skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't understand the "sponsored" content gambit, but I do recall reading various print magazines that had bundled content inside of them that looked very much like "real" articles but were basically sponsored ads. But I don't understand it. I would think that any ad that looks like your material fundamentally is misleading your readers by conflating your brand, your mission, your reputation with its own.

So I don't understand sponsored content, and I certainly don't understand making it look like regular, non-sponsored content.

Going further, the notion of allowing moderated and only favorable comments on your sponsored content is even more deceptive. Hey, but maybe not. Maybe more deceptive would be having the sponsored content that looks like your own material and then allowing all comments which might give even more credence to the mistaken impression the sponsored content is not sponsored.

So whatever, if the Atlantic wants to flush its reputation down, and that of James Fallows and so many other writers, hey, free country, free speech, there really is nothing to complain about.

So in that sense, what I find more dubious is this. The Atlantic taking sponsored content from GE, but refusing to take sponsored content from Scientology.

In what real, legal, sense, provable by things on the book, is Scientology different from GE that makes it okay for The Atlantic to take money from GE and not Scientology?

The FBI is conducting its first investigation into Scientology in 30 years, but apart from stories, in a sense doesn't that confirm Scientology basically runs as a legal business? And in the sense the US Government seems to recognize Scientology as a religion, why is it okay for The Atlantic to refuse content from Scientology? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#Recognition_as_a_re...) Would it so easily refuse content from Catholic, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, or Islamic organizations? (How many investigations of GE has the FBI performed in the past 30 years?)

Again, The Atlantic is responsible for their own content, I have no idea why they do this sponsored content in the first place, if they want to flush Ta-Nehisi Coates reputation down the toilet that's their right, maybe with Andrew Sullivan branching out they have much more limited dollars, but, ...

Hey I think they just compounded their initial stupid decision on sponsored content by caving to whomeever. I think they now look worse, not better. I think their response needs to be along the lines of no more sponsored content, or an explanation of what makes Scientology different.

All that said, to hell with Scientology.
This might be of some use..Wrist watch with vibrator...

http://watchminder.com/
I don't think I'm treading that line. Having an IQ that is a few standards of deviation higher than average makes a person quite different from average people... just as a person with average IQ would feel out of place among a group consisting mostly of people with IQs a few standards of deviation below average.

However stress is stress. People of any IQ feel stress from a variety of factors. One purpose of the human emotional system is to deal with stress and to respond appropriately... sometimes this means flight, sometimes fight, sometimes take a deep breath, etc. Healthy emotional development is separate from IQ and very dependent on genetics and environment.

Pretty much anyone who isn't completely average in all respects is going to find some kinds of interactions with other humans stressful. So I think that it's tough to make the case that certain traits like high IQ are inherently more stressful or make a person more likely to display mentally unhealthy behavior.

Which is why I think there is a general quality of mental health, which can get better or worse in the same person over time (and can change quickly and slowly)... which is an accurate descriptor of the meta factors that contribute to the proper functioning of the person's cognitive and emotional systems to respond to the inevitable stresses of daily life.
how does that bode for websites using Disqus?

That was never a good idea IMHO... If you care about your readers, don't outsource comments. I cannot take websites seriously that are using Disqus (or Facebook, or other such shady, inaccountable stuff) to replace such a vital part of their online operations.
Google is winning the Ecosystem war
Google Cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%...

Image Mirror (Via Reddit): http://i.minus.com/iCziY2iQpxWav.jpg
sorry, but I agree. wholeheartedly immoral. Your doing exactly what corporations on the hill are doing to Congressman. Putting congressman in touch with corporations so that they might write our laws. Thats how I see you.
I understand the commercial need to make money, but if you have to trade your credibility in for the cash, it is probably a sign that your business model is over. Time to close the doors, or find a realistic method of finance.
WBC to Picket Aaron Swartz's Funeral, Anonymous to Counter
> It's my understanding that universities pay significant amounts for site
> licenses and that general public purchases do not subsidize that access.

