skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It still amazes me that analysts fail to see Pixar films for what they really are: Aimed at everyone, not just children. This is why the franchise aspect of the films is a little harder.

Here is the basic recipe for a Pixar film. The main character has to "grow" throughout the film while facing what are essentially adult problems - using animation as the vehicle for story telling.

Compare that to Dreamworks - who's style is heavily influenced by Jeffrey Katzenberg who is responsible for Disney's great run of films in the late 80's and early 90's (Who Framed Roger Rabbit, The Little Mermaid, The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast & Aladdin) before leaving in 94 and founding Dreamworks with Spielberg.

Dreamworks animations are aimed directly at children because of this influence, the stories are often not as complex and the jokes are simpler. They're geared for pumping out 2 films a year instead of just the 1 and are heavily backed up by merchandising. Their marketing teams absolutely blitz the public and this is probably why Shrek 2 is still the highest grossing animated film of all time, even though several films from both studios are better.

Now if the NY Times really wants to make an article about Pixar's future success, they should perhaps write about how the next few films after UP won't be directed by Pixar's main stable of directors (Stanton, Lasseter, Bird and Docter) instead seeing a generational change with new directors handling old franchises.

As Brad Bird of Pixar said during their documentary The Pixar Story

"This is an anomaly, this place is really freakishly alone in this hit after hit aspect"

It's not really a case of if they will make a film that fails, it's when - I personally hope that it never happens, but I'm not that naive.
Brad Feld: Early VC decisions based on complex forecasts is foolish
You might be able to claim that Lisp is 90% "homomorphically equivalent", a phrase I don't think I've heard since Mathematics 2, but who gives a shit?

Well, for those who actually have a little intellectual curiosity, the implications are:

1) Not only can you do anything in langauges X and Y
that you do in Ruby, you can express it about as
concisely
2) Any libraries in Ruby could be just as beautifully
expressed in languages X and Y
3) There's no reason something that closely resembles
Ruby but runs *a lot faster* shouldn't exist
4) Speed is just one factor among many. There are lots
of other things Ruby could learn from.

Sho, there are some who have enormous cognitive dissonance at the thought that their pet language is not the ultimate in the universe. Then there are others that are actually curious about what else is out there, and how the languages they know the most about fit into that continuum. Therein is some valuable and useful information for those who are forward looking.

(For the others, Ruby is awesome, it is the ultimate, there shall be nothing better, yada yada. Now you can rest easy.)

There has been a bajillion hours of awesome work that's gone into Ruby and Rails. There are ways that Ruby and Rails can be changed such that the next bajillion can be several times more awesome. All I'm saying is -- look around and be curious. There's a lot out there to learn!
That's why there is another clause that states "We reserve the right to modify these terms and conditions at any time and for any reason, with or without explicit notification to you."

This is why you always hear "be sure to get a good lawyer" when discussing legal issues. It's their job to protect you from liabilities. Sure there will always be cases where someone could present false evidence, but this is why we have a court system.
I don't quite understand this attitude I've often found here of people to dissect, "try to understand", and take a swipe at what's wrong about other cultures, point out how some attributes of other cultures are so deviant and then take a higher stand, a higher ground on those issues.

Frankly, if you haven't been born and/or brought up in a certain culture, you simply will not be able to understand some peculiar aspects about it. Yes, there are good and the not-so-good aspects and takeaways about every culture on this planet. But I sometimes find the tone of such articles and some of the comments in this discussion not only mildly condescending but also biased. I was born and brought up in India by fairly open-minded and unorthodox parents. And so were many of my friends.

Correct me if I'm wrong. This is not an intelligent article, or discussion. It's in fact a very superficial look at the best. This is just an informative article and in no way representative of the large group of "Indian Men" living in the states. It beats me how the writer takes a few examples and on a respected daily as the WSJ blatantly labels it as "Indian Men Living in US Strike Out.

Why are we even discussing this here?
Research Links Poor Children's Stress and Brain Impairment
A more sensible interpretation is that marriage and courtship rituals ("courtship" extended to include "casual" relationships) have a heavy culture specific component to them.

I had a Canadian manager (tall handsome intelligent guy) who tried applying his knowledge of how "dating" worked when he was posted to Bangalore for a year and "struck out" all the time until one day, at a party, he got drunk and asked me "Dude, how the [expletive] do you get laid hereabouts? I've been trying to get a date for 6 months and every girl says "No Thanks". I am going crazy! ".

