skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
r/keto diets are usually low carb high fat, with moderate amounts of protein.

For high-protein are you referring to protein and kidneys? Bones?

"I'm perplexed by people who initiate insane diets that deviate from the dietary habits of humans for thousands of years;"

The Inuit, Athabaskans, the Siberians, and Masai, and many other groups of people are keto or close.

"I agree that less intake, more exercise is vague advice, but aren't nutritionists a better source of advice? "

The ADA is unfortunately sponsored by many fast food companies like Coca Cola. My own story is that I started the course track in undergrad to become a dietician, but switched out because I was frustrated with it. I was mildly overweight at the time, but my main problem was continuous GI issues (IBS and GERD). The school dietician (who was VERY overweight and a professor for some of my nutrition classes) told me to eat more fiber, low fat, and that I could control my symptoms with medication if that didn't work. It didn't work and the medications I had to go on had significant side effects.

Thanks to googling and messing around on Pubmed, I found some small promising studies with low-carb and GI problems and decided to try them for myself, even though they violated the typical advice for my condition (low-fat, high fiber). And it worked really well. And I also lost weight. And felt awesome.

Later on the internet the FODMAPs concept for GI problems, which is hilariously popular with Australian dietitians, but unheard of in the US until recently because US curricula is so miserable outdated and slow to change. FODMAPs is a diet that restricts certain types of foods that ferment in the colon. And because it only restricts certain carbs, I have been able to broaden my diet significantly.

In the end, I have more time to hack my own condition and read random crap on the internet than any dietician or doctor ever will.
Huh? MBA = Masters (degree) of Business Administration.
You mean my experience writing such systems. Also my experience developing in JS. I quite dislike the language myself, but I'm not going to write in whatever happens to be the metalanguage in style. I'd rather spend my extra time learning a real language that can do what I can't do currently. Not one that does exactly the same thing.
Good look at the history of the marketing term big data. I think this fits squarely in the realm of big data hype, or at least a review of why it is big data hype (something I've blogged about here http://www.klaviyo.com/blog/2012/07/16/the-curse-analytics-b...). The SAS discussion makes it especially clear that it's viewed as a trend.

But - posts like these frequently jump to the top of hacker news, and there's clearly a feeling that access to new analyses and more data is going to change the world. I think this is probably right. I'd love to hear more discussion of how big data has already started this process.

Examples I can think of (and I'd love to hear more):
- weather analysis for farmers (weatherbill / the climate corporation)
- marketing (the target pregnancy example - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.h...)

More examples?
This seems like the perfect application for oldversion.com http://www.oldversion.com/uTorrent.html
That's because he knows how much his JS sucks as a language to program into.
Yeah, lots of broscience there. There are other communities where people actually are looking at the scientific literature and testing hypotheses on themselves. I think the fitness stack exchange is closer to that.

That was my methodology for fixing my condition that I was told was incurable. I looked at pubmed for any study at all on the condition, even animal studies. And if there was anything promising that was not dangerous to do, I tried it.
Software amplifies everything about a business, both the good and the bad. The downside is that because so much is networked today, something "going wrong" can have much larger consequences (and faster) than a wrong decision carried out on paper 30 years ago.

I think that's the distinction James Kwak is trying to make. He isn't saying that the business processes (in this case, buying and selling stocks) was especially clean before software. He is saying that software makes the system faster (amplifying the effects of a poor business process, as you say) while removing a human buffer. When a human order-taker sees an unexpected zero on an order sheet he or she has enough common sense to ask the person handing it to him or her whether the figure is correct. Most financial software doesn't have that "common sense", so it's easy for inadvertent slip-ups or programming errors to cascade into firm-ending chain reactions.

Obviously, the solution to this isn't to go back to slow and inefficient human processes. I think the solution is to continue doing what we're starting to see today - software that asks whether we're sure we know what we're doing when it sees a variable that's out of line. In addition, I think that many software systems are way too monolithic. That is, every component of the system implicitly trusts every other component. I would like to see software broken up into smaller communicating components, where each component can make assertions about the input and output of other components, and components can fail without bringing down the whole system. The system I've seen come closest to this is Erlang's OTP, but there's no particular reason for that model to be limited to Erlang.
>Trying to maximize your years on this earth? Only known way is to calorie restrict. Like extreme calorie restrict. Say, around 1000-1200 cals a day.

Hardcore males doing CR for health and longevity, pushing it as far a they can go, average about 1700 - 1900 a day. At 6+ foot and 120 pounds.

5 foot female might hit 1100 or 1200, sure.

