skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
- Finding space in an urban area of the Bay Area that comfortable can fit 8,000+ people is near impossible

- Tech company employees have a near equal distribution of living in either SF or the south bay, with some folks in the east bay. Having an office in Menlo Park, Palo Alto, or Mountain View is a good compromise on commute time for all of these groups.

- Individual offices require much more space per employee, and isolate people. Facebook has chosen to build offices on open plan, which they see as better for their culture, collaboration, and internal communication.

- Putting an office in a downtown area requires parking, and most of the Bay Area "downtowns" can't cope with 6000+ cars from a single company without major parking expansion.

- Keeping all of this in mind, renting office space in a downtown area would require either purchasing an entire building to fit enough people (if such a building even exists), renovating it, providing parking for 6000+ people, plus all of the other logistical issues that come with working in a downtown area. SF/Bay Area isn't NYC and isn't optimized for non-car commuting.

- Office parks provide many other benefits for companies like Facebook, Apple, Google, etc. They can keep all of their employees (and their NDA-covered communications) absolutely private. They can provide many services at the campus that subtly convince employees to stay at/near the office longer. They can provide large food service areas, keeping employees at the office for lunch/dinner, and keeping their conversations within the businesses walls.

Building out an office park provides easy access to freeways, lots of (free) parking, cheaper utility costs, and easier construction/modification costs. Renovating an office park is going to be less expensive, in general, that completely gutting and renovating a skyscraper.

- At a company the size of Facebook an office park is the only thing that makes sense.
This snarky comment is quite superfluous, I say.
Then prove it by starting a successful company.
Edited the title to make it clearer :)
Meet No. 1: Oleg Firer of Unified Payments
That makes sense especially because the trend to acqui-hires is particularly insidious for investors, who essentially have to chalk those all up as failures (for many funds, simply breaking even on an investment can be, pro forma, a failure). The prospect of an acqui-hire obviously motivates entrepreneurs to tack towards offerings that will elicit acqui-hire interest. If you're an investor, you'd rather your portfolio companies swing for the fences and miss, rather than bunt.
It's not necessarily a recipe for that, but you've gotten us well started down that path with your neg-meta for sure.

Atheists among the population experience a similar level discrimination out in the wild that women do in computer science and we talk about that all the time. Personally, I find this intellectually stimulating and positive news for those who experience that negativity. You don't need to be negative yourself.

Instead of fostering discussion, your post will likely be voted all the way to the top, so discussion of the article's content will never start and instead we can just bicker about whether or not it should have been posted at all for the three quarters of the thread...
Yeah, I found the tone of the article to be vaguely sexist. It depicts Sandberg as "charming" a hapless Zuckerberg, then suggests that Sandberg should move to Miami (because it's "nice") and start an ad agency because "that’s a job she’s qualified to do."
Did anyone read "Armstrong" and first thought of Lance Armstrong? When his life achievements were stripped away, I thought he would be on suicide watch.
Every story that ever gets posted here that's outside the site guidelines is invariably accompanied by these lame attempts to tie the story somehow back to computer science. You could more credibly tie Ron Paul to Hacker News than you could this article about atheism in politics. "Discrimination against atheists in computer science". Really.

In this case, your account has been active for a total of 47 days, so I'm going to put my money on "you've never read the site guidelines that Paul Graham wrote when he started HN". They're linked to the bottom of the page.

And, yep. Also, you can thank me for flagging the story. It doesn't belong here. There are much better places on the entire Internet to talk about this stuff.
I get a weird recursive sense reading this. If you build a social network and then establish your business model as charging developers to build apps on top of that network, what's the business model those developers use to justify the cost? Are they going to sell ads? If the value of the service to the end-users is "all the third party apps", and those third party apps are all ad-driven, how does the underyling social network prefer that model, getting paid by developers who get paid by ads, over just selling ads and creating a small number of "apps" (like photo sharing) itself?
>Samsung will be replaced by another Android manufacturer, or perhaps even Nokia

Nokia? The one that's focussing on Microsoft as an OS? Huh.

Seems way more likely that Motorola would be the more likely alternative to a Samsung successor seeing as they are owned by Google.
Totally understand and noticed Chrome is taking away more shortcuts. Used to be able to do Ctrl-O and now with Chrome 21 that stopped working, and it always opens the open dialog.
Reminds me of something I did back in jan this year. I made a twitter account called SopaSoap and had a huge following.

We were going to allow people to send "SOPA" soap for $8 to their congressman with the tag line "Vote no on SOPA and help keep congress clean".

