skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A car that costs thousands of dollars is a little different. That's why cars have titles. You don't officially transfer anything when you sell a phone or a Kindle, other than a bit of cash and the device itself.

You would hand your American-style locked-to-a-carrier cell phone, that you're paying a monthly service contract on, to another person for a sum of cash? Without wiping your address book, without de-registering the device from the provider account, etc.? Really? And you'd keep paying the contract for the cell phone you don't have anymore?

I can see why you'd imagine that cars are different because of their high value. That's not what I was getting at, though.

I chose cars as an example because of the registration. Even the lowest value cars are tied to an elaborate network of rules - tax laws, operation and licensing laws, environmental laws, financing and insurance contracts, and property rights. A cell phone is a lot like that; without those ties to the network, the cell phone is worthless. A Kindle is a lot like that too.

I'm not arguing that Amazon should necessarily get involved or that they should necessarily have a "find my Kindle" feature. But if law enforcement requests information that Amazon has already promised to hand over to law enforcement I can't see any excuse for not making good on that promise.

Even if you think requiring a warrant is the best policy, the story here is that Amazon now claims the information is lost, permanently beyond the reach of a warrant or anything else.

I don't think Amazon needs amateur defenders and in this case I don't think they even deserve them. Do you think that if the FBI knocks on Amazon's door and demands account information for all customers who read certain books (on doing chemistry at home, on radical fundamentalist religions, etc.) that they will chase the FBI away, or is it more likely they'll cave instantly, without even asking about a warrant? I find it far-fetched that Amazon is refusing to help with petty thefts as a way of looking out for our privacy. They're just doing what most businesses do: the easy thing.
"GPL is a hindrance to your code, not a help... unless you're lucky enough to have your code become popular with a large open source community."

On the contrary. GPL helps those people that I want using my code to do so. Namely, those people who would contribute code back under the GPL. The GPL encourages them to do so, while BSD hurts this cause. So it's BSD that is a hinderance to my code, not GPL.

"GPL prevents any proprietary software maker from using your software."

Good. They can go fuck themselves.

Proprietary software makes can pay programmers to write software for them. I'm not going to help them for nothing if they're not going to contribute any changes they make back.

"Software companies need to make money for a living, and most of them want to do it selling their software, not hoping someone will pay them to support their software."

They're welcome to try to make that money without my giving my code away to them for free.

"In practice there's no difference between BSD and GPL in the worst case, and in the best case, BSD is better."

You're dreaming. GPL has proven its value time and again. The only reason to use BSD is if you want to help someone make a profit for free, without them contributing anything back, and let your own code be assimilated and made closed-source. I choose not to do that, thank you very much.

"Some awesome devs make Cool GPL Software™. Hundreds of large proprietary software companies like the look of the software, but it's GPL, so they can't use it."

Once again, fuck large proprietary companies. I have zero sympathy for them, and aren't going to be slaving away for them for free.
Completely agree with you. However, one thing to note is that while PCs are open as of now, both Microsoft and Apple are moving in closed direction. With Windows and App Store, what is there that stops them from making it difficult to install anything outside the store?

Power users will surely complain a lot, but I don't think an average customer will do much!
Amazon is a selling goods on the internet as cheap as possible company, not a crime investigation company.
Cheater:
http://www.evernote.com/shard/s2/sh/707fc56c-8165-45b1-a2e8-...
You're right. His earlier books used it though. The concept of space marines is a cliche in games and scify space books though.
A programming editor to replace emacs?
Love it!

Can't wait to use this when I present at conferences.
A Farewell to Bioinformatics
That entry just has a definition and some etymological notes. At best, it only tells you what one particular source on the subject has to say.

