skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I lived most of my childhood buying clothes from thrift stores since that was all my waitress single mother could afford. I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination but I am definitely upper middle class now and it's conceivable that I could be wealthy at some point in my future.

Some of my friends are less fortunate and I worry about them, but that doesn't mean that I feel that they have some right to mine or anyone else's money. They've spent their money somewhat poorly, while I've racked up credit card debt to teach myself new skills and get equipment to afford further learning (said debt is now repaid and long gone).

I make the money I do because I have and still do work my ass off. I have never been a "privileged" kid so I know for a fact that where there is a will there is a way. If you don't want to put in that effort I'm cool with that. Seriously, it takes all kinds. Just don't fool yourself into thinking you have a right to be carried on someone else's back. (not you specifically of course :) )
I like CSS, but every time I see an article bragging about a new technique for accomplishing something that _should_ be simple, I lose the faith a little bit.

Can't we just give up and add '<tabset>' and '<tab>' tags to html and call it a day. At the very least, we could stop abusing the poor <ul> tag.
Also: A bunch of higher order functions for arrays: map, reduce, forEach, every, some.

Some small syntactical improvements, like the ability to use a trailing comma in list literals [1,2,3,]

Getters and setters.

A new "strict mode", which disallows some of the more error-prone features. For example, in strict mode, assigning to a non-existing variable throws an error rather than creating a new global variable.
And it's actually a pretty good book if you are going into software development.
Looks like it's been removed :-(
Your inability to stop your car is very, very unlikely to kill enough people to affect society. If by "endangering society", you only meant "endangering at least one person other than the person without brakes", then we're just talking past each other.

> Replace "learning disability" with "using windows" or "being black" or "growing up an orphan" and your argument still holds true. Its just a generality on life, not a rational legal argument.

I don't think "using windows" fits here, but in any case, if there were someone to blame, legally, for those other things, then perhaps we'd see suits about them (and I suppose we might already in the case of orphans suing whoever could be legally blamed for the death of their parents, but I don't know of any examples offhand).

I don't know that the kid actually has (well, should have) any standing to sue, since they wouldn't exist without the actions that were taken, except possibly in the event that the sperm or egg was damaged by the defendant, rather than merely being selected in error by the defendant.
This is why i love google.
Slavery wasn't a matter of contract law.
You've just identified the fundamental split in D&D culture.

D&D was groundbreaking because it was game-breaking - it took the fundamental concept of "game," being a closed loop of processes, and split it open a bit by allowing players to just make up certain things, just enough (or so thought the designers) to allow for some tactical richness that a closed loop can't support. Turns out, though, that lots of players actually wanted to rush out of the closed loop of the rules and spend most of their time out in make-believe-land, only touching on the rules occasionally if at all.

Gygax was always kind of horrified by this - to his dying days he referred to speaking in character, ever, as "that community-theater crap." Arneson's attitude was somewhat different.

Very sad to have to type "was."
Short answer: yes, .net addresses will not be taken as seriously or remembered as easily.

Long answer:

But if tell us about your business and tell us your .net name, we can help you find alternatives.

If you don't the domain indexed by Google you can protect it with http://mailhide.recaptcha.net/ and share a link.

For example:
http://mailhide.recaptcha.net/d?k=01s0ZBjDCRkIF5eU3zPiVtcQ==...
Interesting article. I think prostitution should be legalized. But this website seems like it could fall afoul of the law since it is essentially taking a commission on illegal sexual transactions - not so different from what an escort service does. Obviously police frequently look the other way when escort services with white-collar clients are involved and that's probably what will happen here too. But an overly zealous public official could cause a lot of trouble for a site like this, I would think. Especially after it receives high profile coverage in The NYT. Of course I'm not a lawyer so take that with a grain of salt.
adoption rate of google apps is on the rise. bigger and bigger companies are looking into gmail, and are wanting the features that outlook/others have.

http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=google%20apps&c...
Who cares about the name. Just make sure the product is good.
"You shouldn't have to."

Perfect corporate tombstone material.

You're right. You shouldn't have to. But you do. Squidoo is the rare exception. For every Squidoo, there are hundreds of companies whose projects failed miserably because someone dropped the ball somewhere.

The programming is often the easiest part of a big dev effort. People often overlook the specification, design, project management, testing, scaling, security, etc., etc., etc. In the theoretical world (and mainstream media), these things somehow take care of themselves. In the real world, we know better.
I purchased watchdog.net, which I thought was a great name, but almost no one ever remembers it correctly.
I thought I read somewhere that they had to do a ton of work on the backend to handle scaling etc and can now switch to adding features/frontend things.

Really cool to see the new features fly out though.
It really doesn't matter.
So happy to have this - it was the biggest issue for using Posterous on a more regular basis.

