skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is an extremely complicated question. I run a UI/UX studio here in Toronto and we go all up and down the spectrum, with some clients being shocked at our prices for web design/development but we've also lost jobs from other prospective clients because our prices were too low (no joke).

It depends on two things:

1. Where you get your business

2. Who your competition is

For many, #2 depends on #1. We see three main sources of business: Google (we rank highly for 'Toronto web design'), Dribbble (we have the 2nd most followers in Toronto, and 8th in Canada), and of course, referrals.

Dribbble leaves us with clients with the biggest budgets, who aren't afraid of 5-figure prices for web design. This is where we're competing with other high-end designers and thus our prices are more in-line with theirs.

Referrals are the strongest leads, with clients who when they don't have larger budgets are more comfortable stretching a bit because of our strong work for a friend or mutual acquaintance (and we're often happy to mark down a bit for a referral).

Leads from Google are where the clients who get really shocked come in; they don't really understand or appreciate the work that needs to go into good, iterative, considered UI/UX (and the custom development that goes along with it). The competition here includes a swath of companies who game SEO and outsource work offshore, and they can charge considerably less. Thus, our prices look unreasonably higher to the untrained eye.

There's also a phenomenon where cheaper clients expect more. If you move up in terms of positioning yourself as premium, better clients will consider you and your services-- the types of clients who aren't shocked by "high prices" for design and/or development.

So, if you find all of your clients are shocked at your prices, you're not marketing towards the right clients.

I would also highly recommend listening to patio11's podcast #3 about making more as a consultant: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/10/10/kalzumeus-podcast-3-grow..., and charging more http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/09/21/ramit-sethi-and-patrick-...
Choice may be good, but it always comes at a cost. Each choice takes time to design, to code, to test, to document, to support, and most importantly to learn. Software designers should aim to offer the smallest number of options they can get away with.
The gnome3 ppa is still 3.6 for the most part unless you are also using -staging.
I got excommunicated by my SO who I moved out to California with over being "so negative all the time". That, combined with eliminating the small social circle I had built here in the 6 months prior to that, wasn't the greatest thing for my situation.
Ask HN: Whatever happened to Adam Hinkley (of Hotline Connect, KDX)
Following a very sad story which was documented worldwide, Adam left the company and a legal battle ensued.
Apart from what little there could be read on Wikipedia, Adam was also the author of a personal blog which was running on spl.haxial.net.

Dubbed the SPL's soapbox, and in style very similar to Maddox (mostly containing random rants and religion bashing) it dissappeared off the face of the internet some years ago.

Adam was also involved in creating vizaxia.org; a very interesting read of which I can't seem to find any trace of, in any archives.
From what I could pry out from my foggy memory it was partly inspired by visigoths and offered lifestyle guidelines.
Now in hindsight, it sounds like a recruitement webpage for a cult (Vizaxia club?), but it could be just my mind playing tricks on me.

I would appreciate any info / links to what happened to Adam - what is he doing now, what were his other projects?
@vinceguidry
IMHO being out of date isn`t a WordPress problem, it`s a clients or a developer problem. Any software must be upgraded from time to time.

Can you suggest any more elegant solution? In my opinion WordPress is good solution with great community.

With many different people you get a lot of different levels of deployment, so maybe you didn`t have a luck?
True there are a few gems in the other seasons though: like the piracy Ad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg
You should take a look at aura.js (http://github.com/aurajs/aura). Abstracts many of the steps of this article (require.js, bower...) and offers a decoupled architecture for scalable and well structured apps. There's also a yeoman generator, and they have an extensions system that seamlessly integrate handlebars.js for example.
"Are you using a for loop here? Why not, I learned that for loops are basically the best loop, I don't want to pay for your $.each nonsense. And I want to see you use some switch statements over here too."
The special event topcolor overrides your own.
It its core. I don't disagree with what gnome is doing.

Removing an old feature is fine by me if you have something better.

If you have something better.

but... If you're just trying to homogenize your user base, then you deserve the acrimony you're going to get. I'm glad this story got some publicity. Thanks Signez!
That's actually the first time I've seen a decent set of reasons why zsh is worth using. Well done.

Almost every other "Switch from bash to zsh, it has this awesome killer feature" article I've seen has raved about a feature that's available in Bash & has been for years.

I'm starting at a new job in a month or so, I shall try & use it as an opportunity to switch to zsh since I won't have any can't-live-without bash shortcuts in place at that point.

(Last time I tried switch to zsh, it took OMZ to get it useable, but it also made it too slow to live with. Hopefully starting with a clean slate will do the trick)
I use Tomboy[1] (once very popular note-taking software for Linux) with Tomdroid[2] (a client for Android) and Rainy[3] to sync them. There are a few bugs, it requires mono, doesn't support file attachments, and you need to set everything up yourself but for actual notes/recipes/ideas/quotes it works very well.

And you own it, end to end. No one can close the service down, no one can take it away, no one snoops through your stuff.

