skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wasn't the point of "fully living in the cloud" that you wouldn't need a powerful client? Wasn't "thin client" the dream?

Then again, I guess that's why the emphasis here is on portability and screen quality... so that makes sense.

Then again #2, you need a powerful client these days to run all of the Javascript being used... so the i5 CPU makes sense.

Okay, this is moderately interesting.
> I'm not seeing the value proposition here.

I think what they're going for is the computer-on-cloud concept taken to new heights -- not worrying about viruses or malware (Google is effectively the new system administrator of your machine), not worrying about data being unavailable going from one device to another is the value proposition they're offering.

If you really consider what the bigger half of people use computers for (watching videos, social networking, basic word processing, etc.) it suits their needs well, and the value proposition will probably resonate with them.
I mostly agree with you here, I think we're just starting from different starting points. The "electronic music is future" thing is sort of a counter statement to the idea that EDM is a trend. My only argument is that electronic music will only dig it's claws into popular music. I'm not suggesting that analog instruments die completely. At least I hope not.

I know the synths are a good example of a legit hardware instrument. From the fan's perspective though, it largely mimics the skill of a pianist (even if you upload crazy other sounds into the keys). I'm more interested when we start respecting performers who play instruments conceived entirely in the digital era, with very little vestigial leftover from the analog instruments. Just the concept of that is cool to me.

As for RJD2, that's a big omission on my part, I was such a huge fan in the early 2000s. And also PL, more recently.
You need an i5 just to drive that crazy screen. People have reported that the 13" rMBP (which uses the same GPU as the Chromebook) can barely handle its retina display.
I think this is an interesting idea. Easy to bolt on to existing email providers, and client-side support for this feature could be implemented incrementally.

I wonder what kind of privacy implications this could have (and whether or not we care)? For example, someone could set up a tool to repeatedly poll your service with different parameters over time to get a sense of your daily habits/schedule. (I suppose if this was a concern then you probably wouldn't use this service in the first place.)

Overall though I think this could at least provide a better alternative to clunky out-of-office autoreplies. The sender could make better decisions about where to send an email if they knew ahead of time that their recipient was going to be unavailable.
I work in the PR space -- most of the time it comes down to relationships and resource. Having the email address and even the slightest of personal relationships with influential journalists can work wonders in times like this.

A lot of times these writers are on the hunt for sources for their articles, and making yourself available to answer questions or give quotes, whether you're the founder or someone in the PR/Marketing dept, will go a long way down the road when you're looking for coverage on a new feature or want to clarify some bad press.
UDP doesn't have any guarantee that packet is received. If you stream video that can handle few lost packet it is ok, but if you need reliability than you need TCP. So, it's kind of programmer decision what to use. In reality there should be protocol that is lightweight and somewhere in between TCP and UDP (from personal experience). I haven't read anything about this new google protocol, but i'm not sure if they are trying to do that. Well, maybe i should go and read it >:-)
Yeah I agree to interoperability. Makes it much simpler to have the same Java stack across the distribution. Either way, that's a big boost to Play framework!
For that money I want a real OS.
Actually in the UK anything getting 100k signatures is considered for debate in the House of Commons. You can see a list of debates that began in this manner (warning, pdf) here:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/backbe...
No, the company still owns the patent. However, the company now has responsibilities back to the inventor. So while the inventor still doesn't own the patent, they do have some control over it's ability to be used for evil.
I could probably copy-paste this comment from any one of the many other Scala discussions where this has come up, but in short:

Scala isn't functional; Scala is proper (pure) OO in a way that Java never was. Scala doesn't support top-level functions (only singleton objects), which doesn't exactly prevent it from being functional, but certainly suggests that the primary paradigm is still object-orientation.

It just so happens that pure OO, when properly done, happens to embody a lot of features similar to functional programming - Smalltalk is the easiest example of this (eg. the similarities between Smalltalk message passing and Haskell's implicit currying are very clear).

The reason for this is that it's trivial to create a good object system in a purely functional language, so the FP-OO relationship isn't an either-or so much as a 'special case' (ie, OO can be seen as a 'special case' of FP). The converse isn't so true; it's hard and clumsy to build a truly functional paradigm within an OO paradigm.

What GP probably meant is that Scala isn't a good choice for those who are coming from an FP background, since they'll likely notice that Scala seems very OO by comparison (because it is). Even on the JVM, there are other languages (ie, Clojure) which embody functional paradigms more transparently. On the other hand, Scala is a decent choice for OO programmers who want to get a taste of functional programming (or who want to incorporate those paradigms into their code), because Scala allows several aspects of the FP paradigm to come through as well.
Google Chromebook Pixel
> What kind of apps can you run on this?

