skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> most of the things you list appeared originally on the Mac

Since you seem like a fanboy who loves to make up facts without any basis. Let's iterate over the list one by one in more detail:

1. Finder Sidebar: Windows Navigation pane -> Appeared in Mac = Mac OS X 10.3 Panther = Two years after the Navigation pane appeared in Windows XP.

2. The Mac Path bar: Windows Address bar -> Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard added an optional Path bar at the bottom of folder windows to display the path of any selected file or folder. Double-clicking a folder in the path opens that folder. This feature first appeared as the Address bar in Windows Vista, which began appearing nearly a year before Leopard shipped.

3. Back and Forward navigation buttons in folder windows -> Microsoft first put the Forward and Back buttons of Web browsers into its folder windows with Windows 2000. Oddly, Apple first included only a Back button in the original Mac OS X. It wasn't until version 10.2 Jaguar that a Forward button appeared.

4. Minimizing to document windows into app icon -> Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard adds an option for minimizing, which is turned off by default. Instead of creating a new icon in the Dock, you can have a document window minimize into the application icon it belongs to, as Windows has been doing with taskbar.

5. Screen Sharing: Remote Desktop Connection -> Appeared in Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard which was already implemented in Windows XP.

6. Time Machine: Backup and Restore -> Really? Do I really need to prove that System Restore and Backup n Restore appeared before Time Machine??

7. System Preferences: Control Panel -> Before Mac OS X, Mac system settings were found in a set of separate files. Microsoft put all the settings in one convenient place. For Mac OS X 10.0 Cheetah, Apple stole Microsoft's idea and called it System Preferences.

8. ActiveSync and Exchange 2007 support -> Macs have long been second-class citizens to Windows when it comes to Exchange Server. Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard added native support of Exchange Server's 2007's group scheduling, contact, and mail services.

9. Command-Tab: Alt-Tab -> Well you agreed to that.

10. Terminal: Command Prompt -> Windows has had the command prompt integrated since the very first version. Apple finally added Terminal finally after the 9th version.

Love your products and be loyal to your manufacturers, that is one thing but please don't turn off the logic side of your brain!! If you are going to respond to this comment please backup your statements too.
Design Isn't Permanent On The Internet
There's an aspect that this article neglects to mention; rightly or wrongly, some scientists believe keeping your source code private can be a competitive advantage over other researchers.

Unfortunately, science is an extremely competitive business and providing your competitors with tools to help them publish more papers faster doesn't always make good business sense.
> You can't install a different OS

This only applies on ARM chips. Intel is going to be entering this space soon with x86 chips, IIRC. We'll see how Microsoft responds to that.
What do you mean by "the correct Amex cards to have"?
Prior-art :) - Just kiddin, as TCP is not patented as far as I know... but if it happened to be - would've that come as prior-art... coming from the ants?

(But then one have to prove that ants did that from long time ago, and did not actually learned by reverse engineering our backbones).
The only way Google+ will dominate facebook is when facebook will do something to really piss off it's users. Some of this is already happening (I get tons of meme's and cat photos on my feed as opposed to status updates from my friends..). Their algorithms for feeds is sucking a lot lately (and I like Path for that reason..). But as long as people can mindlessly ogle at anyone on Facebook, Google+ is still going to miss the mass market.

As the value proposition of Facebook drops off, Google+ may take over - I still think it's highly unlikely.

Hangouts are cool though.
What is with HN lately? All the redditors joined, and Eternal September happened. Did all the actual programmers go somewhere else?
this is like being rick-rolled.... but in a more nerdy way.
My solution to personal growth in programming is essentially, when I see a problem and know (or suspect) the existence of a tool better suited to answer it than what I would use, I learn the new tool.

Granted I cannot always do that because of time. And in big projects the tools I have been using are the best solution because they are used everywhere else in the project, and I still want/need my work to be understandable by others without needing to learn a thousand different tools.
Not OP, but I use this: https://github.com/achalddave/Vimdows-Navigation , which I updated from someone's post here http://www.autohotkey.com/community/viewtopic.php?t=44762

Someone else has also recommended https://github.com/MarcWeber/autohotkey_viper , which seems to be more feature filled than the others, but I haven't tried it out.
QED. thank you.
Show battery time remaining in Mountain Lion
Unfortunately, I'm not an IP lawyer. This is why lawyers exist -- they know the historical reasons for why one should file a design patent piecemeal.

My guess is there must have been a prior case where one patented an entire device and the patent was not able to penalize an infringer that may have had a slightly different device. It's possible the defense may have shown that the patent is only valid if the devices are in the exact same category. But who knows, this is just a guess.

