skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I believe HN auto-capitalizes the first letter of titles.

Can't wait to read the book :-)
The question every healthcare IT startup must answer.
Recruiters want to get you on the phone because it's in their tactical interest, not because they are illiterate.
The entire gaming paradigm with pay $X to get better equipment so that you can use that to get even better equipment sounds like a giant Skinner's box.
There's at least two of us who saw that and decided to address it over the weekend.
I'm pretty sure Apple has enough cash to fund both the R&D and legal departments at 100%.
Moreover, I'm pretty sure he means only the smart power button on the machine itself as opposed to the switch on the power strip beside the machine. I assume that flipping that would still do Bad Things. And so the situation is still a bit confusing. Uh and you don't want to hold smart power button down too long either... See, it's really easy and simple to understand...
$100m a year is clearly crazy money, but it's not quite at the scale of WoW yet.

World of Warcraft subscribers have been declining steadily for the last couple years [1], but they still have ~9.1 million subscribers.

The least a subscriber can pay is by buying in 6-month increments, which is 12.99 a month [2].

So, even though they're making less money than ever, 9.1 million subscribers at 12.99 per month is 1.4 Billion a year.

[1] http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/02/world-of-warcraft-los...
[2] http://us.battle.net/support/en/article/payment-option-credi...
tried to wrap up some of the discussion with this rails gist:

https://gist.github.com/3471071
"The Checkpoint" - Point of view of IDF soldiers
"Likewise, high-power attorneys can bill literally millions per year for their employers."

How are these attorneys charging? Hourly, even $1000/hour would be $2-3million per year billing full time. Are there other sorts of things that are getting charged for (at a profit) beyond time?
Upgrading a bundled application does not fragment the platform. In Android you see things like totally different device sizes, new APIs that some phones can handle and not others, etc.
feels like reading Life issue 43 years from now, not 43 years ago...
> No, it was not "perfectly fine." Otherwise they would have sold a hundred million of them.

This is a lot like saying to a friend who sees $100 on the ground that it can't really be $100, otherwise someone would have picked it up already.

Apple is a marketing powerhouse. They are brilliant at it. They hook you emotionally. They convince you that they created some device specifically for you. They really make you believe that it is changing your life. That it is revolutionary. They even help you rationalize flaws. (iPhone drops cals? Oh, that's just stupid AT&T's fault.)

That's how they sell 100s of millions of devices. The devices are also quite slick, but you have to concede that slickness alone is not what drives Apple's profits. The marketing budget numbers came out during this trial I believe, and they were staggering.
Óleo de Melaleuca 
Assim como os remédios elaborados a partir de técnicas laboratoriais, os medicamentes de origem natural também estão crescendo cada vez mais em no mercado. Prova disso é o óleo de melaleuca, também chamado de teatreeoil.
People born with the drive to do amazing things will do them regardless of the education they (do not) receive.
Awesome find. It's a shame that several of the relevant pages are not included in the document. I assume for trade secret reasons? Either way, the ONLY two Apple refutations are:

1. The display is not integrated in the device

2. The video does not conclusively prove the manner in which the software was programmed. i.e. We don't know from the video if it is event based.

If this is acceptable refutation of prior art, it seems like there would be a lot of money to be made by exploiting this. Attend every CS conference and patent everything displayed using a particular programming model and display type.

I suspect, however, this would not normally be considered acceptable or the patent world would be more messed up than it already is.
>Is there any real reason to believe that you should be paid as much as bankers and lawyers besides some thinly veiled form of contempt we tend to have for those jobs?

It demonstrates that it's not unreasonable to pay that amount of money to a single individual.

I agree that there's no talent shortage. Companies willing to pay $300k+ are having no trouble hiring people who can generate that kind of value. Companies that aren't willing to pay that much are, unsurprisingly, hiring less valuable employees.
You should have posted your question in an attachment labeled 'resume'. Hopefully then he will have read it.

