skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've had experience of beign rejected by both, and have got better feelings with TechStar :) Well, the ideas were different too, so it triggered different reactions.

But overall, techstars do good job offering more opportunities for the startups.
"Trust is a funny thing: if your userbase is hardened hackers like the HN lot then you might end up (at least initially) with a trust issue - but the general public aren't going to care that much."

I think the opposite is true - "hardened hackers" may judge the TLD less than the general public.

Eg, I run a couple of small websites, and I know that .com is a matter of routing, and says little about the intention of my website. However, a casual user might see .com as more of a directory than a routing issue.

A few years ago I had a couple of people try and convince me that .org was reserved for non-profit organisations. While that might be the intended usage, it certainly isn't mandatory.
I wouldn't worry about trust, but I think people will definitely forget about the .me and just try .com instead.

For del.icio.us they also bought delicious.com eventually...
Random ramble..
One, a company's assets (let alone possible innovative deal terms where yahoo don't have to spend much) should seem like it can buy another company. Which in this case is a clear no.

Secondly, given the way yahoo screwed up overture and many other great acquired products and people, they definitely cannot run a serious OS or software business, not even half as good as MSFT runs it today.

The only good thing that can happen is someone really focuses on the huge content and community portals that yahoo has been a leader in well.
Hey, you started 12 days after me. Anyway, same sort of thing here. Been around for two years now, and I use to participate more. That's when I was sorta at a phase where I was just consuming a lot of information that was new to me. Now, not a lot is real news, so I'm starting to build more.

Nowadays, it's nice to see when you, mechanical_fish, Tichy, chaostheory, and others that have been around for a while comment. And the occasional comments from raganwald, buccheit, etc.

I still think that the front page shouldn't have upvote links, and that the new page should have them only.
This is absolutely kick-ass!

No foldl or foldr though?
Michael Bierut: This is My Process
Amazon Raises an E-Book Specter
Also check out http://www.jsconf2009.com where JavaScript developers will be rallying to discuss how to use JavaScript to build cutting edge mobile, desktop, server, and web applications. If you have any interest in deep JS tech, you should be there.
From your comments, LaunchBox Digital looks like a good firm, to receive a fund for my startup..

But I still feel that Y-Combinator is better... maybe because it's owners.. I just like them!

Anyway, any startup needs people who can understand it's needs, and provide the right advice in the right time...
I think you'll be fine. The issue usually isn't trust. The issue is more often that people will go to your-name.com and not see the site and give up - no matter how much you tell them to go to your-name.me. Make sure you have both your-name.com and your-nameme.com so that you can redirect those to your-name.me if you're going to go this route.

I don't think trust is as big a factor (unless you're asking for credit card numbers) as them typing the address correctly.
We brought you the Internet

I stopped reading there. "You" did what? Is the author suggesting that "slackers" brought us the internet? It seems to me that a vast army of workaholic scientists and hackers of all types "brought us the internet", not a bunch of wannabe artists working part-time jobs at Starbucks.

Perhaps I'm missing the point of this article, but it seems overly loose and unjustified, and filled with fallacies. Freelancers aren't slackers, they work harder than people in regular jobs, in most cases. Hackers aren't slackers - they have many characteristics of slackers, perhaps, but if you get down to it, most of us are obsessive, driven workaholics - for the right work.
Effective Vices for the IT Professional
Google faces post-Fleetwood Mac comedown
Maybe that (generally) unknown unknown is gene therapy? Look at the recent discoveries of communities with strong genetic HIV resistance.
The links RSS feed doesn't have much information beyond the links. No submitter, no points. This makes them a lot less useful for hacking.
And it pretty much assumes that you have wealthy parents and therefore won't be getting the generous financial aid that all of the top schools offer to students from middle-class families.
I don't think it's as much Twitter killing Google, as it is a recognition that there's something new bubbling up, where Twitter is the poster child. While Google has dominated traditional search, this might be an area where one can grab a foothold. That's as much as I read into it.
hmmmmmmm

Not weird that it has more than 200 comments!
I am going to master the goto keyword.
U.S. Taxpayers Risk $9.7 Trillion on Bailouts as Senate Votes
Google search is evil
The comparisons they use are quite contrived. For example, Mosso charges $0.01 for every 500 PUT requests (vs. Amazon's $0.01 for every 1,000 PUTs). However, Mosso gives you free PUTs if the file is over 100K so they made the tests to have a 150K filesize meaning that they have no request charges. Whether that's true of your application is another story.

