skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That helps, but what a socially-adept person is usually looking for is for you to make a statement that relates their answer back to yourself and then gives them an opportunity to follow up:

A: What is your major?
B: English
A: Oh, cool, I took an English course in college. Probably nowhere near as detailed
as your studies, but I enjoyed it.
B: Oh? Which course?
A: Science fiction.
B: Never took that one. Which books did you read?
A: A bunch of Heinlein, some Ursula LeGuin.
B: I never liked Heinlein - thought he was a sexist pig. I love LeGuin though.

The problem with asking a lot of questions is that there's unequal emotional investment between a question and an answer: the answerer is putting themselves out there a lot more than the questioner. (This is one reason why he who asks the questions controls the conversation.) If you're trying to build a relationship, this feels very awkward. Instead, the point of most conversations is to find & build a connection between the two people, one that lets both of them feel safe simply volunteering information and knowing that the other person is interested. By relating topics back to yourself, you a.) give both parties a chance to ask questions, and b.) show that you're in the same boat as them, and so they can feel free to open up to you.

Notice that conversations between close friends rarely have questions - they consist of people taking turns volunteering new information, often rather animatedly if they have good rapport with each other. Also look at Hacker News comment threads: people rarely ask direct questions, they just contribute additional information along the same lines as the original comment.
Here are some:

http://opendatastructures.org/
http://www.cgal.org/
http://pigale.sourceforge.net/
http://www.algorithmic-solutions.com/leda/index.htm

Oh yeah, and this:

http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html

It's not algorithms but it's amazingly useful, I reference it a few times a year. I want a copy of http://www.hackersdelight.org/ because I hear it's even better.
There are two issues with this article. One, writing software is not like producing things on an assembly line. This is why we have come to realize that CMM is not effective, and Agile/Lean works.....Writing software is analogous to designing a product, not mass producing it.

In the same way that the economy went through a transition during the beginning of the industrial revolution, the same is happening today.......granted I would love to see things move towards a resource based economy ala the zeitgeist movement.....but that is another discussion.
To anyone who favours a free society, your argument may not sound crazy, but it sounds dangerous. Most apologetics written on behalf of a surveillance state seem to ignore the unsavoury elements of the government itself.

Instead of becoming more transparent, governments are wanting to keep more secrets, while demanding that more of yours be exposed. Governments usually do have something to hide, ranging from corruption to murderous adventures abroad (sometimes not even abroad). This is not an institution that I trust to monitor me for "my own good".
GitHub outage is now over.
You have to be careful of how you sample for the A/B testing. Even if they properly chose a set of users to get Feather, and a set of users to stay at baseline, their results would STILL get skewed, since the remote users who now got Feather would view disproportianately more videos than the baseline, pushing up average load time in the experimental group anyway.
My conspiracy theorist side tells me that you don't need another War World to "clean up" the world, because eventually, most will find themselves out of job due to the raise of machines. They will be protesting on the streets, but when you broke with steam pipe in the hand its hard to protest against heavily armed LEs.
Which one are you doing with your comment? ;-)

I didn't get that impression - I got the impression that both CEOs are trying to form a model in their heads. But the developer CEO is building his from the bottom up - he seeks information on the details, and then will let general principles coalesce out of that data. The sales CEO is building his from the top down - he wants to understand the gestalt of the conversation first, and then he'll fill in the details later.

Computers teach us to pay attention to the details first, because they're very unforgiving if we get them wrong, while people will often fill them in for us if we provide a compelling-enough top-level vision. I find I thought much like the sales CEO up through college, while I'm much more inclined now to trust my intuition to produce a top-level picture once I've assembled a bunch of disparate facts.
Abstraction is a good thing, but what I'm talking about here is object-oriented programming. An "object" is something of which one has incomplete knowledge. OOP is, I would argue, about managing incomplete knowledge, on the (correct) assumption that if systems get large, it will be inevitable that people don't understand all the details of what they're working with.

Good abstractions deliver a lot of value. Files and sockets, for example, should be treated as objects, because the client should (usually) be agnostic of how the things are actually implemented. So OOP isn't all bad.

What's messy is a paradigm that gives an unbounded right to inject complexity. Programmers don't have enough autonomy in most corporations to do things right, so the result in most cases of Brownian-motion requirements is an increasingly gnarly pile of hacks. What Haskell does well (being both functional and statically-typed) is punish that style of development while it occurs, making it so that the kludge isn't always the path of least resistance.
That's not 100% true. It's only really the case in patent protected medicines.

