skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A few things really:

1) a good friend recommended angular to me, in pre-1.0 days, the site was horrid, and I just couldn't grok angular. The framework, site and docs have improved drastically over the last year.

2) I was initially against angular's declarative markup style, thou shalt not mix html and code, etc. But after spending a bit of time getting unobtrusive bindings to work with KO [1], and then looking at the angular equivalent functionality [2], I was sold.

3) Having to massage "business-logic" code into ko.observable* (or DS.*) is quite arduous, angular does 2-way binding on plain old JS objects.

4) Angular templates are logic-less and it strongly encourages you to put your logic into your controllers, where it can be easily tested.

In the end KO is a template-binding library, whereas angular and ember are full stack.

[1] http://gratdevel.blogspot.com.au/2012/02/exploring-todomvc-a...
[2] http://angularjs.org/#add-some-control
You're right, and I know. I have an education in economics :-)

The reason I omitted it was the difficult problem of explaining a complex subject in very few words, and still pointing the finger at banks. If you tell joe six-pack that his mortgage sometimes got cheaper you'll either have to divulge a complex explanation of why this is bad for him (which he won't understand or care about) or have him think that the banks should do some more of that LIBOR rigging so his mortgage can be lower.

It's a compromise.
They do, but they are investing their own money and can choose to value whatever they please (e.g. Social responsibility). VC firms on the other hand have a fiduciary responsibility to their limited partners to maximize returns.
No reason to be condescending. I was simply pointing out how unusual it was.
When people complain about threading, they are thinking about shared-mutable-state threading.

Obviously we will never have single-threaded systems, they would be blocking all the time.
Hey Though I didn't sign up for the service (I don't have users to SMS) -- you maybe want to do something about the top header bar once you scroll down into the informational sections... You can add some js and get a static header.. at this point, whenever I scroll the header bar jitters
At this point I have to believe that a Justice Department that will push a guy to suicide for taking files is plainly in partnership with corrupt banks. The Justice Department is merely the legal firm for the banks.
IE was always that way, actually. Please check their release dates. They were very slow by standards we expect today. After 6, they did suddenly disappear for years, but again, this is a Microsoft problem.

It was also closed source, so nobody who found a bug could just go fix it. You had to ask Microsoft, nay beg Microsoft, to fix it for you. And they didn't.

These effects compound one another. The result is that MAJOR bugs become features.
Banks are not in charge of policing the world. If the US wants to stop funds/goods from leaving/ending up in Iran they should stop those funds/goods from entering/leaving the US in the first place.
If a single company was in control of Webkit then it would be an issue, but thankfully there's not. I actually see Webkit's main competition being native apps!
Infinite Scrolling that Works
You can type in "show solution" to see the solution for a level (after a prompt). I'll have to add this to some help dialog somewhere...

(again I apologize about the discoverability for different commands -- was going to document all this before submitting)
I don't know that the two would be quite the same in practice though. It's likely that public reaction would be more of an issue in the US, etc?
Free V5 Admin tool for MySQL, Postgre, SQLite here
Known Arda and Alex for years. They are really smart guys and Palantir is lucky to have them! Sad to see you two go though, but enjoy NYC!
XML is far more structured than JSON.
Thanks! Really appreciate the feedback, I worked really hard on the animations and there were a ton of corner cases to solve in order for them to work. But I do think they serve a huge educational value, so I'm glad to hear the work (and code) paid off.
I'm still digesting the arxiv preprint, and I've also posted it to Physics Forums, which I frequent, and which has a number of relativity experts who have commented on other papers by Poplawski. Hopefully they will be able to shed further light.

The PhysicsForums thread is here:

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=672252
As an aside, I think the difference between the title and URL of this article provides an interesting lesson in editing.
Of course that's true.
Is coinbase having scaling issues?
How to analyze content posting and session data
I lived in a few 'ghettos' for years, growing up.