Yeah, I am pretty baffled with how non-institutional users are requested to pay for access, both on JSTOR and other publisher's sites. Surely this is not a large source of income? arXiv (always pointed out as a shining example of something going right) has recently started requesting membership fees to be paid by the top 200 institutional users. Other than that, the public is still able to go to the site and read about dark matter and substring bananas.

You know, what probably happened was that when the content was starting to get digitized, the publishers only had users that were accessing from universities. So they charged the universities just like they previously did for subscriptions to the bound book issues. At the time, there was probably no concept of doing any sort of analytics to figure out where downloads were coming from, so they didn't think that maybe they should just allow anyone to download, and then setup a deal with colleges to pay their fair share. I think the arXiv model is worth some more investigation..

(This ignores all the actual truths like, they have to maximize shareholder value, they have to make as much money as possible, their incentives are aligned differently, etc. Instead it is simply focusing on the reason why "individual purchase" is an option that doesn't seem to make sense to non-institutional members like the general public.)
They apparently don't do it convincingly enough.
Better yet, reroute them through a 90's website filter such as http://wonder-tonic.com/geocitiesizer/content.php?theme=3...
When you say that a person who committed suicide "asked for help", it makes it sound like he reached out for emotional support in a time of desperation.

While that might have been partially what Aaron was doing, I think the headline leads you to picture a horrifying scenario in which the young man's death might have been avoided, if only the community had been more encouraging or sympathetic. Instead, you find that he was asking for financial support, and there's of course no reason to believe that sending him money could have altered the tortured course that ended with him taking his own life.

It may seem like a trivial point but in my opinion it completely warps this whole conversation. For example, suppose someone shares with you that they have been terribly depressed and contemplating suicide. In this case, I agree, telling them to "man up" is pretty bad form. But that is not exactly what happened here.
You don't think the site could get slashdotted from everyone trying to use this bookmarklet at the same time and PDFs getting generated from it?

At this point, I don't think it would be a stretch to see an overreaction, even if it's just benign traffic from people checking out the free content melt the servers.
lots of insight concerning attention in the video
Like the other commenters, I'm not given much insight into what this group is supposed to do. If their aim is to prevent tragedies in schools, they should probably be a bit more direct.
I keep returning to the moment when I set up an email forwarding in IFTTT for every mentioning of word 'book' on HN feed - boy does it deliver some good links.
In fact, the situation today is probably the opposite. With plea bargains, I believe conviction rates are as high as 99.5% (IIRC). Somehow I find it hard to believe that 99.5% of people charged with a crime in this country are actually guilty. That seems dangerously high. I know that many innocent people are let off when a case or charges are dismissed, but of all those that do go to trial, more than a mere half percent must be innocent.
Exactly, I didn't mean to generalize to claim that mental illness is the only cause, but I would say that mental illness is the common thread in 99%+ of suicides.
"important repository of investigatory talent"

I had to smile. My firsthand experience is that they are like an elephant in a china store. They probably bullied Aaron like they bullied us. Instead of asking me to take down a form they preferred to take down 2 million forms by suspending our domain.

Suspension of our domain was extremely stressful for me. I had the support of my family and employees. But I can definitely understand Aaron. The stress of not knowing what will happen on a case like this can be too harsh for a young emotional person. He was being charged with 35 years. We don't know what kind of bullying he was taking.
I can say, having been on the inside of Atlantic Media a little over a year ago, people are running around like chickens with their heads cut off about revenue there. They've made it into the black through aggressive advertising sales and extreme cost-cutting/staff demands (trying to make "startup hours" the norm, like working to 10pm, letting seasoned journalists walk and replacing them with interns and recent grads), but they were still taking on water whether anybody wanted to admit it. I'm happy I left before it got this bad.
"Temporarily", what absolute bootlicks they are.

Gives them the opportunity to re-up the article once the internet forgets.
Guns don't kill dictatorships, people do
The advertising isn't the problem, IMO. It's the comment censoring that is worrying.
That's not even the number I see in the iTunes.app version of the App Store (1559).

http://i.imgur.com/0bBUL.png

ED: It's possible that the number we see is based on the current store location the user is in. Google presumably has access to the overall count, and the original post contains the number of US reviews.
Internet Activist's Prosecutor Linked To Another Hacker's Death
Like Braintree's entry into Australia, the pricing isn't as amazing as I think people were hoping.

