skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You don't know what you're talking about.

A "fukishima/chernobyl" situation at a fusion plant simply cannot happen. Period. First off, containment is trivial because a shut-down fusion plant generates zero heat and pressure. Zero. Which means that even in a worst case scenario you can just press the big red button and walk away, then come back perhaps years later for any on-site mitigation work. Compare this to a fission reactor where the fission products will continue to generate enough heat to cause a lot of mischief if you don't apply active cooling continuously for decades.

Also, whereas in a fission reactor the byproducts tend to include huge quantities of the worst sorts of hazardous radionuclides such as Sr-90, I-131, and Cs-137 (which are picked up by the human metabolism and then happily radiate your vital organs from within until you die) in contrast a fusion reactor's load of hazardous isotopes is almost trivial. There's a small amount of "activated" isotopes formed by the neutron flux transmuting the structure of the reactor, but this is easily mitigated by picking low activation materials for construction and also by the fact that the materials will tend to be kept in place. The other major risk is Tritium release, but Tritium is not terribly dangerous (it doesn't bioaccumulate, it dilutes rapidly, and it does not stay in the human body long) and the amount that could be released is likely to be small.

Saying that a possible accident at a fusion plant would be "bad but less bad" than Chernobyl is like saying that a paper cut would be "bad but less bad" than a guillotine. They are simply not comparable.
A programmer who is unable to program a Quicksort implementation is like a programmer who can't program anything relatively complex.
Indeed. None of these numbers answer the question "How many graduates who wanted a job could not find one?".
New retinal implant gives sight to nine blind people
And the Google+ Go community is growing fast and is already larger than the sub-reddit. https://plus.google.com/communities/114112804251407510571
With the proliferation of smartphones and projects like Google Glass and Oculus Rift taking off, I really think we'll start to see custom chipsets to improve the performance of augmented and virtual reality systems (battery life, lower latency, and more processing power).
Great point. From what I've read and experienced, you're right on the money: there is a very good chance no one ever wants to use it.

Don't let this paralyze you though - it's why the idea of an MVP and Kickstarter are so popular right now. The best advice I've heard on this topic: just give it the best shot you can, fail fast if it doesn't get traction, and try to learn as much as possible from failing so that your next project is less likely to fail.

This gives you a really great deadline too: MPV in 2 months, fail if no traction in 6 months (or even faster?).

Alternatively, if you really don't like the above idea or you can't build your idea into an MPV in a couple months, stick with your current job and work on your product on the side. This let's you take as long as you need to make the product, removes the pressure of starving, and can turn into an enjoyable hobby even if you don't get much traction.
A related article from Valve's Michael Abrash that may be a better introduction to the matter:

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/latency-the-sine-qua-n...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4985100
It's far from clear that chip-and-pin has been the unmitigated disaster you imply it to be. You're right that chip-and-pin has problems, but those are design and deployment problems, not problems with PKE in general.
Re "heat sink": Most of the global climatic effects of our current energy infrastructure are due to the greenhouse effect, not direct heating. This stops going, which can only be a good thing (though at this point, a lot of greenhouse gains are already "baked in", absent some significant, and hugely expensive, project to take the greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere).

Here's a physicist doing the math: http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2013/02/19/direct-and-ind...
All those radio waves need to be shared between every phone connected to that cell, and between all the other radio based services out there (e.g. Television).

For a direct fibre link, all the available bandwidth is dedicated to you.
Deciding to stop programming and manage people
> Not everyone can produce real-world code. Most of what we do for a living belongs to our employer. Side projects, particularly in the US, can be an issue for IP reasons (California is somewhat of an exception here)

Says who? My side project that I do on my own time doesn't use the same language as my day job nor does it tackle the same problem domain. How can this be construed as an intellectual property issue?
You are contradicting yourself about parametric polymorphism. First you acknowledge it doesn't exist, then you claim a limited workaround solves it.

>It's definitely not harder to prototype in - and I say this as a functional programmer

Have you used haskell to make the comparison?

>if you're writing Go idiomatically, you really shouldn't be thinking very much about the types as you write them.

I don't understand where you are coming from here. I am not thinking about types, that is why I need the compiler to point out when I mess them up. The problem is go has such a limited type system, that you have to change much more code when you refactor, and the type system is inadequate for catching many errors, in particular dealing with error handling. The combination makes go worse for refactoring than haskell. It is certainly much better than python for example, but you seem to be convinced that go is the top of the spectrum and nothing can exist above it.
Push Your HTML5 App To Seven Stores Simultaneously
I think domain knowledge is important, but sometimes it can be a trap that hinders inovation. As Pierre Bayard put very nicely in "How to talk about books you haven't read", when we don't have domain knowledge we open ourselves to questions that we wouldn't make otherwise.
Not only don't use the same password, but don't give your FB password to another app or website. Duh.
This is great. My first thought was "perfect, Haskell!"

reverse "whatever"

"No reverse function? but we can use the internet? The Prelude source probably has the best implementation of a reverse."

foldl (flip (:)) [] "whatever"
I think they look pretty sharp. I especially like the blue color, although it definitely stands out a lot--it's just nice to see a product that isn't glossy black or bright white.