So I gave him a 20 minute crash lecture in how these things worked in India (and specifically Urban India) and the appropriate moves and counter moves and what they mean and how to interpret and act on them. Needless to say these "rules" are very different from the Western "dating". To his credit he picked up the 'rules of the game' very fast and soon managed to get what he wanted.

When any bunch of people get dumped into a new culture, it is fair to expect that a few of them never quite pick up these nuances. Whether that is worth an article in the wsj is a different matter ;-). I could conclude (if had never been in a Western country) "These Canadians strike out all the time hyuk hyuk",and it might even make a popular article in the local paper, but then I'd still be the idiot.

To summarize, the Indian "dating game" has very different rules, and they don't work in the USA (and vice versa). For Hackers an analogy that works is submitting perfectly valid Haskell code to the javac compiler ;-)

Due Disclosure: I am Indian, have lived in the USA and had no problems "decoding" how courtship, sex and marriage worked there.
In my opinion this is a clear ad-hominen attack from Obie against Alex, and one that should not be appreciated.

I am not a fan of scala, but I say lets wait and see what happens, as we all should know by now, in theory Ruby should scale as much as scala, but maybe in practice we come up with different results! As is there is a difference between what you should be able to do, and what you can really do.

Alex is obviously trying what he thinks he can, not what other thinks he should be able to do! which is of course just a theory
I am referring to Amherst College. I thought tsally was too, since I said I went to Amherst (College, not UMass) in the great-great-grandparent post, but perhaps he misinterpreted me and I misinterpreted his misinterpretation.
It is an interesting point you raise. It is perfectly acceptable to agree on roles and settle into them.

But in this case, my guess is that these attitudes have more to do with holding onto a traditional belief in male-dominance than with any concerns for having different roles in marriage. And if I am guessing correct, such beliefs should not be encouraged and nor is it in the interest of any woman to seek out such a partner for herself.
Your comments are really quite naive and dumb. I'm an Indian and I don't expect you to even find these aspects appealing. Hell, even I don't find them appealing. But your language "I guess these attitudes come from being raised in a culture where it's the norm" is derogatory. Please refrain from such attacking comments. Many educated and progressive Indians are aware of these aspects and attitudes are changing. But it's a culture, a very ancient one at that, and deep-rooted aspects about cultures don't change overnight, simply by flicking a few switches on and off.
I one read from a satirist that it is hard to be satirical about the future since it keeps coming true. :)

Seriously, though, if one were to enter into a neuroscience md/phd program now in the 8 years or so when they finish the technology might be more commercializable.
I live in the South Indian state of Kerala. Here 'arranged marriage' means parents and relatives get a chance to background-check the future partner before you do. So for a girl, this means your parents check on the boy's character , his earning potential , the way his parents made money and other related aspects. If parents are happy, a meeting is arranged.If the girl and boy likes to go forward with a relationship, they can take time to know each other.If everything goes well, proceed to marriage.

In short, its like dating with the fittest. All marriages in my family happened this way, and we dont have even a single case of divorce in my family.
> Frankly, if you haven't been born and/or brought up in a certain culture, you simply will not be able to understand some peculiar aspects about it.

A true statement, but not necessarily relevant. For instance, I cannot understand Aztec culture, because I have not experienced it. I condemn it nonetheless.
I think you generalized a lot of things there. I personally am arranged married, and I couldn't be happier. I have a lot of friends who are in the same situation (even ones who are 10+ years into marriage). I also know people who married in 'love' that are not so happy today.

Additionally, arranged marriages need not be 'see someone for 10 mins and say yes or no'. There is a large variation in how the whole thing can potentially be set up. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage#Arguments_for... for a list of pros and cons that gives you both sides of the story.
Oh, totally. The issue, for me, is when society demands people act in a certain way. If my mom, my wife, or whoever, wants to be a house wife, I'm all for that. But if they wanted to be an artist, rock star, or whatever, no-one should stop them (well, except in my wife's case because she's tone deaf).

All that said, I don't see a problem in people specifying a "docile" housewife as a preference, no more than someone might want a "blonde" wife, a "nymphomaniac", or any such thing. Just because you prefer something doesn't mean you have the right to get it but nor does it mean you're "wrong" for having that preference as long as you don't force it on anyone else.
I agree. This discussion reminds me of that guy on HN the other day who was generalizing all women to be Sex In The City watching, sex mad hussies.
Your condemnation does not really have any place in the scheme of things, history, or a bearing on that culture for that matter. I'm not trying to be harsh here. I hope you understand my fundamental point. A culture is a culture, it's a consequence of history, time, and innumerable subtle things and relationships. Just as the American culture is, many aspects of which people outside America condemn. But it doesn't matter.