It does absolutely nothing to address the entirety of my question - an answer to that would require some comparative scholarship on actual usage in various regions.
I was puzzled why Gandi.net does not look anything like this now. Just realised the article is over 2.5 years old. Though, I suppose no less useful a tip.
Not necessarily. I while ago I ventured myself in the stock market and in less than a month I traded over US$ 150k in call options. How much money did I have? about US$ 2k, but I made over 100 buy-sell transactions that summed up to that amount. Unfortunately for me the strategy I was using wasn't profitable enough to outcome the transaction fees :(
Startup Tips From Amazon Founder Jeff Bezos
For Big Data, Moore’s Law means better decisions
re: the glove vs. mitten controversy, i would like to note that there are rules to ifoundyourmitten. i do not accept work gloves or plastic gloves as contributions. however as gloves or perhaps 'fingered mittens' as i might call them... do keep hands warm during the winter- i think they are acceptable contributions.
I will pay anything for this!
I've heard this before and I think it's a great topic. Is the addressable issue that there needs to be a way to "upgrade" to the newest version or is there a fundamental oversight into how we handle upgrades of amazing resources like this. I feel like there is an elegant solution out there but it just hasn't been adopted into CSS and JS yet.
And don't forget all the stuff that is shoved down your throat to make you more "engaged" with the game! Like touching a building to make it work, getting notified every 5 minutes of a completed action and what not. I find myself playing expensive but ad-free/not so purchase based games because of this. Need For Speed, GTA, Infinity Blade are a few names that come to mind!
That seems even worse because it's slaughtering the wrapability of the text. That would only work on a container of pre-set size, and maybe then only on certain clients. How do you know which font client x will load?
I've seen that a couple of months ago on the page of a big airline. Since I had google-analytics.com domain blocked in HOSTS, it took me a while to realize the issue. However it was the only time it happened to me in many years (other than deliberate "please disable adblock to see the page"). Very soon they redesigned the whole page and now it works fine.
I really really like this take. Refactoring is usually pitched as something that is completely orthogonal to solving the actual problem you were given. I think too many of us (clearly, I'm projecting) are weary of anyone else going on a refactoring spree because we see it break down things that were just fine separate. Often with only "warm fuzzies" being the actual gain. The progression shown in this post is really really good.
OK, I'm obviously missing something, and part of the problem is that I'm not a Python programmer so my brain is obviously in "skim-mode".

Couldn't the problematic DRY pattern be alleviated by refactoring the following call:

filter_profanity = kwargs.pop('filter_profanity')
tweets = Tweet.objects.filter(**kwargs)
if filter_profanity:
tweets = itertools.ifilter(lambda t: not t.is_profane(), tweets)
return render(request, template, {'tweets': tweets})

Into something like:

def tweet_list(request, **kwargs)
...

tweets = get_filtered_tweets(kwargs)
...

def get_filtered_tweets(**args)
filter_profanity = args.pop('filter_profanity')
if filter_profanity
etc....
end
return tweets
end

Why does the logic for the Tweet filtering have to be encapsulated in the rendering function?

// edit:

What might help is if the OP showed how the non-refactored code would look with the profanity_filter and pagination features. I agree that his refactored proposal is confusing...I'm just having a hard time imagining how the non-refactored version would be less so.
Facebook Plans to Redo Traditional Emoticons
Delve's Social Newsreader Launching Paid Enterprise Accounts
I'm glad that I did not come off as too much of a jerk. If you think about it there was a lot more that would need to be explained than simply what github.com is.

The network graph could be awesome but for anything with more than 4 forks its just an odd looking subway map.
TPB AFK, The Pirate Bay Documentary, Is Available Now On YouTube
Updated to include link.
I agree with you, however a sizable portion of water you take in comes from the food you're eating as well.
Regular presentation are only controlled by the author. I made a special case for the demo. Yes, there should be a unique-sync code for each visitor to the demo. I though the universal sync would be collaborative. Might have been my mistake.
Nginx rewrite/redirect for blog url
Ah, yes, it is just a question of definitions. I took it to mean something like "has generally good support for standards," in which case no version of IE besides maybe 10 would make the grade.
Its also easier for birds to migrate than for land based creatures.
> Any explanation of Monads must at least cover the actual Monadic operations and the laws that relate them. Also, all of the examples he brings are not actually Monads, as explained by others.

That's not true at all, and thinking like that is the reason why so many awful monad tutorials exist, and everybody outside of the Haskell community immediately tl;dr's when monads are mentioned.

You don't need to understand the monad laws to use monads. You do need to understand the monad laws implement your own monad. They are two completely different levels of understanding, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Yeah everybody use a gun several times a day to fullfil a basic need, make sense.
"I have begun to think now that the most important thing when writing software is to write the usable minimum. If then the tool becomes popular and other people begin to use it, then I should I work on the documentation and interface."

That. Like someone pointed out, I find that documenting and testing the key parts (that is, those I know at least I will reuse) is always a good investment of my time and prevents major headaches down the road. I've been experimenting with project structures that clearly separates the set of tools and functions that will be reusable, and those that are one shot. I focus all my testing efforts on former, and cut myself some slack on the latter.

Btw, I speak from a "scientist" perspective, and nothing I say applies to professional software engineering (I mean, I don't think it does).
> "The platform is almost completely open!"

That's kind of the problem. You can do anything, and plenty of people are. But there's no platform 'boss' to lay down standards.

