skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here's my problem with all of these articles with the rails versus django battle-to-find-the-one-right-answer approach rather than rails and django different-arrows-in-the-quiver

I think the latter is exactly what the article is saying, the title is actually a little misleading.
Ready-to-use web app theme
A simple theme on Github - ready for your web applications.
HIPPA, medical records, billing, medical office automation. The medical industry is in the information dark ages and finally being dragged into relative modernity by the government.
Absolutely true, which makes Joe's rants against OO rather silly. He's been bitten by bad OO implementations and closed his mind to the idea of OO even though he created a version of it with Erlang.
yes, unless it's an actual headache, i.e. Tylenol
Interesting rant about being misinformed, considering the assumptions you make about both my experience with the frameworks as well as my "professional" working experience. How about the fact that I've worked exclusively at two different Django startups over the last year and a half? And with several Rails startups in the 4 months that I've gone freelance since then?
> is there really that much relevant news out there?

I was trying to use hyperbole to make a point (personally I think dilution's already occured). But yeah, look at digg.
Here's a transcript of an interview with a guy who studies the news industry. According to this, subscriptions paid for nearly half of newspapers' operating costs as recently as the 1960s:

http://onthemedia.org/transcripts/2009/02/06/03

Moreover, the NY Times' most recent 8-K shows that 30% of quarterly revenues were from subscriptions (subscriptions were up by nearly 4% from the previous year, by the way). That's $234 million in revenue in the fourth quarter alone:

http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?...

For what it's worth, it's also easy to disprove the notion that people won't pay for content on the web. The New York Times was making upwards of $10M/year with its Times Select subscription service when it closed in 2007, and that was just for archives and editorials (not news content):

http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-new-york-times-to-close...

(Aside: How many dot-coms do you know of that are generating over $10 million a year in ad revenue?)

Now, I suppose you could argue that since these numbers aren't higher that subscriptions never paid for content, but I dispute that notion. Subscriptions were traditionally a significant source of revenue for newspapers, whereas the author of the editorial wants you to believe that they were trivial revenue streams, and that it's impossible to get people to pay for content in the New Media world. In fact, if you look at the numbers, it's pretty clear that the Times is suffering mainly from declining advertising revenues -- which if anything, is a great indication that they should be charging for content.

That's why I said that the editorial writer's point was silly. He didn't do even basic research to back up his assertions.
> As those of us who were online during a specific half-hour period a couple weeks ago can attest, even Google doesn't have a system that's remotely as reliable as this: It appears to be possible to break all of Google search, worldwide, in ten minutes by misplacing a single character in a text file.

How can we conclude that the same isn't true of IMVU? The fact that such a rare event hasn't happened to them yet tells us very little.
I was about to flag this because I assumed the title was simply flamebait, but it turns out the whole article is pretty disrespectful. Now flagging it doesn't even seem like enough.

"'He looks like rock and roll legend Jimmy Page!' I informed a fellow spectator. His bewildered eyes went from me to the guard, who I’d roused to action with the loud and random aside. What was I thinking? Retards don’t like Zeppelin!"
No.

My relationship with food has changed a lot in my lifetime, from frozen dinners of steak Salisbury to vegan/raw/organic experimentation.

Speaking from opinion, I do think food awareness is rising for some, but falling for most. Very small percent of "first world" folks are agricultural and there is less understanding of where food comes from.

Post AIDS sex certainly doesn't seem like food to me.
--> Pick a Mirror --> New User --> Giant Form full of required fields.

That's the form I'm still waiting to hear back from, a week later.

(Looks like they have a "skip this" link buried down below it, but really, are we expected to scrutineer the page that carefully just to download their thing?)
Yeah, I see what you are saying. But what if it was an automated system? No click purchasing to trusted websites where you knew the rates?
I would eat everything in my cupboards, and by the time that was gone (let's just say a week), I'm sure I could kindly ask him if he has any to share.

By that time, everyone would be in the know that "shit just got real", so I'm sure there would be a lot of people who were actually concerned about other people being able to eat, and that it was counterproductive to lock their doors and shoot anyone who gets close. There are also people in modern society who are paid full-time to patrol the streets and keep the peace; while I know they can't be everywhere at once, they could probably maintain a non-catastrophic level of security, and would be joined by vigilantes and other decent-minded people who just want everyone to get out of the situation alive. I know that's what I'd do in such a situation.

I wonder why you didn't even entertain "sharing" as a possibility, I think it shows an unnerving level of innate psychosis in the human race, like we're all just itching for an excuse to smash our neighbor's skull open and drink their blood. Grow up.
I've struggled with this, too, both in my web work and work for clients. What I've come to is, yes, you can use both, but only if the categories are tightly controlled.

