skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hmm, must have remembered wrong because the talk didnt have the game-definition thing. Anyway, Jesses talk is quite interesting.

The farmville comparision i was refering to is probably this one http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/content/cultivated-p...
People wonder where video game arcades went after the console market started to really gain traction in the early to mid 1990s (and really got rolling with the Playstation 2). Outside of Japan, they largely went away, but now they're back: on your mobile device.

We've gone right back to feeding tokens (in-game credits) because now you can distribute the equivalent of an single-game arcade cabinet -- a game that is designed to optimally take in cash at a given rate -- to every mobile device. A good analogue would be to make a beat-em up arcade cabinet that let you start out for nothing, but when you inevitably get KO'd, you have to feed it a few tokens for the privilege of continuing before the 15 second countdown elapses and you have to start from the beginning.
George Brown Google sniper Download? George Brown Google sniper users view
Zuckerbergs attitude about this makes me think he's a terrible manager and probably not a very good programmer.

I get that some people prefer to work together in a room, constantly interrupting each other. I don't understand why, but I respect their desire to do that, and would say, let them do it.

But the idea that every engineer should be subjected to constant interruptions without the choice to have some personal space to focus on work is asinine.

I worked at Microsoft in the past. Their earliest buildings- from when they first got the chance to build their own office buildings are in the shape of very large Xs. Each of the four wings has a central hallway and then is divided up into rather small offices for one or two people. Everyone has a window out to the trees. Its the perfect programming environment (except for my neighbor who got in the habit of bouncing a racketball against our wall).

For an example of what I'm talking about check out building #1-10 here: http://goo.gl/maps/kQRzp

Your view was predominantly trees too. Later buildings are built like Es and other shapes that have a lot of surface area, though some became more "office like" during the period where they were hiring so many employees that they needed to maximize density rather than productivity. (irony, I know.)

One of the reasons I'm a startup founder rather than an employee was too many employers choosing "collaborative" office plans because they were cheaper.

And for the record, I've found that collaboration works much better when you have a choice about it-- when the serendipitous interactions happen in the break room or somewhere else where you're not trying to focus on a problem.

But hey, these days most of these sites are websites, and don't really have big engineering problems to solve. Maybe they don't need to think deeply.

For instance, compare this office with Apple's new Mothership. The O has a great deal of surface area, and looking out the outer windows you will only see parkland (The parking is underground and the property is bordered with trees.) Even the center area of the O is a park itself, and the O is so huge that it should be a decent view.
>>"Is there any disadvantage to cheating on an anonymous website course (other than personally not knowing the material)?"

Is there any advantage to cheating in Coursera? Coursera doesn't offer certification.

>>Is the answer truly "U.S. academic institutions are infallible and the world must comply to our standards?"

No the answer is "Students shouldn't be plagiarizing because they won't get any of the benefit from actually doing their homework."
Well, honestly, how do you change your commute time appreciably without either you or the job moving?
> > It's not competition when one company does ALL the innovation and other companies just copy them and try to win on price.

Zipcar. I just paid $137.39 for an Audi Q5. Audi can't do that. Price is usually the result of innovation, the tip of the iceberg. Otherwise we'd wouldn't be driving cars or, hopefully soon, flying into space. If anyone offers an iPhone 5 cheaper than Apple I'm sold! Better yet, make a phone better than the iPhone AND sell it cheaper!
You're a small business - what do you do now?

You continue to innovate. You do a better job at understanding your customer's needs and fulfilling them. You do a better job at marketing, positioning, and advertising. You give better customer service. There's tons of ways to compete, other than raw product uniqueness.

According to your article you sit back and say "oh thats totally ok because thats innovation and I'm happy that everyone has copied me and destroyed my advantage".

Meh. A better product is not a sustainable competitive advantage anyway. Better to have a product "arms race" where everybody is forced to "innovate or die", IMO.
I've read the patent and while you are technically correct, the effect of the patent is to grant them a monopoly on the feature pinch-to-zoom on a smartphone with a touch interface.