Yes, there is crime, yes, bad things can happen. But I fear the ghetto very little even now. I am a Caucasian, although that should not matter.

If I was a women, I might fear the ghetto, but I might fear parking garages and late night walks, too.

That says something about our society.

Still, I fear living in a state like Singapore more than I fear a ghetto.
Bottom posting is also good for people who might have missed a message in the thread. For example, I sometimes see messages incorrectly classified as spam, and it is really annoying to have to scroll all the way down to the bottom of an email just to see what I missed.

It is also annoying to deal with people who never remove quotes they are not replying to. Bottom posting encourages the removal of quotes beyond a certain level; people who top post routinely ignore the quoted text.

I guess the point of the article is not that bottom posting should die, but that quoting messages at all should die. Remove quoted text or make it optional, and the bottom/top posting argument goes away entirely. If you assume everyone receives all messages anyway, what is the point of quoting?

(Edit: Personally, I would rather not give up quoting, because messages may be lost and I would like to see whatever context I missed. It is also nice to see the context of a reply; "That is a bad idea!" could refer to anything in a message, bottom posting helps to clear it up.)
I don't know if this will help, but at least it might give you a lead on something. . .

http://www.equinox-products.com/masterformulas.htm#No Smoking Nutrition

if you really want to, you could order a bottle and do some tests on what exactly is in it. I'd be interested to see what they put in these things.
The battle was lost long ago. I've tried insisting on bottom-posting, with the result that people sometimes wouldn't even see the reply below the quoted text. Raging against top-posters doesn't pay the bills, unfortunately.

Edit: The only place bottom-posting still works is on technical mailing lists.
Most colleges (especially private colleges) already require you to write essays. Having one on adversity is also, for certain colleges, already in place. I'm not talking about automated judging, or even explicit scoring (besides figuring out hire/not hire, or next round or not), i.e. no, this can't really be used to exactly replace the SAT, but it could be used as an evaluative supplement.
I waited nearly 24 hours for my latest transaction to complete and my balance is currently missing 4BTC for no apparent reason. When you are dealing with people's money I think support is extremely important and they are doing a horrible job of communicating what is going on!?
Well, if you don't quote, you can quickly lose context because everything is threaded on a subject line consisting entirely of "question" or "hi". Plus, top-posters are the ones most likely to not include In-Reply-To headers.
A website can be huge. My uncle idolizes Mathias Wandel, who makes amazing stuff with wood:

http://woodgears.ca/

He's huge with the DIY and home projects crowd :)
We forget the most monolithic mono-culture: x86.
"No central banking, no LIBOR scandal."

Libor is not a central bank mechanism. It's a rate published by the British Bankers' Association, a private trade association. Similar to the S&P 500 for U.S. large caps, it is simply a metric that private parties have chosen to reference when setting. Libor is influenced by central banks' rates, but so would a Bitcoin economy's reference rate be a function of international money rates.
Isotropic coordinates have a discontinuity at the event horizon.

No, they don't; I think you're thinking of Schwarzschild coordinates. Isotropic coordinates are continuous at the horizon, which is at R = M/2 (where R is the isotropic radial coordinate and M is the mass of the hole); but the region R < M/2 corresponds to the exterior of the horizon, not the interior.

The standard interpretation of this is that isotropic coordinates double cover the same exterior region (which is labeled region I on a Kruskal diagram like the one in Figure 2 on the ScienceDirect page); in other words, for every value of R < M/2, there is a corresponding value of R > M/2 that labels the same point in the same exterior region.

Poplawski's paper appears to claim that there is a valid alternate interpretation in which the region R < M/2 is a second, separate exterior region (labeled region III on a Kruskal diagram). That interpretation appears to me to violate the Einstein Field Equation, but I'm still digesting the paper (see my other posts in this thread).
This is one of the key issues folks seem to skip past when discussing the differences.