Aside from (fleeting) de-facto standards (particular flight sticks in years past; the 360 gamepad today) input support on the PC is a pain point for devs. Shoddy drivers, shoddy APIs, shoddy manufacturer support -- to say nothing of the state of vision, voice and touch.

There's a reason PC games are treading water with support for little-to-nothing beyond kb/m and dodgy/partial support for the 360 gamepad here and there.
How are "input methods" a major PC flaw? The platform is almost completely open!

That's kind of the problem, though- the market is too fragmented. Microsoft can release the Kinect as the control device to buy, and everyone does. Meanwhile, the PC has has five competing devices sharing a smaller market.
It's been about 9 months on and off. But the latest iteration was a furious week of coding.
I agree. I can fully understand why his partner is doing this and I can also understand why some people will "just sign" but there is no reason to be critical of someone who isn't willing to just follow the pack.

In the physical world you are also sometimes confronted by people who stand outside a supermarket with a petition and you're supposed to be able to make a fully informed decision as to whether you should sign literally on the spot. If that's such a good system (it's not obviously) we should extend it to other things. But it's not and it's not even as if the person requesting the action that you have personal knowledge of their reputation or whether they are presenting the info fairly and completely showing both sides of the argument.
I think the PC has already become unprofitable for many (Valve are one of the exceptions, and they clearly see writing on the wall). There are very few PC releases that aren't primarily console titles.
I love copy & paste! I also defended it in this scholarly article: http://harmonia.cs.berkeley.edu/papers/toomim-linked-editing...
with a video: http://youtu.be/1wo_7MTdWWI
I've been debating about whether I want to open-source the scientific code I've been writing. A lot of it could be useful to other people in the molecular dynamics field.

I recently introduced my advisor to Github, and he thought it was a good idea; however, there were a few hesitations. The first, most importantly, is the likeliness of a bug. If you put your code on a very public website like Github, there is a chance it's going to be scrutinized by everyone in your field.

Now, unless you are one of the best programmers who has ever lived, there are bound to be bugs in your software, and when someone discovers them, it could have a deleterious effect on any journal articles you've written that used that code. The issue is that even though most bugs do not lead to significant changes in results, you would still need to redo all of your data to make sure that is the case. The software industry has long recognized buggy software as a reality, but I don't think the scientific community is as tolerant of it (hence the reason a lot of people hide their code).

For my MD simulations, I use the well-known LAMMPS package. Bugs in it are discovered all the time! (http://lammps.sandia.gov/bug.html). So I think there needs to be a collective realization among the scientific community that these are bound to occur and authors of journal articles can't be persecuted all the time for it. A lot of computational work is the art of approximation so I would just lump "human incompetency" under one of those approximation factors.

Despite this risk, I think I'm still going to release my code at some point as I would personally welcome critique and improvement suggestions. I'd like to think I'm a better coder than most scientists since I've been coding since I was twelve in multiple language paradigms and have won a major hackathon, but eh, who knows. I'm quite sure my environment isn't up to industry standards because I've always coded solo rather than in a team.
This is the harm-reduction debate. For example, Swedish snus and electronic cigarettes are much less harmful than smoking, but the argument goes that quitting nicotine altogether is less harmful than anything. Yet people still smoke and use nicotine, so switching the stalwarts over to less-harmful methods of nicotine consumption would save lots of lives and money.

Likewise, it may not be possible in the short term to convince everyone to stop driving cars. Self-driving cars won't fix the long-term problem of efficient transportation, urban sprawl, or emissions, but they can reduce its harm by efficiently providing car-like service to the public.
I have not been so fan of most of google work. I do have Gmail account, but that's it. In the past I used use other services such as, search, websites, doc, Google+, ... but not any more. Even Chrome, I use it for testing and nothing else.

Few years back, Chrome has launched what is been described as Evil EUlA [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=google+chrome+evil+eula] because of what the EULA at that time contained, as fellowing:

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights that you already hold in Content that you submit, post or display on or through the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content, you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content that you submit, post or display on or through the Services. This licence is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

Now its been changed:
11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights that you already hold in Content that you submit, post or display on or through the Services.

Although they clean their evil mistake but i never used Chrome, i lost respect for them.

As its clear Google search engine is the best even after Bing attempts. But still i don't trust them, I see they know more about me as user while using their search. I did not need that much time to find out they do collect data, track every thing I search for. Recently I ran into [http://www.duckduckgo.com] where they set them self different from Google as "We believe in better search and not tracking." Then i said bye bye google search.