The end result is that no one else can implement pinch to zoom on a smart phone.

The patent is also overly broad in that it covers all multi-touch touch screen devices. So that whether I use an infrared overlay or a capacitive screen it is still covered.
>Phase 1 of app store monetization was Premium games (.99 titles)

I have no doubt this is how it works, but I never thought I would see the day when something that costs a dollar is considered premium.
Angry Bird as a brand grew also outside the App Store. As long as you don't factor in the money made with licenses on cups, toys...; this analysis based only on App Store revenue just falls short.

Simply put, you don't need to make money in the AppStore (and hand over the a huge amount of that to Apple) when you can monetize outside of it.
Interesting point you picked out - I didn't think of doing this either, in my tests with 8 I was annoyed at how difficult it was to get to a shutdown menu.

I think the real trial for the OS will be whether people will be able to re-learn these basic metaphors that Windows has fostered up until this release. I think we'll see something very interesting happen with the consumer uptake in the short-run, but in the long run I feel they've made some actual forward-thinking decisions.

Maybe, after this change (and ones like it) has been accepted for a few years, people won't be terrified of their power buttons and flag keys anymore.
Some problems with the headline and the summary. Pretty bad considering it's coming from Time.

>> Headline: How Lance Armstrong Lost His Tour de France Titles

The headline makes it sound like a foregone conclusion. He hasn't lost them yet. While USADA says they can strip him of those titles, the cycling body and the tournament runner haven't agreed to it yet.

>> The cyclist's decision to forfeit his titles and not contest charges by the United States Anti-Doping Agency may be, in a sense, logical

Armstrong's comment to the effect that USADA isn't in the position to strip him of the Tour de France titles, doesn't sound like he decided to forfeit anything.
Who said it has to happen within four years?

There's a lot of FB support in these comments, that FB has somehow solved these problems. I suppose I disagree. This article rang true to me, and it's exactly why I stopped using it, in 2012.

I can't speak for others' situations, but when I started using FB I had decided I was going to use it to maintain relationships with a select few close friends. As time went on, a few acquaintances slipped in, but I was generally turning away most friend requests.

However, I was forced to see some of these people in real life. And even though I had decided how and why I personally wanted to use FB, I don't get to personally decide how society does. And, apparently, society has decided that you add all kinds of people to FB. So I was forced to meet with people who thought, "I'm good enough to talk to in real life, but you can't add me as a friend on some software?" There's a social awkwardness that I didn't want to deal with.
There is no non-obvious implementation here. It is the only reasonable way to implement such a feature on a touch screen.
right on :)

the beauty of self-publishing
I think this is actually bad news. Since the guy has a patent to his name, that means he understood what patents are. (EG: protection for unique inventions, not monopolies on features or ideas.)

If the jury had been completely non-technical, and subjected to the nonsense propaganda you see so much these days (that patents are "trivial" and that they cover ideas) and still found in Apple's favor, then this would bolster the trust one can have in the court system.

Further, it is kinda funny that the foreman of the jury has more technical knowledge than many of the posters on "Hacker News", who seem to have no patents and little understanding of what patents are.
Would one of the other Pritzker winners fit the company and its functional needs better?
Everything I wish I’d known about git ...
And that recognition is among a less casual, often "hardcore" audience.
Ignore the article ? It's just tips on how to use Win8 effectively, meant to help you get started with it. If you don't plan on using Win8, okay, you can ignore it.

Besides, of course he's not gonna bash the product, but Scott usually won't lie to your face about how good something is if he thinks it's crap.
I'll check it out. I remember seeing a number of patents involved in the case, just haven't read them. My comment was certainly a generalization.
Yes, or any image archive, with appropriate homework in advance of posting. Or an online LaTeX editor like mine:

http://arachnoid.com/latex

But better, there are some very low-impact JavaScript utilities like MathJax:

http://www.mathjax.org/

Which allow a pretty seamless interleaving of LaTeX and normal content within a page. Within a submission one need only enclose the LaTeX content in unique delimiters, like the often-used $$double-dollar-signs$$.

