skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm happy for the author that he enjoys Android and has reflected on that fact, but he's not making any point with that post. It doesn't really have a reason to exist. It reads like he's answering a question from someone, but redacted the paragraph of setup with the question he's answering.
There are a bunch of extremely light weight blogging/cms engines built w/ node.js. I've seen a bunch on github like https://github.com/joehewitt/nerve/ Probably a good place to start if looking to build your own light weight solution.
Learn Amazing HTML5 Tutorials and Resources
Dart: Milestone 1 Language Changes
Google's plan to phase technology out of our lives
Equiso's trying to do it for $70: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2028163448/equiso-smart-...

It all sounds very doable to me so I totally don't understand all the negativity. Tablets have expensive screens and phones have complicated cellular capabilities.
Stylish is awesome for that, 'though it's only really useful if you know CSS.

I have a theme for HN with this:

@-moz-document domain("news.ycombinator.com") {
.default {
max-width: 45em;
text-align: justify;
}
}

Solves the problem really cleanly.

I don't really go to Reddit anymore, but you can use:

.usertext-body { max-width: 45em; }

to fix the extra large lines, and hiding the sidebar can be done with:

.side { display: none }

By the way, this is one of the best advantages of websites over native apps: it's much easier to tame them to your needs. Even if you don't know how to program it yourself, http://userscripts.org and http://userstyles.org are incredible resources.
If Github can figure out how to serve customers who want to do version control on cat pictures, then I think the link title would have some merit.
47 Famous Entrepreneur Interviews (UCLA Anderson Biz School Talks)
The headline is pure link-bait, but coaxing functionality out of a zero-byte program is a clever hack, so kudos to the author for that.
A series of assertions and "I just don't see it"-s presented as self-evident when they are anything but. No examples of real cases where OO does in fact "suck", ending with the claim that in order to understand the popularity of OO one should "follow the money".

What? I mean, I don't even...
Pants in the UK = underwear. So why do we wear underwear?
Be real with yourself: Cleverness is a finite resource, even yours. Leverage it in the most efficient way possible.

(So alpha-geek pissing matches are clearly a waste. Everything should be focused towards furthering your company's goals while avoiding bugs and making refactoring easier.)
Phones that have put their NFC chip into card emulation mode for insecure communication (that doesn't require security via the SIM) can in theory still operate without the phone itself being on, the Nokia 6131 apparently did this. Since it was seen as a potential attack - nearly all phones with NFC now must be on, and the screen unlocked before the NFC radio is activated.
I disagree, though I used to believe the same.

What you're discounting is that people are born with vastly different mental capabilities - I'm quite certain everyone on HN is at least in the top 20% of the country, and it's easy for us to assume that, just because we've encountered few hard caps on our mental abilities, that others are the same.

What changed my mind was working in a factory - where I had months to hang out with line workers, machinists, technicians, and just shoot the shit with them. My takeaway from it is: a lot of them simply do not have the intelligence to operate in many highly technical jobs. This isn't a slight on them - they're amazing, worthwhile human beings, but it's unreasonable to expect them to be able to write code, even given an arbitrarily large amount of training. For every IQ 120, there is an IQ 80. Remember that.

The other side of it is that our school system performs appallingly poorly, and fails a lot of the population. Even if someone had the natural intelligence and aptitude, for a lot of them their educational background is so poor that there is no meaningful way for them to catch up, ever. A person of solid intellect who, for whatever reasons, barely made his way out of high school math, is not going to be able to pick up a CS curriculum. The foundation we're working from is not very solid.

The third component is of course the system - if someone wanted to retrain as a professional programmer from a factory job, and let's assume magically that he/she has the intelligence to do it, and unexpectedly did really well in school a long time ago. They're about as ideally positioned as one can be... except who's going to pay for the retraining? Who's going to hire the 40 year-old who just got into programming? Even when you have created the ideal state, the person's odds are still horrible.
I wasn't so bothered by the fact that it was opinionated but that it's examples had such obvious and in some cases faulty assumptions. The idea that America will become an exporter of oil due to natural gas is, pardon the pun, a pipe dream. Natural gas has absolutely affected our dependence, but no one knows how long of a supply (or rather given the oil industries continued lack of accuracy on life-of-well numbers, none that I trust) or how regulation will affect this in the long run. Fracking has been targeted by many environmental groups as a huge enemy and I expect to see that continue.
It just reinforces my feeling that it's easier for simple, bad ideas to get funding than complicated, good ones. Modulo the reporting, of course.
There are '?' characters in the paper's PDF as well, page 7.
Immortals and Vampires and Ghosts, Oh My: Byronic Heroes in Popular Culture
Spark: A bash script for helping with CodeIgniter package manager, Spark.
Copy PHP.net's format. Part of the reason PHP remains popular is its the online documentation.
Also, The Economist doesn't provide credit for individual writers since, in their estimation, there aren't any.

