skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think we're arguing about anything substantive. For the record, I shave my neck every day. I also have no problem with thinking of IP as the new Ethernet.

By "layering violation" I really meant "layering" in a systems rather than a protocol sense. For example, it'd be a "layering violation" in this sense if your OS had a system call print_powerpoint_document(2).
I have no problem with Canonical trying to get income from advertising/search/partnerships, and I would like to see Ubuntu on an even keel financially, but the privacy implications are significant here.
Another link in the article pointed to Topomapper which had the best map, in my opinion - an old Yahoo! map. (If you also want to find Atri, it's on the OSM and Bing maps).

http://www.topomapper.com/index.html?lat=24.87709&lon=85...
Rethinking Sleep
The verb "calling" is a great example of how new meanings can overtake old ones to the point that what used to sound faddish and trendy becomes normal and accepted. "Calling" was a thing you did prior to the telephone, but you wouldn't just "call someone". You'd call on someone, or make a call, both of which now sound relatively formal and stiff.
s/Your home/Your average home/
What sort of deals have you done with them? I'm sure I'm not the only one curious.
I've been trying to learn Objective C and make iOS Apps, where did you learn? Everything I've tried so far has been really, really boring or outdated.
If I live in Manhattan and extensively use Maps for public transport info, is it true that feature no longer exists?

If so, I'm going to wait before upgrading to iOS 6. Widespread blunder like this does so much to hurt the Apple brand especially in light of an ambitious competitor like Samsung. Apple should realize that even its biggest fan boys will begin rethinking if you cripple basic parts of their product repeatedly. There will come an unforced blunder that couldn't be fixed by an update or use of a cover.

I've been an iPhone user for years but am seriously considering a move to S3 after coming across a few use cases that make me hate Apple.

Basically the trend I am beginning to see is that if you are making enterprise specific apps, sooner or later you come across a basic and intentional iOS limitation that makes you hit your head against the wall.
Can't do that without capabilities. Apple clearly has tremendous hardware capabilities and to give that up would be inane.
> a tad much and a waste of system resources

Not to mention rather obvious privacy issues.
Okay but it doesn't change my point: better use apt-get.
With the important difference that a truly independent reimplementation is not covered.

It also provides no recourse against third parties. What if someone reverse engineers the design from one of Samsung's products? This is not theoretical--there's a major Chinese networking company that used to copy the designs of a major US networking company down to the silk screening. It also prevents ARM from publishing details in trade journals and forces them to keep documentation and designs under lock and key. It makes industrial espionage tremendously more valuable. Sub licensing, transferability, etc, become a huge hassle.

Is this US networking company you speak of still profitable? Looks like ARM are fairly heavy-handed with defending their designs at the moment, so you'll forgive me being skeptical of patents encouraging the sharing of IP: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4042770/Student-s-AR...
The gateway between your crappy network and the Internet is on the Internet. A node on your crappy network, however, is on your crappy network.

(What's unfortunate is that IPv6 seems destined to become no more than one of these "crappy networks.")
iPhone 5 Benchmarked: The Fastest Smartphone in the Land
Apparently, the iPhone 5 seems to be the fastest smartphone guys at PCMag have ever tested.
I hope Apple understands that when it comes to a physical computing device, people (including me) care about look and feel (stylishness) a lot more than voice recognition.
I scrambled and wired up DNS for gittip.org, but not soon enough apparently, sorry. :^/

Oh well, ready for next time. :^)
It's a silly article. What's really being exposed is just how far ahead Google is with map data aggregation. It's suddenly very apparent that after Search, Google's got great map data.
I don't mean it as an attack, but it really reflects badly on the movement when people talk about "the spirit of Open Source" that way.

Historically, the "spirit" of Open Source (or the motivation to part from the FSF, which was the birth of the movement) was to present whatever was happening in the Free Software world to businesses precisely with the goal of attracting money. Loads of it.

