skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This reminds me of a comment from Richard Hamming, who worked at Bell Labs following the war:

Q: But what I sense among the young people these days is a real concern over the risk taking in a highly competitive environment. Do you have any words of wisdom on this?

A: Ed David was concerned about the general loss of nerve in our society. It does seem to me that we've gone through various periods. Coming out of the war, coming out of Los Alamos where we built the bomb, coming out of building the radars and so on, there came into the mathematics department, and the research area, a group of people with a lot of guts. They've just seen things done; they've just won a war which was fantastic. We had reasons for having courage and therefore we did a great deal. I can't arrange that situation to do it again. I cannot blame the present generation for not having it, but I agree with what you say; I just cannot attach blame to it. It doesn't seem to me they have the desire for greatness; they lack the courage to do it. But we had, because we were in a favorable circumstance to have it; we just came through a tremendously successful war. In the war we were looking very, very bad for a long while; it was a very desperate struggle as you well know. And our success, I think, gave us courage and self confidence; that's why you see, beginning in the late forties through the fifties, a tremendous productivity at the labs which was stimulated from the earlier times. Because many of us were earlier forced to learn other things - we were forced to learn the things we didn't want to learn, we were forced to have an open door - and then we could exploit those things we learned. It is true, and I can't do anything about it; I cannot blame the present generation either. It's just a fact.

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html - the best essay on doing great work that I know of.
I was not talking about open source in particular...
I would have loved to have seen this comment of yours at the top of the thread instead; I agree with everything in it. Further, I'll also step forward as someone who also deals regularly with crippling depression; being more open about it is what I've resolved to do after Aaron's suicide, and the suicide in November of one of my clients. (I've written only a very little about it before, http://www.robsheldon.com/blog/depression-programming/)

You're absolutely right that we can be sneaky. A huge part of that is the stigma associated with depression. I'm certain that if all of my clients knew about it, I'd lose some of them for the simple fact that they'd consider me unreliable in the long term.

So, when Taren mentioned that she'd been "reading up" on depression, and concluded that that wasn't what Aaron was suffering from, I did cringe a little. I came to the comments here expecting to find some discussion of depression; what I didn't expect was the top comment completely dismissing Aaron's suicide as being only about depression.

Depression is probably different for different people, like most things. Mine simply makes me more susceptible to struggling when life gets hard. I'm rarely depressed when the sun is shining and there's money in the bank account and my car is working and my business is good and my friends and family are happy. When too many of those things are off, I feel it intensely and my default biochemical response is to crawl into a hole and want to disappear. I have to fight my way back out of that, every time.

So I find Aaron's case very easy to empathize with. If I were in his situation -- inasmuch as I understand his situation at this point -- I'm honestly not sure what I would do. I can tell you that I'd feel overpowered, hopeless, and defeated. I can also tell you that I would want to punch anyone in the face who said that if I chose to commit suicide as a result of the situation, it would be primarily because of my depression.
I happen to agree but I have no say in this. If it mitigates this at all, the trial assignment is not actual work. It's been solved many times and the candidates who are good do it in 2 days, not much different than the time it takes to do an extensive round of interviews.
You can already do this with Skype through Facebook.
I don't understand complaining about the "without warning". If the course was so bad there was no hope getting it to work, surely the best decision was to stop it. So how should they have killed it with a warning? Send an email with "we are going to close this class in 2 days"? Would that have been better?
It is terrible that they even call themselves a design company. If they are willing to blatantly rip off another design for their own branding - imagine their poor clients.
> Still, the standalone apps for every publication that this thread is complaining about are free, too.

We've been discussing their effect, not their cost. If they prevent free exchange of information, then perhaps that's a meaning of "free" worth talking about.
That also introduces a dependency on ifconfig.me.

If your script contains four or five such 'less work you have to do', I bet it breaks within a year.
Ask the Right Question
> Your comment is not enlightening. It is not insightful. It falls flat on its face if you bother to do even two minutes' Googling to find that while somewhere between 1 in 10 and 1 in 20 Americans suffer from depression (http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsdepression/), "only" 38,000 die of suicide each year (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/suicide.htm).

And some similarly tiny portion of people who are prosecuted commit suicide. What's your point?

> Saying, "that person committed suicide because they were depressed" is ... I have no polite things to say about it. Saying that to the loved one of someone who just committed suicide is really, fucking, wrong. "Tracing the blame back to his parents" -- i.e., blaming his parents -- is simply, horribly, awfully, inhumane.