Keep in mind that's an average though. If you cheat once a week or two weeks you could easily eat a 1200 calorie diet on the other six days and have it work out the same.
I've never understood why anyone who is tech savvy would use a closed-source BitTorrent client, especially if they plan on using it to commit copyright infringement. There are open source alternatives, like deluge (which is cross platform and has a remote client feature that's splendid) or rtorrent (a great little ncurses client for *nix).
Not necessarily. Part of Kwak's problem with software is that it is taking humans out of the system. For example, the stock trading software that runs a modern exchange replaces the human traders who used to exchange physical slips of paper. A human trader can look at a particular trade, say, "Hmmm, that doesn't look right," and ask for confirmation. A computer can't (in the general case). So, if humans are the resilience in any system, what happens when you start taking humans out?
I get irritated by words too (for example, Twitter's use of "tweet" bugs me) so sympathize in general, plus I suppose "grok" is rather unpleasant sounding. But the reason I like it, and why I suspect it (sort of) caught on, is that English doesn't have any other word for this. "Understand" is too general. "Grok" means to understand something intuitively, in its essence and as a whole. Perhaps a synonym would be "get" as in "to get it". But "get" is so overloaded that there's room for a more specific alternative.

(Actually the above isn't what "grok" originally meant, but I think it means that now.)
Last I heard, Google supported completely discretionary developer-initiated refunds. IIRC, at least a couple of the high-profile apps that left the Amazon Appstore took advantage of that to ease the transition for their paying (i.e. not FAOTD) customers. With that capability, implementing a reasonable functional equivalent of a free promo code seems straightforward enough.
Just because they treat their DMCA requests specially does not mean that they don't factor in the DMCA requests.
Good point - I wouldn't buy any of those even if they did show up on a What's New page.
This is the first picture of Mars that made me say "wow" -- literally out loud. The image is truly awesome, not only from visual aspect, but also because of the amazing technological achievement(s) it took to obtain it.

The clarity of the terrain, and the mountains/hills in the background, makes Mars feel much more tangible to me; It almost feels like I was there to take the shot myself.
Something to think about...
That $100k is from 6 years ago .. so 6 years ago their lawyers admitted the site made (at least) $270/day and today it does probably at least one order of magnitude more traffic.
Right, that's why the focus is on introductory classes. As I noted, yes a sufficiently motivated individual will get used to the notation in time but that doesn't mean things are okay.

These things that seem minor to the expert actually make a big difference before chunking is achieved and can hinder all but the most motivated. If you are taxing short term memory by using unhygenicly bounded variables then no, it is not just a matter of who is interested. If you are not pointing out the difference between higher order functions and regular functions nor separating the notion of function from application then you are causing unnecessary representational couplings that create a lot of friction. These things have real cognitive and physiological costs. The design should streamline thought for expert and novice alike, it should not be arbitrary. And in the absence of anything better we cannot say that the issue of notation is not a problem at high levels. Sure learning is no longer the problem but what of adroit mental manipulations? I tend to agree with Alfred Whitehead who said

"By relieving the brain of all unnecessary work, a good notation sets it free to concentrate on more advanced problems, and in effect increases the mental power of the race.".

We can't lament the lack of scientists and engineers on one hand and not try to do reduce uptake friction on the other. There's a real problem with math education if the experts are not trying to relate to the ones who are struggling.

btw braket is a wonderful notation in my book and I'm not a physicist, it is an elegant way of writing sparse vectors.
Happy 80th Birthday, LEGO
Disclaimer: Anecdotal evidence.

Cardio really should be a minimum of an hour per day, at least 5 days a week if weight control is the goal

First of all, who the hell has time to do a minimum of five hours of cardio per week? Some people have families or businesses to run. Getting a runner's high may be great for you, but you in no way need to spend an hour doing just cardio for effective weight loss.

My reasoning? The better your body performs, the quicker you see changes in it. Doing just an hour of cardio a day will not create a body at peak performance. You might be able to run a marathon, but you also might not be able to do a push-up. This is not your whole body working at peak performance. So you're missing out on vital conditioning by using all that time for cardio.

On top of that, you can get similar gains in endurance and cardiovascular fitness by doing a variety of high intensity workouts, and they need not last longer than 30 minutes (IMO) if done at top speed. I have no way to prove this other than the theory that lots of muscles trained to perform both slowly and quickly and at intervals of rest and high performance is going to have an overall greater conditioning effect than an hour of the same muscles doing the same thing at approximately the same pace.

I'll leave the meatheads to expound the virtues of resistance/weight training on strengthening the muscles needed to do such a demanding cardio workout in the first place.
It's hard to comprehend how can anyone take Nathan Myhrvold's statements as serious. His whole business is built on the patent racket. Intellectual Ventures produce nothing, help nothing, and do nothing, except filling Nathan Myhrvold pockets. Well, they also serve as lackeys to Apple and Microsoft in their patent wars against competitors, but that just only makes them worse anyway.
I wasn't giving an argument. I was giving an explanation on how such a law could be made without it being the product of pressure fom some lobbying.
I think this forgets the MOST important point of the name. Easy to remember and easy for people to spread it virally. For example, facebook.com or even "thefacebook.com" is not too hard to remember.