Open Source is a method of work. It says, my value is not in my source code, I'm not afraid of sharing it with the world (as a matter of facts, I get more value by doing so). But it is furthermost a methodology aimed at helping businesses make more money. (Or else all this commotion would've never happened in the late 90s and we'd all be still calling it Free Software).

Canonical is a business. It needs money and if you've ever owned a business, or worked in a financial position in one, you know there's no such thing as "getting enough". If they don't make money, they'll die and the project might terminate. Take it or leave it.

That being said, I chose to leave it a while back, for very similar reasons (I moved to Debian which was familiar and more ... free). But I cannot say I'm surprised they do similar deals, and cannot stand by when people accuse them of ... not following some convenient definition that was never there to begin with.
Yes, if you value money at log($) like microeconomics says you should, then you should start something less risky than a startup.

As Charlie Stross's essay (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/09/on-the-d...) points out, there's another level. Elon Musk might get to retire on Mars. Bill Gates will probably cure malaria and several other big world problems.

So if your goal in life is not just having enough food & toys but changing the world, the big money comes in handy.
IPhone 5 Jailbroken According To iOS Hacker chpwn
PG's definition of startup is self selecting. Increasingly, startups do not need VCs nor Angels as the cloud (Azure, outsourcing what used to be IT for pennies, etc.) quashes the cost curve of startups.

This is pushing angels, seed round, and VCs farther and farther up the enterprise growth curve where costs become something that the founders can't bootstrap. For virtual enterprises, this is leaving them with a smaller and smaller set of companies as software eats all of the historical infrastructure costs.

Basically, he is defining startup in a way that YC is a necessary component - but increasingly, it isn't.
I wish it were more common. It limits your risk (getting stuck in a bad place) as much as it limits theirs (getting stuck with a bad employee).

The criticism I've heard of this approach is that someone who already has a job is unlikely to quit just in order to try a new thing out for a couple weeks, or to take two weeks off for that purpose. But if you have the two weeks, are going to be paid, and think you might like to work there, why wouldn't you want to do this?
Yup, no more public transport info. Until Google releases their iOS Maps app (assuming they do), the best solution seems to be loading up maps.google.com in Safari instead.
Wow. TomTom needs to look at this http://www.flickr.com/photos/78178692@N00/8006546029/sizes/o... and then rethink what they mean by map data.
For reference, here's the Bitcoin ticket:

https://github.com/whit537/www.gittip.com/issues/14

And here's the non-US payouts ticket:

https://github.com/whit537/www.gittip.com/issues/126
Thank you, Stavros.
While the headline is inflammatory, the article itself is not so bad. He makes some valid observation about how the market and Apple's position in it have changed, making it harder for them to be the new and innovative player as they have more and more to lose by taking risky moves.

In general however I agree with your sentiment.
> the voice in your head

I recommend "The Writer's Voice" (Alvarez) for more on this.
You should have your fulltime offer terms in writing for when they do hire you full-time. You don't want to be surprised, especially if you're leaving another job.
The kid's doing what he believes in. Stop the hate, man.
Moreover if you read the original article[1], he was allowed to be working out of AOL.

[1]: http://news.cnet.com/8301-32973_3-57440513-296/meet-the-tire...
Right, but particle effects and all the other scenery look better in motion too...
You're right though. It would certainly be better to show only the edges of it so it looks less like a pattern.
At any inflection point in the business, you have lots of options: you can sell, raise more money, raise more and cash out some shares, you can quit, you can make yourself chairman and have your cofoudner run it, you can do nothing and grow it organically, etc., etc.

Ah, but this is only true for bootstrapped companies or very early stage companies with little funding. Once you raise a Series A or B, your options are basically to grow as fast as possible or get fired and replaced by someone who will.

And this narrowing of options and loss of control is another thing I dislike. A successful bootstrapped company can always go raise money at great terms. But once you do, you can't go back.