For example, a site could have main categories that describe the type of content (essay, photograph, video) and then use tags to describe what the content is about. That way, the content is sortable by type (ie category) and content (ie tag).
Incidentally, have you seen http://www.housingmaps.com/ ?
Please, a little benefit of the doubt here.

I've been using MySQL since 1998, and am well aware that there is a commercial version as well as the open source one. It's the community version I was trying to download.

The fact that me, a guy who's downloaded and installed this software a dozen times in 11 years, got completely shut down trying to download it this time says a lot about the usability of that site these days.
Body Language Reveals Wealth
I didn't say (write actually) that assets are cash.

I asked who would force the banks into bankruptcy and suggested that not doing so (immediately) might have been better than a total financial system collapse, which was supposedly the only other alternative to the massive cash infusions.

When I run out of cash or my liabilities exceed my assets (short term or long term), no one shuts me down immediately. I keep collecting cash and spend it as it comes in. The folks who I owe money to aren't happy when I skip payments, and eventually that affects my ability to do biz on anything other than a cash-basis, but there's no immediate shutdown.

In fact, most US bankruptcies are initiated the debtors, not the creditors, so the debtors can get out of unprofitable deals. (This isn't true in the UK.)

But we treat banks differently. As soon as they reach certain financial "targets", we shut them down. This is a choice that has consequences.
no no no no no no.
Craigslist can't scale like google did because it's LOCAL. If I'm the only person in my country using google - I still have value. If I'm the only person in my country who uses craiglist - it's useless.
My local craigslist sucks. There's pretty much nothing there but spam.

Just make sure that when you launch - that you're not targeting SF/NYC.

(I will admit - there is local competitors that you would have to beat in most markets - so it's still tough - but it's not always cl.)
But the market tanked!

Looking backward, who would have wanted to be "in the market" over the last 10 years? Most who were are now busted - down to half or less of their initial outlay.

As long as we continue getting hit by these "Black Swans", listening to Jim Cramer is the least of our problems and certainly more entertaining than hearing our new President predict "Catastrophe!".
I remember tossing this idea at a friend, and being told that someone was probably already working on it. I didn't have the drive and/or to follow up on it anyway, but it's nice seeing a good idea being executed.
Yeah, but breaking campaign promises is more than just uncool, it's bad politics. (Think "Read my lips: no new taxes")
http://satchmo.python-hosting.com/ don't know much about it or ActiveMerchant but maybe interesting to you.
Fair enough. I apologize. No more political comments from me.
> I mean imagine how many people would buy a newspaper subscription if you got a tax receipt from it!

You can't get a tax receipt for "services received".
> Python doesn't allow monkey-patching;

Do I misundetstand what monkey-patching means? Because other than a few types such as int & str and cmodules(I believe) I can patch my monkey with python all I want.
Maybe I'm missing something, but the pseudocode looks funky. Is he really assuming at most one key per bucket?

This code seems like it fails when the number of keys in the table exceeds the number of buckets. Assuming that 'table.size' returns the number of keys, and not the number of buckets, he'll also be hitting 'index out of bounds' errors.

Of course, I could be wrong. Pseudocode can have a funky syntax. :)
If you can get that launched and advertised, you'll win for sure... biggest issue I'd imagine is that the wedding industry is a local one, and you'd need lot's of vendors in the queue for the brides to find things worth their while.
The reason I posted this to HN, is because I am curious as to how many people here hack at their own body language, and whether you tend to focus on "improving" it, or just let it be "natural", whatever that means. And if you are "improving" it, what are your considerations for particular situations? Do you try act as if you are from a lower SES, to try to level yourself with your listener, or the other way around - try to increase the perceived importance of your SES in order to put down your listener?
This is why I love HN. Don't ever change.
I'd really like to see what they come up with. What about taking on live-chat for support? Or, aggregating tweets to create a naturally optimized FAQ? Anybody else have ideas?
yea, I posted it ages ago for several karma points on Reddit :)

Still a good read though
An out-lier does not a trend make.
Good points, but the most damage has been made by him faking the development process: telling your cofounders that you're moving along, while secretly preparing to launch a competitor isn't what I call "branching" in my book.

You're right, I may come across as strongly opinionated on this matter, as someone who worked his ass off only to learn some day that our partner has had prepared a brand new corporate entity where he's been pumping our IP for stock, leaving us with stock of an empty "shell". Lawyers helped, sure, most of what we got back went straight to their own pockets. Having two guys work for $400/hour isn't going to help you much.

So... I wouldn't call it branching when you're essentially paying (with your time and effort) for someone else's product launch. If I remember the story correctly, Zuk launched Facebook within weeks (!) after finally admitting to them that they're screwed.
I don't believe the 10% number. I would think energy lost to vibration and lateral motion would be negligible compared to air resistance, tire friction, etc.
Actually, the vocals can be synthesized (sort of):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocaloid

I said 'sort of' because the entry said "with specially recorded vocals of voice actors". It isn't completely synthesized.
> But ID itself is just common sense.