Then SOPA got tabled. Luckily it was right before I setup the website and place the order with a soap manufacturer I was working with.
How many of those touchscreens could detect multiple touches at once? That's a prerequisite for doing pinch-to-zoom with a capacitive touchscreen.
Maybe to promote the "learning over credit" model, Coursera shouldn't attempt to stop any kind of plagiarism. This would make the certificate essentially worthless, which would promote learning only for the sake of learning.
I couldn't agree more, we stand constantly at the start of new things, in another 70 years, we will be so far past where we are now that to the people of those times it will seem as though we were as backwards as the people of 1948 seemed to us.
Do Indians fare better abroad?
I hope the trend proves to be short lived, and suspect it will be.
Usually engineers don't get to decide where major resources are applied. That's the call of the increasingly non-technically savvy CEO. (HP is typical of this trend -- founded by engineers who were the cause of its greatness, over time degrading and being run by MBA's instead).

"Why did Google's Android team develop an operating system that resembled a Blackberry"

Irrelevant. The trend toward a more powerful OS as computing resources increased was inevitable. Somebody happened to get there first, and they deserve a pat on the back for winning that race, but they should not get all the credit. People who came before who actually pushed the technology to the limit deserve most of the credit; all Apple did was exploit it at an opportune time.
IAP games are like going to the arcade and paying some small amount per play, rather than buying the game upfront and getting to play as much as you want.
The First Men in the Moon
I don't think code was verified on launch before 10.8. I believe this because several Apple apps didn't verify (iTunes, and the Safari prerelease), and the only way I could tell was to verify at the command line. (Code with an invalid signature does give a message on 10.8.)
My take on it is encapsulated by this:

"For us this lawsuit has always been about something much more important than patents or money."

It is clear that it can't be about the money because Apple makes 10x the money Samsung does, its all about crushing your enemies using every available tool in your arsenal, no matter what. When Microsoft did that by bundling their own browser into their dominant OS they were convicted of illegally using their market domination to crush competition. I don't think that fate will befall Apple but the ramifications of this on Apple will be far and wide and for the most part uncontrollable.

I expect that everyone reading this today will, in 5 to 10 years be able to look back at today and see all the manifestations of what happened because of it and then see what Apple has wrought. I have no idea if it will be the best or stupidest thing they ever did, but it will define them as a company. I'm strangely reminded of the Tesla / Edison rant for some reason.
just a comment about the background, though others have been made.

In chrome, at least, the background starts loading in, then goes white, then loads in again. It's a bit odd.

Have you thought of saving the image progressive or interlaced? Don't know what the common knowledge is on this at the moment, but watching an image that big and busy load in slowly from top to bottom takes time away from getting to the actual point of the site.
Rare Neil Armstrong Interview
Nice article. I'd add a board for tracking serious customer service issues that come up, including bugs and feature requests.
I found your response bit creepy.

The part you quote are the last sentences; obviously it shouldn't be taken 100% seriously and I am surprise you did, since he obviously joked, as there are many other places than Miami that are nice to live, something I am pretty sure you are aware of.

Of course blaming top management is a way to go. That's the major difference between junior, senior and executives; in first two instances for your failures, up to some degree can be blamed rightfully anyway you want to: on a weather, on other emps unwillingness to work hard, etc. But when you are that high in hierarchy as an executive who can hire or fire thousands of emps at once, and should have broad insights into every company's corner, there are no more excuses available to you: you either did your job and succeed, or you did your job miserably and failed. There is just too much power all the way on the top to blame weather or junior emps for your own failures.

Said that, this article is quite frankly right on spot. Other than obviously the author is not a stock market researcher and may not know the numbers behind this stock (P/E f.e.) cannot help but push it down to a reasonable levels, he is right that CEO and COO had entirely different approach to making money.
Looks nice! Congratulations on moving forward with your project rather than letting it languish.

Quick feedback: there's a typo in "sign, sealed, delivered"; should be "signed" rather than "sign".
I don't buy that. A projector is a display, right? Otherwise this sentence would be possible: "I showed my powerpoint the the executive board without using a display".

Either way it doesn't seem relevant since it is capacitive and display-covering transparent capacitive panels have been in existence since at least 1983. (Bob Boie, Bell Labs)

If it was relevant, shouldn't Samsung be in the clear for their AMOLED displays since the patent only mentions LCDs? (elsewhere in the doc)
Companies face entirely disparate problems at different scales. Let's charitably give App.net a valuation of $20M, and take FB's valuation as the approximately $42B the market says it's worth. This isn't even apples to oranges - it's 1 apple to 2100 oranges.
Yeah, I wouldn't normally care about stories sniping at Facebook, but those passages were exactly what set me off; a second read shows that the whole thing is cribbed opportunistically from a book that predates even Facebook's S-1.
Forget about whether IAPs are bad. Did nobody pick up on this?

> In the last month, this single game generated over $12,000,000 on iOS alone. They have not ported the game to Android yet.

> If this is the case and it holds ranking for the rest of the year, then this single game is worth $109,500,000 PER YEAR on the low side.