Well, its Chrome OS, so anything that runs on Chrome browser anywhere (including Native Client apps), plus additional apps using the Chrome OS-specific APIs.

> Chrome OS wasn't a touch based OS as far as I recall... have they integrated touch into the OS now?

Chrome browser (and, therefore, Chrome OS) has been integrating touch features for several versions. Since I don't use Chrome on touch devices (except Chrome on iOS, which is a different beast) I'm not that familiar with it, but my understanding was that the support was pretty far along by now.
WMF is coming up soon. Have you been in the last couple years or going this time? I haven't been in about 6 years since I moved from Miami to SF. Curious to see how things have changed. When I was at the fringes of the scene back then, the tools that are being used for this style were just starting to come into vogue.

Also, I've seen a few performances where iPads were being used in a similar fashion to decent effect. Not sure which software was used. What are your thoughts on that? The machines these guys are using cool, but essentially still hardware. We are at a point now where an artist can commission a unique instrumachine purely in software that runs on tablets or just regular laptops. This reminds me of classic musicians throughout the ages who either invent their own instruments, or commission artisans to build them.
I have the $249 ARM Chromebook. I like it better than a regular laptop because I rarely use a laptop, and every time I need to go somewhere, my normal laptop is out of date and not sync'd with anything. The end result is that I mostly use my laptop for updating its software, not actually using it. Chrome OS handles all this automatically, so can just turn it on and it's ready.

For $249, the ARM Chromebook is built pretty well. It's small, light, and the battery lasts a long time. The screen is fine. The keyboard is fine. Sometimes it feels a little slow, but so does my 8-core i7 desktop :)
I always thought that power users use native local apps and casual users live in the cloud. Hence the emphasis on making Chromebooks as cheap as possible.
After getting an invite to action.io, I can do a lot of my side project development in the browser. I've been using it for about a week, so far, but I really like it.

Not really being able to write code was really the only thing that turned me off from buying a chromebook. I would be willing to get a regular chromebook, but the $1299 price tag of the pixel doesn't seem worth it. I don't see the touch screen being too useful, so if I was going to spend that kind of money, I'd rather just get a macbook air.
Introducing the Chromebook Pixel
The low end chrome book has been perfect for my mother. She can do email, facebook and run her etsy - all she needed. Wealthy mothers might be in the target demographic for the pixel, then. Devs? Not for a primary development machine, and it's too expensive for a secondary. Business traveler? They probably still need offline office or iWork or whatever other apps their company requires. Would be interested to see if anyone here plans on buying it.
This part really upset me - "Unlike those of almost any other area we can think of, the dynamics of the medical marketplace seem to be such that the advance of technology has made medical care more expensive, not less. First, it appears to encourage more procedures and treatment by making them easier and more convenient. (This is especially true for procedures like arthroscopic surgery.) Second, there is little patient pushback against higher costs because it seems to (and often does) result in safer, better care and because the customer getting the treatment is either not going to pay for it or not going to know the price until after the fact."
Thank you, now it makes some sense. These press releases are next to useless.
Look, I really like the idea of the Chromebook, but I feel like Google's kinda moving in the wrong direction here.

What power user lives completely in the cloud?

* Coders obviously can't use this machine.

* Designers need photoshop or other non-web apps.

* Writers are not gonna migrate from Word to something like this, because either they were already using Google Docs and are fine with their crappy old netbook, or they like Word and are gonna stay with it, because writing is still just plain better in MS land.

* Video editors obviously need real apps

* Social media experts will just continue to use their iPad3 or Nexus 7/10

* Gamers can't go without DirectX seriously

What power users are they talking about?
IPV6 vs IPV4 question is orthogonal to those addressed by the QUIC protocol. IP layer is for addressing nodes on the internet and routing packets to them in a stateless manner (more or less... I'm not counting routing table caches and such as "state"). TCP (and this QUIC protocol) are built on top of the IP layer to provide reliable end-to-end data transfers in some sort of session based mechanism.
Aside from the screen, the Air is a bit lighter, thinner,[1] has an equivalent processor, 4x the SSD, is $100 cheaper, and has access to the whole Mac ecosystem.

Again, I'm not seeing the value proposition.

[1] Arguably... this looks like 0.64" all the way across, while the Air tapers from 0.68" to 0.11". In practice I find the taper helps a lot for shoving into briefcases, sleeves, and holding it one-handed.
A higher-end processor also helps decode 1080p or higher-resolution video, or run Native Client apps and games, or just render browser content at 2560x1700.
Once your startup actually fails and is behind you, here's the surprise: You will feel an immense sense of freedom and lightness.