Outsiders attempting to generalize, analyze, dissect, and fix things about cultures they barely understand more often than not cause historical and irreversible damage.
User Interface Design: Notifications and (avoiding interruption of) Flow
Arranged marriages takes anywhere from two to six months to materialize and now, it has become customary for the both the parties to meet and asses each other.

When it comes to arranged marriage, people don't rely on scant information, they have a network of people to cross verify all the cited credentials.
If the images are infact his then he has an easy counter-suit for copyright infringement. If StockArt is found to have sold images that were stolen then they owe the original artist the value of what they've sold the art for.

Come to think of it, this is pretty risky for StockArt. They are betting quite a lot that they win. If they don't win, they lose - big time. They may end up wishing they had never brought it up to Jon.
So <em> can be refined through css?
"if you come to Japan and try to explain babysitting, you get looks of total horror."

My (Indian) mother was horrified when an American woman told her she(the American) was paid by her daughter to babysit her grand kids. The idea of turning baby sitting grandchildren into a "commercial transaction" was a horrifying thought to her.

just another example of "different folks, different strokes".
Microsoft's new ads: They're a trap. Bwahahahahahaha
The article is full of typical stereotypes attributed to Indians.
> Outsiders attempting to generalize, analyze, dissect, and fix things about cultures they barely understand more often than not cause historical and irreversible damage.

Maybe it can also cause progress? For instance, the condemnation of Apartheid by the western world probably helped end it.

(I don't mean to say arranged marriage is the same as Apartheid, obviously.)
I don't know, I disagree with a couple of these points.

Here is the basic recipe for a Pixar film. The main character has to "grow" throughout the film while facing what are essentially adult problems - using animation as the vehicle for story telling.

I think that can be said about most stories with a non-tragic hero.

Dreamworks animations are aimed directly at children because of this influence, the stories are often not as complex and the jokes are simpler.

Of the several PDI/Dreamworks films I've seen, I would say they are at the same complexity level as Pixar's stories. These stories usually have a couple of layers of depth to them, and you only need to follow the obvious one to get the main points. In my opinion, the Dreamworks films are not articulated as well (in both plot and characterizations) as the Pixar films and actually end up feeling more convoluted.

I first saw Toy Story as a child. Looking back on it as an adult, I remembered that I had a pretty good grasp on the plot and characters as a kid, so I was assuming it had been a simplistic film. When I watched it again, I saw lots of things I didn't notice as a kid.

Their marketing teams absolutely blitz the public and this is probably why Shrek 2 is still the highest grossing animated film of all time, even though several films from both studios are better.

Definitely.

Now if the NY Times really wants to make an article about Pixar's future success, they should perhaps write about how the next few films after UP won't be directed by Pixar's main stable of directors (Stanton, Lasseter, Bird and Docter) instead seeing a generational change with new directors handling old franchises.

True. One thing Pixar has going for them is that they haven't made any movies even close to bad. I would say that they haven't even made any movies that aren't great. (Though I'm kind of on the fence about Cars.) They've built up a pretty solid momentum now, and it would take a series of bombs (like Disney after the mid-90s) to shake it.

The people getting upset about Up not being as marketable as past Pixar films will have to get over it. If you're going to get great creative types together and have them make stuff, you have to give them freedom – otherwise you end up like PDI/Dreamworks. In summary:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3472/3398960470_05527c04b1_b....
How does your individuality smell?
The job of a distributer is by definition obsolete in the face of the internet. Most intelligent people I've met agree that fighting the ability to copy content has no future. Distributors may not be dead yet, but they are in the ER hooked up to monitors, with lawyers running around trying to defibrillate them with lawsuits.

For the most part they can't change either, because they are often under contract to provide content to certain channels and certain times, so they can't just start offering a pay or advertising based torrent service.

In terms of producing movies, music or other kinds of content, the only real value that remains in the studio model is financing. That is, someone pays to make your movie based on how excited you can make them in 10 minutes. With distribution being replaced, there may yet be a business model in production financing. Maybe "get enough people on facebook to like your script, and we'll give you 60 million dollars to make it...."