I'm pointing out that if you confuse causation with blameworthiness, you can trace blame back to depression and genetics. I'm not saying that you should make the mistake of confusing causation with blameworthiness! That's precisely the mistake in the article that I'm arguing against.

> If Taren is saying that she doesn't think Aaron would've committed suicide at this time if it weren't for the way that the case was progressing, we have no damn business telling her otherwise, and your completely vacuous comment certainly shouldn't be at the top of the thread about it.

That's not all she's doing. She's implying that Carmen Ortiz bears some moral culpability for the suicide, because she's in the causal chain.

> Is it possible maybe that your background as an attorney is coloring your judgement of this case?

I can just as easily accuse people who knew Aaron of leaving aside their objectivity because of their emotional investment, but I don't because I don't want to walk down that road.
How do you feel about the idea of universal child care?
FirewallIP is my killer IOS app. Once I can get the equivalent for Android, I'll happily leave the Apple ecosystem.
Interesting point. I think that's only a problem if the different TV networks had different standards. If the fair-market setup comes about because the FCC says that anybody who takes broadcast or cable ads has to sell air time fairly, then Coke won't have any incentive to leave CBS for somebody else.
I think OP was more referring to "slant" being an offensive term for Asian people. I don't find it (the domain name) offensive, but I'm not Asian (and I've never heard an Asian person called that before).

Personally I think you make things worse if you say that people can't use a term for its non-offensive meaning because it's also used in an unrelated, derogatory way. At that point you're simply promoting using the term for its offensive purpose.
Since the course was offered by Georgia Tech, hopefully the Computing Education blog (run by a GT professor) will have more details: http://computinged.wordpress.com/
MJNA, I bought a lot when it was only 11 cents a share.
...and then you go to the Elements inspector and "Copy as HTML", and then go to the Sources tab and "Pretty print" the CSS and JS, I try to hold myself on doing negative comments because we never really know all the reasons behind a decision as stupid like this, but really? Do you also disable right clicking with an alert("This content is property of my site bitches!!!")?
'soft sciences' are still sciences. I co-majored in psych and neurophysiology, and the psych section dealt a lot with statistics and the scientific method. I'm tired of this continued derision of 'soft sciences' not being 'real science'. There is plenty of 'real science' being done in areas like psychology - and it's flat-out insulting that you term it so that 'soft science' means 'uninformed'.

Put it this way: your point 3) implies that 'hard science' people have valid inputs. Why does a materials engineer specialising in ceramics have a greater validity than someone from the 'soft sciences'? What about a mathematician working on better algorithms for wifi comms, why do they have more validity? An astronomer working a radio telescope? The guys in the laser lab in the basement? So on and so forth.

Ironically, the 'soft sciences' have more do to with the climate change debate than any of these 'hard sciences' - not because of the scientific findings related to climate, but in order to understand the psychology of the debate itself - there's lots in interesting things going on in terms of how people communicate.
Unfortunately, this is where the writers desire for a good lead in headline bastardizes the gist of what Dieter was actually trying to say.

“…innovative design always develops in tandem with innovative technology, and can never be an end in itself.”

The entire article is filling in the blanks from a series of quotes. At best, the actual quote implies that design innovation and technology innovation are 50/50 partners in future products.
New IPad With More Memory Gains Little Buzz
IMAP client for coders? Let me review: not open source, web based, html emails, no PGP support, IMAP client tied to MUA, no mention of keybindings…

Nope. Not for coders. Even less for "hackers" as the webpage say.

And that's just technicalities, but as others already said, "I obviously can't afford to give my work away for free"… well, sigh.

I'm not saying everyone should use Mutt or read their email in Emacs, but I'm a little sad that this link got so much upvotes.
I love seeing two teams working together on a project like this instead of competing against one another. The web's going to be a better place as a result of this kind of collaboration.
How To Design A Profitable Website Without Stress
Maybe because they realize that treating encryption as munitions is totally unenforceable and strong encryption is basically public knowledge at this point? I know everyone has a cousin in the NSA that knows someone who knows someone who knows how to break Triple DES in 3 minutes, but there's no evidence that is actually real. Even if the NSA or whoever is years ahead of the public in math research (they aren't, BTW, these people would make far more money in the private sector) there's still no evidence to the smartest mathematicians and cryptographers that this is the case. The biggest threats to encryption is parallel computing, weak security, and possibly quantum computing in the future, not a backdoor.
Tent.io could do some cool stuff with this...
They still do work, PdaNet has an option to hide the tethering from AT&T. http://junefabrics.com/iphone/index.php
Interesting that no one is calling this an "Amazon tax", as was done when California did the same thing
Iran's Leader Embraces Facebook; Fellow Iranians Are Blocked
I only finished college because against all reasonable expectations, I was allowed to attend two different schools without paying tuition. I guess that was lucky.
Answer: Never.

