skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
NZ Government releases Broadband Investment Proposal
I'll give you $10 to suck my dick at gunpoint.
40% of patients in a 'vegetative state' are misdiagnosed
That didn't work for me (US store).
From the VC perspective, they're doing their job - getting a return on the investment. I agree it's disturbing, because ultimately it's a bubble, which is then followed by bust and so on... It makes for interesting times, though.
A couple months ago, Ricardo Galli - spanish hacker and creator of the open-source reddit-like "Meneame" - posted an explanation of his algorithm for doing that.

Original link: http://gallir.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/encontrando-patrones-...

Poorly translated by Google: http://translate.google.com.pe/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fgall...
Right, in this case client-side templating just moves to the server.

When JS processing isn't available on the client side, this same stack is moved to the server side. This way the same logical separation between UI and data is maintained.
Earth Hour 2009
No, you have to wait until midnight in your timezone.
Look, no Flash!
Why fill in the pool? Just turn it into a sub-garage room and market it to the buyer as a wine cellar or a "food riot panic room" :)
I have a cheap 24" Samsung with a TN screen. For a budget monitor used mainly for screenfuls of code on black terminal backgrounds, it's fine.
>So J. K. Rowling, who spent seven years developing her universe before she even began writing her first novel, who spend inordinate amounts of time developing her systems, her characters, her plot, the morals and concepts she focused on... once she finished it, that's yours? You own some sort of a right to it?

Jefferson had it right about copyright from the beginning. It's got to be a balance of incentives for the creators and good for the public. Yes, it's good to give artists incentives to create, but only so long as the public benefits. The original copyright limits years may have been a reasonable balance.

Current law is insane. Extending Walt Disney's copyrights even further past his death don't retroactively increase his incentive to create goods for the public. On the contrary, they deprive the public of what he has already created. Similarly, Rowling is already a billionaire. She has been well compensated for her work. There is no moral hazard in letting the public use it. The current system actually gives her less incentive to create anything new, because she (and her estate) have been granted a monopoly on her work until far past her death.
hm. thanks. that looks pretty darn nice.
I wonder how many bad customer services experiences it'll take to train their Bayesian models.
They're not the only investors. They've taken outside funding (only because they wanted to, not because they had to). Either way, I doubt their investors care much because 37s wouldn't have taken them on if they didn't have compatible values.
"The concordance between identical twins, however, is rarely 100 percent - their IQ scores, for example, tend to be around 70 percent similar, compared with around 50per cent for non-identical pairs. By definition, inheritance therefore cannot be the only factor involved: if it were, identical twins would always turn out the same."

Surely "percent" is the wrong term here, which is puzzling, because why wouldn't the author of the submitted article, who is also the author of the book the article is based on, use the correct term?
Google is slowly losing the PR war. It starts with the geeks. It may take another two years to propagate to the general public. By then, billions of dollars in ads (think Microsoft) can't undo the damage.

I'm watching to see if they are smarter than MS.
What would be a nice Google April Fool's joke?
What would be a nice Google April Fool's joke?
There's 3 posts showing the evolution of the debacle, hence the root link. Apologies :)
After 5 years, Gmail goes back into Alpha.
I too have gone down the path of bootstrapping a startup while unemployed by using savings. Even though the prospect is probably very exciting, I would caution you to continue to look for another job. It is unlikely you will complete development and be generating an income from your startup in less than three months. You will then find yourself with no savings. I would suggest you keep looking for a job and figure out how to minimize your living costs. If you can sustain yourself on a part time job or something not IT related, you can still work on the startup in your "leisure time". It will take longer to launch, but it is easier to do when you are not hungry. Good luck!
I'm not saying piracy is ok, I'm just saying that piracy is not the same as robbery and that taking credit for something that you didn't create is separate from piracy. The creators should have some control over their creations, but they don't have absolute control over it once they share it with other people. How much control they should have is still an open issue for me.
Woot! Integrated Debugger

This is a big release for mono, I'm huge fan of the project. C# is actually being designed unlike java, and with each new revision is getting much better.

Here's a cool demo of a mono REPL:http://lucasmeijer.com/files/messagewindow.swf
Venture Capital - Thoughts On The Asset Class
It broke new ground because teenagers like girls... a lot, I mean really teenagers have a large amount of their parents disposable money and if they are spending it on hygiene I'm sure parents are happy. I don't like the smell of axe and I remember when it first came out the high school kids would spray it and not just a little and soon the entire classroom smelt like terrible perfume it just does not work for me.