Individuals prepare the pieces, of course, but the publication's editorial approach marks up the results quite heavily in a process specifically designed to reflect both a house style and a set of long-held positions that maintain a single and fairly coherent perspective.

For instance, they've provided long-standing opposition to the War on Drugs, and rarely miss the opportunity to reiterate this position whenever the subject comes up. Likewise, they had a massive problem with Silvio Berlusconi. As a human being, they held him in the deepest possible contempt. They were entirely open about this, and dedicated much effort to detailing the causes of their overtly intense dislike.

Some disregard what they have to say as "mere opinion" to which they'd say "No, this is informed opinion." In any case, if you're writing for The Economist, you're producing raw material that will get edited and rewritten until it reflects the very distinct views and voice that the publication has painstakingly developed for itself over the course of 17 decades.
Sure. Motherhood issues. Reproductive rights. Sexism issues (of which there are tons). Things that are inherent to being a woman. In some places, there's a luxury tax on tampons (!) - that's a woman's issue. Social clubs (or gyms) that admit only men/women. And, clearly, trying to break out of the stereotypes people hold of 'what women are' is also a woman's issue.

Here is an example of what can happen when people think that love of fashion is inherent to being female. It's an ad campaign using fashion imagery to attract girls to science - and you wouldn't see a parallel campaign using guns to attract boys to be a teacher, would you? Or racecars to be a nurse? Examples of what she's talking about start about one minute in:
http://youtu.be/x3eZQHwGQE0
Welcome to enforced exhibitionism. The world is becoming less and less kind to people who just want to keep to themselves.
harmful.cat-v.org has a lot of odd opinions:

http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/dynamic-linking/

http://harmful.cat-v.org/political-correctness/girls-in-CS
Never seen anyone hook up his phone with a TV (also never seen one do that with a tablet, but I don't know many tablet owners). Maybe because most people already have a console on that port. Which could actually be the bigger problem for OUYA - that game console space is already taken up in many living rooms and I doubt somewhat it will be easily competing with the consoles already taking up that space.
Reassuring reminder that software isn’t just devouring the world we already know
There's a certain allure to saying code should be a certain way because of natural properties of computing, or our own feelings on what things are different and similar from what other things.

The reason OO shines is because it allows you to make that distinction at the domain level rather than the code level. You organize your software into business objects, or components, and have these interact with each other. They allow you to separate it out in a way that a new developer can come to the project, understand what the code should be doing, and look for the classes which seem the like objects involved, including the types of data it has and the things it can do.

There are all sorts of nasty things we've invented in OO over the past few years (mixing up inheritance and composition, using way too much state), but it gives us a lot of advantages from an engineering point of view.
I mentioned MathOverflow [1] on that post and only one person upvoted it (I wouldn't be too surprised if it were someone I know or at least have heard of, now that I think about it).

[1] http://mathoverflow.net
What is this? Basic economics conflicting with a pleasant narrative? BEGONE!
Actually I think the info in the article is on the mark. The most important aspect is a systematic approach to obtaining customers.

The real tricky part though is figuring out how to use each traction approach (the article calls them verticals) properly. For example, in my first three years of business, I learned a bunch of hard lessons here. These include:

1) Most advertising doesn't work unless people already know of you. Push your advertising later. Advertising that does work at that stage is that which has a personal feel to it (like infomercials).

2) PR is golden. Go for it at every opportunity.

3) Your biggest friend is your competition. If you can reach out and build good relationships with folks who are already in the field, that is support that can't be underrated. I thought at first that this was specific to smaller businesses but it turns out that the more I look into it, the more many successful businesses of all size do it, and do well because of it.

4) Public service announcements are very good as well. If you are just doing tech support, and the local radio station has an open hour or so, call up every time there is a major virus outbreak and let folks know. Or buy advertisement space in these cases, or the like.
I'm not sure I fully agree with that. Drug companies should be able to take as long as is needed to make sure a drug is safe without having to tip their hand early to competitors.
Already on the Hacker News front page:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4244876
I was saying compared to the others manufacturers, specially motorola.
I think you're taking too narrow a definition of "expert"? - or maybe my definition is too wide. I just wouldn't expect one to necessarily be pushing the boundaries of knowledge. They just need to be good at what they do.
And why is today crack economics day on HN? Between this and the Economist opinion piece. I wouldn't mind some news stories (including the news story behind the opinion piece), but opinions of staff writers reading tea leaves or justifying their economic principles with sports stories is not what I come to HN to read.
There is no need for one since all the valuable data to/from the server is already encrypted.
“Data structure and functions should not be bound together” — I can't agree with you more.