If instead he blindly sends it to the client you won't have to worry about him much longer;<).
Startup jobs
Wait and see.
Your comment just reminded me why most of the software is going SaaS. One could conjecture that the developers see IAP exactly as a SaaS.
Depend on the country, or more likely on the amount of cyclists. In the Netherlands, they consider the 1000kg steel cars to be the real dangerous threat, not the cyclists. It may sound like a play of words, but it isn't. Everyone cycles, so when you hit a junior cylist, you've pretty much potentially hit everyone's kid. People have been known to get a veritable witch hunt on their asses by local newspapers that way.

The car driver gets the blame, not the cyclist that forgot to wear a helmet.

So the key to safe biking is lots of bikes. Sadly, dressing up like for an execution ("I will get hit by a car door and the car owner can just say sorry and move on so I'll wear body armor") won't get society nowhere.

Note that it might very well be an individual's best choice in some countries, probably also in yours... But it is a sad best choice.
The original game model for PC was freeware first hubs and pay for full games, like Doom and Quake. This is only a more predatory evolution of that concept.
A more probable headline - Apple consumers are wondering what they are paying for.

Not really news, and I doubt its going to affect sales for now. Eventually they'll have to reinvent themselves if they want to stay cool, though. (Like Sony Walkman failed to do so as a brand)
Beautiful.

For Apple, it's all about controlling the minds of consumers. And controlling their access to information about the devices.

For Samsung, it's less about that and more about plain old lack of interoperability: proprietary plugs, crappy Windows proprietary "install" software that was written hastily, and other little annoyances, stuff that will only work with Samsung. Like every other Asian manufacturer for as long as I can remember. (But at least companies like Samsung make SSD's and other components that can be used in any device. They keep companies like Apple afloat. Can Apple make its own components? Not as cost-effectively as Samsung.)

The result is always the same: the consumer overpays for these cheap electronics and gets next to zero customer service. It's "take it or leave it".

Showing a random Starbucks customer OSX in a virtual machine? Priceless.

If they only knew what their iPhones, iPads, "iOS" and "OSX" were really made of. They might never care. But they do care about overpaying.
Hogan holds patents, so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier.

...we debated that first patent -- what was prior art -- because we had a hard time believing there was no prior art, that there wasn't something out there before Apple.

"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down."

This, as well as other accounts on groklaw, give the distinct impression that this jury was very much led by the foreman - both procedurally and intellectually. The latter being a little worrisome.

Additionally, the mention that they glossed over their debate on prior art because it was slowing them down is disturbing.

I suppose since they had, according to this juror, essentially made up their minds on day 2 - there was no need to get bogged down in these pesky details.
1. I thought that the Dalton Caldwell quote I used explained that:

If you are building an advertising/media business, it would then follow that you need to own all of the screen real-estate that users see. The next logical step would be to kill all 3rd-party clients, and lock down the data in the global firehose in order to control the “content”. - Dalton Caldwell

Sorry if it was unclear.

2. I don't think app.net is a success yet. I'm not sure it can be. I don't think users want to pay for access to Twitter or Facebook, but I do think there is a place for charging developers for access to a social API.

3. I guess I figured Facebook's first earnings report as a public company would be common knowledge on a site like Hacker News. Here's an article that breaks Facebook down post-IPO: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48770049/ns/business-us_business... From the article:

In its first earnings report as a public company, Facebook says revenue grew 32 percent to $1.18 billion in the second quarter, slightly above analyst expectations. It had a net loss of 8 cents per share, mainly due to stock compensation expenses following its IPO. Adjusted earnings of 12 cents per share matched Wall Street's expectations. Investors weren't impressed, though, and its stock fell in trading.

For a company with growth and expectations like Facebook - something that's supposed to be as formidable or more so than Google - this couldn't be seen as anything but a disappointment.
Samsung is not Android.