I'm thinking that's going to vary from person to person. There are a lot of factors involved. Age being an obvious one. For us older folks, who may have an "I only have so many 'at bats' left" mindset, the end of a startup could be seen as the end of, well, pretty much everything.

I know that I, personally, am feeling a bit of a "do or die" thing with my startup. If the day comes that I have to acknowledge that I've failed with this, I'm thinking I am headed to the liquor store to spend whatever money is left on booze, and then driving to Vegas to drink myself to death. My biggest hope will be that I find a hooker who looks something like Elisabeth Shue.
I honestly think the high price tag is the point. Google is trying to establish itself as a major brand that isn't just offering alternatives to Apple hardware for a lower price. Think of the plans to build retail stores, and how the Android brand is given less prominence these days: they are working hard to build a consumer "Google" brand that's as strong as Apple.

So far most of the devices they sold were priced to be cheaper than Apple's counterparts. This pricing move is trying to say "we have better technology than Apple and it's worth the price", possibly in anticipation of other high-end products such as Glass.

I have no idea if it will pay off, but it's a bold move.
How is this better than domai.nr? Or any other similar product of this nature?
>I think this is really trying to push the hardware to do something it isn't designed for

We wouldn't be on Hacker News if we didn't try to push things to do something it wasn't designed for :)

Anyway, the Retina Macbook you talk about is missing the touchscreen part which is a big thing for Windows 8.
The Nexus 10 has a similar-resolution screen and it doesn't have an i5.
This is pretty incredible. Not for me, but definitely a great product. I take issue only with the 32GB internal. I know it's a cloud device but it would be nice to be able to store some local videos to watch on that incredible screen. I guess that's what USB 3.0 is for, but still.
I value the people who would be your potential co-workers and the social impact your work makes over how much stock I'd get or the "20% time" I'm given to work on non-core projects.

Startups do give you the opportunity to have a more hands-on role at the company considering the size of the engineering staff. Naturally (if you're driven and you're confident in your ideas and can work well with people), can make a bigger impact at a smaller company/startup than at some of the more established tech giants. I think experience you gain far outweighs the slim chance your 3000 shares of common stock will amount to anything. You can take that experience with you to a larger tech company.
I know this is going to seem like a nitpick, but laptops without magnetic power connectors these days just feel cheap. It's such a simple addition that greatly improves the product. I don't see why larger companies aren't all converting over to them. I know apple has a patent on them, but there's tons of prior art for heaven's sake. I think the only non-apple product out there I've seen with them on it is the microsoft surface (though admittedly the surface one is pretty bad, it's still better than this style of connector).

Overall though it seems like a nice product. I'd probably be interested if I could install ubuntu on it.
It's possible: DTLS. Also CISCO uses UDP for their VPN solutions so go figure.
Do it at the router. It really helps if your router supports open-source Linux firmware.
If you figure this out let me know... :-)

50-60% of a 40-60K salary is where I am at full time 40+ hours a week.
Yeah that's off; if I'm lonely it has something to do with my mental state/feelings about my self-worth. Their Instagram shots on the homepage of people having nights out on the town/doing extroverted activities don't do anything but dissuade me from thinking that that's something I want to partake in.

It sounds like they're trying to look like the good guys by offering such a service, while actually marketing and selling to those that would use it regardless. In that sense, GrubHub sounds like a better bet. Less expectant of me to be outgoing and social for the sake of finding someone to shack up with vs. just there for the company and if something comes of it - hooray.
Yeah, if you do use cloud storage in that vicinity, it makes the deal much better. At current prices, 500GB at Dropbox is $500/yr, and 1TB at G-Drive is $600/yr. Those will probably drop before the three years is up so you can't just multiply by three, but let's ballpark it and say it comes with at least $1k in cloud storage. Of course, that's only really worth $1k for people who were actually going to use that much cloud storage, but if you were, it makes the net cost of the device, vs. just buying the storage, quite small.

On the other hand, if you weren't going to use that much originally, but buying this machine lures you into storing everything on Google Drive, and prices don't drop a lot in the next three years, it might in the long-term be a very expensive device...
I just spent a few days off-and-on Android tablet shopping/researching. It's an exciting and fast-moving market.

The generics have some great selling points - they're always the first movers on new chipsets, so you can get good specs for cheaper. The downside is that they're bad at the device integration and quality control aspects, and that can really burn the buyer. OTOH, average quality seems to be better than it was just a few years ago - I think in another year or two some of those companies might become worthy competition for the big names.