Holy fucking shit. $100m a year of high-margin sales for a single iOS games?

World of Warcraft makes, last time I calculated it, roundabout these amounts, and WoW is one of the most financially successful games ever and requires masses of investment in infrastructure, new content, community management, developers, and so on - so big it swallowed Blizzard whole for a while.

If a silly, simple, stupid looking iOS game can make $100m a year of almost raw profit, this is... well, just mind-blowing, really.
It's had the "do anything" behavior since the Consumer Preview back in February.
Huh, I've heard that attributed to Bill Gates, but Neil Armstrong said it in 1969. I wonder if he got it from someone else?
Yet another example of Apple idiocy (I'm a former customer, having spent easily $100K on Apple hardware).

It became clear to me a year or so ago that Apple is moving in a direction that is anti-developer. At that time I stopped buying their hardware, installed Linux on the Apples I still had, and stopped writing apps for the iPhone. My life has been MUCH easier since then.

We really don't need to be spending any more time dealing with companies like this. We should be collectively writing our own apps for our own open platforms, and forcing them to use the mechanisms that give US control.
Hey, I think the patent system is broken too... but I think Apple used the broken tools at its disposal to make what was ultimately a completely fair case.
No part of this comment responds to mine. Let me simplify my comment, which was simultaneously prolix and a little dashed off. I have 2 points:

1. The source material for this whole article, which concludes by suggesting that Sandberg should move to "nice" Miami to start an ad agency, is a book that was published in June '10.

2. The core critique of the article is that Facebook derives most of its income from advertising, when it (somehow?) might have done something different. The author never specifies what. The most damning thing the author appears to be able to say about that decision is, the entire Facebook upper management team agreed with Sandberg about this.

Aside from that: what's "creepy" about my response? I wasn't explicit about this, but what was "creepy" to me about the story was the way it pitted nerdy male Zuckerberg against "nice" female Sandberg.
> your account has been active for a total of 47 days,
> so I'm going to put my money on "you've never read
> the site guidelines that Paul Graham wrote when he
> started HN"

Pulling out the "You haven't been around here long enough to get it" card already, huh? I've been here for many years with many accounts and read the guidelines many times. I never remember my password. I get a new account when I clear my cookies, so you can stuff your ad hominem in your little hat and keep it to yourself. I appreciate my anonymity and don't want to share my email address. I thank pg for not requiring it. I judge comments based on their merit, not who posted it or how old their account is.

Countless articles are posted here every day that exist outside the guidelines. If you don't want to participate in the discussion that evolves within them, then don't. Go read another article and post to that one, or fine, flag it. You don't need to come in here and disrupt the potential great conversations that may occur just because you want to cry about the guidelines. No hate necessary. Just relax. Give good things opportunities to exist. Be optimistic.
11.) Governments who sell IPR won because more and more everyone thinks the path to success in IT must go through IP registration (of junk software patents in bulk) and (kangaroo court) IP litigation; moreover they can periodically raise fees without much pushback. Their main customers have loads of cash.
> "Especially from journalists who's only job is to tell people their opinion...real tough work."

I was with you until you decided that, in response to people trivializing your work and your contributions, you turn around and trivialize the work and contributions of an entire profession.
Good idea, I'll code a .htacces reader for Node.
Why would anyone care that someone else has purchased a cheap knock off of something he owned?

Unless, of course, the only reason to own it is status.

But I'd hesitate to equate a Samsung smart phone with a knock off Louis Vitton handbag, for example.

I don't really understand the undying adoration of Apple. The tech industry has always been a fast moving, ultra-competitive industry where blatant ripping off of features is expected. If my competitor has a new feature that people like, you can bet the farm that everyone else will implement that same thing and try to leap frog the others in the process.
Plus, it will take a very long time to get to that staffer. Ever since Congress went through the anthrax scares a decade ago, their snail-mail is highly scrutinized, which slows down delivery.
That's the reason I flagged this post. This is not hacker news or even journalism. It's just lobbying for an industry.
I'm in the US and I'm not paying anything to see this article. So what's the logic for letting me see it for free but not letting someone in the UK see it?
Unfortunately it was always slow in Vista, and not as well implemented as Spotlight. To me, spotlight is the shining light of my mac.

Is the Win8 search faster and does it have a better design? I haven't heard anything about it.
Emacs-lisp bignums in mongo-db adapter
ZeroMQ - The Intelligent Transport Layer
Plus, TF2's stock weapons are generally the most versatile, so there are few if any game-changing items.
You make a fair point. I guess I'm just a little bitter after reading that article. Over the years I've noticed that a lot of articles being written are just plain assumptions and opinions of the journalist, and not always accurate of what's going on from the inside. But that's just my experience reading articles written about the companies I work for.
Trello is one of those tools that's really powerful but really open ended. It's hard to get started with so it's awesome to see how others use it!
Boomers Are Breaking the Deal
I'm sure it's appreciated by many people. An awful lot of people were complaining - seemingly rightfully sow.
This is fantastic. I can imagine small advocacy organizations wanting to use this for their members with a custom issue graphic. For instance, if Amnesty International wanted its members to write on behalf of a prisoner of conscience they could use a photo of that individual on the back of the card.

