skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
damn - that's a real shame. Listening to John and Dan shoot the breeze on any range of topics is/was one of the highlights of the week (podcast highlights anyway!). I'm assuming this wasn't a clean split given it was unannounced and given the T-Shirts which were printed for WWDC as announced on TTS90. I understand Dan and John have been good friends for a long time - hope this doesn't kill their friendship.
My understanding is Kingdoms of Amalur was work in progress at Big Huge Games, 38 Studios acquired them and they modded the game to fit the world of Amalur. Which is supposed to tie into their next game.
So... get short on FB?
Bankers Got Too Aggressive With Pricing Facebook
Unless you are talking about the ability of existing management to make positive changes in the future.
Hypercritical is by far my favorite podcast, it took the top spot on my playlists from the Talk Show a long time ago. I get the impression Siracusa does that podcast for fun, not profit and would never ditch Dan like Gruber has.
You can change the "text" variable in the browser. This is an API that you can throw text at and try and detect the sentiment.

Examples:
http://happy.elevenbasetwo.com/?text=I%20want%20to%20go%20ho....
http://happy.elevenbasetwo.com/?text=You%20guys%20are%20amaz...!

http://happy.elevenbasetwo.com/?text=bill%20gates
http://happy.elevenbasetwo.com/?text=linus%20torvalds
Private investment management is usually performance based.
Hot College Couples Kissing In Car
Haha...didn't know this would turn out so well...
http://happy.elevenbasetwo.com/?text=paul%20graham
MemoShake - Android Apps on Google Play
Memolane launches new app. Find fun memories on the go!
Wait until employees start dumping their stock.
Google Goggles is an augmented reality app that basically layers Yelp reviews over Google Maps Streetview. Did he mean Google Glass, the AR glasses that Google made a video about? Does this guy really think that the Google Glass project is groundbreaking? If it's so Earth-shattering, why am I typing this on an iPad and not through some next generation AR display on my head?!
It means that underwriters were putting lots of stocks to buy at the exact $38 level so that this will scare people away from selling (oh wow such a huge position someone wants to buy [$38 x 9999900 shares == $379,996,200], there is no chance someone will buy that much of a shares [and therefore stock will plunge deeper], so I better stick to my own shares and not sell).

They build rather fake barricade.

edit: depends how the big fish will play, you may see none of these Monday morning. Its probably just a hand of underwriters keeping 80% of that shares. If they withdraw, you may see only 25000 shares at $38, for example [so it will be much easier for the stock to go deeper].
I suggest at least eight strong men in a row. You get aerodynamic and scaling benefits, just like with rowing boats.
yip - i listened to it again just now - while it is not uncommon for gruber to take like 3 mins to respond to questions on TTS I thought he was a bit hesitant with the "I guess so" - he must have known.
This is basically the age-old debate between "growth" vs. "value" investing. Either side has some arguments; personally I prefer to stay out of it.
Totally agreed. I know views are split on Gruber and I fell on the side of genuinely liking his blog and The Talk Show, but I think I'm done with both.

I can't imagine how someone could do this to Dan.

Hypercritical is the new hotness anyway.
FB ads are not a failure, they are just less effective.
I don't know what happened here, but I agree with some of the other commenters that Dan really helped make this show what it is. He kept John focused and provided his own great input.

To be honest, I'll probably not follow The Talk Show anymore, and in my mind, the show was far from making or breaking 5by5.
No it hasn't :)

Anyway, what the top comment actually is will not change my feelings towards what it was when I wrote that. I thought it was quite appropriate and a lot more in line with what I'd expect of HN than gushing praise.
I watched it go to down to 38.00, and then went up again 0.01, 0.02, etc, slowly. I don't think it dropped at all under 38.00, and it was most likely manipulated.
After a successful IPO, Facebook has made more money than...
The graphs he cites as evidence are referring to google's display network verses google's total revenue. If that is the case, then the author is presenting no information about facebook. I hope that he did not invest based on these graphs.
They did.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-18/facebook-underwrite...
That's the big difference I see between Dan Benjamin and Mike Monteiro.