I'm not familiar with the maintainers of Angular and their backgrounds, but with Ember you can expect solutions that mimic the methodologies you'd otherwise find in Rails. I'm particularly referring to OO in this case.
This is an amazing methaphor. :)
I disagree entirely. This is an inflammatory piece that is factually full of nonsensical claims that don't and haven't held up. It makes HUGE assumptions that have direct contradictions in practice. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. As for not "talking shit" about WebKit, let's look at that one claim:

> Backwards bug compatibility

This is obviously pointed at what IE did after years of maintaining the same bugs that people relied on. The article actually figured out WHY this happened: taking a year to fix a MAJOR issue results in people relying on it. IE was always updated very, very slowly. Nobody else really had this problem, and IE is the one who instilled major flaws as "features" and refused to correct them later on. This very much describes exactly what Microsoft did with IE.

But then they try to ascribe that, somehow, with major handwaving as a problem that will be seen if everyone uses the same code base. This coming on the heels of Opera deciding to use WebKit. It's very clear they are making the claim that the same problems IE was having would be caused by WebKit. This is called talking shit.

The problem is that these problems were caused by a well known phenomenon: taking years to fix major issues. Google has maintained a PHENOMENAL rate of development on their own browser, and they aren't even competing with Mozilla anymore, they're way out in front. Pushes to stable are slower but Canary is updated almost daily. I've seen major bugs and regressions get fixed in HOURS. And I've seen independent players issue patches to fix problems.

This is a picture that is antithetical to IE. It is the POLAR OPPOSITE of the scenario under which this problem initially became so egregious. There is no basis for this claim. And to the point that we "NEED" multiple implementations of a standard to find where things are ambiguous, please feel free to peruse the discussion groups at your leisure. Not only are these ambiguities discussed without referencing Firefox, IE, or anyone else, but they're often resolved with changes in the implementation or, rarely, in the spec. This would be an impossibility if we all worked on 1 code base, clearly.
> As far as I'm concerned, a top-poster is either a narcissist or very inexperienced in Internet communications. Or both.

I bet you've not been exposed to many corporate email chains. Top-posting makes a lot of sense there. I often get copied on an email chains from which only the last part affects me. For example it will be a long discussion about some task and then I'll get copied because I'm the person who does X and need to help out. Bottom posting wouldn't work here for a number of reasons:

- I don't care about the project and its planning 20 emails ago - but I still may need some information from those emails. What I need is the task (at the very top) and context if required (at the bottom).

- If anyone tried to edit the history by removing unnecessary parts, they'd most likely remove the parts not important to them, but later on same questions would get repeated as soon as new people join the conversation.

- Leaving all needed parts and bottom posting / replying inline would result in 20+ levels of nesting and each inline section would become its own thread. This is just not possible to manage without some public archive with thread support.

Both styles have sense in different environments. I bottom-post to public mailing lists, because it makes more sense there. I top-post to other people at work where exchange==email, because it makes more sense there.

I used to bring up the same argument and the same quote about why top-posting is bad - but I guess I was wrong - I just didn't see the issue from the other side at that point. This makes me think that people top-posting in html on public mailing lists simply don't understand the other side either, but may adjust with time. As long as we don't assume either side is narcissistic and allow the possibility that we're not experienced in every possible scenario of Internet communication, we may just get along... Just try to adjust to the audience and environment sometimes. This may mean top-posting to some office; as well as fighting with your POS outlook to allow you to bottom-post to a mailing list in plaintext without any attachments.
Yeah but this isn't a random location. Chelyabinsk being home to Russia's nuclear research, and relatively close to Baikonur.
The problem with startups and older folks is that they're usually not good early adopters. And a lot of them are not very fond of tech in general.

So, IMO it would be very hard to bring disruptive technology to a segment of the population that is very reluctant to change.

Obviously this won't be the case for our generation.
Could you not prove this (or at least go a long way to do it) just by finding a "white hole"?
Which dying men are we talking about? The ones that owned slaves or just the ones that made sure the black guys could only leave through the door to the alley?