But you bolster my point: it's clearly Apple on one side. Who is on the other side in order for the anti-bad-patent crowd to be labelled collectively as "ideologically driven"?
icon grids predate the iphone, of course (windows mobile, palm pilot, newton?). I think Apple's claims were more specific, dealing with particular icons, colors, and the favorite apps at the bottom.
Who knows... You might actually be surprised by the answer to that...

http://www.scpr.org/news/2011/12/08/30262/california-teen-wi...

http://blog.makezine.com/2012/07/18/15-year-old-maker-astron...

http://gizmodo.com/5813207/teen-builds-nuke-detecting-device...

http://www.livescience.com/14138-teen-cystic-fibrosis-drug-c...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iTa3n7CWj...

Rest in peace Neil. You were and always will be the beacon of achievement for all of us!
Interestingly enough the NY Times article is nearly identical, word for word, to the linked article.
People have always had their ways to escape; prayer, sewing, radio, books, TV. That doesn't mean we're in any less capable position to do amazing things.

Do I think we take our information-rich world for granted? Yes. Does that make us lazy or in any way bad? No.
Maybe I'm becoming cynical, but reading memos like this makes me resent the cubicle world of Corporate America more and more. How about Hawaiian Shirt Friday? Can you change corporate culture by removing turnstiles and parking barriers?
Hi toadkick,

Yep, I'm currently sitting here running 10.6.8 battery life tests as we speak. I'm going to make it as comprehensive as I can and run multiple tests on each build of OS X from 10.6.8 to 10.8.2 (prerelease). It will take a while; should be ready by the middle of this coming week.
The Samsung Gem was also listed with a $4 million infringement. http://www.samsung.com/us/system/consumer/product/sc/hi/10/s...

edit - The Replenish was also granted 3.3 million
http://www.prepaidreviews.com/podcast/SamsungReplenish.jpg

These are just laughable
Individual cases might be largely benign, and definitely are to people who would otherwise just have lost their jobs. The criticism is for the trend, and what it implies.

It's bad for users/customers, who frequently lose access to products they had been using as they get shut down or EOL'd as part of the acquihire.

It's bad for entrepreneurs trying to build a real business since customers will have no reason to believe that this particular company isn't just being built to flip.

It's bad for the world since it means that talented people have an incentive to build a showcase rather than something truly useful.

I strongly believe that most acquihires are a bad deal for the buyer. Or at least to the shareholders, though maybe maximizing shareholder value isn't the main reason these deals get made. Even "proper" acquisitions are horrible deals most of the time, and there the buyer is actually getting something tangible rather than an ephemeral team. I do find it almost impossible to believe that this is actually a cost-effective recruiting method. I'm sure there are exceptions, however.

And while it's not possible to categorically say this is bad, I personally find the inequality that results from acquihires a bit distasteful. Two people can do the same work at the same company as well at grossly different compensation levels due to one getting hired there, while the other got a retention bonus as part of the acquihire. A justified reward for the extra risk of joining a startup? Maybe, but it just doesn't feel like that to me.
Do you only want Forensic Scientists and Violent Crime Detectives on the jury in a murder case?

In fact, the phrase "actually understands the patent system and the patent process" is kind of loaded as the people mentioned only have experience being on the plaintiff's side.
This is completely strange, HN should look into who up-voted this story and see if there is an upvote ring or rings involved.

I suspect foul play by members of FB executive team / board.
I'd like to recommend David Maister's book
http://www.amazon.com/Managing-The-Professional-Service-Firm... It is similar but presents it from the angle of a company, not an individual. It focuses more on how to run a consultancy effectively.
I remember watching a documentary which quite rarely featured Neil Armstrong (and Buzz and Collins) discussing the actual trip to the moon. They related a story where they instructed the computer to begin reverse thrusters to slow their approach to the moon. The computer came back with a code which Collins duly looked up in the manual

3E - Are you sure?

Twas ever thus.

