skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think what's sad here is not the desire for the respect of one's peers, but the means chosen to attain it; or rather, the arbitrarily-established mechanisms for doing so.
By 'healthy conversion rate' do you mean people signed up for your service/ purchased your product? Or are you simply referring to click through rate?
They have a "business" lines of products for notebooks, desktops, servers, .. they even have top of the line monitors. In the case of laptops, look for "Latitude" which is basically equivalent to Lenovo's ThinkPad.

I have E6400 and it has all the nice perks - metal-ish body so it's not squeeky and wiggly like a plastic notebook, one screw to remove bottom (to clean up fan, change ram, ...), one screw to change hard drive, "multi/ultra"bay slot so you can swap the useless optical drive for battery or hard drive, only few screws to change keyboard (so you can get an underlit one), docking station, international next business day care (with accidental damage) ... They just don't look so good as ThinkPad did/does. But that's a matter of opinion of course.

I haven't seen any of their books recently but if I were to buy something new I would definitely look into them.
There's a similar routine which has some jQuery selector syntax resemblence: https://github.com/blacktaxi/dollar-gee
In Sweden, engagement rings are a matching pair of plain gold bands. At the wedding, the bride adds a (nicer) wedding ring, and the groom exchanges his engagement ring for a wedding ring.
It isn't in your argument, but is the elephant in the room. If low usage was really the cause for GReader sunset, G+ should have been chopped too. It wasn't, hence it isn't.
Savings, Selling (thing I own) and Freelance kept us alive for a long time until we first raised some money. Lots of occasions where the lights actually went out, but as old friends it was much easier for us to brush it off and keep finding ways to press on.
While these are excellent suggestions, if you check out the links he makes to other posts there is a LOT of noise in there that he has to wade through, weigh (open/close/discuss) and take action on.

My interpretation of it is that he is lamenting how the issues list has become a catch-all for everything from bug fixes (which are fine) to random non-Backbone related development questions, and looking at the issues at lot of them are in the form of "HALP!" with a very light description.
I'm glad to hear it -- I just wrote a page that needs it, one that looks terrible with the lame substitute that non-compliant browsers offer instead (a text entry window). At the moment only Chrome supports the range input type -- Firefox doesn't and MSIE doesn't.

The page in question: http://arachnoid.com/relativity (scroll down to the General Relativity section to see the range control)
Logstash is OSS, fork it and call it whatever you want ;).
The firing was definitely an overreaction. Then I feel her choice of tweeting vs. just telling him to cut it is really a form of conflict avoidance rather than some noble goal for sake of the children as she spins it.

Still I think the guy most likely acted like that just because the female was around. I mean, would a developer seriously bring lewd jokes each time forking is mentioned? Perhaps it was his take on acting manly or just general lack of social skills. It's unfortunate how it all ended.
But for simple issues, is it necessary for Mark or Dave to go through the tickets themselves? The examples you gave didn't have to be personally closed by Mark.

If people are willing to contribute, wouldn't they also be willing to help you out with all the gruntwork? Is it just a matter of setting it up with Github, which may or may not support that level of granularity?

Man, that really sucks.
There are many nice cars that aren't Porsches, and there are ways to own and/or drive a Porsche discreetly.

No matter how nice a car is, the large-scale social consequences of flashing a status symbol should be considered before purchasing a brand associated with that, especially for a daily driver.
If you notice in the comments, someone with the listed name claims their identity was stolen.

Its quite expected that a competent criminal would use a stolen identity so as not to connect themselves to the crime in any way.
What about the precious metals that go into your smartphone?
Those same "bunch of scum" generally are responsible for digging that out the ground too.
Love an idealist, so unpractical though.
I don't know that anything "financial" qualifies as an evolutionary concept.
The biggest and best advice, is to sort out your relationship/responsibilities with your partner in the business.