Look, I'm not saying that there's not a lock of fucked up in the world. There surely is, and some of the bank stuff is probably a part of it. But if you step back a bit and consider the big picture things really do appear to be moving in the right direction overall.
Oh I'm not offended, but let me explain how I read the comment string. At first you were insulting the people that vapidly shared quotes. Then I questioned if that actually made them morons. Then you said that the very act of conflating 'vapid quote sharing' with 'sharing ideas' marked a person as a moron. I was the person conflating those two, not the people you were originally insulting. Doesn't that make it a personal insult? If I misread something please do correct me.

Anyway I would say that a moron is someone that is stuck at the level of simple ideas, not just someone that indulges in simple ideas from time to time.
They were uploaded to Scribd, so if you're on a Mac you can choose the print option and then open it in Preview as a PDF or save it directly as a PDF right from the Scribd preview on the page. I had trouble using this method with Chrome, but Safari worked fine.
I used to bottom-post until I noticed that I was the only person doing it over several years of communication, and that following the old convention now made _me_ look like the newbie who doesn't know how to use email.

Top-posting is efficient for single responses to single-issue threads because it brings the newest and most relevant message to the forefront. Context is not a problem for most messages because readers who have been following the discussion can get sufficient context from the sender and subject line. For the minority of messages where it is a problem, the parent post is right after the text. Context does become a bigger problem when there is a long thread with multiple users discussing multiple topics using the same subject line, as often used to happen on Usenet but which I have rarely seen in email.

I will still inline-post if replying to multiple issues in a long post like in old Usenet debates.
We'll talk about this Tuesday :) People usually have a very good reason to prefer the language they're more comfortable with, because it makes them more productive. Of course, it could be easy to dispell if some guy insists on writing only assembly, or C++, vs Python. I've known a guy who wrote whole Windows GUIs in assembly, it's pure madness.

There are many valid technical reasons to rather choose C than Python, Java than Perl, or PHP than Go, Erlang rather than C++ ...

But Perl vs Python vs Ruby? Hardly any difference, extremely similar dynamic languages. It's only a matter of personal taste at this point.
Downloadlink there does not work for me: AccessDeniedRequest has expired
Link to Scribd?
> So as a word to the wise for first time entrepreneurs, don't be afraid to ask investors, VCs or others where their money comes from.

Is the $150K Yuri Milner convertible loan offer still open?
>..., but they're worse when you're suing a megabank, because the suit impacts the broader economy.

Or so the hypothesis goes. I'd argue that avoiding a hypothesized short-term economic problem in this way simply creates the much larger problem.
My only criticism is that there a million modals you have to go through, and some are even multi page, adding complexity. I would rather have fewer modals/pages that show more text at once.

But overall, this is super handy, great idea :)
Just dumb luck, I think. In general, anything that depends essentially on working in base 10 tends to be just coincidence :-).

If you compute some more places, you get 1.0000000271816967980437100574683393 so the digits of e don't continue for very long.

The thing that's more surprising on the face of it is that the result is so close to 1. Let's rearrange it a little:

exp(s3 gg) ~= exp(1) s3 gg

which I prefer to write as

exp(s3 gg - 1) ~= 1 + (s3 gg - 1)

because the series for exp looks like exp(x) = 1 + x + ... -- so what gives you the value close to 1 is that s3 gg - 1 is rather close to 0, so that the first couple of terms of the series are close to the actual value of exp(); in other words, that gg is close to 1/s3. So far as I know, this too is just a coincidence. (There are lots of simple-ish constants between, say, 0.1 and 10; it's not really that surprising to find a pair that are approximately reciprocals.)

The e-like digits that follow amount (after a little simple algebra) to the fact that (s3 gg - 1)^2/2 ~= e/10^8 or, if you prefer, 1 - s3 gg ~= sqrt(2e)/10^4. Which smells very, very coincidental to me. It's a basically random smallish number; why shouldn't it be close to sqrt(2e) / a power of 10?
Privilege seems to be a common theme today, based on the very worrisome line of thinking that averaging over 150 million people spanning 100+ years tells you anything meaningful.
"Well, if you don't quote, you can quickly lose context because everything is threaded on a subject line consisting entirely of "question" or "hi"."