The best thing, I think, would be for Google to offer insurance at some reasonable rate, so you can get a replacement if someone steals your device. I'd pay $50/year to protect my $1500 device.
I assume your simple solution handles common things such as recurring billing and the ability for websites to re-use previously entered card information without requiring the user re-enter it.
I believe I detect a tacit assumption that there's a correlation between quality and message length. Long-form encourages repetitive rumination, digression, and purple prose at least as much as it does detail & ornate linguistic aesthetics. And short-form encourages wit and clarity as least as much as haste and inattention.
I found cryptography, for example RSA, a great application of math and a neat example to see how math has real world applications.
I realized this was way too flippant. To elaborate, we're paying around the same as what everybody is paying, and a candidate with similar experience and skills to my own would make the same I do. It's rare to have someone turn us down due to pay. The people we want generally don't apply in the first place because they already have a job they like.
I'd be interested to see your numbers benchmarking with `siege' rather than `ab'.
To expand upon the author's idea, the problem is not just that credit card data is reusable, but that possession of credit card data amounts to permission to charge any arbitrary amount to it. Not legal permission, mind you, but permission in the sense that the infrastructure lets you do it, and you have to sort out the consequences through social/legal channels after the fact.

Not only should future payment systems be based on cryptography, but they should also require an affirmative step on the part of the payer to initiate a given transaction of a given amount. In other words, it shouldn't be a matter of handing over your card number, or even a one-use cryptographic token, and letting the merchant fill in the details. You should have to explicitly send an amount of money that you specify. Then, of course, a smart merchant would verify that the amount is correct before fulfilling her end of the bargain.

In other words, the process should be that the payer gives money to the payee, not that the payee takes money from the payer.

Unfortunately, as the author points out, progress on this front has been almost nonexistent with respect to the established credit card networks. We may have to hope/work for a totally new system to replace it. (Perhaps Bitcoin, or something inspired by it.)
If you think it costs you something to be interviewed (thus your suggestion about an application fee) it certainly costs the company at least that much if not more. They are paying their staff to work with you on something that likely will not produce direct value for the company (usually a throwaway project or trivial task)

Plus they will spend time before and after the interview discussing your qualifications, performance etc. It comes out about even.
There's a flip side to the problem - not only can startups not pay, but they might not even know that they should be talking to someone like Matasano. Many tech startups severely underestimate the security implications of what they're doing, especially those dealing with very private business data or very personal consumer data.

With respect to fees, there's a whole swath of lawyers, accountants, and other service providers who work with companies from YC and other incubators. They don't work pro bono - they operate on some combination of fee deferral and / or equity. I realize this still doesn't have as much impact as the checks the big guys write, but it seems like it would close the gap.
I am not suggesting anything. Please listen to Eben's talk: it is much more serious than an "accidentally" entangled account.
WPScan for Android, WordPress vulnerability scanner
I think the monumental failure of Nintendo's Virtual Boy pretty strongly illustrated that if you can't do this perfectly, you shouldn't do it at all. Within the current constraints (including budget), making a "good enough" product is clearly not feasible. As this article points out, even a few milliseconds too much causes massive problems (worst case: severe nausea – car sickness).

On top of that, it's not even clear that people want this. Full-on Virtual Reality is a bit antisocial and hyper realism isn't the only thing that makes games immersive and/or fun.
I would love to startup on Mars :D
> It violates few basic principles of Lisp - one common underlying list-structure for code and data (Clojure's code is a mix of different containers)

I can't see how this is true. IIRC Common Lisp has more standard data types than core Clojure does — it's just that Clojure has reader support for more of them and uses them a bit more freely. It is still homoiconic.

> It violates a general evaluation rule - one for every expression with a very few special forms, etc.

I assume you meant to write something like "one list for every expression". Clojure has essentially the same rule. In general, the things you are probably thinking of that omit lists where most Lisps use them (like Clojure's let and cond using juxtaposition rather than lists to group things) are macros, which could be written in any other Lisp just as well. These are done for convenience, much like Common Lisp's loop.
Meteor: first draft spec for DDP
I assume the parent post does - and so do I, in at least this particular case. Seeing how closly knit Facebook and Spotify are.