All this because W3C can't seem to agree on a standard way to render mathematics in the browser itself -- or more to the point, get the browser builders to agree to anything they've proposed.
If I wasn't living it I would believe this to be The Onion or something out of 1984.
Yes, true, the term "antimatter" has always been somewhat of a misnomer. "Antimatter" differs from matter in a number of ways, but there's only one kind of gravitational mass-energy.
If I understand correctly, this naturally handles concurrent multiple users the way a normal Google document would?

Looks very cool!
Eeh, I don't know, kids today. Back in my day, when I was young (and it weren't even that long ago neither), the hallmark of a "proper" computer was that you couldn't just switch it off...
I miss the Turbo button on my 286.
Except my Samsung Galaxy S II is lighter and thinner than an iPhone 4, with the same camera, a bigger screen, twice the RAM, and more of the features I want. And I can develop for it myself without having to go through a middle-man. Original or not, they're very good phones.
I don't dispute the OP's argument. It just makes me sad.

One of the things I really used my iPad for a lot is games. The distribution mechanism and purchasing system are super-simple. You could (and can) get high-quality games for a low price. I see I've spent 100+ hours playing Bejeweled 3 alone.

Yet the trend has clearly gone towards in-app purchases. I tried some golf game (Tiger Woods something?) and it was constant nagging for in-app purchases. That got deleted in about 2 minutes.

Then there are the "social games", which to me is really an abuse of the word "game", since they are nothing more (IMHO) than exercises in feeding addiction and inducing compulsive behaviour. There is no element of skill. It's simply who can purchase the most. And I've tried a bunch (spending no real $$$) to see (I'm a sucker for world-building games and there's a dearth of those, sadly).

The second category (normal games with in-app purchases) create the wrong incentives. Whereas Angry Birds originally spread because it was a hugely fun game, the game developer is incentivized to make you fork over more money, typically at the expense of the game itself.

It saddens me that Angry Birds has gone the in-app purchase route too.

Sadly the genie is out of the bottle. Any sensible game developer will go this route. Add to this the "social" layer being foisted on users and it's really looking like dark days ahead for gaming.
Did the guy invite media interviews, or has the media just taken it upon themselves to pick his life apart in great detail for him doing his civic duty?
Friend of mine got charged almost a thousand dollars just for being taken to hospital in an ambulance. The journey lasted about ten minutes.

This kind of massively-overinflated cost is endemic in US healthcare. Getting rid of it would easily allow you to lower spending whilst covering more people.
Yeah, I'm surprised that the companies don't use something like a cloud service to handle the short term rush. It might be expensive to have the infrastructure in place to handle the rush, but surely protest reviews on Amazon and Metacritic - which are getting a lot of press for nigh-on killing some games - are more expensive?
>Patenting a single one is absurd.

Yet the individual patents are still there. If Apple decides to go after any company for implementing a single one they can still do so, and probably will.
>But it says something bad about where we're headed when "bouncing" scrolling, black rectangles, and pinching motions are considered legally protectable innovation.

They aren't. You can't patent features. Jeff Han demonstrated pinch-to-zoom around the same time the iPhone was announced. His method was completely different. Thus he and Apple could both patent their methods (presuming they both meet the other burdens) and thus have patents that you would characterize as "pinch to zoom".

The idea that Apple has a monopoly on features is not correct, it is spin. This is not how patents work.

We're fortunate that a jury saw thru this smokescreen.
Are you saying that the apple patents are unique inventions? I ask for clarity because that is not a common position on hackernews.
I despise Apple's practices, but I'm typing that on my MBP. In all fairness it is a company machine and my main reason for having it is that we do some iOS development. That being said, it's still one of the nicest laptops (as far as form factor and hardware) around so I wouldn't fault anyone for choosing their hardware. I would personally, however, choose a linux variant in a heartbeat if I could somehow solve the iOS development issue.
Announcing Toolbelt: a gallery of web development tools that anyone can edit
I also got many years out of my old Nokia smartphone (which on paper could do more than the first iPhone). However, I immediately understood what a revolution the iPhone UI was when it launched.