New drugs undergo testing, to get FDA approval. New surgical treatments don't. New (and old) surgical treatments and old drugs aren't lucrative enough to warrant real testing. Surgeons will claim it's for ethical reasons, or because they just know better, or that they are artists who can't be constrained by the laws of statistics, but it's simply a lack of regulations and / or incentives.
The issues these optimizations pose for the workflows of the whole team and the maintenance requirements are the blocker. You must be able to convince people that so much of their time are worth the gains (the same people that use high level languages and JS frameworks they may not need very much of for productivity boosts).
Are you sincerely arguing that, since this author experienced an HFR showing with little laughter and a non-HFR showing with plenty of laughter, this is valid evidence that the HFR format is less engaging on average? If so, that is completely preposterous, and I'm curious how you explain that both of my audiences laughed? Perhaps I'm the outlier, and nitrous oxide was pumped into my HFR showing?
You are absolutely right, and that's the point of my post. Programming is too hard. We can't make all these people become programmers. But a lot of what we are doing as programmers shouldn't really require programming.

When I'm building a website for a small business, I'm not breaking any new technical ground. They need an inventory database, product news, search, an ordering and fulfillment system. At the moment, there are a bunch of systems that promise to fill that niche, but they usually still need somebody who knows HTML and CSS if they're going to customize them to any degree. Why is that? There should be WYSIWYG editors for these things. You should be able to drag-and-drop drupal modules into place in an editor, not glue them together with configs and code.

Your friend shouldn't have to know about Ruby or Rails or Agile development. The fundamentals of computer science are as relevant to building a low-traffic website as the fundamentals of chemistry are to baking a cake. Sure, you do better if you know them, but 99% of people can get by just fine by trial and error.

What the people who have CS degrees should be doing is not building websites; they should be building the WYSIWYG editors.
Funny blaming jQuery (one of the leanest frameworks, striving to only fix the browser, not provide app architecture). Disable that and not much of the web will work. Remember these same jQuery-ites want to ignore IE6 and 7 which is what the people he describes from around the world are way more likely to be using.
> "GNU might get you something roughly comparable to BSD/Solaris/etc, but without the Linux kernel there is really no technical reason to prefer GNU to BSD/Solaris/etc."

This might make sense... except that it is popular to use GNU userlands on non-Linux systems, and that has always been the case. Hell, what do you think people were doing before Linux existed? So really it makes zero sense whatsoever.

Gnome without a userland, GNU or otherwise, is completely and utterly pointless. Who would use such a thing? GNU without Linux is business as usual.
Not sure how to interpret "it doesn't have to be Donut C"...
I'm a big fan of https://www.google.com/flights/explorer, since it gives me an immediate picture of how far in advance I should book to get the lowest prices.
Eh, the dating bans are because fans expect their idols to be "pure" and "virgin"; the thought of them being with a man ruins that image and can even spark outrage from the community (mostly consisting of very obsessed 20s-to-middle-aged men.) It's not so much about being socially conservative as it is ruining a bunch of guys' fantasies because women should be "pure."

And a lot of K-pop songs have to do with relationships— just not actual ones.
"Turning off your brain" is a very condescending way to refer to people with skills you don't possess or understand.

(To borrow terminology from "Thinking, Fast and Slow"):

In my experience, more socially-inclined people are able to rely easily on System 1 -- whereas the more awkward ("engineer" types) attempt to engage System 2 continually, and thus the experience of talking with them often feels effortful and lacking in "flow."

EDIT: A quick primer, from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow#Two_sys...)

"In the book's first section, Kahneman describes the two different ways the brain forms thoughts:

System 1: Fast, automatic, frequent, emotional, stereotypic, subconscious

System 2: Slow, effortful, infrequent, logical, calculating, conscious"
People are not taking into account "browser crunch" of parsing and executing all of this javascript required to defer loading to ajax. This is painful to phones, but heavyweight frameworks like jQuery mobile are still used, even though we know just parsing jQuery can take phone several seconds. It could be quite a while before your $.ajaxes will fire.
1. How do you monetize if the transactions are free?

2. I can't access any of the links. They all prompt me for a browser authentication. It looks like your HTTPS connection is not configured properly.
It's okay, but it's no Hipmunk.
The moderators can and do change titles, and it is oft-remarked that they tend to do it from useful towards useless, rather than vice-versa, for unclear reasons.
Non-lethality of guns by country
You couldn't be more right. We're still working with such low level tools it's embarrassing. The worst part is, I think this is because of a sort of job security mentality. We had real working RAD tools in the 90's (NeXT/Apple enterprise object frameworks). Systems with databases built into the OS in the 80's (AS/400), and so on. But we've abandoned all of those.

>I think would be obvious to more programmers if it weren't for the HTML+CSS tradition that has been built up and become ensconced.

HTML/CSS and in fact the entire web stack is a horrible monster. It's essentially programming in assembly to put dialogs up on a screen. The only real saving grace is reach.