Whether it's because they too rely on nab (An Australian bank) to provide the multi-currency account (Also used by Braintree) or because they aren't looking to differentiate on price I am not sure.
One word: Good.
We know who bullied Aaron: Stephen Heymann, the deputy chief of the criminal division for the US Attorney's office in Boston. It was his decision to hammer Aaron with 13 charges and refuse any reasonable plea bargain, not USSS. His name and signature are on the filings.
And just like hacking, in many places, Cambridge included, "jay" walking (I refuse to acknowledge this preposterous concept with its own word) may be purportedly illegal, but is actually accepted and encouraged. But you still must beware the rare meddling fed; they don't like people undermining the need for painting all those hazardous crosswalks.
Anecdote: My wife and I both play COD MW3 and Black Ops 2 online almost daily yet despise war and violence. We're both in our 30's and have played FPS games since our early teens.

I think a poor understanding of other cultures, a dash of jingoism and hint of racism would help desensitize us to war.
End of Chumby as we know it...
> Generally, it's because MRAs tend to find gains for women zero-sum.

The stereotypical MRA does.

> There are issues with regards to divorce, child support, and custody that can be discussed, but all these can be addressed as a feminist and do not require "masculinism" as some sort of a counter.

Your experience might be different than mine. In my experience, any mention of the idea that men can be raped by women, for example, gets shouted down by 'feminists' (you can take that label as you will) as 'hijacking' the 'real' discussion, which is solely about men raping women. Men being raped by men is, at best, a side-show to that discussion. Women being raped by women is similarly absent as a topic.
I trust PG to make the right decision.

As an Atlantic editor, I'd only note that this decision was not made by the people who produce our magazine's journalism.
This method does not convey any understanding of the problem. I'm not sure it's a good idea in the long run. It'll create a class of people who know how to solve a particular mathematical problem, but don't understand why.
The canonical reply to this article, by Steve Losh:

http://stevelosh.com/blog/2012/10/why-i-two-space/

Among other things, he points out that computers have a much easier time parsing sentences which are clearly separated by two spaces, and that some features in e.g. vim don't work well with single-spaced sentences.
The story has been replaced with:
"We have temporarily suspended this advertising campaign pending a review of our policies that govern sponsor content and subsequent comment threads."

There you go, one demonstrable example where complaining on the internet actually had an impact.
> That's what I learned in elementary school and have been using since then. It's
interesting to know how others to do it.

well, i generally do it using a 'covolution approach' like this:

45
x 86
------
0 (5*6 == 30) -> take the units place, and put '3' as carry over
4 (6*4+8*5+3 == 47) -> take the units place, and put '4' as carry over
36 (8*4+4 == 36)

-------------

3640

-------------

with sufficient practice, you can multiply arbitrary 3 digits in approx 10-15 seconds or so ;)

[edit-1]: my formatting sucks, cannot seem to align stuff nicely at all.
You know, it's entirely possible for something like that to have happened as a result of a poorly thought out advertising initiative without any ill intent on the part of the overwhelming majority of employees of Atlantic. While the editorial office and the executives of Atlantic should really know better than this, I'm not necessarily willing to jump to conclusions based on this single incident, which, moreover, appears to have caused them to reconsider their sponsored content policies.

I do like the idea of assuming incompetence (or negligence) before malice, and, well, clearly someone hasn't done their job to allow this to happen, but that's probably the extent of what happened.
No, I understand that and I disagree completely. To the extent that you're not mentally handicapped and understand that your actions have consequences, what you think you're up to when you commit a crime is completely irrelevant.
Enlighten me. I'm curious.
"Every so often, the Church of Scientology goes up against the Internet.
Every so often, the Church of Scientology gets its ass handed to it."