It stuck in my mind, as humanising people who otherwise outstrip us who in all ways look up to them.

He will be sadly missed.
I don't want to pry too much, but do you have a team? Are these companies looking to hire just you or your IP? I am curious to hear more if you'd like to share.
I would be really scared. To be one of the only 3 people for a quarter million miles. The black sky and no one to save you if it all goes wrong.
Unfortunately, very little is going to change as this does not affect a large proportion of users. The majority of users will not realize what they lose because of drm and region segregation.
Actually, if you'd had a patent on it, you could claim that, under current law. Some of the software patents being upheld cover far less.
Ask PG: Black bar for Neil Armstrong
Could we get out the HN black bar for Neil Armstrong?
It does come across as sexist, sorry, but also as an ad hominem attack.

The point you are making about advertising at Facebook can be made without pointing the finger at one person. It would be a lot clearer, and the gaps in logic more obvious.

Even if one person is at fault (I'm not arguing that), in business, as in all things, it's generally better to focus on fixing the problem rather than giving up on the person.
If we fired people every time they made a mistake then we'd all be unrmployed.
Actually, my personal, unscientific, experience indicates a fairly high correlation between being a recruiter and not being able to send an email without spelling or grammar errors (unless it is a pre-existing template, in which case it'll be damn obvious cause they are so poor at adjusting the font of the mail merged part appropriately for it to not blatantly show.)
I haven't made any IP statements, broad or otherwise.

I agree that the issue is surely complex. It does seem fair to assume that I can use logic and literacy to at least isolate the items I don't understand. If you look a few comments down, we seem to have reached that point.
The Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 10.1 costs $100 less than the latest iPad, and the same as the iPad 2. May I assume that "Samsung's iPad" in this case was actually a seven inch model, and a blatantly unfair comparison?

edit: not to mention that the value of OS X is part of tw cost of MacBooks; running it in a VM on another OS is common, but unfair to portray to random people as a legitimate action as evidence that Apple is ripping peons off.
It is not his death we should focus on - for Neil Armstrong, and his collegues, we should not let his life be in vain.

Back to the moon for good - or a lot of good people wasted their time.
I consider myself sensible, but I would never use IAP, except under one condition: the old "shareware" method. That is, distribute a demo for free, charge for the full game. Even this model has been abused though with certain expansion packs (cough cough Mass Effect).

The second you start treating your customers like cash cows, the faster history will forget your game. Make games that are fun to play, charge enough to support yourself and expand your company. You do not need to rely on parasitic behavior to accomplish this. The possible end benefit is that you build more loyal customers. After having played my first game with IAP, I will never buy another.
You're right; I'm sorry I missed discussing that. Our testing methodology is to run each test at least 2 times and if the second test is within 5 percent of the first, to average the two results. If there's a greater than 5 percent difference, we run multiple tests until we can determine which result was abnormal and why.

It's not THE most scientific methodology, but it's a decent balance between time and accuracy. In the case of our most recent round of tests, none of the second results were more than 4 percent off the first test.
This is a perfect example of judging a book by the cover. So these folks look at the device and think that the hardware is what makes it. Problem is, either you realize that it's about the software and you care what iOS and the Apple ecosystem gives you, or you're just an average Joe PC user who can't tell the difference between a good coffee and Starbucks, I mean between Windows and Mac. Regular people, with very little ability to discern the average from the good, the half finished from the polished, won't care. But maybe they do. Maybe once they experience a iPad or iPhone and then switch to Android, maybe they will realized there is a difference. I think this is what Apple is betting on. But then again, some wont. And some Samsung/Android fanatics are going to revel in these cases, just like the PC fanatics revel in talking about how amazing Windows is, and how much software they have access to. I still can't understand how these people think, and how they judge quality, I think for some people, mediocre is good enough. Obviously, I have my own particular way of judging things, and I wouldn't confuse an iPad with a Samsung device.
>"Frankly, the most astounding part of this decision was that Samsung's standard-essential patents were not considered infringed."