Likewise, the test is 1TB of incoming bandwidth and 100GB of outgoing bandwidth. Now, Amazon easily trumps Mosso on outgoing bandwidth charges - BUT Mosso is offering free incoming bandwidth until the end of the month. Seems a little unfair to be creating a comparison on a situation that will exist for another 19 days.

I should also note that Mosso seems to measure in Gigabytes instead of Gibibytes. Why? Well, they're storing 5TB which would be 5120GB, but they've calculated their pricing based on 5000GB as being 5TB (5000 * 0.15 + 100 * 0.22 = 722). So, you're actually getting less storage. It's not that important in the small range, but when you're talking about terrabytes of storage it sure as hell becomes important. It means that each terrabyte used on their system is over 90GB short. Now, Amazon might be using the same logic there so I should pull back.

Really, it's cheap to do a comparison using pricing that's going to go up in under a month from when you wrote the comparison.
With two career-focused people in a relationship, there must be compromises. In particular, the best job opportunities for different economic sectors are usually in different locations in the world, directly leading to conflict about where the couple is going to live.

Unfortunately, the "most equalizing" compromise is going to involve the person with the best career prospects at the margin[1] to discard them, as they can get "reasonably good" prospects by moving to where the other half has best prospects.

If you're the one with the better career prospects at the margin, and you invest much of your personality in being the best at what you do, that's going to be a problem: because you simply won't be able to become that while in that relationship.

You're gonna have to choose.

1) By "at the margin", I mean at the step levels, such as promotions, new job offers, new opportunities: simple measurable things that indicate propensity for advancement.
It's an op-ed by a writer - creative license and all that. Keep reading. It's a bit better. Made me think about how the safe path isn't all that safe.
I read a great article about an airplane manufacturer that had tight operations and grew at a solid, relatively slow rate. They had a really solid engineering corps, and didn't hire new engineers for certain But wasn't hiring much on certain parts of their engineering corps. Then they look around, and realize in a decade, everyone's going to retire and they'll lose all the knowledge that wasn't handed down. All that expertise, know-how, common sense, and hard lessons learned were going to evaporate if they didn't have young people working on it, and veterans handing down the valuable lessons.

Microsoft absolutely needs to be developing and growing online business for the innovation and expertise that come from it. Even if they lose money on most of their online ventures, they still need to do it. Who thinks the desktop OS and business software is going to be a huge cash cow in 20 years? MS needs smart people learning, building, experimenting, and doing cool stuff online to keep going.
By the way, I am so glad that they decided to choose the Silicon Valley instead of Boston..

Although I never been in the Silicon Valley, but if you open my heart, you will see it standing there... LOOOL
No she's not. She's clarifying the difference.
Setting Expectations for Contribution Based Projects (Part 1 )
You're right, I guess, but ... yuck. I suppose that's another reason why I prefer smaller companies. I think companies ought to be free to hire and fire who they want, when they want, even when it's a stupid decision.
Actually he is fine with incentive based compensation, but the government needs to be paid back before they can collect the incentive's. What he is trying to avoid is news story's where the government lost money and the bankers got million+ dollar compensation.
One thing that makes me crazy is how americans tend to place labels in people since their teens: that's a loser, two nerds, three jocks, four yuppies, etcetcetc. Once people are stigmatized with those, it's hard to backtrack, and my feeling is that they tend to go all the way with others' expectations of them.
A conversation with Terry Childs in jail
A good boss gives you fair warning so you don't have to implement/sign the PIP.