Lucky for Apple that most competitors had key people who thought exactly like you do for a good while after the iPhone launched - why give a shit about smooth scrolling and polished, intuitive interfaces?
> Windows 8 is the Digg of OS. Complete redesign for no purpose at all.

That statement might only be valid for the blind users of Windows.

The OS was redesigned to fit the (new?) market...

More or less, the desktop was too difficult for 95% of the users, and just got in the way of their use-cases.
Winter in SF is cold and gloomy -- it's a tough July.
Everybody's different. You can be more straight-forward with some people, and others need to hear a lot of positive framing.

Always be kind and positive about what you say though. Assume that their intentions are, like you, to create a good product or do the right thing.

Another direction that you can take this is in getting other people to agree with you and speaking indirectly through all of them. However this is complicated to do right...
Nesting views, along with data binding as MatthewPhillips pointed out, is not the hard part of developing frontend apps. Custom UI/UX is the hard part. Can angular fadeIn/slideDown your nested repeated/collection element? No. In angular, along with any other MV* framework, to handle this trivial UX, you have to write a special js routine (directive). Most apps will have much more custom UI/UX and you are going to have to write javascript, and you may have to fight your framework if it is too opinionated.
Waiting for the Google to release their collaboration API to allow real time collaboration. But yes right now you can share a file just like you would as a Google Document.
Patents cover implementations, not features. These patents are not BS, they are legitimate. There are bigger patents that cover larger aspects of the iPhone inventions but those patents were filed later and thus not granted in time for this trial.

The Mac IS based on the work of Xerox, but that work was licensed by Apple from Xerox. Thus there is a huge difference-- Samsung does not have a license from Apple.
What Exactly is Open Source Dentistry?
The Beginning of the End of Print: 1992 WaPo Memo
I don't use F# but ServiceStack has been a breath of fresh air for us - much easier to get going and more productive than WebApi.

Only Found it when reading that StackOverflow uses it: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/02/stack-exchange-open-so...
Coursera is based in the US and taught by US professors. Their teaching methods are based on US societal norms because that's what they believe to be most effective. If you disagree, you're free to not take their classes. You're also free to take your unique insight into cross-cultural education and start a competing site that embraces cheating - I'm sure the students from China/India/"Over There" that you stereotyped as cheaters will abandon Coursera in droves and flock to you. Good luck!
But then, the time is wrong on your phone - which could cause problems far worse than "having to wait for a new feature on a mobile game."
Did any arcade games do the equivalent of allowing IAP - like get a better weapon or new super move for 1 credit?
Then I wonder why other companies hasn't realized this and hired the same marketing company as Apple uses? If marketing is all (or mostly all) there is, why can't other companies easily replicate Apples profit margins?

Why didn't Apple just rebrand a Symbian or Maemo device and put an Apple logo on it, if marketing is the main deal? (Or better yet, why not just relaunch the Newton GUI?)
More to the point, Windows 8 is bound to be less confusing to the average Windows user than a Mac. Aside from the Explorer ribbon, UI changes to existing, mainstream functionality — whether you like them or not — are mostly cosmetic.
Yes it works just as well on fish as it does on people. Also try prayer, which also works on fish (except for unclean shellfish and eels) and doesn't require purifying the water with UV light.
By "concurrent multiple users the way a normal Google document would", I think manaskarekar meant real-time collaboration, so that's a no.
"Even the most rabid Apple fan can see through this and realize this is just about money. If it wouldn’t be about money and control then there wouldn’t be so many efforts to get injunctions and damages." - Seriously ??? Dude, A billion dollars is nothing for Apple. They probably earn more than that in a month.

If I'm not wrong, these were Steve's words to Eric Schmidt - 'I don't want your money, I don't want 5 billion $, I just don't want you to do Android, period'. So the lawsuit is definitely not about money.
>"Is there any advantage to cheating in Coursera? Coursera doesn't offer certification."