Dan is a professional and has my respect, where as Monteiro makes cheap vulgar jokes. I know which attitude I prefer to support.
Liquidware Amber Let's you Build your own Android tablet | Best Android Tablets
Microsoft products often annoy me, but "too much memory consumption" is pretty low on the list. Does Windows 7 really demand a substantially higher amount of memory than similarly-capable competing systems in most categories? (Linux running FVWM isn't comparable for most categories.)

I agree that Windows 8 is so far rather unconvincing with regard to providing a realistically strong competitor to the iPad in market terms; but if I were to hear that the Windows team was focusing on some technical aspect, I'd expect, based on history, to see them have pretty good success with it.
How the Victorians can Influence On-line Business
Facebook IPO An 'Embarrassment'?
Facebook Billionaire's Girlfriend Priscilla Chan Has Big Week Too
i always wondered
It started trading at $43.00 and ended at $38.23 which is a -8.39% loss. Why is the IPO price $38.00 if it started trading at $43.00?
My take on this article is this: it's short-sided to put so much money into one particular sector, and to encourage others to pull them out of longer-to-realize-profit sectors. That the end result is a diminishing return in the long run for the country, or region as a whole. This being caused by a lack of "long-term tech investment."

However, the striking problem with the statement is that it is not backed up by data. How much money that would've been invested in "core" technology (technology used to enable other technology), pharmaceutical, or other investments was instead funneled for short-term gains into social start-ups? I'd understand that if one just read tech news, one might think all investment goes to SV software firms these days, but I have a hard time believing that's a fact and not just a matter of media selection.
Just relistened. Yeah the last 2 minutes sounded like typical Gruber, but the last 10 seconds do have an extra bit of awkwardness now with this news. Who knows.
@klausa: Wouldn't it be standard practice to remove any references to 5by5, if only for legal reasons?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanholiday/2012/05/17/why-i-los...

Advertising isn't worthless, but advertisers are very naive. You talk about companies spending money because they are stupid. I SUSPECT, but only Facebook has the data to KNOW, that there is a high turnover in companies advertising on Facebook. New companies coming in every day, but also many who realize they aren't getting a return on investment and leaving. I think a lot of big companies advertise on it strictly for brand presence, rather than for direct sales. That's fine. But let's not pretend that there is remotely the click-thru rate that Google has.
10 Writing Tips from a Real-Life Editor
Facebook Buys Mobile Gifting Firm Karma
Make Firefox More Responsive by Suspending Actions in Background Tabs
Yeah, Dan seems like the kind of nice guy you just cant help but like. Seems to me like he's been stabbed in the back on this one.

Shame on Gruber.
very cool, BUT, needs a better name, I'll never remember that.
So... Facebook has some code you can put on your page and you have an instant like button. Well... what if Facebook starts providing a neat little bit of code that also embeds an ad? If the Like button knows who you are... so will the ad widget. So now they are serving "Facebook ads" on other sites. Of course that is what Google does with AdSense... but does Google know as much about you on that page as it does about that page? I could see it possible for Facebook to grab eyeballs on other sites... sites that are currently monetizing with AdSense. Not that I'm convinced they would make a dent with this approach... but you can't just compare the ads ON Facebook to the ads on Google search. If Facebook was putting the ads on pages that had a different focus than what you do on Facebook... there is a chance.
This app?

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/5by5-radio/id520847556?mt=8
Kind of sounds like Gruber didn't like it when Dan said "So, you approved a new 5by5 t-shirt."

That strikes me as something Gruber would get pissed off about — Dan not clearing something like a new t-shirt that uses 'his' brand.
And curing cancer will have an even greater impact. But as of today, cancer still kills millions and I am unable to buy an autonomous vehicle. However, I'm writing a comment on HN on my iPad.

I think that autonomous vehicles will be revolutionary, but it's going to be 5-10 years before such claims are anything more than bold prognostications.
Love the distortion effect!
I think you're making my argument for me: if anyone has stats on the total number of adsense ads served vs adwords ads served, we can derive the value of adsense vs adwords ads.