I had a tendency of coming in fashionably late at my job. Like 945/10am/1015am/1030am. It was very inconsistent and laissez faire attitude 'i don't care when i show up'. To the point where my boss was like we want you to be consistently on time - because they actually do worry if sometime bad happened (e.g. accident) if you're not there. And my boss was like if you don't start coming in consistently - we're going to have to put you on a performance plan. And he was like - "you don't want to be put on a performance plan". He explained how it would basically track when I got in every day and graph it and median/max had to be within a certain range. If you go outside the variance, you basically are terminated. I started coming in consistently from then on. And realized how bad it looked when I would schlep in at post-930 (not just for me, but for my boss and our team.

Problem solved.
I've been wondering how close the US itself is to going bankrupt? Who would buy our treasuries? What would happen to the economy? Things seem to be getting out of control financially.
I venture to say careers and relationships have separate evolutionary roles. Relationships are for companionship, which increases survival potential (two can survive in a cave in the dead of winter better than one), which obviously increases potential for spreading one's own genes, or helping the genes of one's community to spread. The surviving genes will be more disposed to forming relationships. Careers (hunting/gathering) are obviously for survival, for obtaining basic necessities. Careers are the primary driver for survival. Relationships are more a tertiary, but still important, factor for survival. A career entails being a good hunter to bring meat, warm fur, and so forth, into my cave, for example. But having a relationship with somebody helps my emotional well-being, helps me get better sleep perhaps, which in turn makes me a better hunter. So I don't think in a relationship two people need the same careers or whatever. Careers and relationships simply play different, but mutually supportive roles for the benefit of the genes. Personally I tend to gravitate relationship-wise towards "artistic" type drag queens, who tend to not be too high-tech, but talented in other ways, like say karaoke. But that is fine, because it serves a different evolutionary purpose for the selfish gene than my own personal career interest in technology. In short, to be a good (read: successful) "gene-carrying robot", we need not have relationships that are in the same vein as our careers, rather, to serve the gene, we need only try to be happy, which increases our survival potential, which helps the gene. From an evolutionary point of view, the simple rule is to try to find someone that makes one happy. That is all the gene asks. Not a bad set of affairs, eh? :-)
Televisions 'to be fitted in contact lenses within ten years'
Still, the "buying a house" thing kind of got to me when I was fresh out of school. According to statistics, my salary was actually in the top 10% of salaries in Germany (it wasn't that much, just goes to show how little most people earn), yet buying a house or apartment with that salary seemed elusive. The only way to afford it would have been to inherit some money from the parents.

That was one of the major reasons why I became so critical of just being employed and "working for the man". I just didn't feel like I would ever be able to escape the rat race.
The revised title is better. I wish I had thought of it when I posted. And, yes, the blog post could have been shorter too.
Don't confuse .me and .me.uk - two different extensions. :)
MLB.TV streaming in HD this year for the first time
I've not had problems getting (and keeping) users on a .me; but I'm not selling anything. I also have a fairly young audience (14-18 primarily). I'm sure both of these things have an effect.
State of the Browsers (and the wars)
How did we geeks become experts on macroeconomics?
Influence of brain type on sex of children (coders have more boys?)
He sometimes comments on here:
http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=joshu
Web 2.0 defamation lawsuits multiply
A thought: No one - male or female - marries or gets into a relationship thinking it's going to break down into a lazy, unkempt, mildly hostile situation with minimal affection and no sex life with. Likewise, no one hires someone who they expect to half-ass it, break more things than they fix, and be a terrible coworker. Yet, bad hires are made and bad relationships/marriages are gotten into.