Make it clear from the start and don't argue about it later.
You don't have an option for "less than nothing". Long story, but my parents split and left me with their debt and my brother to raise. By the time we started the company I was £200k in the hole, at the age of 22.

Nothing like having a fire up ones' backside to make one work...
جدول الضرب من 1 الى 12
I wonder if you hackers could do this in one line of code?
Wanting respect is fine, but not respect based upon the size of an arbitrary stone.
My uncle Jack Jolis, a diamond dealer/consultant who has worked for forty years in every part of the globe where diamonds are mined, bought, sold and cut, written for WSJ and testified to congress on diamonds, had this comment. His words:
'Well, one man's "bullshit" is another man's "eye of the beholder" sort of thing.

It is true that of the three aspects that originally made diamonds "above the rest" and therefore desirable, i.e., their rarity, unparalleled hardness, and beauty, the first two don't really apply anymore and the third is increasingly iffy as technology marches on -- but the same could be said of other objects to which we ascribe great value, i.e., "fine" art, which began as sublime and evocative interpretation of life, divinity and transcendence, but which these days more often than not is just a hodgepodge of "Emperor has no clothes" random splotches, un-made beds and (literally) piles of shit, but to which we nevertheless still ascribe great value. So go know.

In any case, the "death" of diamonds has been predicted before, and by better writers and more thorough reporters than Mr. Dhar, here, c.f.: Edward Jay Epstein "The Rise And Fall Of Diamonds", 1982, -- and yet Cecil Rhodes' babies are still going, stronger and more lucrative than ever.

There is certainly nothing intrinsically valuable about diamonds -- but then what does have "intrinsic" value? Even gold is largely "valuable" because of a near-universal belief and agreement that it should have value, and has done so since the dawn of recorded time. If everyone in the world suddenly decided that gold (or diamonds, come to that), no longer had any value, well, that "value" would certainly disappear -- it has happened before, to other "valuable" commodities, such as tulips in the early 17th century and other evanescent enthusiasms throughout history. But some consensuses seem to be more permanent and on solid ground than others -- and I suspect that diamonds and other precious stones are more in the "gold" class than in the "tulip" and "piles of arty shit" class....

So are diamonds really "forever"? Maybe not, but probably so. They've survived the emergence of synthetics without so much as a hiccup, and they've even survived the disappearance of DeBeers as a controlling agent (DeBeers, although still an important factor, no longer has anything like any monopolistic control -- it is just one of 4 or 5 other "important players" in the business), and the diamond industry even laughed off (with my, ahem, small contribution) the "blood diamond" non-scandal, so I'm pretty confident that they (diamonds) will carry on through such iconoclastic pinpricks and nitpicks as may appear on W's "Interwebs".

So, "bullshit" diamonds well may be, but tell me -- when did being "bullshit" ever stop (or even slow down) anybody or anything, especially in these days of ascendancy of the likes of Justin Bieber and Dennis Rodman? Nevah hotchee, GI -- in fact, I'd say that bullshit is one of our great growth industries as we move heedlessly into the 21st Century, so if diamonds really are "bullshit", then this article can only constitute yet another boost for the industry.'
Oh dang
Former US Treasury Official - Fed Desperate To Avoid Collapse
I upvoted the original submission because I think this is an interesting and important problem for maintainers of large OSS projects.

It would be nice for Github to provide some administrative tools or interface changes to make maintainers' lives easier. However, I am tentatively in agreement with the posters who suggest that this is largely a management problem.

I've read the examples you linked, Jeremy, but I don't see why those issues (and the majority of issues on large-scale projects) require review by the head maintainer/BDFL. Most of these issues are chaff - either they're not reproducible, poorly explained, or requesting features which have already been discussed and dismissed. It shouldn't need Mark's or your time to say "nope, works for us" or "already decided we're not doing that".

At Coffeescript/Backbone/Bootstrap/etc levels of activity, you have a huge, vibrant community. Out of all those thousands of developers, surely there are a couple of active contributors who can't commit to the project at the "core dev" level but who have to skill and time to take on the role of "issue maintainer"?
Issues need a priority/voting system a lá reddit.

People who run the project could set a minimum for getting notifications about issues.

Different maintainers could have different minimums.
Avoir un site e-commerce pour vendre ses produits en ligne.
10 Questions to Assess if Your Career is on the Right Track
Do North Korea have the expertise to do such attack? It sounds to me more likely that supporters of North Korea did it (say groups inside China).
It happens in a similar way to anything: you see what works, and create sense with symbols and consistent repetition as in any semantic field. Why is one burger better than another, or one steak? I can't say we have the science yet for exact measurement, but it may come. Sometimes it's obvious: cheap industrial plastic supermarket cheddar really is full of less decent chemicals for your senses than pricier artisan ones like Humboldt Fog. That can be demonstrated, and I suspect in the future more will be demonstrable with wine. So far you can realise why that cheap Zin blend from Lodi doesn't really do it for you with the most obvious of measurements: yield! They get even 10 tons per acre there rather than 1-3 tons in a high-quality vineyard. Fewer nutrients and flavours to go around, and more water, sugar and untasty components have to flesh it out (poor overburdened vines, eh!) that's just the first variable: I know some more, but there are good soil scientists who can tell you a lot about all of the other variables too. Feel free to ping me for pointers, as I don't have time to write about it now.

I frequently prefer cheaper wines to more expensive ones, and agree price-quality correlation is not good, depending on what your wine source is, but at the same time you're going to have to find good data to demonstrate no correlation: for price is one (flawed but still input-data-rich) indicator!

We do fool ourselves with patterns, but also we do not. AFAIK there is not enough research to rove it either way, but qualitative methods can point us to better theories to work with until we have good enough constructs for quantitative analysis for our minds' perceptions.
Yes. It's really important to be selective in what you choose to oppose, but just because you're opposing certain social norms doesn't automatically mean you're invalid. They deserve objective analysis.

My wife and I have been married 4 years now and gone primarily without rings. No negative consequences so far, and I'm definitely glad I didn't dedicate 20%+ of my income to a valueless trinket. We have objects that signify our relationship, but they're cheap or free, and imbued primarily with sentimental value only. This is, in my estimation, much better than propping up the diamond myth and cartel.
When we got married 22 years ago my wife was about to go into law school and I was living on a pittance doing a PhD - so we didn't spend much money on rings.

These days, although she still has her original engagement and wedding rings she doesn't wear them. What she does is buy rings every year or two and designate these as her "official" engagement and wedding rings...

The particularly amusing thing is that she never spends much money (I checked this morning and the rings she is currently wearing cost £12 and £55). However, they were bought in interesting places (Marrakech and Krakow) and look great - in particular her current "engagement" ring (cost £55) - has huge clear stones. Because she is now a successful commercial litigation lawyer everyone assumes they are real, although when people ask she tells the truth. Everyone assumes that because she could afford a real ring her fake ring must be real.
From all psychology signaling is most powerful when it shows expensive resources spent on unpractical, useless things. As the peacock tail.

Spending a hundred bucks on something useful is not a signal showing wealth; but lighting a cigar with a hundred dollar bill is such a signal.

Being seen with, say, an expensive computer is less powerful wealth signal than being seen with an exactly equally expensive ring; the computer might be (even if it isn't) practical, but the ring states "hey, I can afford to waste money, so if you don't then obviously I'm of a higher social status/pecking order than you".
Alright, I'll bite.

See, when you say you see a "thread full of bitter men", I cant help but feel you are expressing some kind of bitterness yourself. At least, I don't share your dismissive feelings towards the concept that a ring should symbolize more than monetize (yeah, strawman right back at'ya :) ). You know... when something is _really_ important, yet no argument is provided to back it up. "Makes her smile", is a positive side-effect, yet not a rational reason that can counter what is bad about diamonds. The whole notion that affection and devotion should be demonstrated through financial sacrifice (and I don't use sacrifice in the terms of "something given up or lost", but "destruction or surrender of something for the sake of [deity]") is a cultural irrationality that you seem to have a very positive look on, and good for you!

If someone looks at his/her ring, and feels negative emotion because this ring, which is meant to symbolize the "let's share a life together" between two people, is only made of plain gold, and not something which was more expensive to obtain... It's a good thing for me that I find this cultural irrationality an unattractive red flag.

Have a nice day.
This is a beautiful way to show everyone that you guys know what you're doing and to build brand loyalty. Best of luck!
There's more to Agile than Scrum. And there's more to Scrum than Scott's saying.

Ah good - somebody else go there first ;-)

To James' link I'd add reading the Agile Manifesto values (http://agilemanifesto.org/) and principles (http://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html - everybody forgets the principles).

If folk want to learn a bit more about Scrum the Scrum Guide is a nice summary and not that much longer than Scott's mild oversimplification (http://www.scrum.org/Scrum-Guides).

(And since he's too polite to pimp it himself - James' book co-authored with Shane Warden is one of the ones I recommend to folk wanting to learn about agile http://www.jamesshore.com/Agile-Book/ - well worth a read if you're interested).
If they don't, they still probably have some offshore funds which they can use to hire criminal groups to perform such attacks.

Anyway with current information one can only speculate on what just happened in Korea and who was behind it.
And just by the fact that the sprint planning meeting is taking hours I can tell that they're not doing Scrum effectively ;-)
C# Smorgasbord, Filip Ekberg and ReSharper
The Half Life of Facts

Most useful explanation I have found to explain why the pre-internet age grown-ups (that would also be me) get stuck thinking that facts remain always the same.
That's not correct with regards to the dollar. It's inflationary because the purchasing power of those dollars in the bank decreases more rapidly than you accrue interest on them.

The current US inflation rate is around 2%, so unless you're making more than 2% interest on your money every year, your purchasing power is going down. For point of reference, yield on a 1yr treasury bill is around 0.14%.

Bitcoin is deflationary because, once the coin limit is hit, the number of available coins will decrease over time simply due to coins being lost. As the currency contracts, the purchasing power of a coin goes up over time.

In a world where BTC had an inflation rate of -2%, 1 BTC now would buy what 0.98BTC will buy in a year. Any investments you make now need to yield in excess of 2% per annum for you to be better off. In an inflationary world, an investment only needs to beat the T-Bill rate for you to gain (or least be less worse off), which allows for less risky investments.
It's relevant not simply to "an entire gender", but to the whole world of people, primates and most other animals.

It's because social status by definition is a zero-sum game. For status symbols, the absolute value is irrelevant; but what matters is the value relative to your peers.
Superhero.js: articles and videos on building large JavaScript apps
Botnet uses hacked devices to scan the internet
An end to negativity
Not just phytic acid, but lectins and all sorts of nasties. Red kidney beans are poisonous unless you soak them properly before cooking.
This is what makes starting-up in India crazy difficult Its true.
It's done server side, so isn't just a case of applying to your image a linear transform that matches the destination image of the phone you want to place it on, then using "green screen" technology to insert the transformed image into the image of the phone.

Seems pretty trivial, technically. Maybe I don't understand your question.
Blood diamonds are no different to blood coltan.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/blood-coltan/
Just like one can have safe_parse() and unsafe_parse(), there could be an elevated API that could be safely used when vetted. For instance, when the SMTP server rejects a request it could put it in a special queue which requires manual confirmation.

This type of problems happen so regularly. In fact, a Japanese trader accidentally punched one too many zeros and lost a lot of money for the company. This type of problems can get very expensive in an instant. As an industry, we tend to think of input validation in passing because we don't pay enough attention to the problem domain.
jag - see above reply.
So the markets are such that some wines are heavily underpriced and others overpriced, often because of extrinsic social variables! Absolutely! I'd be very surprised if the correlation was zero, however! Show me the data!

I'm interested to see how they did it. I'm open to new data and changing my mind (I have done several times already, and used to be insufferable!) but I want to see several studies with good method.

I see you're not denying that more expensive wine can taste better, and I misread this at first to think that you were denying any possible objective (conventionally-agreed at least) values for "higher quality" wine and that it was all bull. You haven't said that, and so I think you're not contesting that, but just noting the market's strangeness, that there is no relation in price and a wine's agreed quality.
Why not just use Domo? https://github.com/jed/domo
I think creating nodes in javascript is a nogo, keep your html in your templates and just read the templates from js and there you can refer to nodes to do whatever you want in js.

But as always there are exceptions to the rule, and then this lib may come in handy.
It would be really interesting to see which of these alternatives that has the highest success rate 5 years later.
Well, the magic is what enables the big productivity boost. It's a higher risk, higher reward approach. In some domains that added risk is unacceptable, but for many applications it's a very worthwhile tradeoff.

I think often when people say "I hate rails", they are really saying, "I hate building the types of apps that rails excels at". Which is fine, and makes sense, because rails excels at making apps that can be very cool and innovative on the product side, but are usually pretty boring on the engineering side--it doesn't really get interesting for the engineers until it's time to start replacing the lower level tiers of rails with something else. And while secure best practices are certainly stressed (and included as defaults), conservatism isn't seen as a valid reason to hold up progress. So you get both the speed and the occasionally bumpy ride that strategy entails.
I think he's probably talking about dealing with the fallout from failed tests rather than the tests themselves.
The problem is that the manifesto doesn't give you a concrete way of doing things; Scrum does, and it can be really as simple as this article says.

Basically, the article is a backlash to things like http://programming-motherfucker.com/ , which is a backlash to people doing Scrum, XP, etc. so wrong that it seems no better than the beaurocratic monstrosities that the agile manifesto was a backlash to.
That's entirely right.

This is more of a problem with the current workflow of the current implementation of GitHub Issues, for large projects -- it's absolutely something that can be solved.
you mean one document per collection.
An Outage is not difficult

If that's the maximum NK can do I wouldn't be worried

What would worry me is the old and insecure system South Korea uses (based on IE and ActiveX), that should be their biggest worry right now.
Nice theory, but you don't want to marry someone who doesn't behave like a 10 year old, you want to marry the person you love.
Sneak peak at new Firefox Developer Tools
Honest, slightly unrelevant question: does North Korea have access to the world wide web? And if so, who do they connect through?
Forget learning how to 'sell' a product. You can't just 'sell' a bad product.

WHAT YOU WANT

What you really want is to learn how to research, develop and market a product 'that sells'. To learn this, I suggest you do two things that might surprise you.

DO THIS
First, write a 2 minute infomercial script for your product. Practice being the presenter. This is a surprisingly informative exercise. Make sure to address any questions or objections people would have about the product, support or refunds in your script.

THEN DO THIS
Second, write out a one page direct response magazine advertisement for your product. Anticipate any and all questions, objections and concerns in your ad. For examples, see old-school direct response ads by Joe Sugarman for products such as the Pocket CV from the 70's.

IT"S THE PROCESS
By going through the process of writing a 2 minute infomercial script, and also writing a 1 page direct response magazine advertisement you will be forced to understand and echo features, benefits and emotional benefits and also anticipate and answer questions and objections. These are the two most valuable selling skills whether in person, online or in print.

SELLING IN PRINT
Being able to sell in print is really valuable, because your ads and advertising can scale to billions of pages.

There's a lot to know about selling, marketing and developing products that sell. I've been studying it for 10 years, and it's going to take a lifetime of learning to do my best work.

I would be glad to share some things I have learned with you. Reach out and let's connect - dan [at] tinylever [dot] com.
Thanks god in Europe the social pressure is not as strong as it seems to be in the US, reading from the comments of you guys