I do like the commercials for some product, I think nivea for men or something like that that, shows all the silly axe kids saying why they don't like it. I'm sure for adults axe works just as well as any other thing but the people under 25 really don't know what moderation is.
Because they rely entirely on my creation to exist, and they add nothing beyond what I've made. All they do is take my creation and remove some things. They add nothing to the procedure.
I don't know whether to be impressed that you wrote all that, or irritated that in all of that, you ignored that I was saying, mocked me, called me names, and then treated yourself like you were the victor.

I wasn't explaining Rowling's reasons for protecting copyright. I was explaining my own. That's an opinion that has nothing to do with anybody else's view of it, or the existing law. It's my own opinions.

Now, you could have debated those opinions and we could have an argument about just how much control my labor entitles me to. Instead you ignored that, gave your own "acceptable" answers, and then called me names.
What If? Stemcell technology may make Artificial Gametogenesis possible
[show = all but deleted] -> [select all] -> [resume]

It's not rocket science :/

The UI is 100% clear. This is a non-story. As soon as you log in, top right shows "Show | all / all active / all but deleted".

It's actually quite worrying the poster is spending a lot on adwords, yet doesn't seem to understand the UI and instead suggests setting all your bids to 0.01 to avoid resuming deleted campaigns having a big effect.

Choosing [show = all] shows deleted campaigns, and if you select them all, you can resume them...

To suggest this is "intentionally deceptive" is laughable. Worrying this has been voted up to #1
I don't know guys, but after take a long run, I usually in high mood, and ready for everything, yes that include talking to some strangers.

but then again, I am to lazy to do a long run periodically
It's EUR 279 over here (according to http://accessories.euro.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=nl... ), which converts to about USD 368.

Doesn't really seem like a major bargain..
There is not anything that says this, that's just the way I believe it should be, for many reasons. Put simply, I don't think anyone has the right or the ability to keep complete control over something as large and important as Harry Potter.

That's fair enough. That's essentially what I'm arguing too, but in reverse. I guess that's just a matter of opinion.

What if Linus didn't want anyone else to improve on Linux?

Then it would have died out in favor of some open source thing. But it was Linus's choice. Say a writer could gain a massive popularity surge by open-sourcing her world and characters. She'd have an edge over Rowling because Rowling won't do that. But either way, it's not the law allowing her to get ahead, it's the market. If Rowling is ignored for some more open world, then the market has spoken. If, however, her ideas stay big despite her retaining outright control, then there's no incentive to take them from her, and my opinion is that it's morally wrong to.
Warfish.net

Works in mobile safari.

You'll need to be invited to a game to play, which I can do, but I dont really play much anymore.
GDC 2009: Experimental Gameplay Sessions
Why can't the public create their own icons? This is the central point of my argument. I know that Disney stops people from taking Walt's original concepts. But is that a bad thing? What concepts did Disney steal? None: he made his own. Other people can do that too.

The idea of capitalism is that if somebody, say, changes the face of literature and sells more copies of her book than anybody else sells copies of anything, then she's entitled to spend the rest of her life doing nothing, because she put that much work in. So even if that was the excuse for ending copyright, making Rowling go back to creating things, it's unjust to force her to do so. As it happens, she's going on to write new things, because she didn't write to become a billionaire, she wrote to write.
Email in Indian languages
This is probably the first substantial article I've seen on the lead-up to the recession written by someone who's "one of us." It seems like much of his career activity took place a decade ago, but much of what he relates still rings true for computer scientists and software engineers on Wall Street today (excluding those that go straight into trading, banking, etc., of which there are a lot).

Until the recession hit, the odds of you making well over six figures in three or four years without even being that extraordinary were pretty high if you worked for one of the big five investment banks, and if you went to work for a hedge fund, you could be making much, much more than that without having to become a "business person."

It's more demanding psychologically (ironically, sometimes what I think is most poisonous to technologists' morale on Wall Street is the occasionally subservient and submissive attitude of some of their peers towards the traders and bankers) than working for a normal software company is, and your absolute maximum monetary return is still the highest with a startup, but in a way, it's an interesting middle ground between the stability of a regular software job and the potential payoff of a startup (just looking at the money here, personal fulfillment is a completely different discussion).

And although the whole "second-class citizen" thing does sting, it is interesting to see how much softer the criticism of the article's subject is on the New Yorker site compared to the vitriol usually hurled at an actual banker or trader; in fact, a few months ago, in the midst of the worst part of market volatility, one of the technology directors where I work was stopped for talking on a cell while driving; the cop asked him where he worked, and after telling him, our director implied that he was only let off without a ticket because he was in tech and not a banker.
The implications of this really jumped out at me. There are the obvious benefits - infertile/homosexual couples would be able to reproduce. It would also make possible "perfect" contraception - safely sterilize yourself knowing you can still have children.