To be clear, I'm not blaming investors or saying anyone is being cheated. But I do think that many young, naive, overly-optimistic people end up taking a path they wouldn't take if they saw the world a little more realistically. It's the same situation with early startup employees, who almost always get shafted.
Make your Rails development faster with Ruby-perf and Zeus
It's a pretty safe bet that the money is related to django as the last time i looked nearly all of the activity on gittip was django related.

And if you're going to define "open company" I think I'd shoot a little higher than open source project + authorized_keys
Apple will never be able to match Google in Maps. Here's why:

Apple does not have any technical depth.

I am a former Apple employee. Apple can't do technically hard problems that require a multi-person effort. Yes, Apple can and has done good Hardware. But hardware is not technically hard - its an art. Apple is good at Art. Google is good at science.
That's not gaming. If a movie is rated 4 stars on IMDB but you think it should be 5, you won't rate it 5, you'll rate it 10 because that pulls the average closer to 5. Likewise, if it's rated 5 stars but you think it should be 4, you might rate it 1.
I was planning on buying the new iphone but after upgrading my iPhone 4 to iOS I'm having second thoughts. I might just go and get the S3 or wait for Note2 to come out.
And for a good reason. I find the noise to signal ratio of these articles relatively high and I think many would like to see less of them.
Chances are infinitesimally small you can fix it. If you start to maintain it, you'll be the one who gets the blame if it doesn't work. In an absolute best-case scenario you get to rewrite it whole in your spare time, while trying to keep the legacy code together with ducttape and chickenwire on your employers time.

Get out, get out now. They don't need a maintenance programmer, they need a ninja programmer, the liquidator kind.
Do it on your second venture, especially since now you're talking about levels of wealth that offer odds of first-time-founder success far, far below 1%.
Jeesh, we get it, iOS 6 maps are the worst thing since Super AIDS.
They probably have, but that doesn't mean they don't have a lot of great contributions ahead.

The last decade at Apple has been a once-in-a-century run; we might all die before seeing another company pull something like that off again.
Yeah, but what happens when your phone is google glass (could happen in 2 years). Style would end up be just the frame you can buy anywhere.
> Just realized that I sometimes type keywords to find local files matching filenames and content that's personal in nature. Does this mean all those keywords are sent to Amazon and perhaps data mined to show personalized results?

That would have been fine for me if Amazon din't make it really obvious. Every damn time I search for something while signed in I am sure to receive an email from them the very next day suggesting similar items. It was even wierder when I watched a documentary about sex on xbox's amazon video and the next day I received an email talking about my "interest". So now I have to do all my lookups in incognito mode and will only sign in when I am ready to make the purchase.
> Guess who gets to see the pictures from the house party and who doesn't?

Google gets to see all of them. The proper way to compartmentalize is to actually compartmentalize.
What was it running before iOS?
Part of this is the same old rehashed-to-death "would Jobs allow a misstep" revisionism, but the question about protecting the current success is a more interesting one I haven't seen elsewhere. Apple, from '97 until now, hasn't been afraid to cannibalize their old mainstay products -- and that's where I think the absence of Jobs (and just the sheer size of the iOS success) might change things.
I live at a station without automated barriers. If I don't tap in or tap out I get charged the maximum fare automatically. This is a good enough reason to tap correctly.
> Has any company in history been so large and yet so reliant on a single product?

Google? (AdWords)
"Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion." Oscar Wilde
Aren't there 100 transit apps for Manhatten? Are they not as good as Google's?
Well, I, for one, still have an iPhone 4. Never updated on 4s (or 5). Never had any reception problems that I can recall (i.e not getting through a call).

It might be that I get a good signal where I live and work (and in 2 different countries, neither of which is the states). So, YMMV.

But, I do remember iPhone 4 owners actually reporting LESS dropped calls than iPhone 3GS:

"iPhone 4 owners are reporting fewer dropped calls than iPhone 3GS owners":

http://www.tuaw.com/2010/08/04/report-iphone-4-owners-report...