Well I can dream can't I?
StumbleUpon - Featured Painting sites
The concept and system of arranged marriages is not something that needs fixing. It has evolved and will continue to evolve to adapt to changing conditions and attitudes among the youth and parents in India. A marriage is much larger than whether it was arranged or born out of (fleeting/puppy/divine/heavenly) love.
Please share the rules you are talking about. I think a lot of us Westerners would be interested to read about this foreign world.
The concept and system of _Apartheid_ is not something that needs fixing. It has evolved and will continue to evolve to adapt to changing conditions and attitudes.
Nice post. (For the record, the simplification is understandable...I got my PhD in this stuff, so I'm not exactly the target audience.)

I agree that convergent evolution of protein folds seems unlikely to have happened frequently, but I'm not willing to dismiss it as impossible over the course of evolutionary time-frames. More importantly, I'm not willing to extend that idea to the conclusion that all protein folds must have been extant at the beginning of evolutionary history. There are simply too many ways for new protein folds to be produced -- and not necessarily by stepwise point mutations through stable intermediates.

You're right that PFAM isn't a structural classification system per se; they do what you describe a bit later, and build massive sequence profiles to detect homologies. But at the sequence identity levels used to build PFAM, you can safely assume that any sequence within a family that has a solved structure will probably share that structure's overall fold. The details will be different, but the fold will be conserved. That's really the point of PFAM (and why it has a symbiotic relationship with SCOP).

But here's the problem with drawing too many structural conclusions from sequence analysis: with state-of-the art algorithms, we can detect structural homologies out to about 25-30% sequence identity. Beyond that, we just don't know how to call two structures "similar" or "dissimilar", without having the structures themselves.

Point being, you can't really say that those 800-1300 "roots" of the evolutionary tree are independent starting points. All you can conclude is that our tools aren't good enough (or there isn't enough data) to trace back the evolutionary tree to the point where those "roots" may have converged.

For the record, I'm not trying to be pendantic or argumentative. This is one of those few fun debates that makes the field interesting. ;-)
ToughSkin Case for iPod 4G & iPod Photo - Blue
Speck Products ToughSkin ruggedized iPod cover provides rugged protection and fashion for your iPod. Its one-of-a-kind design customizes the popular rubberized skin for extreme lifestyles.
Well, obviously I didn't mean that Apartheid was a concept or system. And you know that.
My point is that your argument validly defends Apartheid. It is a standard (if somewhat impolite) rhetorical technique to parrot your opponent's arguments in a way that makes them seem obviously flawed.
"Please share the rules you are talking about."

When I have the time I'll probably write it up as a blog post (or a series of posts! 20 minutes of conversation is a lot of writing!) and submit the link here.
To be more precise, Sun has 744.71M shares issued, and 0.15$ per share comes to 111.7 Million USD
I've considered something like an electronic notary system a number of times over the years.

I can imagine having a URL like http://[known and trusted e-notary].com/[user]/[date]/[file or md5sum] would do a lot to discourage any shennanigans.

It wouldn't serve the same purpose as having something actually notarized so you'd have to be clear about that, but it could be a source of evidence when a case went before a court.

Doesn't seem all that technically difficult - md5sums for files and an RSA keypair per day are the common starting points for most of my ideas in that direction.
But then Apple would have to spend a ton of resources on getting OSX compatible with a gazillion different hardware setups. It will either slow down iterations or hurt the user experience, the "it just works" magic.
Yes you can build it in C as well, that doesn't make C dynamic.
If I have learned one thing about arranged marriages from my close-knit extended family of 100+, it is that no two arranged marriages are same.

The ONE element that almost all arranged marriages I've seen do have in common is SOME strong referral or existing friendship between the two families. In that sense, they work a lot like VC referrals:)

The type of arranged marriage most common to my larger family is a love marriage. Oxymoron you say? Well, not really. What happens is the girl and guy meet(usually at school) and gradually word starts spreading. When the news makes its way to the parents, if the parents know the other family and approve of it, you are usually good to go. The "love marriage" is smoothly converted into an "arranged marriage". All my uncles(and my father) got married through this route.

I guess I am just not sure of how common the stereotype arranged marriage where a dude is forcefully dumped on a girl is. Notice all the negative connotation that is assumed by the stereotype.

All the while I have a few aunts who got married without having seen the guy until wedding day. This was may be 30 years ago. They are all still married and pretty happy. Lastly, with 50+ couples in my extended family in last 40 years, there have been fewer than five divorces(credit to Geni for handy stats).

So does this process seem weird? Hell yes. Could it result in happy marriages? Seems like it, at least for one family.