BTW, Posterous handles it just fine: http://www.sachinagarwal.com/testing-gmail-labs-new-insert-i...
UR Getting Old. Dude
Free Computer Science E-Books
Regarding the guy holding the .com - Just because there's no website there doesn't mean it isn't being used. Think email.
Communication between developers should happen asynchronously, because synchronous communication destroys mental state. That means IMs, not speech, should be the preferred mode of developer communication. That can happen just as well in private offices.
Choose a different name. There are still tons available. Let the domain whores hold on to their "Premium four letter .com!!" names.

Just look harder and you'll find the gem.

(I spent about a day and found mibbit.(com|net|org) and I'm still pleased enough with the name).
Best of both worlds.

You should really be reading Reddit, not HN.
The problem is that if you're successful with the .net, the .com will magically become more expensive. Given that you think it's an awesome term, it may be a generic word for which you'd have no recourse to obtain.

That said, upcoming did OK with .org and SlideShare did ok with .net for a while. I'd recommend going with another .com, but the choice of TLD shouldn't make or break your company.
The President might define "critical infrastructure" as being the entire Internet- and many other countries route a large portion of their Internet traffic through the US- so a shutdown in the US would certainly slow down, if not shutdown, much of the rest of the world.
You're the Shit.
A colleague of mine just sold his Facebook app and went back to the Gmail team. I'd like to think it was him.
I don't think we should be making decisions based on principle; we should make them based on data.

But in a nutshell, I think the $10 trillion debt is not a problem of public will run amok; rather, it is a reflection of how little influence public will has over the lumbering behemoth that is our government, compared to banks, military contractors, privatized prisons, industry lobbies, large unions, et al. It's a failure of our particular democratic process, not our system of taxation.

Ultimately, I don't think there is a clear distinction between progressive taxation and socialism, in the same sense that there is no clear distinction between a fetus and a human. It's a spectrum, and there is no "correct" solution, but rather a large panoply of potential solutions, some of which are less bad than others.

In my personal opinion, the progressive tax system we have right now is actually a pretty good one (corporate loopholes notwithstanding), and the changes that have been proposed are pretty damn minor (yes, it could be a slippery slope, but so can absolutely anything). What matters more to me is that the money raised by taxation of whatever kind is spent on smart things (education, infrastructure, technology R&D), and not dumb things (resource wars, policing of victimless hobbies, "too big to fail" bailouts).
Why do people make a lot of money for starting a successful business? Because they took a risk and have proven that an idea has merit. Once you have a successful proven business growing it is just a matter of grinding through a lot of steps. (Keeping on top is a different matter).

If a startup had invented the internet we would trumpet that as the crowning achievement of free enterprise. If a small company had come up with the idea for a transcontinental railroad, we would give them all the credit even if many others profited in their wake. But the government spawns both of these things and you minimize their importance as "just" the seed for it.

It was a lot more than land in the case of the railroads: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Railway_Act

It was a lot more than just a few networks at DARPA for the internet, and privatizing a road that the government already built isn't all that hard - you are privatizing maintenance not the initial hard part of construction.

When a private company can build a new bridge over the hudson I'll eat my words, but I don't believe they ever will do something like that.

The bottom line is that the private sector is not good at some things, and our taxes pay for those things. And to say that the government has no impact on the money that you have made or the success you have had is flat BS. All of the people at my startup came through public schools, all of them are of the age where they grew up in those schools when taxes were significantly higher. We shortchange our kids today for our own greed even though we grew up during a time of higher taxes. Thats the bottom line.
i'd get a .com first and foremost, can you do what facebook did and run as the[greatsitename].com?
Am I going to regret pushing forward with the .net address, or should I try to think of some different names that end in .com?

Yes. Since 1996 it has always seemed that all the good names were taken, and yet it has always been possible to find ones that weren't. All your name has to be is acceptable. Google.com is not a great name; the reason it seems good now is the associations we have with it.
I know what you're getting at.

I was commenting specifically because I hate sloppy language and sloppy thought: there's just no meaningful sense in which "a particular kind of contract becoming non-enforceable" simplifies into "not being able to sign a particular kind of contract"; the latter implies some kind of intrusive intervention -- a noncompete gestapo slapping pen-from-hand should you try to sign such a contract -- which clearly wouldn't be the case under the proposal.
I'm not saying that it is impossible to have "earned" wealth. There surely are people who work their butts off to be where they are.

However, consider a few things.

Opportunities and luck have really played a role in the wealth of many people, and some have barely lifted a finger to become rich.

There are people who make far, far too little money for the effort they put in, even in Western countries. These people have sacrificed enough. There is no point making them destroy their income to pay for a road, when a rich man could cover the whole thing without even blinking an eye.

