing here?
Right. I'm speaking of WIRED specifically.