Hardly, rather, it is common ignorance. ID is creationism, plain and simple. Its primary premise that the universe is too complex to have been an accident and thus must have been created absurdly ignores that its chief objection must also be applied to this supposed creator.

If the creator doesn't require a creator, then neither does the universe, making the whole hypothesis absurd. And it is just a hypothesis, not a theory, and cannot be in any way held up as an alternative to evolution by anyone with half a brain.
Not all of the people Mark hurt were co-founders.
Feed Sidebar in Firefox, subscribed to about 150 feeds.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4869
If you want to learn maybe the "purest" implementation of object oriented programming, learn SmallTalk. Everything in SmallTalk is an object, and objects communicate exclusively by sending each other messages. Almost every other programming language has some non-OO "escape hatch," like direct access to data fields or primitive (non-object) data types.

Use Objective-C if you want to program the Mac or iPhone in the near future. It largely copies the SmallTalk model, but grafts it on to C, which means that you can still do all the non-OO things that C can do. This engineering compromise seems to have turned out to be a pretty good design choice, but perhaps not as aesthetically pleasing as the "pure" SmallTalk design.
Would anyone but the sort of person who reads sites like HN go for that? It seems like you would need a lot of training and a lot of trust (or wait for a new generation of humans to grow up) for that to take any mainstream hold, without SOME initial gateway. I mean, even if there were some sort of central PayPal-type system, you'd have to login or click "enable" at least once on any new site. "Enable paying for stuff. [x]"

A truly gateless ("zero click?") system which would just start charging your card the moment you landed on a page would obviously alleviate that issue, but that would imply a (probably currently impossible) amount of trust in content providers.

All that aside, I'm still not wholly convinced the numbers will work out for microtransactions at that low a cost even if people would go for it. I'm glad people are having the discussions, because obviously people need to continue to crack how to make money off of content that isn't a commercial song, TV show, or piece of software, but I'm wary of this particular proposal.
That doesn't answer my question, but in the interest of not stifling conversation, I pose the question of which of Apple's patent claims is not new, inventive, useful, or industrially applicable.
"...if the hypervisor exported all its APIs over 9P."

Please sign me up for your newsletter. I need to find more excuses to use 9P. Wmii got me hooked.
I got a few grafs in, and then I read:

"Both, if pursued without regard to consequence, can prove ruinous not only to oneself, but also to other people, and even to society itself."

and for "both" I substituted "food" and "sex":

Sex, if pursued without regard to consequence, can prove ruinous not only to oneself, but also to other people, and even to society itself.

Food, if pursued without regard to consequence, can prove ruinous not only to oneself, but also to other people, and even to society itself.

And, seeing that neither substitution yielded a true statement, I stopped reading.

Just thought you'd like to know.
Googled around - these are my findings.

1. The Fed publishes -several- press releases every day. They report on the most mundane issues (meeting times, etc) up to their financial decisions. So this event must have been mentioned in a press release.

2. The best match I found was this one: (http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/2008...). If it is about the same event, they described the crisis as "elevated pressure in U.S. dollar short-term funding markets." Response: $180 billion dollar increase in swap lines by the Fed.

This press release was posted on Sept 18th this year, the date of the supposed catastrophe.

3. I couldn't find a single reputable news source or agency that even hinted at a possible catastrophe.

For your amusement, Google "federal reserve 550 billion" and watch the Ron Paul references fly by. Considering the lack of supporting evidence I think it's safe to say the world wasn't about to end on Sept 18th this year.
Oh, OK, I'll bite.

When choosing a framework, I want it to be community supported. This means it's under active development and open to change.

When programming an app against a framework, I want it to simply not break when updating to a point release.

I'm not really interested in a comparison of app implementation details of Rails versus Django. What I'd like to know is the crap I'm going to have to deal with moving from x.2 to x.3. Or y2.3 to y3.0. And how does the plugin/addin/module structure enforce limits and consistency?

And while we're at it, someone come up with more interesting posts than Rails versus Django. Can we get some well written comparisons of, say, a Clojure-framework for apps versus a C# one or a server-side JavaScript one?
Moralizing over food preparation nothing new - I have a hard time believing that it is a substitute for moralizing over sexual behavior. Doesn't anyone remember the four food groups? Three square meals? (even though they were marketing ploys to get people to eat more food, they still tapped into this good/bad for you moralizing) Going back even further we can come up with endless examples of food preparation being moralized, two of the most elaborate systems are the kosher or halal laws.

