skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Eric Schmidt tanked Sun, Novell, and Google. His best CEO ability is ejecting before the crash, so his effect on Google is not yet evident.
No, actually removing context from headlines, reverting them to original titles, or even completely changing the link target is a long-standing tradition on HN. It's not reserved for YC-related news. And it has been happening more often lately. Is that a policy now?

It's not a big hurdle or anything but does take away a bit from the convenience of scanning new content. Those editorialized titles often contain the reason why a submission is relevant, or, like here, what is the "claim to fame" of participants... that's one of the benefits of having humans post those links.
Can you explain further? How does using the Accessibility framework in a way other than designed to facilitate testing (code that really shouldn't make its way into the final app anyways) get in the way of Accessibility in the app used by the end user? Are the internal hooks into the Accessibility framework overridden at the API level?
I've never understood why taxes, benefits etc. all seem to work with step-based functions instead of continuous ones – anyone care to explain that to me? The only theoretical benefit I could see is that it makes/made administration easier, but with everything being automated that surely can't be true nowadays.
His answer can actually mean anything.
Not providing an RSS feed is like not providing an API; you're giving up control of how scrapers access your website, but I'm sure that readers will find a way to get automate content aggregation either way. It's just annoying to lose standards.
Ask HN: Link to Dev or VC Blog with great reviews of business/tech books?
I'm looking for a blog authored by a well known techie or VC (can't remember) who also scribed great abbreviated reviews of meaningful business books that he's read (pretty sure it is a he). Failed to bookmark and desperate to locate...

Anyone help?
NASA outreach is tremendous bang for the buck.

Remember, science isn't just so the scientists can learn. It's so the scientists can learn and then present their finding to the public.

Of course, NASA didn't cut outreach because they carefully looked at their budget and decided this was the 1% that produced the least marginal value. They decided to cut outreach because it would generate public outrage.

I think NASA's budget should be increased, FWIW, but I recognize when I'm being played.
Redistribution of wealth is incompatible with liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It violates my liberty when my wealth is taken away by force.

Wealth redistribution is morally hazardous to the recipients, getting something without earning it or doing anything in exchange.
You don't want to develop your sites in a way that helps the disabled access it? Is this a value of your company?
PS Crystillize if you had any actual experience with the law rather than Internet armchair surfing, you would know that Twitter is no different than TV when you're sitting in front of a judge defending your case.

If she's making money off her Twitter posts -- and it appears she was and still is -- she better be ready to pony up if the people she's using to generate that money ask for their fair share of it. In this case, she's received national attention and will probably spin it into a profitable book or something. Not so for the victims. If these guys don't sue it's more likely because it's just not their style. But if the tables were turned, and they photographed her with libelous remarks attached, I'll bet you lunch that she'd sue them. They have a case if they want it. And by the way, they claim she did libel them. The forking part of the conversation had no sexual connotation; and she has yet to provide anything resembling a direct quote except for the expression "big dongle." Which is pretty funny and fairly harmless, frankly. She spiced it up with the "forking" thing because she's a tabloid journalist. And after this no serious publication would hire her as a journalist, because she doesn't fact check. "Hey guys, I'm about to tell 10,000 subscribers your "forking" joke. Can you say it again so I can actually hear it?" That is how professional journalists behave, because they have a spine.
It's absolutely insane if they are using Mongo as their source of truth (and not say some kind of caching layer). If there is one thing that should be ACID, it's financial transactions.
> Under California's Fair Employment law, if you complain about harassment, your employer can't fire you for it.

But she wasn't fired for complaining about workplace discrimination using the available means for grievance management. She Tweeted her complaint and went so far as to risk a "false light" defamation prosecution. Not at all the same, and not acceptable behavior.

> I think Sendgrid shot themselves in the foot when they explicitly said why they were firing her for complaining on Twitter.

No, that's what justifies the firing. If they had said she had no right to complain, they would have been in the wrong.

> If they had just said, "She's being let go" and left it at that, they'd be in a better position, legally.

No, that would have opened them up to an unfair termination lawsuit. They needed to give a reason, and the reason they gave was entirely appropriate.
I trade real money on a similar system, but using genetic algorithms. I worked on it for maybe 4 years before putting money on it in 2013. So far, I'm up 1.05% on $284K traded.

I wrote my own fairly pessimistic backtester. Also, I currently use the generated models for buy signals, but I tend to sell earlier than they dictate, because I find it hard to turn down even a modest profit.
Heh.
I've been defending my right for penis jokes those last three days, but in that case I'll totally agree (and my sword is yours).

The right for our "penis jokes" also entitles us to a moral responsibility: be "a bit" sure we can make these jokes to our audience (though I admit I don't check/care for people around whose ears have long reach, but this is another debate), which is why you ought to be a little self-conscious of what you are wearing.

On the other hand, this makes me cringe a bit... I bought this hoodie that says "Cool story bro" (obvious reference to the meme), what if I stumble upon persons who will understand this as me "perpetuating the testosterone bro-culture that is driving women away from tech"?

If we start drawing the line somewhere, how do we know someone else didn't draw it earlier or later to ours?
I ride into grand central every morning to work and it never ceases to amaze me. Dozens of platforms underground for departing and arriving trains, all built 100 years ago under Manhattan. Coming down the Park Ave tunnel you can glimpse the old 59 street station that's now just an emergency exit and its all so damn cool.
But it does not appear to be used for the financial transaction component, so its use should not be able to cause inconsistencies in account balances, etc.
Apple has been touting their JD Power awards since forever, certainly even back when they were also running the "I'm a Mac" ads. Feels like the author is looking for things to hang his preconceived notions on.
Bitcoin: the fastest growing currency in the world
> She did tweet and make it a public issue, but we don’t know that she didn’t also complain to her employer.

Doesn't matter. She could be fired for the Tweet, the public action, apart from any complaint she may have made through channels.

> ... but you can’t fire someone for making even a baseless complaint.

Yes, you can, depending on how and where the complaint is made.

> Could they turn around and go, “Well, you really damaged the company. Clean out your desk.”?

Yes, if the proximate cause was her public interview, and if her public statements were malicious and/or misleading. And they were.
Maybe more of us should use the phrase, "Follow my feed".

[1. Follow instead of subscribe. 2. Feed instead of RSS, because (a) there's also Atom, and (b) neither "RSS" nor "Atom" are quite as friendly as "feed".]
As pointed out in the comments the code is quite contrived to begin with, no surprise such mistakes go unnoticed.

As long as a warning is emitted when the compiler relies only such undefined behavior it is a good thing to optimize this heavily, there are not many other ways to get more performance from C/C++.
Why do you hate vowels?
Indeed, perhaps he just likes marshmallows.
Procedural Textures With Minecraft Blocks
I hope what you're building is open source and resides 100% on the client's machine. Because if it's closed source or makes use of your servers, then it can't be trusted, no matter what lofty rhetoric you use to advertise it.

The fact is that if it makes use of your servers, you have the power to spy on the people using your service. You may claim that you won't, and provide a lovely privacy policy, but there's no way for the users to make sure you're actually adhering to those policies. Then it comes down to trust, and some of us don't have a lot of trust left.

This is why I use client-based, open source RSS readers like Newsbeuter,[1] and will not be moving to any web-based reader, no matter what features they have or how concerned they claim to be about privacy.

That said, if I had to use a web-based service, I'd much rather use one that claimed to have a commitment to privacy than one that didn't. So kudos to you for that.

[1] - http://www.newsbeuter.org/index.html
I'm not really a crack at micro-optimizing C code, so can anyone here explain to me why the given function was written in the form it was?

Why not something like this:

int d[16];

int SATD (void)
{
int satd = 0, dd, k;
for (k=0; k<16; ++k) {
dd = d[k];
satd += (dd < 0 ? -dd : dd);
}
return satd;
}

Does this generate slower code?
This applies to online shopping, but many ADA policies will end up affecting startups. Just an example, think of a new AirBNB competitor: they facilitate reservations like a travel agency or hotel lobby, businesses that are subject to ADA regulations.

Of course, ADA takes a little additional time and care (not much, but hey, if you're agile and running lean, your MVP can't let regulations get in the way, right?) The government wants to regulate my site, but they just don't get it. ADA is the result of a dying industry that don't apply to me because I'm disrupting. DISRUPTING!
(also X, myself (1979, so kind of borderline, but enh)

Ending MAD was actually done by GI or Silent generation people (essentially, the last push in the 1980s), and the general implosion of the Soviet model. It's fair to give some credit for everyone who survived and didn't cause a war during MAD, but that's largely top political leaders (who remained older longer than the general population or most politicians, even) and top military leaders (who were probably 45-55 in the 1970s and 1980s, so kind of borderline as baby boomers). But a lot of the soldiers, engineers, etc. from 1970-1990 were undeniably baby boomers so they get credit for that.

There were plenty of good things done by the baby boomers (I'd say some environmental regulations, like clean air/clean water/ozone, have been incredibly good, and were largely a result of lobbying and organization by baby boomers in the 1970s). They didn't do as many good things per capita as would be expected, and they have done far more bad per capita than previous or subsequent generations.
@coldtea/staticfish:

I think you two are comparing two evils. It doesn't matter which empire is the lesser of the two evils - ALL empires should be scorned. Why don't we all agree on this fact? The next thing we should be persuaded on is the democratization and decentralization of these two empires.
I agree with you, but there are a few things to keep in mind:

1. The engineer/manager impedance mismatch. We're used to having our "subordinates" (machines) give blunt negative feedback. "Your shit don't compile. Line 189; fix the fucking thing." Most managers are extremely thin-skinned and would rather fire people to silence dissent than have their decisions (as much as they affect other people) questioned. We're aware of our imperfect job performance because it's literally impossible to become good at software without bugs along the way. They have a child-like innocence of their own imperfection, because no one ever fucking tells them (for fearing of getting fired) when they make bad calls.

2. Most organizations use ambiguities in performance evaluation to hide things and like it that way. Fairer performance reviews diminish middle-management and executive power. The problem with healthy corporate cultures (e.g. Valve, pre-apocalyptic Google) is that it's hard to hire external executives. (That's why Google sold its culture off.)

3. Objective performance reviews for software are impossible. Automated code comprehension isn't even theoretically achievable over arbitrary code. As much as the "shoot me an email"/"let's synergize" apes have tried to drive out all creativity and R&D, the intrinsic convexity (see: http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/gervais-macle...) of what we gives it enough of an R&D nature to make objective performance assessments impossible.
.. as long as you forget all the other user-generated-content sites Yahoo has closed over the years.
Facebook and Twitter can be indexed, it just takes more effort.

It's not really about effort; it's about the fact that FB & Twitter don't really want Google indexing them.

But let's imagine there would be no way for Google to index the web, then they would find other places to put their ads.

What makes you think they'd be successful in finding such places?
> Try telling sex jokes to a coworker within "accidentally overhearing"-space of other employees and let us know how it works out for you.

We aren't discussing the social context, we're discussing the legal context. Women can't simultaneously demand equal treatment at the pay window, and unequal treatment everywhere else.

> (This isn't necessary for the argument, but I'd further point out that this wasn't just an accidental overhear; she'd previously been part of the conversation with one of the two men.)

If she wasn't a party to the conversation she overheard, any prior context is irrelevant. She overheard something that she found objectionable, then she demanded unequal treatment based on her status as a woman. A clear case of gender discrimination, and she is the guilty party.
Legitimately good employees are in demand, therefore there are potential employers willing to pay top dollar for them that you have to compete with. You may think there are aspects of your company worth more than salary, but so do most employers. You want your employees to think of themselves as equals and all worth the same amount, but you refuse to apply the same logic to your competitors?
I have nothing against having transparent salaries (in fact I think, implemented correctly, it is a grand idea). But if it makes you unable to hire top talent because you are unwilling to justify a discrepancy of pay to those less skilled, it's going to be more trouble than it is worth.
You set women back 20 years by standing up to what exactly? You can't handle two men making jokes amongst themselves? Yet your twitter makes similar jokes with your friends? Your friend on twitter argued it was because of an established relationship and context. I would argue that is the exact same situation with the two men. The only variable in this entire situation is YOU Adria.
It makes me sick that you have used your social media skills to demonize these men, but your actions are truly devious and evil. Pycon code of conduct? LOL. That man has a family, and lost his job for an alleged joke to a friend. Furthermore, this man is taking the high road and not fighting back. Sounds to me that if you had spoken to him privately and told him you were offended, then he prolly would have provided you with a sincere apology. Instead, you ruined his life, career, etc.
People like you are leeches on society IMO. Hope I didn't make any sexual references you might be offended by.
I guess OP meant that if you could see only a part of the web available to you as a logged in user of some service, then you couldn't build an index which globally scans a whole website, since it cannot log in.

NOTE: well spiders could technically log in and index public shared stuff, but those services could forbid that via terms and conditions and sue any company violating them
Well there was a service named Aiderss that did ranking based on internet popularity which was renamed PostRank[1]. Google bought the company behind it in 2011 and discontinued the service instead of integrating it in Google Reader.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostRank
Or they could actually design the iPhone to actually have enough metal and thick enough glass.

I've dropped my Samsung Nexus S a hundred times without damage. Just saying.
first saw this thing around 12 years ago on an AS/400 terminal. Our neckbearded Lead Programmer was supposed to have programmed it in RPG but probably this thing is even older?
Can't tell if elaborate troll or serious...

"lack of gener[al] privacy": Wasn't Google the first major webmail provider to provide SSL access (and encourage it)?

"no way to get your data back": http://google.com/takeout

"run by the traditional corporate drone": Would that be Eric Schmidt, who got a Ph.D. from Berkeley in EECS and co-wrote lex ? Or Larry Page, who left Stanford's graduate degree program to be an entrepreneur in 1998?

If Nuuton is worth anybody's attention, you won't need to lower yourself to this kind of post.
This website is hilariously slow to download. Why is each screenshot an enormous PNG?
Is this whole archival movement the Internet equivalent of hoarding? When is it ok to clean house?
A relevant point of concern: Google Drive isn't actually downloading documents.

Maybe someone's already brought this up, but I just tried Google Drive's desktop application for the first time. It downloads what amounts to a shortcut that's a text document with a link to the file on Google Docs.

The benefit of syncing is lost--you don't have a copy of a usable file you can open in another program or save somewhere. Even Microsoft's SkyDrive downloads real documents made in the web version of Office.
Thanks for posting this. It inspired me to figure out how to get my BitCoins out of Coinbase and into my own wallet.

I've used MongoDB enough to know that I don't want my money to be held by MongoDB.
I never bother with cookie-cutter interviews. With the exception of the first, every time I've had one I ended up being made an offer, and turning the job down. First, I found obscure technical questions from interviewers a bit sadistic. Almost as though the interviewer is trying to tell you how good she is. When I accepted an offer after such an interview I only lasted three months, because the interviewer felt threatened by me.

If, conversely, a candidate asked me the questions edw519 listed above, you'd pretty much be guaranteed a job. I don't care how well or badly you program. I don't care whether you know Boost or not. I want to know whether you'll fit in here. Ever read Peopleware [1]? There's a great example in there on why you should value the
programmer that seems to deliver nothing of value, and yet makes the team gel.

If you don't know why this line of C++ code compiles with Visual Studio 6, but produces the wrong result, hey, that's ok. Are you giving me the impression that you like programming? That you will try and find an answer yourself before coming to ask for my help? If I ask you a question that you can't answer, do you bullshit, or do you say "Hey, I don't know, but I'll find out and email you the answer tomorrow."

The character is far more important to me than your ability as a programmer. The former is a fit, or it isn't. The latter I can work with. Because it's a long game.

[1] http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0321934113
What the parent meant was:

"Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that."

Could be

A) sarcastic cover while distracting readers from the fact that there's no good reason (trying to get others to appeal to authority)

B) there's a real reason which is sufficiently obvious that someone jumping to conspiracy is off-kilter

If (B) were the situation, the "real reason" isn't obvious to me or to the parent (and I suspect you don't find it obvious either)
I haven't taught a MOOC but I have "taught" a more traditional online course with 20-some students and I don't think it was really all that great. The reason I put "taught" in quotes is because it was a standardized course where all the sections taught at the state-wide community college had to be exactly the same so I was basically just a grader. I didn't have any opportunity to actually "teach" anything so when a student turned in an assignment that was totally wrong, there was no opportunity for me to intervene and give the student a chance to redo it or to give the student any substantial guidance.

Moreover, because most students would wait until the last minute to do the work, they might turn in the next assignment before I had a chance to grade their previous assignment so they would not only do one assignment wrong but then the next one and the next one and I can't do anything about it. I feel for the person, so I'm not going to fail the student. So the student gets a C in the class, doesn't learn anything or even worse learns the wrong thing and my hands are basically tied.
"One could argue that the demise of Reader is the best thing to happen to RSS in along time as this supposedly decentralized and decentralizing standard became too reliant on one vendor"

I'm overjoyed that yet another for-profit corporation is out of this segment of the internet market. If it gets some former Google Reader users move to client-based, open source RSS readers, that makes for less spying on users and more privacy; and the more decentralized the net gets, the better.
Yeah no wonder they fail so hard, they use Macs.
Perhaps, but honestly the wording lead me to believe he was referring to the practice of keeping job postings open for non-existent positions. It's a relatively common practice, albeit a questionable one IMHO.
Absolutely not. There is a huge difference between something like plumbing where you do one or a few sets of well regulated activities and building infrastructure for businesses across many industries. Web programmers have a lot to be aware of just to do their own work, suggesting they should be responsible for their employers' or clients' legal obligations is completely unreasonable.
I think "flat design" also includes a lot of attention to typography; thus, HN and Yahoo circa 1995 wouldn't count.

WebFonts and especially Retina-class displays are making it possible to do some very interesting work with typography, and once you've got that, the need for faux-2.5D sort of drops away...
Do not trust them with a single coin.