I have a systematic way to evaluate this by actually telling over 100-200 people via an audio or video the domain name and then asking them later to remember and write down the name. You will be shocked at how difficult it is for people to remember most names and also at how easily they misspell.

I also totally disagree that the .com name does not matter. It matters a huge amount for referral dynamics, for the brand. The companies listed in the article were mostly forced to buy the .com name at great expense. If it didn't matter they wouldn't have bothered.

In these cases listed in the article the companies succeeded DESPITE the handicap of not having a great .com domain.

It's better to start with a cheap domain to save costs if you don't have the money, but if you can get a memorable .com domain then great.

Whatever you do don't get a .co domain. These are proven by overstock to be total duds (they tried to launch o.co and after a huge and expensive launch they realised that a large percentage of people will remember it as .com and they lost all that type in traffic). A .net .me .biz is much better than a .co
Running 20 minutes/day 7 days a week is very realistic for 90% of the population.
That's enough to keep the body in a good shape.
And according to that language, YouTube should be demoted quite a lot - we know it receives tons of takedown notices. Just search for any copyrighted video in history, it's on YouTube.
You motivated me to clean mine up. Here's the result:

https://github.com/tammeri/.files
> Why would YouTube be the largest target of takedown requests?

> 1) YouTube acts on DMCA notices

Exactly - YouTube receives a ton of takedown notices, and acts on them. Those are grounds for demotion in search results now according to the new policy.
"Martin Fleischmann made the greatest discovery since fire..."

An interesting recap of the recent history and current state of cold fusion/nuclear effect research.
I'm dealing with a rather strange pricing dilemma now, actually. My startup sells a somewhat-arcane electronic test instrument which is generally used by larger corporations, government agencies and defense contractors, and universities/national laboratories. It's advertised for sale at $4995.00 in 1-4 unit quantities, which is an insane bargain compared to what these users are accustomed to paying for similar equipment.

I sold one to a particular Fortune 500 company a few months ago. Recently someone else from the same company -- a fairly highly-placed manager, going by his LinkedIn profile -- emailed to ask for a quote on a second unit. Except he insists that his budget is in the $4800 range, and he needs the quote to come in under $4995 in order to make the purchase.

I can't begin to guess how to interpret this, or how to answer it. Lowball offers are nothing new, and generally easy to turn down since demand for this piece of gear is in line with projections. And there's plenty of room for negotiation on purchases of >4 units. But a lowball offer for one unit, from a company with a $15B market cap, asking for a discount that's negligible to the point of wasting both parties' time? WTF?

I'd like to maintain a good relationship with this company and do further business with them, but I don't understand the signals they're sending with regard to price tolerance. Obviously if I were asking $5995.00 instead of $4995.00, they would have tried to drill down to $5895.00. I have to believe that the same would be true if the advertised price were $3995.00. Could I have avoided this bizarre negotiation by picking a price of $X495.00 instead of $X995.00?
What did grok originally mean, then? I thought Heinlein defined it pretty much as you did.
The article tries to make a point and then at the end evades the conclusion:

> The only real solution is to acknowledge that computer programs are going to fail and try to minimize the damage they can cause in advance.
[the best way to do this is to not use the software in question at all]

No, the only real solution is to provide a meaningful warranty with software (rather than typical "no warranty" clauses). Regulation can enforce this and the price will have to be paid by the customer. We have put up with these crappy licenses for decades and the result is the buggy mess we have now and no way for customers to demand a working product. Mistakes will still be made, but they shouldn't harm the customer more than the vendor.

http://mil-embedded.com/articles/software-warranties-new-era...
Alternatively VsVim for Visual Studio. I prefer it, although I couldn't give any reasons why.

It still fails the "Does it break flow by not implementing some feature or other?" test fairly frequently though. First thing that comes to mind is that while it has text objects, it seems to be lacking "tag" though (vit, not vi<). Which is a shame, as it's quite useful for web dev.
There's that, and also monkeying about with the trackpad (reverse scroll is okay, three-finger drag is very awkward for me), as well as hiding the Library folder, forcing use of the App Store to get Xcode, Xcode constantly crashing... I feel like I'm not part of the target market anymore.
It seems the author of rtorrent doesn't want to add highly important features like manual addition of trackers among other things.

Deluge was buggy last time I used it (about a year ago). Lot's of potential though.
Interesting tidbit about my ebook products, piracy, and naming:

I sell a few ebooks. Let's say they're all about growing plums in your personal garden.

Two of them are brandable, unique-on-Google names. Like "Plum Thumb" or "Plumateer". The other is a generic name. Like "The Plum Guide". plumthumb.com, plumateer.com, and theplumguide.com. All my ebooks are $12.99. I imagine the piracy rate increases substantially once you Photoshopize the price.