Agreed, see my edit; I would rather not see quoting go the way of the dodo. Unfortunately, top-posting discourages quoting entirely; the quoted text just piles up at the bottom of the message, easily turning into hundreds of kilobytes of text, until someone is kind enough to delete it (usually a bottom-posting sort of person).

"Plus, top-posters are the ones most likely to not include In-Reply-To headers."

Shouldn't that be done automatically by one's email client?
I'm sure this is relevant for a lot of people, but personally I didn't really identify with a lot of the points.
Money consists of central bank money, or currency and deposits at the central bank, and private money. Bitcoin would replace central bank money. It does not, however, replace private money.

If I paint your fence and you give me an IOU, we just created money - real services were rendered and a nominal claim was accepted in return. Similarly, Bitcoins are as (if not more) theoretically fungible as Treasuries. Banks finance themselves in the wholesale markets collateralised by Treasuries. A repurchase agreement using Bitcoins is not beyond practical contemplation.

Note that fractional reserve banking originated on the gold standard.
VCs showing interest in DeveloperAuction
I don't think I have ever seen someone so fully embrace logical fallacies.

Do you have any reason to think the article is wrong, besides who the author is and where it was published? Any at all?
Edit your quotes. We don't need to (re)read the whole thing.
I am probably totally misunderstanding all this, but it sounds like the big bang is the white hole.
Can you give an example of a bad interface for submitting resumes?
I think it is the opposite, he makes journalism look like smears. I pretty much agree with him 100% on the issues but 0% on the presentation -- I can't stand to read his articles because they drip with vitriol. Over the years I've grown used to seeing that style associated with attempts to deliberately misinform and pander to the worst elements of the population's character. So when I see him do it, it compels me to distrust his reporting.
Outlook at least used to be a big offender in not including those headers.
I'm not familiar with Taibbi's work but what exactly is wrong with this article? His facts are easily verifiable. Sure its polemical but that doesnt exclude it from being journalism.

Indeed it seems he's had some commendations for his financial writing regarding the crap we've seen from banks in the last few years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Taibbi#Financial_journalis...

Is there evidence he's been loose with facts in the past or do you take issue with his writing style?
California Scientists Propose System to Vaporize Asteroids
> (...) corporate email chains. Top-posting makes a lot of sense there. I often get copied on an email chains from which only the last part affects me (...)

This is actually a great argument for top-posting! Totally agree on this one.
I'm actually working on something for this problem, but it's been slow finding a web designer to help make the interface. On the upside, the core technology for solving the problem is dirt simple.

So any web-design help or interest from a potential customer would be really helpful.
I usually top-post because why would someone I reply to want to see their own text first? Gmail hides the quoted part anyway.

The exception is either when it's already a big group thread in which everyone bottom posted, or if I'm replying in-line to several parts of the email.

I don't get why some people are so annoyed by bottom and/or top posting though. For me it all seems to go quite naturally...
MoviePile now has a Chrome Extension to Download Embedded Videos
Bought off, some maybe, for those that won't be bought, they'll either play along, or face fierce opposition within their own party, lose financial support and hence, have a slim chance to be reelected. Consider some of the things Ted Kaufman said in the recent PBS special about this exact issue.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/business-economy-fin...
See also http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/in-japan-fa... "In Japan, fax machines remain important because of language and culture"
Didn't know that, I never actually had to deal with the US admissions system.
I'd love to get feedback on this extension or the actual app itself. I haven't been able to get any comments on HN on MoviePile yet. Thanks!
My first HTML5 game. "Stellar Alien", physics-based space game
The original source still works fine:

http://sonnydickson.com/apple-technician-guide