There are many more adsense ads displayed than adwords - it's google searches vs. most of the rest of the web. Yet it only makes up 1/4 of google's revenue.

Last I checked there was an order of magnitude difference between the value of an adwords vs. adsense ad.
What's the Appeal of Programming?
Is it me or does this feel like a blatant Google PR article?
Reddit needs this badly.

Their search provider was acquired and closed doors recently. The new engine has a weird syntax.
You're way out past the point that Google became Google. Two PhD CS students worked on a research project that became a multibillion dollar company. The project was not dumb luck, but the outcome was. It is not dumb luck when a hedge fund manager raises capital and makes billions of dollars. See the difference?
This. Gruber's flippant attitude has been bringing the Talk Show down for the past few months. Dan is what holds it together. These days, Hypercritical is by far the best podcast I listen to.

It's not worth listening to without Dan Benjamin.
I believe it's relatively easy for a girl to for an IT job in bay area since companies are trying to balance the male/female ratio. Try big companies?
Check http://h1bme.com for all companies that sponsored H1B visa in recent years
> Hire people - not MBAs or PhDs

Completely agree. (Full disclosure, I have an MBA)

I really like the way Hunter Walk put it in his essay here: http://www.hunterwalk.com/2011/12/its-fine-to-get-mba-but-do...

"It's fine to get an MBA, but don't be an MBA"
Something that has been concerning to me over the past few years is the shortsightedness at the national level.

Sure, a national endeavor for growth can include tax policies, broadband programs, educational reform, capital investments, flexible monetary policies, etc.

BUT, I think one of the most important and worthwhile goal should be the decentralization of high-growth job centers.

Setting up shop in Silicon Valley these days is ridiculously expensive. Besides, basing a large percentage of your high-growth businesses in an area that may be ravaged by a natural disaster at a moment's notice is clearly unwise.

Furthermore, the success of the nation should not be tied to the fate of Silicon Valley, or the fate of 3-5 major job centers.
Hence, a national priority should be to decentralize this economic activity across the country.

There is no catch-22 here, contrary to what people say. ("We set up shop here because all the qualified workforce is here.")

With real estates, school expenses, public transportation capacity and urbanization reaching unsustainable levels, there is no doubt start-ups would benefit from setting up shop in less expensive areas, where their employees could live without mortgaging themselves to retirement or sacrificing the well-being of their family members.
Please let us know how you are sure Mule offered any money let alone a lot.
UK Facebook hacker sentenced to jail for a year
Congratulations to Karma but is Facebook on a race with Google for the number of startups acquired this year?
I think he's saying SpaceX is a "Bigger Fucking Deal" than Facebook.
Twitter Account of Hopsin Taken Over in CISPA Protest
It's the only manipulative practice allowed by the SEC because of the need to "maintain a fair and orderly market". This article describes it fairly well in its abstract: http://economics.ouls.ox.ac.uk/10713/1/IPOstabilization.pdf.

"Stabilization is the bidding for and purchase of securities by an underwriter
immediately after an offering for the purpose of preventing or retarding a fall in
price. Stabilization is price manipulation, but regulators allow it within strict
limits - notably that stabilization may not occur above the offer price. For
legislators and market authorities, a false market is a price worth paying for an
orderly market."

EDIT: Just included the full description.
Speculating is not about what you think will happen. It's about what you think other people think will happen. It's about the market, not the inherent value of the stock.

Good investing is about buying into something you think is undervalued.

If a business has been "shown" to be profitable and stable, as you say, then its stock price will be high enough to reflect that, and it's probably not undervalued, unless you know something special about it. All you can expect it to receive a steady small stream of dividends, or sell the stock sometime in the future for roughly the same amount you paid for it originally. That's not really "investing", that's just swapping cash for stocks. Save yourself some risk and just put your money in an index fund instead.
Well, lets see how Gruber does without Dan. To be honest, they never seemed to be a particularly good match to me.
It seems a bit pointless when it would be relatively easy with a dirigible (i.e. add a bag of hydrogen or helium). On a windless day, your pedalling should propel you quite a distance anywhere you want to go. Problem solved, with technology that is at least hundred years old.
How is a device that afford convenience not disruptive?