On the subject of risk. While becoming rich can definitely require serious risks, it takes far less risk to remain rich, or become ridiculously richer. Is it really a "risk" anymore to bet a million dollars on something, when you have a billion? These "risks" are widely available to rich people, and would be considered insane for even the middle class to invest in. The super-wealthy simply reach a point where risk is not really required to continue living comfortably. Whereas, some people making $25,000 are doing really dangerous jobs, risking their families' futures, only to stay afloat.
Exactly. If you want your employees to be loyal to your 'cause', give them equity. Don't expect them to be a team player without some sort of reward beyond simply keeping their job.

As an employee I 'clock out' when my day is over and are free to pursue whatever I want in my own time. As an owner, I do everything I can to make sure my company survives and thrives around the clock both at work and at home. There's a definite line there that shouldn't be crossed (or you'll get burned)
First register the .net name while you are thinking. It's only $7 or so.

.com is better than .net because .net is below the radar for most people. Have you thought of .org It doesnt mean nonprofit. It was set up for everyone else not in the military/industrial complex. Most people are aware of .org.

The going price for parked or low volume domains is around $15K Maybe an offer in that range will get his attention.

Someone in another thread made the point that most people will come to your site via search and your real name is not important. I dont really subscribe to that argument because people tell their friends without giving a proper link, say on the phone.

I thing you will regret the conflict if you go the .net route. Find another catchy name or add another word to the name you are already considering. TheCatchyName vs CatchyName. Remember catchy names are rarely as good as you think they are.

Final piece of advice. Do a trademark search for your name. (tm) is weak but (R) is very strong and you should avoid the conflict.
The double-edged sword of $5.4 billion of biodefense funding
You're right, I think this will be much easier with more information.

I'm working on a "for fun" gambling site - the domain I have is gambool.net; I suppose it's mostly good if you're a gambler (i.e. you know what gambool is).
Reading Mr. Market's Mind
Around the World in a Solar Boat
It's not a very interesting answer, but technically linear algebra : transformation matrices for rotating and scaling graphics...
"He has an almost mathematical approach to assessing relationships, and once even computed the costs for a girlfriend, mistress, prostitute and wife — mistresses turn out to be most expensive by the hour; wives, by the year; girlfriends are cheapest all around. But he’s not as calculating as he seems. In fact, he concluded there’s little correlation between cost and quality. Still, he is relentlessly searching for an algorithm that will predict relationships’ success."

LOL. This guy's a hacker!
In the recession, does advanced education really pay off?
The green shoots are weeds growing through the rubble in the ruins of the global economy
I love this insight into google culture. Really wish more companies did this and dropped the strictly-business curtain. Do you know of any companies that do this type of thing? I know Last.fm is pretty cool and blogged about their ball pit..
Hm. You're right, I didn't adequately address your post. My apologies.

When it's over that many millions, then yes, I think it's reasonable. It's highly questionable whether any individual is actually worth, say, 100 million a year. There's virtually always someone who could take their place - if Bill Gates hadn't made his fortune on MS, a different, perfectly adequate OS vendor would have succeeded, and the PC landscape probably wouldn't be so vastly different from what it is today. Ditto Ellison, etc. If the individual isn't totally irreplaceable, it's a bit hard to justify their having the income of 2000 average households - so it's fair to tax that income as a correction of the unfair inequalities that a capitalist system naturally leads to. The truly irreplaceable people - the once in a generation brilliant minds - tend not to be vastly wealthy anyway.

A further point is that few people become entrepreneurs in order to become stellar-level rich. Sure, they want to be wealthy, and I think we all know that a tax system that discourages people from wanting to become millionaires is a mistake, but it's unlikely that massive taxes on people earning more than 50 million a year is going to discourage entrepreneurship.

I'm not, however, arguing that a 90% tax rate is necessarily sensible. In the modern world, people will likely just move out of the country to avoid the taxation.
If I remember correctly, it doesn't. The crawler ignores it.

The problem is, some people still want to be indexed by the Live crawler, but without the spam in the referrals. At least by blocking the crawler purely in the stats, they still have a chance at ranking with Live without the pain of sorting through hundreds of fake referrals.
I don't mean that.

I mean Hummer mean more comfort that is not really needed. So it's more for the appearance not the transport itself and then you have to pay for it
Packaging is part of the package, so to speak.

In other words, it's a part of the ownership experience and part of what people pay money for.
There are some good sources out there to try and find a domain name. http://www.domainpigeon.com/ is a good if you're looking for a random name.

To answer you're question, you should absolutely get a .com. In my experience, the .net name eventually becomes a pain in the butt for branding and user acquisition, especially with the .com having only a blank directory (a user will just think your site is dead).