As much as I would love to get rid of the shitty overpriced service I have, it isn't going to happen.

Google needs to have something of a service so they can keep their finger on the pulse. When Google knows how much it costs to provide service then they can negotiate better for their position within the oligopoly.
I expected more than, what, four slides?
Why not use RSS feeds instead of emails?
This is not something you should be proud of. Anyone can ace a class they are passionate about; the fact that you failed out of courses you were intellectually capable of destroying says a lot about your character. Getting a college degree is a sign of commitment and work ethic. If I can't trust you to stay with my firm when the work isn't a roller coaster of stimulation, then I can't count on you at all.

Full disclosure - I am an RIT grad.
> This is desired functionality by the creators of YAML, since it gives developers the ability to write and read Ruby objects to disk, like an object database.

It is? I don't think the creators of YAML exactly had Ruby in mind.

This isn't a problem with YAML, it is a problem with how the Ruby/Rails stack handles YAML.
The Same Origin Policy can be overridden by the site accepting the connection (http://www.w3.org/TR/cors/), so assuming that site is hosted by the attacker it wouldn't be helpful. If the site used (and the browser supported) a Content Security Policy (http://www.w3.org/TR/CSP/) you could restrict such outgoing connections.
Failure, Start-Ups, and PhDs
Yeah, I think if the course was on something else people might have been a lot more forgiving. I guess the instructor has spent some time with the theory side of online education but is totally out of their depth with doing it in practice.
"Most porn so strongly caters to male fantasy"

That in itself doesn't seem to make it sexist?

"Most porn is strongly rooted in objectifying women in a way which denies their humanity"

Or maybe porn is simply about one, limited aspect of humanity? By chance (might have been YouTube's recommender algorithm) I watched this on Objectification recently: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkUhW41Qpjg

I guess I can settle for "sexist porn is sexist", though - obviously there is a huge range of porn out there... Is a picture of a naked woman sexist, for example?
You just claimed not to be a scientist, yet you claim the high ground in knowing how science is conducted?
1/4 is just dishonest. Its like saying that 1/4 of ALL children starve to death (which is statistics wrapped to the point of uselessness, even without then claiming that 1/4 of all children of people in IT starves to death). When using statistics, please use some kind of reference and try to include what the shortcomings of the said statistics are. At least start with something like <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics>; which gives the reader a starting point.
Congrats to Aza Raskin. A brilliant designer/visionary that has truly helped shape a lot of what we love today. Can't wait to see what he can bring to the table at Jawbone.
Warning: this page breaks the back button.
Simon Reverb on Moupp - Direct to fans mobile app
Before we let the pendulum swing from one cargo cult to another, let's simply recognize that there are often more cues involved in conveying an interface's intention.

A login form will be accompanied by a Login button, for example. In this case, the intention of the two preceeding input fields should be obvious. (A well-designed site would permit any unique user key, including email and username.) Placeholders, in this case, are generally acceptable.

At the other extreme, a customer information form would have to rely more heavily on explicit, rather than inferred/implicit cues. This includes labels, and their heavyweight siblings, descriptive tool-tips and sidebars. Very complex forms may require extensive documentation.

Most problems have a whole spectrum of possible solutions, supported by a wide variety of tools. Don't let a single aggressive voice narrow your understanding of that.
> "Google is going to be able to sell personalized advertisements in TV shows. Forget targeting networks or shows, Google can hit exactly me, complete with all my search history."

I'm all for disrupting the oligopoly that cable companies set up, but this point you're making in particular (ie. ultra-personalized TV ads) is not something I'm looking forward to.
The proposal isn't to fix to lobbying--it's to fix the problem of corporations being so large that the public is forced to play helicopter parent and coddle them and these companies subsequently become emboldened to act like reckless entitled brats. The only point the article makes about lobbying is that it interferes with our current mechanism that is supposed to allow regulators to breaking up companies that are too big or that the Administration can just decide not to prosecute any cases.

If companies are naturally downsized by market/tax forces then they won't be lobbying to maintain their monolithic state. Rather then the financial engineers in the companies working out perverse ways to keep "profit" low, they instead have to focus on carving themselves into optimally-sized independent units. I'm assuming gross revenue isn't as easily gamed as profit is.

In your scenario, "luxury" going into bankruptcy isn't a problem--people can just buy the more common computer.
Building a content brand isn't going to be cheap or short term either.