There's not just a shared investor group - there's also a partnership between the two companies. And it's pretty strong, as in; yes, it does seem like they have shared product control or at least great influences on each others product management

Mark Zuckerberg is listed and quoted as one of the references on their sign up page, by the way.
Are you suggesting that a mutual (or any) investor has no influence whatsoever?
Microsoft's cancellation process - can this even be legal?
Are you sure it's the same public? You're making it sound like the same people who were once for it swung against it.
I havent done pairing interviews but I have tried giving candidates some started code and having them develop a solution based on that.

One piece of logistical advice here: keep different kinds of keyboards/IDEs available. I use a mac and I interviewed a candidate who wasnt comfortable with the mac keyboard. In an interview situation where a person is already slightly nervous the last thing you want is for them to be worrying about keyboard shortcuts!
The user experience of a pizza?
Can you describe features of a pizza, which are giving you a great "user experience"?
What distracted me the most was not the glasses, but the weird gazing into the distance look that he did when "reading" the glasses. Kind of disturbing.
Don't believe everything you see in travel shows... I live in The Netherlands, and I can tell you we have out share of ugly sprawl (look up The Bijlmer near Amsterdam on wikipedia or google maps for instance). We have homeless people too, health insurance is mandatory but more expensive than in the US, a fair share of issues with immigrants, and a huge tax burden. It's not all peaches and cream here!
The difference is that, using public-private key cryptography, an evil merchant can't, in any way, copy my european card. I can be sure that my CC number will not be stored.
An Update on Our Trademark Issue
This is pretty shameless, even for Facebook.
Increasing Public Access to the Results of Scientific Research
Nodejs_resource.markdown
Benchmarking on macbooks is often an exercise in testing the mediocre default configuration of the network stack, not your language. My macbook pro gets 4k rps with apache, node, go, and nginx. YMMV and all that, but I'm always wary.
Do not staple anything, ever again
My bet is that when Clojure gets to be 29 years old it will, also, suffer from several problems. I don't believe it is possible to design a future proof programming language. Who knows what will come next and how it will affect programming tasks?
A large portion, if not most, of the card numbers being bought and sold on the black market are obtained via phishing or via malware on the end-user's computer. Better encryption between the computer and online stores doesn't affect either of those theft vectors.
No One Is More Excited For Google Glass Than Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg
Deuterium is pretty cheap. It's 1/2500 of the hydrogen in seawater and easy to separate.

Tritium is bred from lithium, which isn't rare either. The main problem here is that tritium breeding limits the rate at which you can build new reactors. So tritium is going to stay pretty valuable for a while but that price will go down as we build more reactors breeding it.

Neutrons are definitely a problem, and that's one advantage of General Fusion's design, which has lots of lead and lithium to capture the neutrons. Of course the whole problem goes away if one of the boron fusion projects works out.
It says quite clearly: "Log in with Facebook or Spotify". That means you can log in using a Facebook account or a Spotify account.

The username field says "Facebook Email or Spotify Username". So when you type an email, you log in using a Facebook account.

It's not that hard to understand. By the way, that account you made on the sign up page is still unused: you logged in using a Facebook account, which is a different account from the one you just registered, so you have two spotify users now - one you signed up w/o Facebook and one you actually logged into.
That's all obvious.

But people tend to copypaste and share this url to facebook, twitter or hackernews. Which completely skews your GA information.

Therefore my original question: is it possible to avoid this.
Can we get details about the way this is implemented?

I assume you poll Github on some timescale? I noticed that Beeminder took around 24h to see my commits.
Awesome post Gabe, and so so true.

It doesn't help that a million different people and organizations are trying to get through to you, the end user. My wife expressed it pretty clearly to me when she said "I feel like I'm being attacked by a million marketing mosquitoes trying to grab their bite of blood." There are advertisements everywhere, they become the digital snow of the electronic generation.

Getting through that organically takes a long time, years. You can blast through it with a big chunk of cash (temporarily light up the sky) but you risk resentment from the folks who don't care. Leanness and frugality are the traits to cultivate when you're in it for the long haul.
At least for English users, Google voice commands are pretty damn amazing these days - it's pretty rare that Google Now on my Nexus 4 misses, aside from heavy background noise and folks who decide to start talking in the car when you're trying to ask it to navigate somewhere.

For simple, prompted, two or three work commands, it would work even more reliably.
The notion that getting cold causes illness is basically discredited, and in fact the reason that people get sick more during cold seasons is because they tend to stay indoors in closer contact with other people. That supports the nordic practice of having babies spend more time outside in fresh air even when it's cold.
I wanted to try spotify a while back but got stuck when it required a FB account.