Yeah. I thought the whole purpose of the open courseware initiative was placing the learning of content ahead of the "credit". If you choose to cheat, who cares? You are only hurting yourself.
Or perhaps just "the fall of transparent gaming costs". Apparently the games are still paid, just pay-as-you-go without any clear/simple way to determine how much the game will cost to complete?!
"Insert Coin to Continue" seems like an IAP.
Python code goes in, LLVM IR comes out. Sounds like a compiler to me.

As you know, the basic idea of the project is to make writing fast, vectorized code for numerical and scientific computations as easy as writing native Python. And to do it in a way that maintains compatibility with the extensive CPython universe.

I think the criticism you're fishing for is that it is not an implementation of Python. No, it's not that. But, yes, it is a compiler.
They didn't, but the idea behind arcade cabinets is that without continuing to feed in money you got an incomplete experience.

The issues you're bringing up -- and is valid -- is a fair number of free to play games may instead give you a sub-par experience (unless you pay money, you have to wait) unless you feed in money.
I'm ....... .. ....... .. your .... ....... ............. ... ....... I .... .. ....... .. .. .... I ....... I ... .... .. .. . I ....... ... ..... .. .... ...... .. ... ..... ... I ..... . ...... .... .... ........... ......... ... .... .. ........ .. .... ... . .... .... . ............. I ... . ... .... . ... .. ........... ........ .. my ... .. ... ..... ..... .. .... .. ... ...... ... .... ........ ...... .. ........ .. me .. ..... . ... .... ...... .... ....... .... .. ..... ..... ......... .... I .. ...... ...... .. ........... I .. .... .... ....... .. ..... ........ .. ..... .. .. ........... .. . ....... .... ..... .. my .... ........... . ........... ..... I ... . ...... ... .. .. ..... I ...... .. ... I .... ..... ... .... ... I ... . .... . ....... ........... .. ............. .. ....... ...... I ....... .. ........ ........ I ..... .... .... ..... ... ....... .. .... . I .... ......... .......... ..... .. .. .... ... .......... ... .... ....... .......... .. .... ... ....... ....... .. ........ ..... .............. ... ..... ... .... ........ ... .. .. I .. ....... ...... .... . ............... ............... .. .... ......................... ..... .. .. .... ........ ...... .. ...... .... .... ........ .. ... ... .. ... ......... .. . ........ ............. ............. ...... .. ... ....... ..... ..... ..... ... .......... ..... ........ .. my ....... I ...... .. ...... .. ....... ... .. .. ... .. ... ..... .... .. .... .. ...... ..... .. you .... ..... I ..... .. . .... ... ... .... ......... ...... ....... me .. ............ .. .. ............. ...

Reverse the ratio of the first-person and second-person usage here. Hat tip: Dale Carnegie.
Pull to refresh is patented by Twitter, and Apple has bought a license (apparently, since it'll apparently be implemented in iOS 6).
>Apple's uses capacitive touch screen and a lot of VERY sophisticated software.

Here is a summary of the claims.

A multitouch display detects at least two contacts.

Those contacts perform a first gesture.

That gesture adjusts an image in some way

The first set of contacts is broken.

A second set of contacts is detected.

The second contacts perform another gesture within a pre-determined period of time.

The gesture continues to adjust the image in the same way.

That is the obvious way to implement pinch to zoom on a touch screen. You don't have to copy their "very sophisticated" software to violate that patent. If you implement a feature that copies the above claims, you are in violation.

Apple effectively has a monopoly on the feature pinch to zoom on touch screens. The patent is sufficiently broad that there is no way to do it on a touch screen that avoids the patent.

That is the problem with the patent system. Many patents are so broad that they don't cover a specific implementation.

If that were the case the infamous Amazon one click patent would cover a specific implementation of one click--say a particular way to store the user information, and you could implement a similar feature using a different method. However, you can't therefore Amazon effectively has a monopoly on a feature.