I have ghostery installed in Firefox and I love it. Basically I block any script for Analytics, tracking, privacy and advertising.
Check out what AdSense do behind the scene: [http://www.ghostery.com/apps/google_adsense]

Data Collected:
Anonymous (Ad Views, Analytics, Browser Information, Cookie Data , Date/Time, Demographic Data, Hardware/Software Type, Interaction Data , Page Views , Serving Domains)
Pseudonymous (IP Address (EU PII), Search History, Location Based Data, Device ID (EU PII))
PII (Phone Number)

Data Sharing:
Anonymous data is shared with 3rd parties.

As you see while you are searching your info (which google got them for free, because you trust them or you don't know) is been sold for third parties.

I want to feel safe and not been watched for what I browse and search online. That's why I like my new trust search engine [http://www.duckduckgo.com]
Yeah, that seems likely enough.

What is the functional difference between running an organization that doesn't have protocol X and running an organization in which the boots on the ground - the people charged with implementing protocol X - do not know or follow protocol X?
I just spoke to them on their website's livechat/Olark -- they're very responsive and helpful. Also the service is free so no reason not to play with it.
> "Again, I should be clear: I'm not imagining some cartoonish image of crowds marching through the streets with pitchforks."

If that is really the case, then maybe think next time before you start off by making comparisons to lynching.

Yeah yeah, I know. "Why not LOIC him?" doesn't carry the same juicy emotional punch...
For subtitles and ledes, or really anything larger than the main body text, I actually prefer the <br/> solution. It's important not only to break in a pleasing shape, but also to break at grammatically-sensible points. So it's better to say:

Take the blue car
to the shop

vs

Take the blue
car to the shop

or

Take the blue car to
the shop
That's because you have OSX font rendering, here is what it looks like on ubuntu: http://i.imgur.com/YysUNuX.png

I'd hate to see what it looks like on windows (especially chrome which makes fonts even thinner).
That still seems complicated to me. You're still passing around an object representing a collection of arguments/options, and there are functions whose outputs vary based on this object's state—it's not immediately inferable from the call to `get_filtered_tweets` whether the result will be filtered for profanity or not. So you might as well have that bit of code right next to the code which uses its result, rather than splitting it up into two separate (but still complex) parts.

EDIT:
I added a bit here on how I would do it better without needless refactoring: http://localhost:3000/2013/02/08/copypasta/#a-better-solutio...
> This may come across as a straw man argument

Big time. The refactoring in this case was ill advised. When things started getting hairy, it should've been backed out.

Piling too much flexibility in one function is a common mistake. A justification for copy/paste it does not make.

I worked at a shop with this rule: don't try DRY until you've seen at least three repetitions. I think this saves one from premature refactoring.

Another way to put it: Refactor when the code speaks to you, that is when need is evident. Keep the result only if its a significant improvement. Avoid refactoring only because you are enamored of refactoring. (Or enamored of a rule.) Goes for any programming technique/tool, really.
Twitter secretly launches lolcats UI
Any list of quality web typography resources accessible for programmers? Thanks
Square seems to be the go-to AFAIK.. they probably have the widest following in terms of absolute number of businesses adopting them. I could be wrong though.
I'm sorry, but paying customers of what, exactly? Amazon's Kindle device? Amazon's Kindle store?

Both, presumably.

Which of these products comes with a service which helps you find your stolen goods?

Let's suppose that neither does. What does this have to do with "telling your paying customers things that are not true?"
Ask HN: Contracting for a LeanStartup based project
What kind of legal contract makes sense for a client who wants to develop MVP first and then iterate with the contractor over 6 months period to create the final product.
These latter two examples are worse because the first splits up the subject and the latter splits up the prepositional phrase.
The fact that there are fewer possible bitcoins than inhabitants on this planet should tell us that bitcoin should be a good investment at the current excange rate...

...given that bitcoin is still around when all blocks are exhausted, legal to most of the worlds population by then and not outcompeted by something better (better marketed?) by then.

Warning: I am no economist, I still don't know what a fiat currency is although I might have an idea after reading this thread.
Thanks Jakub. Just what I was looking for.
It isn't that surprising to me, considering the payout for miners was halved a month or two ago.
"evaporation cooling"

Exactly if you give people a "complaint department" and a method to file a complaint you put distance between their anger and the thing they are angry about and they will many times cool down and not explore other more viable options (not sure if that is what you meant but it's one of my thoughts about a process like this).
That screenshot is Skype from 2011. This is how the app looks today: http://phandroid.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11...

Responsive design is one of Android's most fundamental design principles. It just took a while (and a few million tablet sales) for developers to take the platform seriously.

Most new android apps are responsive these days. And those companies that maintain their existing apps are busy adding big screen support.