On the other hand, this would completely undermine maternity/paternity testing (and thereby associated laws?). Anyone could unwittingly sire someones offspring by shaking their hand (imagine what crazed fans would do with this).

Anyone else have thoughts on this? I suppose while the promise of stemcell technology was always obviously revolutionary to me, this "What If?" just made its disruptive potential clear.

*edit: re-maternity/paternity laws, i wonder what legal precedents are set by people contesting responsibility on the grounds of having an identical twin.
Yeah, I get that. The problem is that "optimal" is misleading, because making money isn't the only goal of opening a business.

Would you say that David Lynch is a suboptimal director? His movies aren't enormous hits. He hasn't won for Best Movie. But those aren't his goals. Similarly, sometimes the people developing a site have more at stake than maximizing profits. Sometimes they want to make gorgeous web pages or gorgeous processes. And there's no optimal procedure for that.

Some people look at it another way. The 37s team obviously treats design as a sort of art rather than an exercise in optimization. As it happens, they make better products (in my opinion) than the people who go the other route. So they serve as a sort of inspiration.

That's my point. The argument is not entirely meaningful, because there are two things happening at once, and you can measure the one but not the other.
He makes an interesting point on the side - "the world is not flat".
I am posting in a dead thread to see what happens. I have nothing to add to this discussion, other than that a few years ago, I was using a 90lb fixed-sync CRT.
You know what, i love the idea of mono and i did a lot of c# projects. But I just don't trust enough mono to build my stuff on top of mono.
Of course it is. There's no guide for "how to make money." Usually, wealth is created by making something that doesn't already exist. Similarly, the high-quality services that result from the impulsive process would be stifled if those same designers worried too much about quantification.
Give me a real-world example of two companies, all other things even, that made a similar service where the one that won did so because its designers used metrics rather than "taste".
There will always be user error, which this clearly was.
But an "expression" as a unit is meaningless. The value comes from putting it all together as a whole, which is several orders of magnitude harder than figuring out each instance separately.
Remember that you've garnered a lot of attention for this attack on Google in your "publicity campaign". Anybody who buys your book would be either a dolt or a schmutz, IMHO.

Show us some links for your supposed JavaScript foo, and we can talk. Not third party links, dearie; let's see them on your server.
About 13 years ago give or take when I was ~13 I tried building a telepresence robot. My attempt was quite crude given my limited knowledge and involved a seat in a frame with a helmet attached to the top. The helmet was used to track movement of your head which would move the cameras. I couldn't do walking so I was stuck with a remote control car which fit well with the seat+box method since it was like a telepresence racing game.

My attempt failed but it's great to see someone with real skills+knowledge taking a go at it.
Twitter Replies Are Now Mentions
"Much of the critical evidence has emerged through the study of twins. Identical twins share all their DNA, while fraternal twins share only half - they are no more closely related on a genetic level than are ordinary siblings. Both kinds of twins, however, share a womb, a family and a cultural environment. Comparisons between the two types can thus tease out the extent to which inheritance is important."

Except that different kids have different experiences growing up. The same family does not mean exactly the same life. It's just not true that genes are the only difference between fraternal twins.
No. One of the first rules I ever learned about human factors was to translate "user error" into "design flaw." A mistake that is easy to make is a design problem. In this case, this easy-to-make mistake benefits Google.

It's probably not intentionally deceptive, but it is deceptive and Google should fix the problem.

Default actions should not affect deleted items. Think about GMail: "All Mail" excludes your Spam and Trash.
Of course, but the point is, identical twins are consistently more similar than fraternal twins.

Furthermore, identical twins are about as similar when growing up together, as when growing up apart.
Google car.
I think its a great post. The strength of stackoverflow is obviously the community of users. It is perfectly logic to use a local language if it helps to grow a new community somewhere else.
this belongs on reddit
How To Tether iPhone 3G over AT&T (iPhone 3.0 Required)
"Do not confuse the copyrightability of ideas with the copyrightability of an expression."

I'm pretty sure I wasn't doing that, but I don't think you read my comment very carefully or followed the link I posted, so I'm going to assume you just misunderstood me.

"every court that has seen this sort of case has ruled that a fictional fact or character is considered an expression, not an idea"

I interpret Warner Bros. Pictures v. Columbia Broadcasting Sys., 216 F.2d 945 (9th Cir. 1954) to have gone the other way. Do you disagree?
> Motivation... they reinvent things like for loops, if statements, and expressions poorly

and how is incredibly ugly looping and conditional syntax the solution?