I've studied quite a lot of social science. It's really, really dangerous to say, "Blah on statistics - I'm not average." Everyone thinks that. Better to understand them, really fully understand the natural pressures and challenges that come along with something, and if you don't like the consequences - fight them with your eyes open. If you're in love, you'll rationalize that your partner is perfect and that everything that applies to "all those other folk" don't apply to you. That's a bit dangerous for obvious reasons.

That article's got a couple interesting points, and some ridiculous conclusions/extrapolations. Just keep in mind - when you see a statistic that you don't like and immediately go to dismiss as "not applicable to you" - well, don't dismiss it so fast. The older I get, the more I realize I'm part of all those statistics and commercials do, in fact, work on me like they do with everyone else.
Trogdor: Burninatingly fast search using Yahoo BOSS
Daniel Pink's new career advice book makes this the first lesson:

http://www.squidoo.com/Johnny_Bunko
Apologies if it was sent before, I didn't see it mentioned and found it interesting :)
I would think twice about taking relationship advice aimed at Forbes's readership.

Scratch that. I would think about it once and then actively ignore it. The poor tender egos that they have to coddle and actively shelter from smart, talented, driven women have absolutely no relation to mine. Their worldview is so alien as to be antithetical.

These are the B players that hire C players: in work as in family.

My advice? Surround yourself with brilliance, talent, drive and passion in all aspects of your life.
3 TED trends: efficiency, robots, genomics
If I recall my Camel Book correctly, Larry Wall called what the article describes as "False Laziness". Copy-and-pasting code will save you time in the short term, but probably cost you time in the long term. If laziness is about minimizing effort, then a truely lazy person will take the time to do things correctly so that he or she has less to do later on.
First: I think the influence of the word lazy on good programmers is to encourage them to be more efficient. I could be wrong, but that's how it feels to me.

Although I think the author is right that copy/pasting the same function 40 times does represent laziness, it also represents short-sightedness. Something the Wall quote doesn't explicitly state is that the good programmer is looking to optimize for the sum total of effort over the project (or programmer) lifetime, not to be "lazy" in the immediate moment, mortaging the future for ease of the present.
Funny that barristers cost just as much then as now! They had by far the highest wages in the careers listed in the article.
Microchip: 7x faster, 30x less power
meh no real difference. If he is uk based then .me.uk is more likely to be remembered :)
Apple App Store developers look to next level
Ref. 2.) Making a syntax element like hard coded strings so much stand out is contra productive in my opinion. It would be much smarter to focus on emphasizing the important aspects of your code rather than over-highlighting strings.

Well... nature works by killing what's bad (extinction) and not simply duplicating what's good (say, cloning). Removing errors improves the final product, copying what seems to be better at a given point in time limits the possibilities and eventually leads to disaster.
Why aren't developers interested in Ada?
If you have a service for the tech-savy audience this shouldn't be a dealbreaker - actually it may be more exotic/interesting to some.

If you want to cater to a broader audience - a .com may be better.
Secure File Upload in PHP  Web Applications
If by no real difference you mean that one is a top level domain extension and the other is second level intended for personal sites, yes.. you're right.

I'm UK based - I'm more likely to remember .me or .co.uk than I am .me.uk
But the first definition doesn't make much sense does it?

For example: if you're in good shape you can run up a flight of stairs without any effort. But is getting in shape laziness? Not by any sane definition.

I'm sure you can think of a dozen other analogies, but they all illustrate the same thing: educating yourself, improving your tools, getting in shape are not laziness but the opposite.

And I think that's what original author meant. There is conflict between the definitions, and only the second definition indicates laziness.
Long term laziness and short term laziness aren't the same thing. Good programmers are willing to sacrifice in the short term (work really hard) to be lazy in the long term (have the computer work really hard for them). Like learning Emacs or VIM - you work hard in the short term to work less in the long term. Like almost all things in life, having a long term view of things makes short term sacrifices seem less painful.
"No respect for work and real estate or the value of a good pair of cufflinks... But now, in the cold glare of a recession, everything looks different: We've got no house to lose, no career to dash, no school-aged children in need of pricey Wii gaming systems."

Author makes some big leaps. He doesn't think that having high work ethic is a virtue regardless of what work he's doing... and he follows through with the logical non-materialism... and then, he's lucky he doesn't have kids, because you have to buy toys for your kids?

I think he was trying to drive home that he's a nonconformist, and nonconformity is looking a lot better right now than it did two years ago. Very true - but you don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
People who say Good programmers are lazy are obviously using the word in a different context than what the author of this article is talking about. She even mentions this.

She then proceeds to say that it's a "cry for attention", like a skinny girl calling herself fat. It is not, it is an honest statement, and frankly the meaning of it isn't far from the classical definition of laziness.

You know why I write shell scripts? It's not because I'm concerned about clarity, or modularity, it's because I don't want to type "dhcpcd -k wlan0 && iwconfig wlan0 essid $ESSID && dhcpcd wlan0" more than once. This is why people have made things like paste, or abbrevs.

When I'm writing application code, sure I'll be more concerned with clarity, modularity, efficiency, and the rest of it than I am when I'm basically pasting some command commands into a script - but a good bit of the abstraction that I do in application code also stems out of laziness. I just don't want to type that shit in again, if only a little bit of it would change. Laziness is one tool I use to discover abstractions worth having.

Sure, copy-and-paste works too - but that's only laziness in the short-term, and often generates an assload of work in the long-term. Most people who have been writing code for any length of time know this.

I'm lazy for the long-haul.

She's correct that simplicity and elegance are hard, and that striving for them is not lazy. I can tell you that some of the repetition-saving abstractions I have made before are neither simple nor elegant, and didn't take much striving.

I don't think that anyone ever claimed that good programmers are just lazy. Laziness without that strive for simplicity/elegance/clarity leads to hard to maintain code. However, I have yet to meet a coder that I had any respect for that didn't twitch and the prospect of having to perform the same task on a computer more than twice though - and that's because that means it could be automated, and they "didn't want to have to do that shit over and over", not because there was necessarily a beautiful abstraction to be found there.

But uh, yeah. That probably sounded a lot harsher than I intended it to. I think I should get some sleep now.
Heck, it is only because my wife has a career, and a steady job, that I've been able to spend time exploring startup opportunities. I can do my work anywhere as long as there is a decent internet connection.
Can you elaborate? What is their systemic hiring problem? What are some of the deep organizational problems? What was the original model and why doesn't it scale?

I suspect some of these might be obvious to people close to Google but I'm intensely curious.
That's me right now. I am where I am as it is where my girlfriend needs to be to do her studies, but it is not the best place for me career wise. I can still earn a reasonable salary with a reasonable company, but I am only here as she can go nowhere else without losing alot.

Still, I do not seem to be too saddened by this so I guess I do not 'invest much of my personality' in my career.
8. Stop reading, start writing.

No. How about "8. Stop writing, start thinking." Plan a little bit before you start smashing out code.

Also, regarding number 5, go read the Plan 9 source for insight into clean style and tight code: http://csplan9.rit.edu/magic/webls?dir=/sys/
What he's actually claiming is that Yahoo! should buy MSN, so that MSN gets the benefit of Yahoo!'s alleged knowledge of how to make money online, and Yahoo! gets the benefit of having MS as a significant minority owner, which supposedly would stop them doing silly things that, er, stop them making money online. The whole thing seems to depend on two contradictory ideas about the relative cluefulness of Yahoo! and MS.

The nearest I can come to making sense of this is: Cringely thinks that Yahoo! understand how to make money by doing business online, but that the management of Yahoo! doesn't really care whether they make money or not and therefore doesn't bother to do the right things rather than the wrong things. In that case, having MS as a substantial shareholder might enable MS to pressure Yahoo! into trying to make money. But this strikes me as very silly indeed.

Anyway. Can some kind person with the necessary awesome powers please change the HN title to "Yahoo should buy MSN"?