Here's an experiment, put up a modal dialog up in your GUI. One line. Now do the same in a webpage.
Agree on eBay. Any thoughts on Amazon?
I like the concept of the investors having some skin in the game. One way might be to have them invest a lot -- and have a lot to lose, in addition to having a lot to gain from a smaller valuation. I also wonder if a smaller valuation makes a company more hungry and more driven to innovate and work harder than a company that knows they can throw money at a problem and 'solve it'.
This is exactly the point that I was trying to make: when we write here, its in public. We have the expectation to be judged for what we say. Could you imagine if you had that feeling writing to your friends in private?
http://mobile.theverge.com/
I'm not so sure. I've been watching this since I found out about it a few days ago and it seems like it goes both ways.

I took a few people who were numbers 15 or 16 on my list (didn't automatically show up on chat list) and went out of my way to like a few of their photos. They all started showing up on chat even when they weren't online.
:-) the original and mirror repos would still be available, even if the mirrors would be outdated since the mirror service failure ?
Housing is politically saturated. There's plenty of room and technology to vastly increase the number of housing units and lower cost in desirable cities, but current zoning and planning regulations make them illegal to build.
I can change them trivially in KDE, so there is no need to stick the commands in .xinitrc. FYI, allowing mouse acceleration threshold to be set to 0 was added in year 2003 in KDE:

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31189

Anyway, I certainly agree with your opinion. It is just that I think E17 is more than a window manager, and I would place it in the same category as XFCE.
In several places like the top of 9990 at the canyons they have "You Will Die" signs http://parkcity.tv/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Dutch-Draw-1-1.... Jackson Hole's Sign: http://gallery.uberu.com/main.php?g2_itemId=4180&g2_imag.... If you can't understand what these signs say, I don't know what other help you can get. Usually there are lots of other scary "Experts Only" signs on the lifts that get you to these points. They scare the cr*p outta me and I've been boarding for 18 years. Also, as the article says, it's national forest on the other side of those rope lines. It's not illegal in many places to cross.
I don't use it because, last I checked, it's unable to handle what I think of as basic corner cases, like booking a roundtrip going out from one airport in a metro area and coming back to a different one.
The state of low-level system programming
Are you aware of the fact that normal 24 FPS film projection already has a shutter rate of two or three times the film's frame rate? Obviously, it still displays only one new frame every 24th if a second, but the flickering is much less noticeable at 48 Hz than 24 Hz. This fact makes me extremely skeptical of your claim of visual excitation or exhaustion.
1972 Patent Case for BCD
This is a patent case I read for a school assignment. If you have the mental energy to finish it, you can see a forthright and reasonable verdict against the patent, a stark contrast to the nonsense that gets put through today.
I have a todo.txt on my google drive.
If this is in fact how they're measuring...I was going to make this post a long rant about how ridiculous it is to measure it in that way, but then I realized that people do sometimes measure probabilities by quoting the win-to-loss or loss-to-win ratio.

This is called "odds" and frequently used in gambling. Usually, though, someone says "4.7 to 1" or "47 to 10" (abbreviated 4.7:1 or 47:10) instead of 470%. Usually the larger number is stated first, and the direction is usually indicated by a word like "favorite" or "longshot." So one would say "Errors seem to be a 4.7:1 favorite today."

It's slightly complicated by the fact that odds can measure one of several things:

A. A probability ratio ("Red" is a slight underdog in the game of roulette [1]; the odds against hitting it are 20:18 since there are 20 non-red spaces and 18 red spaces)

B. A payout ratio ("Red" pays 1:1, meaning the prize if you win this bet is equal to the amount of the bet)

C. The current payout of a paramutuel pool [2]

Odds are seldom used outside of a gambling context.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roulette

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parimutuel_betting
Is there not a demand side to the equation? So costs are reduced essentially to zero. Who's buying?
There's at least one HN reader (I believe it's actually called "Hacker News Reader") that allows you to view the text-only cached version of article URLs. Definitely worth it if you're data-starved.
A place that has reviews of unpopular products?
I'm looking for a linux developer laptop. I know plenty of people here have had this issue before. System76 seems appealing because

1) I can customize their machines

2) their costs are reasonable. 16gb + i7 + SSD + 1900x1080 resolution is about 1100$.

3) they support linux

4) representatives frequent the ubuntu forum, which gives me the impression that there is some customer support.

Their machines don't appear on amazon, newegg, or notebook review though. I have no way to judge the quality of their products. I don't care for random stories and reviews online. I want statistics: how many people were sold a failing machine? What percentage of machines died after the first year?

Right now, as far as I know, there is no place which offers me this kind of information (or at the very least, something similar to the amazon/ newegg system).
I really hope to see Go and Rust move in the direction of pluggable runtimes that can be embedded into a C host program. Currently, both runtimes require being seated as the main entry-point of the program to function. Both projects also have issues in their bug trackers to rectify this:

Rust issue: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/issues/3608

Go issue: http://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=2790

I wonder who will get there first.
I read this case for a school assignment. If you have the mental energy to finish it, you can see a forthright and reasonable case against the patent, a stark contrast to the nonsense that gets approved today.
http://dx.com/p/tp-link-tl-wr703n-mini-3g-2-4ghz-802-11b-g-n...