And after the media noise blew out, there weren't any complains about it --as if the forums and people forgot all about it--, just people using their phones.

And AT&T could be to blame, not the iPhone. For:

""According to a March study by ChangeWave Research, AT&T is the reason the iPhone drops calls. Users of the Verizon iPhone 4 reported a 1.8% dropped-call rate, the same rate as users of other Verizon phones. Users of the AT&T iPhone 4 reported a 4.8% dropped-call rate, 2.7 times the rate of Verizon iPhone users.""
The naturals form a monoid, not a group. Or am I completely misinterpreting you?
good catch, I missed the 6
I agree - the article was basically a cheap trolling shot at Apple. It ignored a lot of history (remember the initial release of OS X?) and overplayed the map problems. FWIW, iOS6 Maps work great for me, and I live on a private rural road. Apple has always incrementally improved its products, and Maps will be no exception.
Wow - did you work at the Apple Store, because that comment is very short sighted. In terms of technical problems that require multi-person effort, OSX is a testament to that, as is Motion, Logic Pro and Compressor. All those are highly technical pieces of software that lead their respective markets. To say Apple can't "do" technically hard problems is extremely short sighted.
You said: "In general it's not good to use that command because it can leave your system in an inconsistent state -- when there are packages which depend on the package you just removed."

I demonstrated that dpkg will not remove packages with dependencies. Furthermore some packages are so crucial (ie: essential) that dpkg does not even bother checking dependencies before erroring out.

How does that not change your point?
Companies can and do return money to investors through stock buybacks. To first order, it is the same as a dividend, except that only the investors who want money get it.
That's a poor example, because "search engine" is the kind of business that is necessarily out on the far end of the scale.

If we start travelling down the continuum, next you'd hit something like "an app that makes lawyers more effective", then further than that "an app that makes patent lawyers more effective", etc. At each increment, you trade off market size and ultimate growth potential for less competition and lower marketing costs. Each of these niches can still be extremely lucrative (from the perspective of the entrepreneur, possibly less from the perspective of a VC who wants to make 100x).

What's more, individual businesses leap up the continuum all the time. The first McDonalds was a barbershop-like business.
>While the headline is inflammatory, the article itself is not so bad. He makes some valid observation about how the market and Apple's position in it have changed, making it harder for them to be the new and innovative player as they have more and more to lose by taking risky moves.

They have made the EXACT same arguments since after the iPod.

The Zune was to kill it, cheap alternatives were going to kill it. Didn't happen.

Then they put out the iPhone.

It was doomed, they said at first, then Android was going to kill it, then the Antennagate, then the 4S was not impressive enough, etc.

Then the iPad came out, and at first it was "just a large iPhone" and it will fail, then it was gonna be killed by Windows tablets, then by Android tablets, then the Kindle Fire.

They never stop in the same bloody vein. How about instead of BS predictions they do some REPORTING?

I.e tell how Apple does based on numbers, and report it when they --inevitable at some point-- start losing out? Why do they feel they have to play prophets?
Businesses that are good for society need to grow quickly to actually reach a large fraction of society. To get from 100 users to 100 million, you need to double 20 times. If you only double once a year, it'll take 20 years before you benefit a lot of people. If you can double 5 times a year, you benefit a lot of people after only 4 years.

So no, rapid growth isn't just something investors like. If your product helps people, you want it to help the most people possible as soon as possible.
This article is, for me, more proof of a general phenomenon that's happening recently - startups are no longer considered the best vehicle for hackers to become wealthy.

Maybe it's just my own history and confirmation bias speaking here (recently switched from startups to a Consulting business). But lately, the whole "bootstrap" movement is getting much more popular around here. More and more, I'm seeing articles and comments from tptacek, patio11, and others talking about how programmers could make vastly more money, especially by doing freelancing. I think the message is starting to sink in - the kind of people who read this site can start very profitable businesses, make loads of cash, and do this without the high risk of startups. No chance of a working 5 years and then striking a goldmine of an exit, but much higher chance of working 5 years and putting aside large amounts of money.