I can walk from Seattle to Portland if I desired, the only advantage a car offers is convenience. Yet through that dramatic increase in convenience the car has proven to be one of the most disruptive inventions in history. Similarly, one can communicate, do graphic design, mix audio, produce movies, write letters and novels without a computer but the convenience afforded by computers and the internet has fundamentally transformed all of those activities.
> One, you presume that advertisers are incredibly naive and don't measure returns.

What if there were enough naive newbies to keep things afloat even in the face of advertisers who became disillusioned?

http://www.jperla.com/blog/post/facebook-is-a-ponzi-scheme

(via: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanholiday/2012/05/17/why-i-los... )
Many people spend 10% of their waking lives in cars, and more of it earning money to afford their cars. Automatic driving with the associated ease of fractional car ownership is potentially huge. Keep in mind that not everyone works at a desk job that can almost as easily be done remotely.

Social networks really, really aren't nearly as impactful in the the productive sense. They've mostly made it easier to chat with more people, and browse through more photos - things that are intensely interesting to people, but not really useful.
It's easy to downplay the impact of Facebook compared to the kind of stuff Elon Musk is doing, but it was only last year that we saw dictators being overthrown with the help of social networks like Facebook. That's pretty cool too, no?
FOR ONE BILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!!

lol
Although the linked article ignores certain MS OS's, like Win ME (for good reason), it does accurately convey the message that MS often does fairly innovative things that run against conventional wisdom and, in most cases, this has worked out rather well for them. MS spends way more on research than Apple and occasionally good things make it into MS products.

Even with that in mind, Metro is a pretty big gamble. They're trying to bring a unified experience across mobile and desktop devices when there are practically no mobile MS devices out there! It would be an ambitious idea if Windows phone (or tablet!) was well established and had a decent amount of market share but, as things stand, it's appears almost insane. MS is taking a huge risk with their core market to expand into markets that they're almost completely locked out of at present.

However, if you look at the trends in computing its absolutely true that more and more is being done on mobile devices, often at the expense of the desktop. The argument could be made that MS, as a company, would be in serious trouble if they just stuck to the desktop market. It very well might be "go big or go home" time for Microsoft, and they are clearly choosing to go big.

I say good luck to MS. I hope Metro lets them push into the mobile market without alienating their desktop core. It's better for consumers if there's more choice.
Well one thing are those god awful POS systems like Micros: http://www.micros.com/
Thanks to this thread. Now, it's second.
I'm picking out a case that was caught on CCTV

I'm suggesting that while CCTV provides footage for conviction it doesn't actually make you safer and stop things in progress.

It doesn't matter where you live.
Love it, Gabriel. Index Ask and Show threads as well, like the good ol' days?
I sort-of agree with you, but I wonder whether the effects of automated driving will be positive. Firstly, I doubt most current drivers will be extra productive in the time they gain once they have an automated car. Secondly, I worry whether those who currently drive cars professionally will get any job at all once we have automated cars.
Why Does Every Consultant Want To Build A Product?
Hahah yeah. I thought it was just Gruber's personality. There were probably problems when Gruber slammed Readabliity as a scam while one of their investors is Jeffery Zeldman, another 5by5 host. He talked bad about it for a few episodes
oh Lord... I bet he'll love this.
Dude. It is ok. The huge valuation these guys had for their flippant startup in 2012 will be of little importance in the long run, and when we are on our deathbeds.
I think it's best to go directly at the source. Wikipedia has a very understandable sketch of proof (which in itself is quite unconventional) that helps understand the motivation and the content of the theorem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_sketch_for_G%C3%B6del%27s...
I don't necessarily disagree that CTR might not be the most relevant metric here, but at some point their revenue is limited by the CTR. If they have a billion page views per day, one ad per page (for simplicity) and a CTR of 0.1%, then their daily revenue is capped at 100 million * p where p is the average price per click.