Sounds like it's no longer required, but I suppose I still don't trust them enough to try their service.
It is totally possible! Anyway, fonts have been removed in the name of being on the safe side.
This is awesome! The "random examples" is a nice touch. The visualization is great.
Of course this fight is not over, and I agree with your points to some degree or other (especially "they might not wait as often" - memory access being the bottleneck is in my experience less likely for a moderately sized multi-CPU system; and as to room to improve power savings - muscle needs calories :)

In fact my point was only that fight is never over, as a counterpoint to "brawny cores beat wimpy cores most of the time" - not that the reverse statement is true.
> Go's type system, by design, stays out of the way - if you're writing Go idiomatically, you really shouldn't be thinking very much about the types as you write them.

I'd wager that if you aren't thinking about what your inputs and outputs are going to be at every step, you're introducing bugs or working harder than you have to. A strong static type system like you find in Haskell formalizes that so that it's required, but even in the languages I write most often (Python and C, which get bashed constantly for their type systems), this is just what writing solid code is about.

In Python, I may not be thinking exactly "what is the type of this thing, foo", but I am asking myself "okay, I'm trying to iterate this thing, is it actually iterable? How do I handle when it isn't? or guarantee it to always be an iterable ?".
The cure for what ails you is travel.
That still doesn't help the candidates who just don't see the trick.

What if you know memoization and dynamic programming, but it just doesn't occur to you that day, that to correctly split on spaces (not adding empty tokens at the beginning and end of the string, etc.) you need to use a state machine?

You could give the candidate that "step" of the solution and continue on to see if they know the rest, but the candidate will likely be feeling a loss of confidence. They'll think "hey, if I couldn't answer the 'easier' part, why should I be able to answer the 'hard' part?" and then their mind will lock up even harder when they search it for the next step.

This is why IQ tests are organized as a series of orthogonal questions. No question is dependent on any other question, so you can just move on quickly from a failure and prove your worth on another question.

In fact, on a usual IQ test, you're even given five or six "presentations" of each question, each slightly different--like math homework questions with different numbers inserted. It happens quite often that you'll get stuck on, say, recognizing how one specific pattern of shapes go together, but will be able to see a different pattern instantly.

Interviews do the opposite of this; they are presented as if intelligence is a linear quantity, and if you fail on any part of a puzzle, you couldn't possibly be able to solve a "harder" part. In other words, interviewers are using the "error" theory of intelligence, rather than the "bugs" theory[1].

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5233497
Want to sell your app?  Use analytics
Facebook and Spotify are tightly partnered together - at one point they actually REQUIRED the use of Facebook to log in. The option to register without Facebook was only reintroduced recently.
What a dumb article.

Especially how the author makes such a huge deal about how a 1.5:1 screen is "almost square". (Of course, a 1.6:1 typical flatpanel isn't, of course).

Not to mention that's it Gawker blog-spam crap.
Zombie Cells - Maybe better than living ones
But "pushing" has proven to be problematic for US consumers. They've basically traded the 5 or 10 basis points of fraud losses for a substantially better user experience (although they didn't really get to make that tradeoff decision).
It probably came from comparing accept percentage of Harvard (6% now but 7% a couple years ago) with a kidnap chance calculated for the whole of children born in the US. Of course applicants are already a selected subset and not representative of all candidates born in the same year. It's a pretty useless comparison.

e.g. 40 kidnaps per year for 10 years = 400. 400 * 700 'times more likely' = 280,000. Divide that by 4mil children born in a year to get 7%.
Engineers are culturally unusual in being very tolerant of criticism (from other engineers). That's because our compilers, nominally subordinate, yell at us on a daily basis about minor syntactic errors.

With managers, you can't take the same approach. You cannot simply tell your boss that his managerial style is nukular buttfail. That gets you fired.
Seems hard to imagine it's beneficial for the kids other than in situations where there are fewer germs outside but as cultural idiosyncracies go it makes a lot more sense to me than the fear of sleeping with a running fan in Korea.

In Germany there's an obsession with stale air in rooms, during the day you "auslueft" the room but when you're in the room you close the windows and doors to prevent uncomfortable or even unhealthy drafts.

Irrational health beliefs are very stubborn, like many Germans my mom and her sisters believe that sitting on a cold surface can lead to bladder infections, here in the US nobody seems to know about this.
How to Monetize your API in Minutes using Mashape
One more instance of The Law Of The Too Solid Goof: In any collection of data, the figures that are obviously correct beyond all need of checking contain the errors. Corollary 1: No one you ask for help will see the error either. Corollary 2: Any nagging intruder, who stops by with unsought advice, will spot it immediately.
Great idea! Try using a pentatonic scale, or sharp the 4th (F) to avoid some dissonance.