And the MPAA isn't so formidable an enemy. They lose on issues like SOPA that receive any sort of public attention, because they don't have a populist message. Both sides of the aisle* have basically abandoned them looking for the next grassroots internet issue.

And this isn't that high of a hurdle. We already secured similar compulsory distribution rights for radio and cable without any concerted lobbying effort, because it's a really common sense solution that benefits consumers and producers. There's not as much legislative or judicial inertia on these issues as it might seem.

As to cost, Netflix is spending $100 M per show and doing 5 shows a year (maybe the others are significantly less?). But for just 0.3% of one show per year, you get a top lobbying firm. I'd be willing to bet other distributors would pitch in to defray the cost.

That's more pressure than this issue has ever seen, and it's an issue that's already been won in other domains. Given that history, I don't think it'd take more than two years of effort. Maybe five?

While Netflix is seeing revenues of just under a billion dollars a quarter, they'll be fine for a while.

Pricing: http://lobbying101.wordpress.com/about-lobbyists/how-much-do...

*UPDATE: I should have said "some individuals from both sides of the aisle," I didn't mean to claim the MPAA has lost all support, just that cracks are starting to show.
I'd much rather see Google invest their time in an Android version of something like the Accelerate API from iOS. It would be a lot more generally useful.
How would you feel if banks paid interest that was proportional to their profits? How would that alter things?
Suppose you'd never heard of this study, and some conservative institution announced a finding that names associated with males (Steve, Darnell) were more likely to bring up ads mentioning arrest records than names associated with females (Emily, Latisha). Suppose the paper announcing this discovery was full of terms like "discrimination" and "fairness," and speculated about who or what was to "blame" for treating men in this discriminatory way.

Would the politically enlightened consider this increased association of men with arrest records (vs women) to be unfair bias against men? Would there be a call for a followup to determine whether it was a biased algorithm, a discriminatory corporation, or our entire anti-male sexist society that was to blame? Might they shrug it off, placing most of the blame, not on the ad system, but on the statistical behavior of men themselves?

If there is, as I suspect, a similar "bias" against men in this ad system, then any discussion of how to "fix" it should not address the question of black/white names. It ought to deal with the larger question of what to do when the data show that the probability of X given name 'A' is greater than the probability of X given name 'B'.
Oh, thanks for clarifying!
Yeah, you're totally right and people would be better off following your advice than mine. Small communities have actually had very good success in strong-arming telecom with the exclusivity contract. In fact, I have a tiny bit of optimism that it might meet success in heavily gerrymandered towns like St. Louis (my area) where most city people actually live in a small incorporated semi-burb. There may be millions in the area, but my actual legal town, Overland, is only 16K residents and has very close ties with the surrounding incorporations. Maybe I should look into starting to attend the city meetings.
I really like the idea behind this website, there are few interesting topics. One suggestion: in "Select viewport" section add number of upvotes for each viewport (so you don't have to click on every viewport to see number of upvotes).
Big fish in a small pond moved to a much larger pond :-(

After reading I get the strong vibe that the instructors had online education experience in the context of the 20-person online classes that have existed at universities years before MOOCs. Then they moved into the giant MOOC pond thinking it would be the same. Unfortunately, they found out they were now small fish in the big pond of 40,000 eyeballs judging and crashing systems that previously worked smoothly.
I'm a ruby noob, but if I read this right it means that when you deserialize a YAML string into an object it will also create methods from ruby code inside the YAML string?

Does a serialization format really need this functionality?
it strikes me as something that is clearly dangerous and you would be better simply to deserialize data members?

Is it a common requirement to pass code around as strings?
Unfortunately, no: both browsers need to exchange volatile information to establish the connection. It includes information like how to traverse NATs to get to the other browser. You need some more centralized service to exchange that information and bootstrap the process.
The title is a little confusing, but the article just describes how one virus particle can't have any visible color because it's too small. A substance made of lots of virus particles is like a substance made of lots of atoms; of course it's possible for that to have a color.
I'm not sure I can add anything that's not been said already in response to this post, but yeah, you don't make sure somebody else doesn't sell your product better than you. But note this: if it's open source, they have to credit you - and you've got more experience with it than they do.

It's thin gruel if you're operating on the "build a product, sell it to people" model. But you're not talking about building a business on this, are you? So sooner or later, you're going to wake up to the fact that nobody's going to pay you to share your toys, any more than a kid on the playground is going to get any love for wanting to play ball but also get paid rent for the glove he's providing.