So even if users coming from Facebook are more likely to actually buy something than those coming from Google (which would make Facebook ads more valuable than Google ads, all else equal), the CTR still creates a cap on how much they can earn.
I felt the same way as you at the time I listened to it originally but it's very possible we are over analyzing it too.

One day a week I work on-site for a client and it's a monster commute. I need four hours of podcasts each week to make the drive down and back bearable. The Talk Show helped me get through a big chunk of that so it's a bummer to see its old format go away.

I'm going to give the new Talk Show a shot though. Even though Mike Monteiro doesn't appear to be directly involved with this new version (yet) my usual reaction to most things involving him isn't very favorable. I don't particularly enjoy his current podcast at Mule Radio and his recent book is good but not as good as he or the people involved want you to believe it is. But I find Gruber's take on most things, in particular Apple, too good to just automatically discount this new show through guilt by association.
I'd bet that's the core of it. Gruber probably thought he deserved more money, and Mule was willing to give it to him. The 5by5 hosts bring the lion's share of the value to the network, and I can't blame them if they want to get paid as such. It isn't screwing 5by5, per se, but perhaps a little scummy (as Gruber might write)?

UPDATE: Other explanations I'd also bet on (might as well hedge, right?):
(1) Gruber wanted to be with his friends on the Mule network
(2) 5by5 was getting a little crowded, and Gruber wanted the Talk Show to stick out a bit more.
I'm glad about this.

If we had trading that quickly doubled or tripled the market cap then that may well be evidence of unsustainably high valuations (I hesitate to use the word "bubble" [1] as it's largely a baseless pejorative at this point).

That being said, some say this is evidence of FB being fairly priced. I disagree on two points:

1. Pre-IPO investors expect an immediate return. Investment banks ("IBs") underwriting IPOs will be selling those shares to their most valued clients (in large part). Those clients expect an immediate return. Also there is a nontrivial number of "stag" investors in IPOs (investors who do first-day sales to trade on this bump);

2. The IPO itself can in large part in set the tone. A stock that jumps 50% on IPO sets expectations as a stock that's going places. A stock that drops can have everyone for the hills and a stock that's level can just make everyone nervous (becoming a prisoner's dilemma);

3. There's evidence the IBs are propping up the stock at issue price levels; and

4. Current investors will have a lock-out period from selling. This may be 6 or 12 months. Whatever the case, if supply meets demand now then extra supply suggests a price drop may be coming when that lock-out period ends.

Consider this: Even Groupon jumped 25% on first-day trading.

Now I'm not predicting doom and gloom here. In all honesty I have no idea what will happen with the stock. I do consider it a high-risk investment at this point and personally I wouldn't touch it. YMMV. It may still be spectacularly well. OTOH it could be the Beijing Olympics of the tech sector (the Beijing Olympics being essentially the turning point of the economy in 2008).

Trading at a P/E of ~100:1 is high risk. Make no mistake. Facebook has important strategic issues they need to deal with.

Anyway, to those early employees, congratulations. This will change the life for many (and already has). I'm particularly glad to see that Zuck didn't pull a Pincus [2]. This speaks highly of him IMHO.

[1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3987892

[2]: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020462190457701...
Definitely creepy. If I want to read what Paul Graham says I'll just go here http://paulgraham.com/articles.html
Hypercritical is a GREAT show. So is Back to Work
Damn, I nearly bought one but didn't get round to it and now I probably never can. Would pay a premium for one now.
A "small-time investor"
Google Analytics in Real Life.
DDG Rocks. Now my main way to search.
The clicking really adds to the song!
Dumb luck and timing.

Believe it or not, Facebook has changed a lot in the way people interact with each other. Just like Google search changed the way we do things online.

And it certainly changed a lot more than GMail...
I haven't but I'm not too surprised. I don't think the ambition ever goes away. The reward of having as much of an impact as he did must be tangible. The money, probably not so much, after a certain point.