I should also note that I'm a different person that the one whom you were replying to in your previous threads.
Where did someone say it was OK? As far as I can tell they just explained the reasons it occurred.
I especially liked the "Disclaimer: I don't work for the Windows Team" line. Nowhere does he say anything about Microsoft proper, just the Windows Team.

Just wait, in 6 months, we'll see that Mr. Hanselman was paid for this pro-Metro blog post. By then, the positive spin will have made us all forget the past two months of anti-Metro postings.
Deleting posts because someone called you out is pathetic.
As bandwidth increases and hosting gets cheaper, someone is going to create a nonroyality paying music (and eventually video) streaming site with the ability to select any song. And it won't even have to be hosted from countries that don't reliably enforce copyright, as the number of cloud providers and hosting resellers increase it will become easy to rent new servers to repopulate their CDN faster than they can be shut down by the government/RIAA.
Best of "Ask HN"
Is OATH related to OAuth?
Convert Canon EOS 60D to WMV/MPEG/AVI for editing in Movie Maker
Convert MOV from Canon EOS 60D to WMV/MPEG2/AVI for Movie Maker, so can import EOS 60D shootings in WMM for editing.
Hey thanx, it's a nice talk for sure :)
Laws such as these are only selectively applied

Laws architected not be obeyed but to abused are totally unacceptable.
Because the vast majority do not have that drive, and simply fall into the same pattern as their parents.
I'm probably too paranoid, because first things I think about are "appeasement": reading that article you can think "ah, it was just my laziness that made me fail, hard work still brings success even to poor people" and "even rich kids fail because they have callous parents". At the same time, a lot of people don't have to work at all, and probably sponsor articles like this to keep the working population calm.
I suspect the "self-important people like this" that trekkin is talking about are those who tell IT to "copy every program (and call) in the codebase, add 'Acme' to the front of all the names, and overwrite a clone of the present general data with Acme's data. Why can't this simple task be done by the end of the week, so I can 'deliver a business solution' to Acme next week?". This is just an extreme case I've seen of how the legacy code in many corporate IT depts consists of thousands of copies of the same basic code patterns.
The chips actually make the entire card easier to counterfeit. Someone just has to walk by you with the proper radio and your card will speak up and give out all the information necessary to make charges.
Armada Online Kickstarter
Thanks for the heads up. I'll add rate-limiting directly into the API.
That is why I don't think Apple will do it again, I don't think Tim Cook is able to make that kind of leap. Elon can, but he's already running two other companies.

I don't either. They had the right combination of a bold CEO and their backs to the wall with little to lose at the right time but everything they've done since then is just basically polish. They need to keep coming up with iPad-level hits to maintain their market cap and I just don't see something like that coming out of Cupertino now.
Intel's roadmap for how long it'll take for everything to go retina: (png)

http://media.bestofmicro.com/M/F/333879/original/Intel-Roadm...
We should be clear which of two kinds of scientific code we're talking about:

1. A program that implements a new technique which forms an important part of a research project. Maybe a program that is the research project, which will be described in a paper.

No doubt this code should be included with the publication, no matter how "ugly" it is. Some journals, e.g. Bioinformatics, already require that an article about software must include the software itself. This is the stuff the Bioinformatics Testing Consortium would run a smoke test on, because amazingly, a lot of programs that have been written up as journal articles just don't compile or work at all on somebody else's machine; many articles don't include the source code, and some don't even say how to get a redistributable binary. That's wrong, and we can fix it.

2. The mountain of single-use scripts and shell commands that are used in a research project that's not really about software at all, only a small fraction of which produce some output that the scientist follows up on.

Key points: (1) this code is very unlikely to work on anyone else's machine as-is; (2) crucial parts of these pipelines are lost in the Bash history, or were executed on a 3rd-party web server, or depend on a data set on loan from a collaborator who is not ready to release the data yet; (3) almost all of the code is dead; (4) whatever comments or notes exist are usually misleading or completely wrong.

As an example of what can go wrong when this code is released as-is, remember when the East Anglia Climate Research Unit "hide the decline" stuff hit the fan? It wasn't clear which code was dead, the comments made no sense, and people freaked because they couldn't be sure how the published results came out of that godawful mess. The eventual solution, way too late, was to make a proper open-source, openly developed software project out of the important bits. That, in a nutshell, is why scientists won't release ALL the code -- even the hard drive itself is not the whole story; the scientist still needs to be available to explain it and navigate over the red herrings. And getting code into a state where it's self-explanatory takes time.
The idea of a reactive IDE just seemed so interesting that I downloaded Light Table last week even though I don't know Clojure. It's wonderful. I've started reading up on Clojure, which turns out to be wonderful too. And then I discovered Noir! How did I not know about this stuff before?
Exactly how I rationalized spending $3k on the MBP retina. I commonly see people that think its crazy to spend a few grand on a computer but to me it's a device that supplies my income and where I spend the majority of my time.