These are not equal. They never get anything more than slaps on their wrist, and they employ enough lawyers and politicians to "every so often" make us all less free.
I would still recommend slideshare as the best bet. In the first page you can have a QR code. Also all slides can have a shout key (http://shoutkey.com/).
I enjoy the writing in the Atlantic as much as the next guy.
(Edit: and to their credit, here is a slightly more interesting story they did on Scientology in 2011: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/02/scientology-... )

That said, it's not hyperventilating to point out that prohibiting dissenting comments on articles, even if they are shameless (and paid-for) advertising, is pretty much bullshit.

I mean, The Atlantic is a private company, they have the right to do whatever they want, squelch whatever discussion they like. The First Amendment doesn't apply to posting on websites. But they get to deal with the fallout that comes with it, and it looks like they either didn't anticipate exactly how badly their shameless cash grab would be taken, or they didn't think there was anything wrong with essentially putting their good name and credibility behind something as controversial (charitably speaking) as scientology.
Anti-Semitism In Western Music
I used Megafauna Software parsed data to quickly create a model using BigML: http://bml.io/W6lKqe It uses information gain mix to create a decision tree. It also concluded that winning the 'best director' is the most important field. However, 'make up' didn't top the most important fields. See the results below.

Data distribution:
n: 16.94% (82 instances)
y: 83.06% (402 instances)

Predicted distribution:
n: 16.74% (81 instances)
y: 83.26% (403 instances)

Field importance:
1. Directing_1: 84.47%
2. Music (Scoring)_0: 3.59%
3. Music (Scoring)_1: 2.68%
4. Art Direction_0: 2.39%
5. Sound_0: 1.75%
6. Film Editing_0: 1.55%
7. Costume Design_1: 1.40%
8. Film Editing_1: 0.82%
9. Costume Design_0: 0.54%
10. Cinematography_1: 0.52%
11. Art Direction_1: 0.29%
12. Special Achievement Award_0: 0.00%
13. Scientific and Technical (Bonner Medal)_1: 0.00%
14. Foreign Language Film_0: 0.00%
15. Sound Editing_1: 0.00%
16. Scientific and Technical (Bonner Medal)_0: 0.00%
17. Sound Editing_0: 0.00%
18. Scientific and Technical (Academy Award of Merit)_1: 0.00%
19. Sound_1: 0.00%
20. Animated Feature Film_1: 0.00%
21. Scientific and Technical (Academy Award of Merit)_0: 0.00%
22. Documentary (other)_1: 0.00%
23. Animated Feature Film_0: 0.00%
24. Music (Song)_1: 0.00%
25. Documentary (other)_0: 0.00%
26. Actress -- Supporting Role_1: 0.00%
27. Short Film (Live Action)_1: 0.00%
28. Music (Song)_0: 0.00%
29. Documentary (Short Subject)_1: 0.00%
30. Actress -- Supporting Role_0: 0.00%
31. Short Film (Live Action)_0: 0.00%
32. Documentary (Short Subject)_0: 0.00%
33. Actress -- Leading Role_1: 0.00%
34. Short Film (Animated)_1: 0.00%
35. Documentary (Feature)_1: 0.00%
36. Short Film (Animated)_0: 0.00%
37. Makeup_1: 0.00%
38. Scientific and Technical (Technical Achievement Award)_1: 0.00%
39. Actress -- Leading Role_0: 0.00%
40. Documentary (Feature)_0: 0.00%
41. Actor -- Supporting Role_1: 0.00%
42. Makeup_0: 0.00%
43. Actor -- Supporting Role_0: 0.00%
44. Scientific and Technical (Technical Achievement Award)_0: 0.00%
45. Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award_1: 0.00%
46. Directing_0: 0.00%
47. Actor -- Leading Role_1: 0.00%
48. Scientific and Technical (Special Awards)_1: 0.00%
49. Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award_0: 0.00%
50. Actor -- Leading Role_0: 0.00%
51. Writing_1: 0.00%
52. Scientific and Technical (Special Awards)_0: 0.00%
53. Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award_1: 0.00%
54. Acting (other)_1: 0.00%
55. Writing_0: 0.00%
56. Scientific and Technical (Scientific and Engineering Award)_1: 0.00%
57. Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award_0: 0.00%
58. Acting (other)_0: 0.00%
59. Visual Effects_1: 0.00%
60. Scientific and Technical (Scientific and Engineering Award)_0: 0.00%
61. Honorary Award_1: 0.00%
62. Cinematography_0: 0.00%
63. Visual Effects_0: 0.00%
64. Scientific and Technical (Gordon E. Sawyer Award)_1: 0.00%
65. Honorary Award_0: 0.00%
66. Category_1: 0.00%
67. Special Achievement Award_1: 0.00%
68. Scientific and Technical (Gordon E. Sawyer Award)_0: 0.00%
69. Foreign Language Film_1: 0.00%
70. Category_0: 0.00%
Hilariously contradictory response from CBS:

"CBS has nothing but the highest regard for the editors and writers at CNET, and has managed that business with respect as part of its CBS Interactive division since it was acquired in 2008. This has been an isolated and unique incident in which a product that has been challenged as illegal, was removed from consideration for an award. The product in question is not only the subject of a lawsuit between Dish and CBS, but between Dish and nearly every other major media company as well. CBS has been consistent on this situation from the beginning, and, in terms of covering actual news, CNET maintains 100% editorial independence, and always will. We look forward to the site building on its reputation of good journalism in the years to come."
google search results count in million is a fraud as well, click sequentially the number will fall in logarithmic scale
The really confounding thing here was the shaping/censoring on the comments... Want to post something that looks like an article with a comment area to boot? A responsible publication must then at least allow a healthy discourse, so that readers who don't spot the advertisement can find a little enlightenment. Alternately they may have, in good conscience, permitted no user feedback at all; put "Comments on sponsored content are unavailable" at the bottom. Good enough.

The illusion of an article plus a sham of heavily censored comments went beyond the pale.
> We have temporarily suspended this advertising campaign pending a review of our policies that govern sponsor content and subsequent comment threads.

looks like you're right
Tax code encourages having kids. If family has kids, then it's unlikely that spouses would have about the same income.
4 words: too little, too late.
To you. Ergo you ask questions, you don't insert your premises where you fail to comprehend mine.
Meanwhile, some sponsored content from Boing Boing:

http://boingboing.net/2013/01/14/dread-cthulhu-leads-his-cul...
A knotty Strings Puzzle
Great books, but why is it necessary that every hacker should read them?

How are these relevant to the hacker who writes his own Linux device drivers? Or the hacker building an open source voice recognition library?

There are plenty of hackers who do amazing work that has nothing to do with visual design.
It is all part of a scam whereby these "companies" pick up seed money from Maciej and then immediately flip to the likes of Groupon and Pinterest, whose investors promptly kick back funds to Maciej, who makes a point of firing all his employees exactly 37 minutes before their vesting cliff.

I've talked to him about it. He's a _dick_.

late edit: now he's trying to get me hellbanned. I saw him give a talk once to new startup founders about this. Anything to get an edge early on, including hellbanning innocent people like me.
Another web design site, another page that's almost impossible to read due to washed out text.

Guys, do you test your sites on anything other than Macs with "retina" displays? For example, I maxed out the brightness setting on my Thinkpad x60 and the text is still barely legible. Granted, this TP has a very average display, but do you really want to limit your audience to Mac users?
Extreme Decoupling FTW
Does it keep intact original request host names and such, or do all requests appear to come from your servers? Also what about mixpanels user stream functionality - would this break stuff like that? I can see the value prop and usefulness of this, but it is just another fee on top of a fee, in a way.
Ahh, I did not think you where pulling numbers from thin air so I just parced it as thermal efficiency so the numbers worked out.

Average coal power plant in the US has ~32-33% thermal efficiency with plenty in the sub 30% range. The best singe cycle coal power plant has 42% thermal efficiency so saying there is a 10% difference is a good ballpark a for thermal efficiency. X thermal energy times (0.3 + .1) is ~30% more than X thermal energy times 0.3.

PS: I do find it hard to be clear when doing lots of efficiency calculations using %'s.
It's a neat trick, but the method doesn't do much to reveal why multiplication works as it does. Most students will just sit there drawing lines and counting intersections without understanding why it gives them the right answer. Memorizing a routine without understanding why it works is just one step above memorizing a table.
Martyrdom much?