I usually get them 10 at a time. Looks like the price went up to $26 :(

You can always try your luck on ebay. Looks like lots of vendors are shipping new ones from HK.

The '02 is just the '03 without a USB port and less flash. It can't fit OpenWRT.

Edit: Ahh. Looks like they superseded it with the TL-MR3020. The bad news is, it costs $33. The good news is that it has a software readable 3 position switch on the side that does seem supported under OpenWRT.

http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-Portable-802-11n-Wireless-TL-M...

http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/tp-link/tl-mr3020
It does that now - click on the button that says 'round trip' and choose 'multi city'.
Shame you are down voted for this because you have an important point, our human contradiction.

If government lets something bad happen because of privacy issues, we the people complain, and can vote them out. If the government pull out all the stops, including trampling all over privacy, then we don't like that either, and can vote them out. So what is a government supposed to do?

The next problem is that we the people say its fine for our governments to abuse the rights of "them". We don't mean "us". But government has to get that distinction right, and to do so, as best as they can, they have to cut through privacy and decency. That's fine for "them", but not "us". If its some Arab in gitmo, meh, whatever. If its some western god fearing christian, hmmm, that can produce a different response. If its me or my friend, we can get very upset about it.

In the end, people have to make a real grown up choice. We need to decide how far this goes, and accept the risk that goes with that. That risk works two ways. Risk of say a terror attack and risk of our own governments increasingly ruining our lives. And this is a cold numbers game. Think about it, are you or me more likely to be killed in something like 9/11 against perhaps daily government interference.

In many ways this is our fault. We expect too much and are not prepared to accept the risk or responsibility. Personally, I'd rather have my privacy and freedom, with a higher risk of being killed in a terror attack. I'd rather those who oppose those freedoms didn't win by making our society more like their ideal. If an attack happened and my government proved that it did everything possible, but privacy protection for us all got in the way, I personally would accept that. Its the price of freedom.

Mind you, them and us again. Of course Im calculating that the chances are I personally wont be involved in a terror attack, and the victims will just be another "them"......

Contradictions............
Happens everywhere. This sort of thing is exactly what is hurting (some would even say killing) the Australian retail sector. You can buy things on eBay from Hong Kong for far less than what you can buy it in shops here - because the shops have to go through several layers of distributors.

Even buying from the US can be drastically cheaper - I bought a professional condenser microphone, and even with $80 shipping, it was literally half the price of buying it in stores.

The retail industry is up in arms about it, and keep lobbying politicians to reduce the tax-free import threshold from $1000 (which will hardly make a difference), and saying it's the internet's fault - but all the Internet is doing is showing what BS the whole supply chain is.

If the shops could buy directly from the supplier, instead of buying from a distributor buying from a wholesaler buying from an importer buying from a US distributor, we wouldn't have this problem.
We started off with GitLab so we're kind of used to it. It provides the following powerful anti-features: it's both more polished and far easier to use than Phabricator, which encourages lots of useful but esoteric and BOFH-style development processes like forced test plans, test coverage analysis, and pre-commit code reviews that take time for people to get used to.

Basically we're looking to leverage some more of these over time as we find the time to invest in the learning curve, without throwing away our lovely, easy to use, already functional, and far more polished GitLab system.
"When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich." --Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Then you have the reason why you haven't received an answer - your question is framed (almost deliberately) to have no answer. Copyright does not exist "in an object". It _is_ a state-enforced statutory right that "exists" in a "work" whether that work is a movie, music, software, book, etc. The "physical medium" you refer to is merely one copy of the "work" that is copyrighted. The work itself is necessarily incorporeal - it is an intellectual creation of somebody, and lies beyond the mere physical expression. You can do whatever you want with the box or medium - you are entitled to do that, except to the extent that you are limited by protection of the "work" that is copyrighted.
YES!

If there isn't, I'd like to start one.

Ideally, I'd like the code to be under a very liberal license like MIT, or under public domain.

Anyone in?
> In most cases, if we just got a lot of stuff done, we'd have no need for an app, because the list of stuff to do would be rather short.

I find quite the opposite: The more things I do, and the more productive I am, the more rapidly things get added to my todo list. It's when I'm less productive that my todo lists stay short.

It's an interesting phenomenon that (at least my) todo lists are effective sticks for the carrot in that the size of the todo list scales with productive output.
No man, you're not unreasonable at all. I think the winner over the next 30 years will be a happy consolidation of web and local storage, let's hope HTML5 get's it right.