My plumthumb and plumateer products are super-easy to pirate. Googling "plum thumb rar" or "plumateer ebook" brings back a whole page of ebook warez links. On the other hand, Googling "plum guide [rar|ebook]" brings back pages of unrelated plum links that aren't my product. The name is just too generic. (Note: theplumguide.com is the first google result for "plum guide").

My "plum guide" ebook serves a broader niche than the other two ebooks thus is more heavily trafficked and has more sales volume. Most of my sales volume comes from PPC->sales-letter funnels. Using free link-back tools, plum guide has a proportional word-of-mouth backlinks to sales ratio.

I don't know how useful this information is. Does forcing someone to use google-fu or fish through Google results to pirate an ebook increases sales? Does a little obscurity-through-genericness provide any benefit when your sales are driven through Adwords anyways? Who knows.

If general behavior is "can't pirate it? then forget it" instead of the wishful-thinking "can't pirate it? fine, here's my credit card", then isn't it better to get pirated? Audience begets more audience and there will always be shrink.

It's fun to think about.

I hope I didn't obscure what I was trying to say with the arbitrary plum examples.
Leaving Github
> Americans are more into protein and more into weightlifting than any other nation I've ever seen. And while there are a number of muscled-bound guys strutting around, there are a whole lot more fat people buying into the same pop weight-loss ideologies.

How on earth did you generalise from people who control their diet and training to become "muscled-bound" to the rest of population who clearly don't?
The game theory for large corporations asking for discounts: If we don't ask for a discount, we don't get a discount. If we ask for a discount, sometimes we get a discount. Thus, we write in our Big Book of Purchasing Rules to always ask for a discount. (Or you just ran into one guy who likes the psychic charge out of winning a concession.)

P.S. You're only an insane bargain for one sale. After that, your price is the reference price.
Ah; I tried Appcode and hated it too much to get to debugging, but it is nice that someone's figured out how to interoperate.
The key obstacle to weight loss is the same as any form of self-improvement: Motivation. Most people know what they need to do in order to lose weight. They just don't do it because its hard to motivate ourselves to do things we're not used to doing. i.e. It's hard to defy our habits. Healthy people don't defy their habits any more than unhealthy people do. They just have healthy habits. So when you're trying to become healthy the goal should not be to "lose 5 pounds this week", but to form healthy habits and break unhealthy ones. This kind of thinking is crucial. You might have enough willpower to defy your habits long enough to achieve your weight-loss goal, but only forming healthy habits will keep the weight from coming right back.

This is possibly why doctors aren't terribly useful. They can tell us when we need to lose weight and perhaps even give us a general idea of what we need to do, but they really aren't trained to focus on habits and motivation. Even if they were, everyone responds differently to ideas and we each need to sift through a lot of possible ideas to find ways of changing our habits that are actually compatible with how we live and think. It's a matter of brute-force. A doctor has maybe 10 minutes to set you on the right path, but you can spend hours upon hours reading reddit looking for things that will work for you.

One point in the linked article that I absolutely disagree with is that cardio is unimportant. To be fair, he only really said it's unimportant for weight-loss. If all you want is to look pretty then perhaps it's not crucial, but it absolutely is important for being healthy. Above I said that forming healthy habits is a way to side-step the need to constantly motivate ourselves, but the truth is that it also takes effort to change our habits! Having the strongest possible motivation helps, and I've found that being healthy so I can do things like play sports and hike is a better motivator than simply looking good.
I've actually been looking for something like this, and Moom seems to do the trick. It's got some nice customization, so I can at least set my own shortcuts for different areas of the screen. It works really well since I don't like straight 50/50 screen splits (I prefer a sort of pseudo-golden ratio layout -- Moom can't do it precisely, but it's close enough).

Pretty good use of $10, I think, unless I suddenly need that $10 for an emergency, like beer or coffee or a raw turkey. So, thanks, even if I'm stuck without a supply of raw turkey for a week.
I was also wondering what that was, anyone know?
Great story. I love that they did it Pixar style =]
Apache Wicket – three years of lessons learned
Although this is pedantic, wavespark actually is not a flash game, it was made with processing and is a java applet.
various "news" sources are also quite adept at turning the cameras off when the larger agenda warrants it
Ask HN: What kind of toolkits have people written on top of statsd? 
I am looking for tools to daily reports for graphite, better installer for graphite, better UI like graphine etc.
I wouldn't go as far as saying that but reading this post did make me wonder what advice of that kind my dad ever gave me, if any.
The quotes at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grok imply that in Heinlein's novel, to grok something meant to merge one's being with it in a kind of total rapport. So, something more than a variant of cognitive understanding. I haven't read the novel though.
Statement for President Nixon to Read in Event of Disaster on Moon Landing