The evolutionary psychologists have proposed that elaborate rituals and taboos about food preparation - or the seemingly arbitrary tastes and revulsions people have (e.g. I can't stand marshmallows) are built into humanity to keep people from fraternising with foreign tribes. I'm not sure if I believe this theory, but the fact that the psychologists felt it needed an explanation, suggests that food morality is close to a human universal.

Sexual morality has also been observed to wax and wane over generations. Never has the cost of sex been so low because of effective birth control, but there were still times in earlier history where sexual mores were a lot looser than the 1950's USA.
CNN reporter either doesn't know how long ago Jesus was born or cannot do basic arithmetic
There's an interesting UK/US divide here -- I'm in the UK, where most papers don't have a subscription, and where the cover price contributes substantially less to a paper's revenue.

That said, even at their 1960s best I think it still stands that US readers "don't pay for content". They paid for less than half of operating costs by your figures, and this in what we now think of as a newspaper gilded age where competition was substantially less.

Now you may say that operating costs can be lower today, and would be vastly lower if the dead trees were out of the picture, and you'd be correct -- but it's still not a rosy picture for journalism if it has to depend on selling its wares directly to the public, instead of selling the public to advertisers.

It calls for a complete culture shift on both sides: journalism has in the past been subsidised so heavily by advertising that readers have never had to bear the expense of its creation.

That's the real problem, which the author doesn't really get across. It's not that people won't pay for online content at all, it's that they won't pay enough -- they won't pay enough to meet the costs of creating it, and they certainly won't pay enough to meet the current profits that persuaded investors to back newspapers. Yet without their regional monopolies, the media groups can't make enough from advertising to cover the shortfall.

That's why the talk is now all about alternative business models. It's just difficult to think of a plausible one, because by its very nature journalism burns up cash. It's somewhat similar to venture funding, in that you pay reporters and photographers good money, and often they come up with nothing and only occasionally hit the jackpot. To get investors to take those sorts of risks with cash, there has to be a good return. And for the sums that we're talking about here, the opportunity cost of sinking it into journalism can be very high indeed.
ActiveMigration really solves a different problem. Our problem is that adding indexes or altering popular tables is impossible to do on a live and in production database. To get those changes out we have to go through quite a bit of extra work. It's really a MySQL limitation, not a process problem.
Oh God yes. Please, please, please.
There are some good papers on perceived IQ, and how perceived IQ correlates with actual IQ. It turns out that pIQ is mostly a function of body language, eye contact, rate of speech, and things like that; what comes out of your mouth doesn't actually matter all that much. Some of the factors you are able to fake and boost your pIQ, but most you aren't. So if you are into that it would pay off well to figure out what those are. :-)
You speak with such authority, evdawg, I find myself wondering which of your many Django and Rails projects I must use every day without even knowing it. Care to tip us off?
You got downmoded because in many languages, Strings are mutable by default.
In Rails, it's a bit easier making web apps because AJAX is built in with RJS and helpers. With Django, you choose your own Javascript framework and do it yourself. Which isn't a bad thing at all, I actually prefer Django's way.

With Django, it's easier making web sites because of the built in automatic admin interface. It's production ready. With Rails, you have a lot of plugins/generators to choose from which does the same thing though (which again, isn't a bad thing at all).

Honestly though, Rails/Django users have created plugins/apps to extend their favorite framework, so it's really easy to make websites AND web apps with both now.
Short answer: yes.

Long answer: it's hard to know for certain. I chose Computer Science as my major having done very little programming. I didn't do any serious programming until my intro to programming course my first semester. I did some programming in a high school course, but really, my start as a programmer coincided with the start of my formal education.

But during my education, I was exposed to things I doubt I would have encountered on my own. In particular, what I learned from my programming languages, compilers and operating systems courses. In fact, if it had not been for my programming language course, I don't know if I would have realized how much I like thinking about how to express concepts in code. If it wasn't for my graduate studies, I doubt I would have become so comfortable with systems programming and performance in general.

I'm also a biases person to ask because I'm close to getting my Ph.D. I have a Bachelor's and a Master's. So I've done a decent amount of schoolin'.

The problem with being self-taught is sometimes you just don't know what you don't know. I know it sounds boring, predictable and constraining to learn a menu of concepts. But the benefit is that lots of people who came before you decided "these things are important to know to be in our field."

(Hope you see this reply, I didn't realize you replied until just now.)
You should go thru an American Broker.... maybe one in the Philippines
I never really paid much attention to mine: after all, I'm a nerd, judge me on what I do, not how I look. However, when I ran for office, I found that I needed to - because the vast majority of people judge solely on looks, appearance, and to a much lesser degree, actual message.
I don't. Even the thought is a bit repulsive to me. Regardless, I don't think it's worth the effort, because people are less likely to infer my wealth from my body language; even if they know nothing about me, they have other (more reliable) sources to go by - my clothes, my accent, my hair etc.
Maybe he meant the community frowns on monkey-patching.