However, in Smalltalk (and even Ruby, to some degree) objects are not data structures, they are collections of functions invokable on a 'thing' with an unknown structure. They have an internal structure—potentially immutable—but you never see this, because you only interact with methods on the object.

And in many cases, there is syntactic sugar to make invocation of these methods look like slot access: think of Objective-C’s `@property`, or Python's descriptors, or Ruby's `def method=(value)`.

When people talk about 'object-oriented languages' in such general terms I get frustrated, because there's a lot more nuance to this than simply 'bundles of functions and data structures'. That's a very implementation-led way of looking at it. The reality is that these objects are supposed to represent real-life situations where knowledge of what something is, or how it behaves, or how it fulfills its contracts is unknown. If NASA's Remote Agent[1] had been implemented in Haskell, OCaml or ML, do you think debugging DS1 would have been as simple as connecting to a REPL and changing some definitions in a living core? I don't think the image-based persistence of SmallTalk and many Lisps would be possible in a purely functional or traditional procedural language.

And what is a data type anyway? It's supposed to represent a mathematical set of possible values. Sure, you can use a simple array to build a b-tree, but don't you want to explicitly state that variable x is a b-tree if that's the case? I was always taught that explicit is better than implicit.

I should probably stop ranting now, it's just that if you’re going to start hating on programming paradigms, at least sound like you've thought your argument through a bit more.

[1]: http://www.flownet.com/gat/jpl-lisp.html
Isn't that a bit of a false dilemma though? Can you not have clean interfaces and separation of concerns without OO -- even with something as 'simple' as python namespaces and dicts?
I meant controller when I said joystick, it is the common name where I live.
The majority of games I have on my android have virtual buttons and virtual sticks, some are ports of older console games, like Max Payne, GTA 3 and sonic CD, some are those gameloft action games and some others are action games from EA and madfinger. I even use my PS3 controller and my device plugged on the tv to play better some of those games.
I think it's better for smart people not to have patronizing attitudes about the rest of humanity, but that's just me.

I also think that charitable gestures towards men risking their lives and suffering great hardship to protect entire civilizations are categorically a different thing from a commercial product. I think the troops probably felt this way as well, which is really the crux of the whole issue, isn't it?

There's a massive difference between "here's a little something to say thanks for fighting for our country" and "doughnuts for sale"--and one is hardly a substitute for the other.
Americans don't use "ensure" and use "insure" for both meanings. As a Brit living in the US it really winds me up!
But Github is about one specific kind of real work. The conversations that happen on Jive and Yammer are also real work, as are the documents made in corporate/public wikis (which are studied extensively) and the work assets made and stored in SharePoint and Google Docs. I don't disagree with the author's premise that GitHub is great and should be studied, but it only covers one small portion of one type of work.
Exactly How Screwed Is PayPal? (Hint: Very)
Path's consistency of tone
... is it? I figure this is one of those things that you can either take at face value -- or not.

The real question is did you find the rest of his information useless, if you did, then does it matter if he has an actual statistic here? If you didn't find it useful, would the citation make a difference at all?

I'm just saying it seems like a weird thing to focus on in the scope of this entire article. It probably wouldn't destroy the entire reading experience if you just mentally said "He probably meant 'Many'..." and kept reading to see what was important in the article.
So when is Foursquare going to start contributing it's venue data back to the OpenStreetMap project?
OO isn't the only way to implement the Actor model.
I think OOP took off because it seems like a great way to model things. The idea that you can simulate a car by saying you have a base kind of car with properties and actions and then a Ferrari is a kind of car, so you can just kind of take that car object and make it have more horsepower and a different body type and you have a Ferrari, is very exciting.

Businesses like to model things and simulate things. So, in that respect, OOP was probably an easy sell because it's selling an idea of what businesses want, even if it hasn't worked out exactly as they hoped in all cases.
> .. perhaps a century from now low-income Americans will pity the living standards of today's 1%.

This is by far the stupidiest article I've read this week.
I didn't realize security was why they pulled that functionality. Back in 2007, I was using that Nokia phone as part of my pitch to parking meter companies and others in the parking industry (we were a startup company). None of us would have guessed that it would take this long for NFC to materialize, but it seems the credit card companies and cell phone companies are still arguing over who owns the customer.
On Worthwhile Endeavours
Other than the $12/month part, I don't see why this is such a lousy effort. It's pretty insane that in 2012 you can't get free broadcast TV over the net. Kudos to someone trying to make it happen. No kudos to those trying to prevent it and to those calling it stupid.
I fully agree with your point of "not bashing your head" against something. At least for me, I only understand it when I'm truly ready. If not, I just go read something else (preferrably another source/master, or random crap) and then come back.