Apple submitted evidence (receipts) proving that they had purchased the chip from Intel, who had in turn already licensed the patents from Samsung[1]. A business cannot demand payment for a patent license twice. They also cannot dictate who the patent encumbered products may be sold to. This is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of simple fact. If Samsung do file a JNVO, then it will be thrown out with prejudice for that reason.

[1]Known as patent exhaustion - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaustion_doctrine
12.) In a carefully orchestrated dance, both won.
http://stritar.net/Post/Did-Apple-and-Samsung-just-pull-the-...
>“So why were photos and events so good?” he asked. “It was because despite all their shortcomings they had one thing no one else had. And that was integration with the social graph.”

You know, it's funny. The social graph is helpful, it means I can restrict who can see my photos. On the other hand, most of the photos I choose to share I'd be happy to have on the public Internet. I mainly keep them on Facebook so I don't have to pay for bandwidth or manage anything.

Honestly, though, if someone could provide the UI Facebook provided a few years ago (clean, uncluttered, with a good tagging mechanism) I would pay for it. I would have paid Facebook $5-10 a month if they had quit iterating a few years ago and focused on reliability and having a very clear privacy model that doesn't get broken by data model changes.

They should really adopt the Github model, with privacy being something you pay for. They might have to grandfather in some data, but they could stand to make a ton of money this way and restore customer trust.
My experience with Linux is that the Windows key is used exclusively by window managers. Most of the mainstream window managers have windows-like keybindings, so they inherited the WM/app confilt from Windows.

If you explore some less mainstream WMs, you will see a completely diffent standard of key-binding, which uses the windows key in all of its commands.

For example, ALT+F4 would be WIN+SHIFT+C
And ALT+TAB would be WIN+j

The only time I ran into a problem with an app conflicting with keybindings in this system was when I ran windows in a virtual machine, and my window manager kept thinking I was giving it commands when I used the windows key.
i would like to know if this is handwritten or printed? handwritten would be a lot more effective, print looks like spam mail.
Google+ asks for my Google account password. Is there an alternate URL for this text?
Your view on the scope of the guidelines noted. Thanks for taking the time to reply.

There are much better places on the entire Internet to talk about this stuff.

If it's too much trouble, never mind, and perhaps the reply to this question should stay off-forum, but what are some of the better places for discussing the topic of the submitted article? I have not found those yet, perhaps simply because the places I've seen for discussions of that topic haven't established as civil a culture as the best online communities I frequent.
Smartphones and tablets are getting cheaper all the time. Out of a $100 dollars paid by the end customer, $20 is a massive amount, especially as there's a bunch of other costs to pay e.g. the alleged (but possibly mythical) $15 to Microsoft.
Also in Unity and Gnome3. Microsoft seems to be a bit late in the game with all of their UI changes.
On the bright side, you have a skillset that is highly in demand. There are worse problems to have than being bombarded by job offers :)
To hold a patent doesn't qualify one to automagically understand the patent system and the patent process. Or in the case of this jury, to be able to redact error free concensus from the group. The fact that one person on that jury has a patent on a "Method and apparatus for recording and storing video information" is a really disturbing factor that might explain a lot on how the jury deliberated.
Thanks very much! I completely agree with keeping the simplicity of it - I'd much rather focus on having it do one thing really, really well rather than lots of things "just ok". Really appreciate the kind words, thanks again.
I loved shareware games back in the day. Being able to play a substantial portion of the game for the price of a stamp and a floppy disk pretty much guaranteed you would want to get the whole thing if the game didn't suck.

I did pirate a few games back then but the majority of the games I bought at full price were shareware.

I don't understand why this business model doesn't seem to exist any more. Just throw a demo of your game onto a torrent website and make grabbing the full game as easy as possible.

Even on Steam there are hardly any playable demos.
in coelo quies est