The part about the car however, I do not agree with.

I'm an auto enthusiast and unfortunately I spend way too much on my car as well but it is something that I love to do and it provides me with a hobby to let me get away from all the time I spend on my $3,000 MBP.
I would love the help. I'll be hammering on the library next weekend, an I'm sure I'll have a laundry list of features I want to add.
This has been driving me insane lately. Every site I follow a link to gives me an app splash page. What is particularly frustrating is that usually its a complete waste of both of our time since I already have the app. LinkedIn in particular drives me nuts with this.
No. Because I refuse to log in with my google credentials to even read your post.
The problem is on mobile/console/etc. devices.
As a software engineer my machine is one of my most important tools. Considering as much time I spend on it, $2200 is a rounding error.
Am I misunderstanding something here? I attend UNC and here we have Microsoft Live Exchange accounts (or whatever they're called, it's forwarded to my Gmail). Is there a way to sign up to Google+ as an .edu user even if your school doesn't use them? Or is it just a mistake by the author?
>> not a half-baked one like the first versions of iOS, Android and Windows Phone

Or, closer to home, the first Playbook OS.
Appeasement is what we'd all be doing if we allow locking down the BIOS. It isn't to solve the malware problem; it isn't to make computing "safe"; its to put OUR computers in the ownership of a few large corporations.

These same corps have long used bureaucracy, paperwork, a maze of rules, large costs to shield their business model from real competition, and that's how they'll do this. Getting the privilege to have access to our own property will be obstructed by all these barriers. Barriers which are minor for a large corp, but insurmountable by private citizens or open-source programmers.

To be suspicious of those who have long shown a disregard for the greater good isn't promoting anarchy; its plain good sense.
The only way Google+ will dominate facebook is when facebook will do something to really piss off it's users.

No, not really. Remember what happened to MySpace? Sometimes people just move on to the next thing. Yes, the network effect is pretty strong for FB, but it has been done before.
It seems a good portion of the HN crowd is obsessed with spending more money than necessary. I totally get the "Put money into things that matter" idea, but overpaying for outdated specs is not some honorable trait.
It's better, but still hot.
I agree that Samsung has gone overboard with regards to the packaging. However I feel that a design patent on a tablet form factor is not the best idea. Perhaps it works for fashion designers, and I am not denying that there is creativity in designing hardware devices.

However, as I look at all the various LCD monitors that are around the office right now, I can't help but think about what would happen if there was originally a design patent on the form factor of a monitor. They all seem to have relatively similar:

- border widths
- button placements
- rounding of corners
- status lights and their positions

The same could be said for keyboards, computer towers, even many laptops. There is probably a finite number of practical design available when building a touch screen tablet. If all of them were to be patented, then nobody could build a reasonable tablet.

In response to your second point about the scrolling: It may well be true that the scrolling implementation was non-obvious. Based on your comments, I would agree that this particular aspect is perhaps non-obvious.

I'm just worried about the number of patents being asserted, and that it is highly unlikely that all of them are non-obvious, especially based on the coverage I have read. It seems more likely that Apple hit the big one with the iPhone by building incrementally on existing technologies and techniques, then adding some nice, non-obvious features, rather than building a device so chock full of non-obvious ideas that nobody else would have developed something which was somewhat similar to what we now think of as a smart phone using similar technology.

I don't think the few non-obvious ideas, nor the fact that they brought together existing technologies should be the basis for court fights and attempts to block importation of competitors products. I understand that this was a relatively narrow case, against Samsung and not Android in general, but it seems pretty clear to me that this it is a business decision by Apple to attempt to reduce competition through the courts.
Gardens as crypto-water-computers
Can you drop me a line at noufal at emacsmovies.org. I would appreciate some advice. My transcoding-fu is mostly empirical and it would be good to get someone to review my decisions.
I see this complaint a lot when a G+ link is posted here, but Google never asks me to log in. Anyone know why it requires a login from some but not others?
"Modern?" They were way ahead of us.
A key counterpoint to the "put money into things that matter" idea is "but don't put unreasonable amounts of money into those things".

In other words, it doesn't rationalize spending $10,000 on a laptop if the $1,000 model is 99% as good.
Wondering what the startup community can do to get clean water in Africa?
I'd go for a lower resolution one now that I read about the slow scrolling thing, that would really bother me...
What type of practice produces peak performance?
I had the opportunity to work with Yongfook once, at a client. He's a smart cookie. This advice is pretty good -- I'd suggest reading it.