I feel it's like exposure to a new language. You just need to get soaked in it, rather than trying to actively direct the process.
Windows 8 Mail leaves users pining for the desktop—or even their phones
If Crockford were CEO of Yahoo he would fork a Node.JS and create Ynode.
Didn't know Google now has a class of stock with no voting rights. We should start calling it "Wall Street Class Stock", which is meant for professional investors that know nothing about building businesses and running companies.
In Romania we have an saying that goes something like this: better to be first in the country than last in the city.

I mention it only to highlight how ridiculous it is for the article in question to argue that the bottom fifth of today's society have it better than the top 1% in 1790 ever did. Imagine, those poor top-hatted bastards living on their massive estates without any electricity or Internet. Without so much as an automobile to call their own; making do with only their chauffered horse-drawn carriages to get around.

Oh, the humanity!
I don't get it. If people don't like OO, why don't they just not use it. Just use your favorite methodology to get the job done. Why do they have to bad mouth it?
All the top users on Digg aggressively dugg each others submissions, that is undeniable. What's more, because of the "I'll vote your shit up if you vote mine up" mentality, and the ability to easily follow users to see what they submit and vote on, they also acquired hoards of normal users who would do the same without reciprocity in hopes of joining the top ranks.

It would've been a fairly worthless currency if not for the blogspam networks like Gizmodo, Engadget, Tech Crunch, Mashable, Cracked, Life Hacker, etc. that sprung up to funnel Digg's firehose of users on to ad-laden pages.

While no system would be perfect, Digg's made it excessively easy to game (maliciously or otherwise) and the content of submissions soon became almost irrelevant compared to who was submitting it.
i'd take anything i read at cat-v.org with a grain of salt, they seem to appreciate the art of trolling: http://gofy.cat-v.org
I'm willing to do all the work to get the content even if I have to grab the first 1000 pages of content manually.

From that content I want to provide my own summaries and some "clippings" of the originals. But i'm worried about copyright / or stealing of other's work; I know blogs repost content all the time (well usually not the entire article. hopefully not) but I'm just wondering how people will react if I take their insights and "reorganize" them on my site.
Next home for Retina: Apple's TV display?
There are so many second, third, and fourth order effects to any change that you make of any meaningful scale. Humans just don't understand the reef well enough.
At NASA Dryden, the futuristic X-48C gets ready to fly
Not really. The core issue is that Co2 creates an acidic environment and lowers pH levels. It would be like trying to clear a room filled with poison gas by blowing bubbles filled with oxygen...
Change the ridiculous, misleading title. Fabra has nothing to do with the Spanish royal family.
Act first. Think later. What could possibly go wrong?
"Her father has "won" the lottery at least 7 times"

That would seem to be a red flag.
Yes, this is indeed a stupid article but not as stupid as: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/apples-brilliant-boondo...
And you shouldn't compare yourself to him. People are not born equal, he had his own unique upbringing and environment. He was surrounded by genius, the cool kids, thus his view are such. And you have your own unique situation, probably was far less lucky than his so what's the problem?
OO vs. FP is just a matter of whether you focus the nouns or the verbs. The counterargument to the OP is that surely a function that manipulates "data" is less powerful and abstract than one that manipulates objects.

For example, take an "interface" or abstract data type like Array, consisting of a length() and a get(i) method. (This is really called List in Java and Seq in Scala.) There may even be an associated type, A, such that all items are of type A. This is very powerful because functions written against the Array interface don't depend on the implementation; we can store the data different ways, calculated it on demand, etc.

The "binding together" Joe is complaining about is binding the implementation of length() and get(i) to the implementation of the data structure, which is surely understandable. The alternative, seen in Lisps and other "verb-oriented" languages, is that there is a global function called "length" which takes an object... er, a value... and desperately tries to figure out how to measure its length properly, perhaps with a giant conditional.

The original OO (SmallTalk) was about message passing rather than abstract data types; just the idea that an object was responsible for responding to certain messages, and that these communication patterns completely characterized the object. This is how we think about modern cloud services, too; it's kind of inevitable. Who would complain that S3's "functions" and "data" are too coupled? Who would ask for a description of S3 in terms of what sequence of calls to car and cdr it makes internally? OO concepts allow a functional description of a system that starts at the top and can stop at any point.

The "everything is an object" philosophy gets a bad rap. It's a big pain in Java, especially, because of how the type system works. Ideally I'd be able to define a type of ints between 1 and 3, an obvious subclass of ints in general, whereas in Java I find myself declaring "class [or enum] IntBetweenOneAndThree" or some nonsense.
we could use a term like green washing these days, for this kind of thing and the dual license hucksters
From a purely scientific view, OO is a terrible idea because it moves the program further away from the mathematical form and makes it harder (if not impossible) to say, logically prove the correctness of the program. But from a practical perspective OO is a great idea because it makes many things so much easier.