> {.repeated section @}, {.or}
Blaming the user is rarely the correct response to an incident.
They also rewrote the standard library.

http://ocaml.janestreet.com/?q=node/27

And did so only recently. Imagine how bad a standard library has to be before a shop takes it upon themselves to rewrite it. I think that might partly explain why many people have dabbled in Ocaml but few have really embraced it.
"Fictional facts are considered expressions, not ideas"

My understanding is that fictional facts must stand the tests of originality and specificity. Neither unoriginal ideas, nor vague characters/settings have copyright protection. I believe that exactly when a character or setting becomes original and specific enough for protection has been interpreted in different ways by different courts.
I think the French language tolerates it just fine. French <i>people</i> don't tolerate <i>people</i> who butcher the language, because it's a social thing, but there's not a human language in existence that doesn't degrade gracefully.

You can walk from Paris to Rome, never finding two neighboring villages that can't understand one another. Somewhere along the way, what they're talking isn't exactly French or Italian -- they just polish up their speech when the government men from France come.

That's less true today than it used to be, of course; more people go to the city for education. But it's still true of everybody's grandma.

My point is that all human languages are fault-tolerant.
From 18 to 24 or so I was on tons of various anti depressants. In my experience I found them all to be placebos! I was no different on them or off them. Either way I really could never be myself around people I hung around with; anxiety-ridden & silly OCD stuff(I can laugh at now).

For me talking about anxiety and OCD stuff was the biggest help. So many people go through the same thing but you think your the only one and are afraid to talk about it, because oh no people may think Im crazy. Yet were all the same! Though even after talking about my issues it generally took some years and feeling comfortable in my own skin was the end all cure.

Im not saying anti-depressants don't work, but for me they were pointless. Time and talking about my issues with friends/others was my cure!
It is not exactly "confusing". The problem (as I see it) is that the question "does man cause Global Warming?" is ill-posed.

OK, let us say that we have a mathematical model of the global climate: a bunch of partial differential equations describing heat and mass flow, etc etc etc. Since humans burn fuels and release C02 on the atmosphere, it is obvious that man influences the weather. The real question is not "whether", but "how much". The Sun's cycles also influence the weather. Varying levels of cosmic radiation also influence the weather.

And if it's possible that the climate is indeed changing dramatically, what does "global warming" actually mean? The max temperatures are rising? Or does it mean that the average temperatures are rising? This is such a complex problem that interpreting it as a "yes / no question" is infuriating to say the least. Some people want to compress the entire global climate problem in one single bit of information. It's pathetic.

And what pisses me off is that there are hords of ignorants who believe this is a "religious war" against big oil and corporate America and claim that anyone who dissents is an heretic who was bought by the dirty capitalists and who should be burned at the stake.
Actually things are just getting worse.

If you missed following article anyhow...
"Google slips from list of top companies on privacy" - http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10123251-93.html
Google releasing an SDK for iPhone.
I can definitely relate to the ugliness of ORM, and the elegance of object stores in an OOP environment. That's all fine and good, you can chop off the entire bottom of the stack, I get it.

My problem is data modeling with objects. I build my object architecture based on what I want to do with the data, but I've never been happy with it as a direct data model. It changes too quickly. Do I put things in an array or a hash? Well, it depends. Persisting these specific structures might be expeditious for the app at hand, but if I need to access the data in some other context then I could see complexity spiraling out of control very quickly.

A relational schema adds layers yes, but have low-level structured data adds tremendous value. There's a parity mismatch to be sure, but I'd rather do those situps than have no structured data at all.
Total clickbait title. To be fair, the article doesn't make this claim anywhere. Flagged with extreme prejudice.
The title is misleading. The codebreaker was not a nazi, or built by nazis, only the codes were.
Blackboard is shockingly awful, but the people who nominally control the purse strings in education are an incredibly cautious (cowardly) lot, and so for the most part they'll just buy whatever everybody else in their community does.

The teachers who are on-the-ground have very little say in the purchasing process; they're just handed tools and told to use them. Which is why Blackboard continues to have customers, in spite of their shockingly bad product.
> In this case, this easy-to-make mistake benefits Google.

And, worse, it seems to be a pattern. Clicked the wrong button in your adsense campaign? No appeal, we take your money. We detected fraud in your google payments account? No appeal, we take your money. We detected click fraud in your adsense displays? No appeal, we take your money.

I'm glad I don't do any business with them.
Jon Miller, Who’s Taking Over MySpace, Doesn’t Have A MySpace Profile
While I think it's safe to assume that most on HN know who Alan Turing is and what he did, I think it's fine to have an article about this in general. But this actual article is of pretty poor quality and doesn't really contain any technical information. Sure, it's nice that a replica was built, and cool to see pics, but if that's the story then please make the headline match it better.

Wikipedia's article on the Bombe is much more interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombe