skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Couple of design/usability things I see:

- Using a stock font included with OSX (Marker Felt) for the logo would not have been my first choice. And, marker Felt reminds me of comic-sans.

- The logo is not matted properly, I can see a square box around it of a lighter shade of gray. Could be due to color shifts with your color profiles in Photoshop, or your original file is CMYK and is being converted to RGB when you save for web. The easy fix: change the CSS background-color of the header to #1b1c1e instead of #000.

- From a IA perspective, what's more important to the end-user: 1) the twitter user that submitted the job or 2) the job title and description? I believe it to be the latter, but the jobs titles are lost amongst the bright pink links used on submitters name and pagination (two items relatively unimportant, but those elements shout at me).

- The [1] next to each title is also confusing. Perhaps using Tooltips throughout the site would improve usability. I could also see that number being moved to the right of the Job Title.

- I can't decide how I feel about the Twitter avatars as I can almost immediately tell that the site seems to be more focused on aggregating aggregators – at which point I tend to bounce onto other job sites that offer distinctively different jobs, than the same stuff I see over and over again.

- The rotating headline at the top is wasted space as it stands. That is prime real-estate that's not being utilized effectively. I would switch it to a leaderboard banner that you can rotate JobMigo announcements through until you have paying advertisers.
according to this page, they helped Akami increase their sales by 25%: http://www.basho.com/about/clients/6-akamai_technologies

I have no idea what they do, but attributing +25% sales due to a seminar is like me saying I bought the CEO of Leham Bros a coffee and therefore its down to me they went bust.
Vietnam Travel Guide Online 24/7 Having fun and a massage at Da Giang Stream
Finally, a keyboard that is free of bits of dirt. :)
What more evidence do you need for what happens after we die? The brain's cells, awesome in their cooperation during our life, start failing and dying off, and that's the end of it. Case closed.
We don't need to "embrace" fairytales of omnipotent sky gods to be able to identify with groups larger than ourselves. There are teams and groups of all shapes and sizes and all conceivable missions, with no need of ridiculous 2,000-year-old shepherd diaries.

I'm not going to condone "faith" in imaginary entities just because people "want to be part of a group". They can choose a different group. Just like I'm not going to condone rape because people like sex. I know they like sex. It's still wrong.
Great idea in theory, but not everyone can afford the costs of spending as much time as they want without income (much less follow it up by traveling for two years).

In the real world, people are often forced to 'grow up' faster than they would want due to external factors.
Possibly something taking advantage of the coming "Green Bubble".
Funny, even hearing these stories, some of us would kill to have that job.
A few comments:
- the tagging tool doesn't work well, tried Senior System Administrator, didn't find category, same for CTO
- I tried "CTO at companyx, Montreal, Canada" it showed "text too short"
- you might wanna also weigh in the number of followers to rank the tweets. I think a twitter bot will have less interesting tweets (auto-generated tweets), while a company's official twitter account will have much more followers, with legitimate twitter jobs
- you should also have a navigation menu, or search function to find jobs by city or country

also I'm ok with using the hashtag rtjobs, but #jobs is more obvious no??
Why does science exist? Why do I exist? Why do you exist?

As long as people have questions, there's a market for answers.
You could have bought one of those noise-amplifying toys, stuck its microphone inside the bedroom, attached headphones to it and turned the volume up.
I don't see how by changing the way you really are or act, and pretending to be impressed or entertained is going to help you make friends? Because, you're not being "you", and surely that's the whole point? I want people to like me for me, and I want to be friends with people who I sincerely find entertaining and interesting. If you're pretending, well... might as well join Twitter and make yourself feel better with hundreds of followers (Friends?) who don't really give two shits about what you say, if they even read what you're saying (doubtful). If it makes you feel better about yourself... I guess.
And community.
Chris Martenson presents The Crash Course [video]
Looks like somebody didn't get a visit from the Easter Bunny this morning.

If you want to believe in something -- even if that something is "I don't believe in anything unless it can be proved empirically" then you should know the limits of that belief system.

Because all belief systems have limits. There are things that are true that are unprovable, and there are things that are proved that are not true. Science models reality as an abstraction -- and all abstractions are leaky. The power of belief is separate from the thing believed, and the propensity to clan and tell stories is not going to be wished or rationalized away.

Besides, there's always hope for next year, right? (wink)
What do you think, is this guy mostly just selling fear, or should we be very worried?
ha! no we were never meant to be a games blog - full 360 was about touching all points of analytics in the enterprise. There are only so many ways to represent 360 degrees - so it ended up that way unintentionally
"I can agree so far that it lacks respect to laugh outright at other people, even when they do hilariously stupid things."

Mere laughter is disrespectful and immature, but pointing out the stupidity of their actions and the absurdity of their core beliefs is right and necessary. I would strongly criticise parents who refuse to vaccinate their children based upon unproven New Age beliefs. How is religion any different?
The author has written a follow-up article here:

Just Don't Go, Part 2

http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2009/03/2009031301c.htm
Will "startup investors" discover a lucrative black market in selling H1-Bs? Rich foreigners could pay them $200k under the table to invest $100k in their new startups, thus buying citizenship.

Just following up on this particular point, what would be the problem with letting rich foreigners buy American citizenship?

Personally I think Paul's startup visa is a great idea, but orthogonally to that, I just don't see a problem with letting wealthy people buy their way into the US.
Soros does not use quant strategies.
YAGNI vs Usability
How to balance the XP principle of YAGNI (you aint gonna need it) with UX design.
Affective death spirals.

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/12/affective-death.html
Without getting too philosophical ...

I personally believe that I am in no position to ultimately judge what someone else believes. For me to label what someone believes as "stupid", would be quite odd as that would imply that I am the ultimate authority on the subject.

I can disagree but ultimately my opinion and beliefs are of no more accuracy than that of the fellow.

You see?
Reminds me of my experiences at university. One of my friends referred to the labs as the 'blast furnace'. This was due to a lack of air conditioning and a great many computers being used at once in a relatively small area.

Also the 'quiet room' was anything but - if only one person wasn't being quiet then you would hear every sinlge syllable they uttered. Very distracting.
I disagree with the methodology, mostly. I believe that teaching Finance as if it were a hard science is dishonest. I believe that mathematical rigor is no substitute for data and empiricism. I would also claim that a MSc in Statistics may be way more valuable than a hardcore MFE. Just my 0.02 USD.
How do you know that consciousness remains bound to the brain, which has lost all function? For that matter, there's no scientific reason to believe that my consciousness shall remain bound to my brain 5 minutes from now. My body and brain could continue on living, with my consciousness going elsewhere, or ceasing to exist.
Loading the data, including parsing the xml and converting it to json was about 50,000 records per hour on a c1.medium aws instance.

Just transforming the data from one json format to another and loading to a new couchdb is much faster - about 200,000 records per hour. The server does trip over sometimes on the bulk load, and requires a restart. This happens once every 600-700k records

Reading the data is extremely quick, While creating the views on an existing database is slow, once created, accessing the data is very fast using the keys in the views
I think its ok, with time there would be more apps that its the only thing lacking: more options
"There are things that are true that are unprovable, and there are things that are proved that are not true."

Not in my reasoning there aren't. An example, please, of something that has been proved, yet remains paradoxically untrue?

Anyway, I wasn't really talking about beliefs, I was just pointing out that the natural human tendency of "wanting to be part of a group" doesn't excuse or require magical thinking as the price of entry.
Ha. Makes you wonder if in 2000 years some guy will be digging up html table layouts and exposing the virtues of "the forgotten technology."
Being the trading app whipping boy to a bunch of BSD (not talking about Unix here) equity traders; one of whom actually complained to me that he couldn't log into his trading app because his username wasn't pre-filled in the login prompt of the app.
dbrown26 why did you stay there so long?
I seem to see that you argue that all opinions are equal and proof and facts doesn't matter. (My determination to not laugh is sorely, sorely tested...)
Hmm, interesting...

Twitter could become a classifieds portal if they exploit user-submitted ads sending tweets like @ads @jobs @auto @love etc.
I don't disagree. I thought my irony was obvious.
See also:

http://www.bristollair.com/outer-game/skills/social-vibing.h...
> I personally believe that I am in no position to ultimately judge what someone else believes.

Really? If you met someone who walked around insisting that the earth was flat, despite all evidence to the contrary, you wouldn't openly question that belief?

> I can disagree but ultimately my opinion and beliefs are of no more accuracy than that of the fellow.

There exists objective facts, and when those facts are on your side, then your opinions and beliefs are more accurate than the other fellows. This idea that all our beliefs are equally valid is just absurd. Some peoples beliefs really are just stupid.
Missed by the HN duplicate detector:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=484013
An example, please, of something that has been proved, and remains paradoxically untrue???

Science is built of models, paradigms. These paradigms are validated and true only to the ability of experimenters to empirically verify them. That's the way science works. That's what faith in empiricism entails.

So, for instance, Newton was "right" in his law of gravity. But then again, he was wrong because once relativity came along our understanding of gravity changed. It's likely to change again.

Science is built on a really interesting idea called induction[1]. It says if you go outside and drop a rock and the next day it rains, and you repeat that experiment a few times, and each time it rains, then you can assume that dropping a rock is a cause of rain. That, of course, is the worst-case scenario -- an experiment that looks good simply because it only fails when ran a (relatively) large number of times.

It's easy to prove things that aren't true. We've done it time and time again. And we'll continue to do it. That's the way science works.

1. I'm oversimplifying here to a great degree for brevity's sake
I don't think we'll ever find a scientific explanation for consciousness, and here's why. Science assumes two physically identical objects to be identical: a kilogram of iron is a kilogram of iron. This reduction is useful and necessary; we wouldn't have organic chemistry if we allowed philosophical disputes about the "personality" of individual carbon atoms, which (even were such a notion to exist at all) is irrelevant to the questions organic chemistry exists to answer. With consciousness, however, it doesn't make sense. If a physically identical clone of you were created, there would be no scientific distinction between you and the clone, but the difference would still matter to your consciousness. For that matter, we can't answer scientifically why your consciousness is bound to you and not the clone, or to you and not some other person or animal.

This discrepancy isn't a sliding error that can be reduced with better tools of observation and knowledge. It's a fundamental gap. Ergo, I think it's safe to say that, as science is defined today, there will never be a scientific explanation for the binding of mind to matter.
metalab styling (colors, font) maybe different but the layout and the flow of the application is very similar.
That's an interesting analysis, but I disagree on some points. My ideas:

1) people tend to have sex with people of roughly the same attractiveness. Only a fool would fail to realize that there's a sexual market out there, and one's price in that market is mostly dictated by looks, not intelligence or interests. (disclaimer: I live in Southern California, and I realize that I may sound overly superficial).

2) Sex and stable romantic relationships are way different things. It's true that people tend to start relationships with people of roughly the same intelligence, socioeconomic status, and interests... but come on! I would not turn down a funny, hot girl just because she's an English major who's not interested at all in Quantum Field Theory! I probably would not want to marry her, but some NSA fun once in a while is refreshing...

3) Grad students at MIT should be rather smart, driven people. They should be surrounded by people of the same intelligence and interests, and they still don't get laid much. Your cute analysis does not explain this.
Sitting in a dusty concrete building, deep in Baja, down a 180 mile road dirt that takes 4 hours to traverse at 45-55mph, in a town with the best right hand point break on the west coast.

Hard to get work done with that right point firing and visible from the window.
If you think that, then I suggest you're not up to date on the science. Read some Steven Pinker, it's pretty well established that the brain is the seat of consciousness. There may still be arguments over what consciousness is or how it's formed, but there's little debate that it comes from the brain and exists only until that brain stops functioning.
It depends on the standard of proof. Mathematics has no concept of platonic truth (things are true or false within a specific logical system) but precise notions of proof. Since any rich logical system has a P such that neither P or not-P is provable, this means that there are unprovable truths, if the law of the excluded middle is to be assumed (not all logic systems do). Most of the world has it the other way around: a very strong sense of truth/falsity and mediocre standards for "proof", allowing things that turn out to be false to be "proven". Many people have been "proven" guilty then found innocent.
Poorly written response with as many bad arguments as good ones, but I agree with the sentiment. The startup visa idea strikes me more as one that comes to you and seems good for the first hour until you come to your senses, than one that is well thought out and backed by good data.
Luckily I haven't yet started to blog, so I don't need to back that feeling up with good data or reasoning of my own. :)
He doesn't know for sure, it is just the simplest and most likely theory that fits the facts as we know them - consciousness arises from certain complex arrangements of living cells, and is not known to exist outside of those conditions.

You can speculate to your heart's content, but until you have some evidence to suggest the current theory of conciousness is mistaken and that yours fits observable reality better, then your speculation will remain just that.
No, valid, currently normed IQ test yields a credible score of 175.

Anyway, IQ is orthogonal to rationality,

http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=97803001238...

http://www.amazon.com/What-Intelligence-Tests-Miss-Psycholog...

and sufficient rationality might explore the implications of the submitted article without any reference to IQ tests.
Pretty depressing reading, but good on him for trying to spread the word.

I'm sorry that the chances of getting a professorship in humanities is small, but I'm even sorrier that there doesn't seem to be many/any viable careers for a humanities student aside professorship.
Ironically Truveo's iFrame is less shitty than Digg's--it doesn't always stay at the top.
Don't start a start-up or apply for seed funding. There are lots of great hackers out there, and only so many spots for top websites. The odds of putting together both a solid product, good marketing, and the right timing are incredibly slim. I talk to people all the time who are working on start-ups with no benefits, no salary, and only a small chance of hitting it big and becoming profitable.

Even if you do get accepted to one of the top seed start-up firms, you're still not guaranteed to be successful. You have to realize that you're really just an exploitable resource for venture capitalists.

On a more serious note, I'd say that anyone who's thinking of going to grad school should read this. Then, if they're still certain they want to go, they should go for it. Just because something's hard or might not work doesn't mean you shouldn't try.
Ok, at home, my parents and my sisters are really kind and they don't do noise.
Also my mother understand that I need some concentration when i'm on computer, although she don't know what the benefits of 'sitting for long hours in front of a screen with much gadgets and text!!'

The worst time is at school, when my friends (tech-savvy people) ask me for questions in a very noisy way that I loose concentration. So I agree with most of you about concentration, we can class it then

Concentration

Computer bugs and speed

Screen (if u sit for long hours)

Mouse and Keyboard (especially for those cheap laser mouses!!!)

Computer noise (if it's an old dirty one)

your girl friend (if u got one!!!)

Those are all factors that can affect your programming or whatever you are doing if it's mind related, like Math or Physic calculations

Also I posted it in SOF, no the question was not closed
Now that I have this up, I was hoping to be able to work with the usaspending.gov team to get a feed or extension to the api, that gives me the changed records since the last upload. Then update the aws snapshot with this. Do this on the same timeline that the usaspending.gov does it, monthly
Hogwash.

> If a physically identical clone of you were created, there would be no scientific distinction between you and the clone

More hogwash. The moment such a cloning happens, you'd become two distinct individuals and would immediately diverge into having separate experiences. Science would not at all consider you the same thing.

> For that matter, we can't answer scientifically why your consciousness is bound to you and not the clone, or to you and not some other person or animal.

C'mon, are you for real with this. Science would say there are no two distinct and separate consciousnesses. And we very well know consciousness is bound to your brain.

> I think it's safe to say that, as science is defined today, there will never be a scientific explanation for the binding of mind to matter.

I think it's safer to say you don't really understand science if you actually believe that.
The difference is that a startup has a much bigger potential upside.
They could have just called it a security patch and made it automatically install for IE6 users ;)
HostGator Review
One of the basis of evidence for this about spear use is very misleading. We have no idea how long humans have been using wooden spears since they don't preserve. But since chimps do, it is possible we have been for millions of years. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02...
If you measure success exclusively in money, then that's true.

Grad school isn't for me, but it's the right choice for the right people.
It's well-established that, to the extent that consciousness is bound to the body, the central nervous system is the strongest and possibly sole contributor. It's also obvious that changes to the brain can induce massive alterations of consciousness and cognitive function. Not even the most religious people would argue that, while we're bound to a human body, the physical state of the brain can dominate our experience.

This is not quite the same thing as saying that consciousness comes from the brain. It's equally plausible that "the world" emerges from mind.
If you're subcontracting and getting paid corp-to-corp they shouldn't be skimming much off the top. I'm just pretty sure that the market rate for a senior Java dev or team lead with 7+ years of experience is a lot higher than the pre-tax corp-to-corp numbers mentioned, even in Chicago. I have front end dev friends who make much more than that, just doing CSS/HTML work.
"we can't answer scientifically why your consciousness is bound to you and not the clone"

Huh? If you did indeed clone a person's exact state, a perfect atom-by-atom up-to-the-microsecond copy of an actual living person, the consciousness would copy over as well. Obviously, for technical and perhaps ethical reasons we have not done this experiment, but I don't think there would be much doubt that scientists would expect the apparent consciousness to be duplicated just like everything else. It is all just biochemical process and atomic state.

Consciousness is an emergent phenomenon from (currently) animal brains, if they're complex enough. Your talk of it being "bound" to anything is misguided, and the controversies you allude to simply don't exist.

You might as well say that science can't explain why light is "bound" to a light bulb. Consciousness is a more complex phenomenon, certainly, but the principle is the same.
There is no current theory of consciousness. There is wide and probably intractable debate. It is as speculative to claim that consciousness cannot exist outside of the brain as to claim that it can.
This might be a bit cynical of me but I'm quite convinced that if a rich foreigner wanted to become an American citizen that wouldn't be much of a problem.

Steve Jobs for example got Feist, American citizenship: http://www.tuaw.com/tag/leslie-feist/ it's not the same thing but there obviously has to be different channels to go through for the wealthy.
> It's equally plausible that "the world" emerges from mind.

Uh... no, it isn't.