Otherwise, are you willing to share some of the details about the fulfillment side of things? How did you find a printer? How are they receiving the orders?
Indianapolis Colts vs Washington Redskins live stream watch here
odon lal Indianapolis Colts vs Washington Redskins live stream watch here NFL Football Preseason 2012 and get nfl full season
Houston at New Orleans
Match scheduled:
Date : SAT, AUG 25 2012 Time: 4:00 PM (ET)
NFL Preseason 2012 venu: FedEx Field
10.8.1 seems to have improved my battery life on my MBA from 10.8. 10.8 really killed the battery life. But 10.8.1 I'm noticing improvement.
The Well Dressed Coder
You know, I think you might have been the person that told us about it.....so, thanks!
Interesting insight - but I'm not sure why you had to finish it by trivializing journalists - particularly Sarah Lacy, who's probably one of the hardest working journalists in the valley and has deeper insight into how the startup ecosystem works than 99.9% of the journalists out there.
Hedge fund managers routinely generate 8-figures in profits per year for their employers. Likewise, high-power attorneys can bill literally millions per year for their employers.

There are members of our industry who do generate that kind of enormous value to their employers - I've met some of them - and they are all being paid in that ball park already (i.e., $300K+).

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?
While I agree the possibilities are terrifying I have a rather hard time imagining this type of interface becoming ubiquitous. I just don't think most people have enough mental self control to avoid accidental input. For example how many times have most of us, in a moment of anger, thought about saying or texting someone something that we'd never actually send? How would such a device determine between what you actually want to input and what's just passing thoughts?

I also have hard time seeing the "normals" feel comfortable with this kind of tech for everyday use.
That site is such a massive eyesore, to the point where I struggle to have any motivation to read past the first paragraph.

Colors, typography, the massive line-lengths. It's a wall of text. Just an all-round horrible design.
Even without a paradigm shift, it is not uncommon for companies to try and become the market with loose piracy protections. If I recall correctly, Microsoft and Adobe are on the record saying they would prefer people pirate their product than use a competitors.
I take back the comment here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4432744,

apparently this is exactly what Gigaom was referring to earlier today. I didn't think people would care, but apparently they do, don't understand, and Apple is paying the price.

What would have happened had Samsung won??
I'm exactly the opposite. I don't have any strong feelings about patents but I'm fully aware that they're abused. That said, it was plain to me that Samsung was wrong and really did copy Apple. However, even if I thought Apple was plainly wrong which I have many times in the past I wouldn't think twice about buying their products and developer for their OS. I don't develop or buy Apple's products because of their corporate behavior. I do so for two reasons:

1. Apple products are the best in quality, design, and utility for me.

2. Their platform is hugely profitable and I want in on the action.

For me, it's simple economics. But I also tend to be an oddball around here. I'm one of the few who sees the benefits of copyright and I also believe patents have a completely valid place in society. What I think really sets me apart in these views is that I'm not a hard liner about any of them and from what I've seen on HN for the past 3 years, most people here (at least the ones who comment on these issues) are. I know about the dark side of patents, their abuse, and I'm right on the same page as others when they come out against abuse of the patent system. I also see some of the insanity surrounding copyright too. But you have to consider all the information in order to make an informed decision. Because of this I'm not one of those who decides to boycott all things made by company X because of their actions or position (could be one or a history of them) on issue Y.

I don't understand why people such as yourself take to boycotting every time something like this happens. I truly don't, and I'm not trying to be snarky or dickish at all so please don't read it that way. What I see in this case is standard Apple behavior and coincidentally they just happen to be right on this. If this abandoning of Apple really is about the lawsuit then why didn't you jump ship from the start instead of waiting for the ruling? And if this really is about the patent system then why is everyone making it about Apple? Apple is using the tools at its disposal to protect itself and in other cases simply make sure they stay ridiculously profitable. Apple didn't invent the patent system. If anger belongs anywhere it should be directed toward the system not the user of the system.
It sounds like you're more talking about a straight acquisition.
Can someone explain the parking barrier and turnstile changes for me in more detail? I don't get it.
I take it back, this article https://plus.google.com/u/0/114476892281222708332/posts/246s... (and submission http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4433011) show that gigaom was correct.
And they wouldn't necessarily be wrong in doing so.
I'm sorry if this came off in a snarky way. I simply wanted to talk about our moon history.