This pg article is a great one, and a very honest one too. To me it reflects the changing times, and the changing understanding of what a startup means. No longer, like in previous articles on wealth, is pg very clearly advocating that all hackers should be starting startups. This essay, to me, reads as a much more precise explanation of what someone can expect if they start a startup. And it makes it much clearer when people should not start a startup.
Yahoo CEO Zeroes in on Search, While Her Ad Team Eyes Tech Upgrade Options
That's just your opinion. I'm ex-Apple, and disagree.
Modularity, compositions, and reusable/flexible kernels are strong design components. "Layers" are a straitjacket. I'm automatically suspicious of designers who invoke them, because they tend to have more to do with shutting down discussions than they do with designing. That's all.
Well, you also have an extra risk, namely that they decide not to hire you after those 2 weeks. So it depends on how much they pay for that period. They should be paying freelancer rates, to account for the overhead (taxes, health insurance, etc) and that extra risk.
> Another example: the late Steve Jobs. Doubtless he received the best medical care that money could buy—but it wasn't enough to save him because a cure for his pancreatic cancer didn't exist at any price.

I'm not a Jobsologist, but didn't he eschew traditional treatment in favour of alternative medicine for something like 9 months?
But by the same argument, cough medicine spending is by virtually everyone for their own direct benefit: that 500m targets a vastly greater number of people in the UK than malaria spending.
This is likely a direct symptom of the code being developed by someone with very little to no experience in HTML forms.

Which implies, but does not prove, that there is a high likelihood that the password is stored in plain text somewhere in whatever persistent backing store is used for the site.
No: what's necessary is listening, both to complaints and feedback. Having a massive data sink doesn't help.
An impassioned plea to other Start-up founders to use automated tests
I believe it is pending approval.
I don't know that anyone would buy an iPhone Nano. There is such a thing as just being too small. See HP/Palm Veer.
I can't tell if you are just trolling or if you really mean to classify Eric Simons as a criminal?
It is beyond time for Ubuntu to quit pussyfooting around and partner with ASUS or some other competent hardware manufacturer* and sell Ubuntu-branded laptops on the Ubuntu website. The Linux desktop (in various incarnations) has been in "testing" for over 15 years. Shuttleworth created Canonical and hired designers and developers to put together a 1st-class desktop system. Time to double down. Try and get some real customers who acutally pay for things.

*No, Dell's half-assed shitty Ubuntu machines don't count.
Google News Turns 10
Dividing Founders' Equity
520ms was for the full dynamic version.

But we did have a snafu. The 'groovy' program seems to choose its JVM in an odd way, it was using Apple's 1.6 JVM despite 'java -version' returning the 1.7 JVM.

I fixed this by setting JAVA_HOME and now get ~300ms for the full dynamic version, 22ms for explicit types and 586ms for the @CompileStatic version.

I'm guessing my method of running this is not compatible with @CompileStatic given its results. Did you run this through groovyc and package it into a jar for your tests?

This is on a 2012 MBA with the i5 cpu btw.
Don't see any problem, as I have adblock installed.
I don't think apple has peaked but growth could be slowing. Like Google and Microsoft, there are many places where they can improve.

It looks like they rushed a few things. They are clearly under pressure from other competitors and they are sweating bullets trying to maintain an edge.

I think the worse positioned companies are the OEMs. Samsung, HTC, and Nokia do not control the software stack. Microsoft and Google are moving towards making their own hardware.

I think Samsung, HTC, and Nokia have peaked. Plain and simple.
If you're a big adveriser, yes. Otherwise, well maybe if you generate a lot of unpleasant buzz...
The 3D view mess-ups are fun to look at but are the most understandable and least unique to Apple. It's not hard to find messed up 3D in Google as well.