This import reseller has some really interesting articles on recent market developments: http://www.topnotchtablets.com/articles

In the end I gave up on the generics and got the Lenovo A2109. In the past I've biased towards Lenovo for laptops too - they never have amazing specs for the price range, but they're one of the only manufacturers that are willing to advertise the physical sturdiness of their equipment, and that always puts me over the fence.
The price ($1,299) should be in the title of this post so people can avoid getting excited about it.
That is one beautiful laptop (note that it's not 16:9 either). I feel like we're missing something, there's no way Google would be blind enough to build such a powerful machine (vs existing Chromebooks) that's so limited by the OS. There's either something we aren't being told or Google's jumped entirely off the deep end.

(Alternative: there's no way they could do a "Retina" Chromebook for reasonably cheap, but the Nexus 10 would seem to disprove that)
Interesting theory -- it especially makes the other Chromebooks seem like better deals
This is actually ringing a bell in me right now. For such a high end Chromebook, without the ability to feasibly add in another OS, the price tag seems far out of reach for all the current offerings online with regard to what one may achieve.

In fact, I really won't be surprised if Google has a bag of online goodies under its table right now just waiting to be unveiled alongside with the launch of the Pixel. Unless they push with this, I just don't the current market place for such an expensive Chromebook. If Google does push forward a new set of online tools/cloud offerings, it might be groundbreaking.
What stops the employee and the inventors from just agreeing to use the patent offensively? And if they can do that then what stops the company from just compelling the employee to agree?

I know the IPA says they have to obtain the permission "without additional consideration or threat," but I don't get how that's practical when companies can fire employees for any damn reason they like in practice.
> If you really consider what the bigger half of people use computers for (watching videos, social networking, basic word processing, etc.) it suits their needs well, and the value proposition will probably resonate with them.

A tablet suits those needs a lot better than a $1,300 device that can do less locally than a $500 iPad.
Are you sure it's not the other way around? Or, perhaps an intended dual functionality?

Pressing the power button on the physical machine, as far as I remember, does not load the dashboard.
The Ghostbusters' HQ, Incredibly Recreated With Lego
>I think it is purely amazing the specs for that price.

The display specs are amazing, but storage is a paltry 32GB so I guess it's compensated there.
Yes but dolphins are not selectively breeded for domestication. At all. They are anti-domesticated in fact.

If a killer whale attacks or kills a people in a zoo, (and this accidents happen) this whale is not killed and is maintained in breeding programs, as its sons. Too much expensive animal to lose its genes.
looks like 4GB
I wish that laptop manufacturers were not so blatant about copying Apple designs. Apple designs were not successful because they found some mysterious perfect design but because they were different enough and look reasonably good.
But there is still a lot of things that can be improved on that design.
chrome environment has developed enough that the "web browser" is no longer just a web browser. Consider it like emacs as it was way back when GUI's weren't around.
Probably a new thing for Java

Not really. I don't see what features Play Framework has that are revolutionary or things that no other framework running on the JVM/Java wasn't able to do before.

"Rapid iteration" is the kind of "feature" that every framework claims to allow. No one advertises they allow "slow iteration".
Contact your local cogent rep. If your dedicated server is in a building with a cogent feed you can probably get a line to it. I'm not sure their current non sales pricing and that might require a 10Gbps commit.
President Obama on Patents
Just a friendly FYI since you're new: around here we don't sign our comments.

http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
"Brilliant," thought Ender, "Eibrahim was able to distill Drama without using Sexism or Rails. He might even be able to submit a 'white' paper to a Ruby conference!"
The rise of the robots
It really is. Even if you end up fully agreeing with his reasoning, the iOS comparison shows that what he means is that "Google has killed 'Android' in the same sense that Apple doesn't use 'iOS'", which reveals how impact-less this is.
Well, they've done a good job at ignoring the subject matter even for those petitions which elicited a response. No reason to suggest they'll do anything different this time...
I love bold moves and this is certainly one of them. I just don't think it's going to sell well. Yet.

I don't think the average consumer will understand what it does and why it's priced the way it is. I understand what it does and does not do, I work in front end web engineering, and ultimately would really like to see Chrome OS take off (selfishly because my skillset would be very well suited for writing software for it). This is all a step in the right direction as far as I'm concerned. I just wouldn't plunk down $1300 for one.
Isn't it the norm on UNIX-like OS'es for things to use tons of dynamic libraries and spew pieces of themselves all over different directories?
But isn't it essentially just running web applications? I know I could download applications from the Chrome app store but I couldn't install any other applications, correct?
I think they're abusing the term 'power user' here. What they mean to say is 'power consumer.'
With 4GB of RAM, USB 2.0 (how do you even get that? what kind of oooold chipset are they using?) and only 32GB of storage, this thing is ridiculously overpriced and pretty much dead on arrival.