(With regards to any particular company, by the way, my frequent experience is that you find one or two channels which really blow the doors off... and then struggle like crazy to find a third trick. You won't typically have your company be at A+ execution/results on all of these simultaneously.)
nope! confusingly unrelated.
Even with large numbers of twelve year olds with Blackberries, there'd still have to be apps that people want for piracy to occur.
This.

"I used it at the scaled “1680 × 1050” resolution the entire time, since the native “1440 × 900” resolution isn’t enough space..."

Now, granted, I've only used it for 15 minutes at the store and not a week straight, but the poor IMHO software scaling required to get more "usable" space is a huge bummer for me.
(I went for the high-res 1680 × 1050 display when I bought my latest MBP last year to get the greater screen real estate.)
This strikes me as underpants gnome logic:

1. Google will allow .edu Google Apps users to activate G+.

2. ?

3. G+ will "dominate" Facebook.
Hey! I spent lots of time there the few years around 2000. Have you finally rewrote it in Java yet? :)
Ok, many have these quotes have been previously picked apart, so I'm going to focus on one particular one. Please, do not mistake this as a commentary on patent infringement, but rather the sheer inanity of some of these jurors' statements:

"There are other ways to design a phone. What was happening was that the appearance [of Samsung's phone] was their downfall. You copied the appearance.... Nokia is still selling phones. BlackBerry is selling phones. Those phones aren't infringing. There are alternatives out there."

Nokia and BlackBerry are hemorrhaging money. They are dying. They are proof that alternatives are not out there. I am not claiming this allows patent infringement (nor am I saying whether infringement occurred) but that was a simply ridiculous statement.

Additionally, the fact that "One of the jurors, believed to be Peter Catherwood, is a project manager with AT&T" presents a huge issue to me. The carriers are incredibly staked in mobile phones, and AT&T is a greatly invested in iPhone's success--their Android selection is poor. How can no one who reviewed this jury have said "maybe we shouldn't have a manager from AT&T"?

Finally: "Hogan was jury foreman. He had experience. He owned patents himself...so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier."

I've already seen a number of people criticize the foreman's leadership, but I'll add. The plural of anecdote is not evidence, let alone the singular form. He was not an expert witness. How can we know whether false or misleading statements by the jury foreman didn't redefine prior art?

This whole trial is ridiculous.
Selling digital goods is a science
1) Screw outsourcing your authentication database to a third party, or incorporating third-party JS, as a mandatory thing. It's ok if you build something (like OATH) which allows a third-party service provider, but it shouldn't be mandatory; you should be able to implement the entire thing on your own infrastructure, and ideally play nicely with other sites in a user-selected client (potentially a browser).

2) I'd rather just do N-factor using a client cert stored in the web browser (mobile or desktop), combined with a password. x509 is probably terminally defective in desktop browsers due to historical accident and a messy protocol, but it could work on mobile, and stuff like OneID or BrowserID could meet the same need for regular browsers.

I don't believe in desktop + cellphone both being required to log into every site every time. The OATH compromise (using the phone periodically, along with a desktop password, and caching something in the browser) is an acceptable compromise for some apps.

Ultimately what I want is trusted keystore of asymmetric private keys on devices, and then multifactor auth to the keystore (biometric, password, location/time based heuristics, etc.), and reasonable management of keystores and keys (so I can for instance revoke every key on my phone if stolen, or disallow ipad and iphone but not mba13 for dropbox, but allow all 3 for linkedin)

The technical problem is relatively simple; it's an integration program (the auth libraries used by every site, plus mobile OSes, maybe desktop OSes, and hardware in phones and computers).

Give users the ability to make their own choices, and let sites establish minimum standards as well. I should be allowed to make a site depend on fingerprint swipe + physical location + specific machine if I want, but it shouldn't be mandatory for a random game site for everyone/anyone.
In regards to cars, yeah, that comment gave me pause. I mean, when I was a teenager I was a skinflint on cars, but once you've got some funds... your computer can't kill you. Your car can.

This is not an advertisement for the latest car with fifty airbags. Rather, a suggestion to avoid being downright cheap with an automobile. Assuming risk is one of the costs of driving, and should be factored in to your purchasing decision.
I'm not sure I trust mypermissions.org any more than Facebook. Not even an "About" page or a FAQ page? Nothing explaining what they do, how it works, etc? Just click on a button with no explanation of what will happen? Sorry, but that rings all of my alarm bells. Not to mention that their solution to keeping apps from getting private info is...another app?
I hate to be "that guy", but the floating social media buttons are horribly distracting. Please get rid of them.
So they have a university outreach program ... You do realize Facebook is doing something quite similar as well with their groups product, right?