It's also one of the first questions you'll get when pitching to investors. Why couldn't you get the .com? You're answer so far has been that you couldn't negotiate it. That sends the wrong message.

Cut your losses and just find a .com.
WebKit! Nice!
You appear to have mistaken the author for someone who cares about Digg's audience. Gruber doesn't care about Digg's audience ("mindless, borderline illiterates"), and he has little incentive to educate them on why Digg's new shit salad has so much shit in it.
Register the domain before telling us. We are all very honorable, but the lurkers might not be.
isn't it true that .net is "for fun" and .com is "for money" in the online gambling world...partypoker.net vs. partypoker.com etc etc
Not anytime soon, but I might eventually provide a representative subset and run something like the Netflix Prize.
Gmail needs a better way to deal with Contacts. The current situation is archaic, lacking both UI polish and underlying functionality.

I use gmail for one of my personal accounts and would consider switching in an instant (yes, and even pay) for a gmail like service with really good address book features and mobile device integration (a client that would run on my Linux boxes wouldn't hurt either). I am so amazed they have done nothing in this area - I though the Android involvement would make this happen, but it seems not, at least so far.

As a point of interest, does anybody know of any features that have migrated out of Labs on the default setup? I think the initial concept of Labs is good, but it only works if stuff makes it out of there. Otherwise it becomes a partially used dumping ground for half-baked ideas.

Sorry if the above comes a bit strong, my google experiences have been quite frustrating of late.
Just remember, since you mention del.icio.us, that it redirects to delicious.com.
Forget the elaborate business plans. Kids with passion are our next great entrepreneurs.
choose a different name and go .com.
think and think again and you'll find a great name.

Never go for a .net or .info. When people remember, they remember only the name and put .com in the end.
I think that this was unfairly down-voted - there's a ton of great information here.
i don't think facebook is a [greatsitename], it was a legacy name because Harvard and MIT had actual physical 'facebooks' for getting to know other students in your class.
My point is not at all that I support higher taxes for the wealthy (I'm actually quite libertarian on taxes) - my point is that flat taxes don't work because there is a minimum non-discretionary spending every person has regardless of income.

If you have a flat tax as the OP proposes (in fact declares as the only "ethical" way) then some people get hammered more than others simply based on the fact that we all must eat and we all much live somewhere.

The right solution to lowering taxes is cutting spending to match. But even if you did that and all we had were programs libertarians agreed on - you will still have progressive taxes. Even if the top bracket was 15% - the bottom bracket should be lower to be fair. To say that progressive taxes are unethical is to not understand what those at the bottom are fighting to get ahead.
I definitely agree that a government could simply blow it. And in some respects, raising taxes may amount to just throwing money at a problem: without plans or government workers to back up the money, there's no guarantee anything will come from it.

You could certainly argue that the first problem to solve is not where the money comes from, or the amount of money, but rather how it is spent (and ensuring every penny is spent responsibly). The whole tax question would go away if we discovered that the government can actually do the same job with half the money it had been using.
And not surprisingly this topic has already been discussed on Perlmonks ;-)

Here's one variation..... http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=719475
I imagine skyhook should have enormous leverage here. They business is normally the opposite, but it's foolish for them not to use their databases in the reverse. Same applies to large skyhok users such as Google and Apple, as they should have access to all of the same data.

Next, there is Amazon - they know where you live and they know your IP address. Everybody shops at Amazon.

Now, I can't think of an open & free way to collect exact information yet... ideas?
The analogy was in the real guy showing up, not in any comparison with you and the guy in line. Sorry if I implied otherwise. My mistake.

One of the things I love about here is that you never know who may suddenly pop up. I always thought that was really cool.
Thanks. Tablets were comparable in price to laptops, and today's netbooks are around $200, so relative price hasn't changed... with respect to that particular competitive set.

But the absolute difference in price might make a difference with respect to other alternatives, especially non-computing ones. That is, new applications, new markets.

Are there any? Historically there's only one way to tell (try it).
YouTube and Universal to Create Music Video Hulu
Forex Robots Are Becoming Widely Used For a Great Income
The vc will issue non-competes relating to its portfolio companies and future investments. That, to me, seemed unreasonable
I agree - the animations are a cool novelty but these static images give you a lot more information. Kind of an interesting commentary on how you present/visualize data.
yeah, we at Posterous are happy to have this built into gmail. Our users are going to love it. But, you could always do inline images with Posterous by using a rich client like Mail or Thunderbird.
"When we raised our first Union Square Ventures fund, I told prospective investors to expect 1/3 of our investments to fail. I always like the 1/3 rule, which is that 1/3 of the investments will fail, 1/3 will under-perform expectations, and 1/3 will meet expectations."

http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2007/11/failure_rates_i.h...
World Wide Web Consortium's Ivan Herman talks about the Semantic Web