[1] http://projects.gnome.org/tomboy/

[2] https://launchpad.net/tomdroid {the newer .apk, not the Google Play version)

[3] http://www.notesync.org/
Also relevant: http://www106.pair.com/rhp/free-software-ui.html
This text is the unofficial Gnome UI manifesto. If you don't agree with it then you probably will never be happy with Gnome and should use something else.
I would suggest that retaining an option needed by some users with unusual perceptual requirements is a 'very good reason'

(Personally, I do leave my XFCE4 desktop on default settings, but I do alter defaults in some packages)
Writing a compiler is easy. Optimizing one, not so much, but setting "writing a compiler" as some kind of difficult thing that requires arcane magic irritates me.
I've found that most of the confusion comes from a mis-understanding of the service that is being provided.

My clients understand they're not buying a blog, or an e-commerce shopping cart, or a newsletter system, or {insert some feature here}. Rather, they're paying for my time and expertise -- and to provide that in context of what they want.

Any time I've encountered a customer who has sticker shock, I've always focused on making sure they knew what they were buying. More often than not, that always made customers much more comfortable. And, in a few cases, I explained that they should look for someone to provide their requested service at a lower cost. (Surprisingly, several customers freaked out and then pleaded with me to take their project. Go figure.)
Ok, thanks. That's quite confusing. I'm using the Gnome 3.8 shell, with mostly 3.6 Gnome packages. Looks like I'm in for a surprise when I upgrade in the future.
Except he's from the pre-modern era and does not fit the definition of what we call now a "scientist".
He probably did science (laws of motion, universal gravitation, etc) alongside alchemy, and occult studies.

It's rather a counter example : you can do occult studies, while in the same time providing the world some of the most revolutionary scientific concepts.
If you use a big screen your brain will be able to refocus faster when you look from one side to the screen to the other and back again when there are more recognizable patterns in the background.
Cholesterol... Please check how many milligrams or - actually - grams of cholesterol does your liver create every single day. Also note, that Vitamin D is naturally metabolized from cholesterol. Metabolism is not simple and it is not calories in and calories out.

I do not see how natural sea salt is harmful? For ages people had dried salt from the sea to be used in foods as well as cleanser for skin and balsam for hair. Just my 2 cents.
Couldn't agree more. It seems to be used to mean knowledge of some of the stack on a front end, and some of the stack on a back end, and some of the stack of whatever runs your database, and the idea that this is unusual and special.

I've never described myself as a full stack engineer, but have worked on front ends, back ends, underlying language implementations, underlying database implementations, and so on, and I just consider myself a (hopefully good) engineer.
I've never taken the time to really get into org-mode but from everything I've read it sounds great.
This is probably irrational, but it's always annoyed me that Yeoman is little more than a package.json file and small bash script yet has a professionally designed logo.
Hmm... I've been trying to keep a published "world bible" for a story setting I've been developing. This basically presents the same problem in the article, but with the added need to have a read-only version of the wiki available for access online. Anyone have a suggestion for managing something like that?

The default solution--running a whole public-facing wiki, with access-protection layered on top--seems a bit much; I'll be the only person editing it, so it'll be useless for anyone else to see anything about "revisions" or "markup." It should just appear to be (and can be) a static website.
I agree with most of your points. Within one product there should not be too much choice. But choice between different products i.e. Linux distributions or operating systems is ok IMHO.
> Apple's ARC is a compiler hack. It only works if you happen to use set of Cocoa libraries that are recognized by the compiler

I don't understand. How does ARC rely on more than what NSObject provides? I'm coming from the C++ shared_ptr world and ARC does not feel much different so far (less explicit, but easier to optimise).
I would create a nice and simple graphical explanation of how the app/service works. I don't see that nearly as often as I'd like.
How can I use a full screen terminal window and still read documentation in that same screen?
In new software, I can see your point. This issue relates to a removal of a previously available option.
That would be where Gollum comes in, so I can have a mobile web interface. Haven't done it yet but I'm planning on it soon.
I understand that Bugzilla may not be the appropriate place for the discussion. However, the reporter did not seem to be impolite in any way and may of not been aware there was a more suitable location to discuss the change so I'm not sure what warranted the blunt reply from the first developer who replied. The reply later on from Tobias Mueller seems much more appropriate.
Transparency makes me happy.

With aterm (transparent only to backgrounds, not other windows) and an imagemagick script to shade backgrounds, I get to have pretty much any photo I want as a background, and it doesn't impact my work.

Only exception: astronomical photos with lots of stars. Very hard to resolve a white '.' character.

Shading script is short. Here it is for reference:

#!/bin/bash
# should set my background and darken the image for aterm
# imagemagick documentation here:
# http://www.imagemagick.org/script/command-line-options.php#fx

convert $@ -fx 'u/2.0' ~/.shadedbackground.jpg
fbsetbg -c ~/.shadedbackground.jpg

And, my aterm options:

aterm -tr -sl 10000 -fg white -bg black

Terminals that permit a dynamic view of obscured windows are also occasionally useful. For example - keeping an eye on small process-monitoring gui while continuing to code.
It's the attitude more than the bug. People (and to a greater extent Developers) don't always have the greatest grasp on language. And this DOES NOT mean everything needs to be 'sugar coated'.

Want something removed? Create a definition of when you should activley remove something. Like this:

Candidates for feature removal of (SYSTEM)

* Does not impact how the application can be used

* Requires manual testing

* Is greater than 1% of the size of the application, or greater than 500 lines of code

If X meets all three candidates it's up for removal. Any bug created can be referred directly to this list.

There. You don't have to come out and say "We're terribly sorry, but unfortunately we've decided to remove this feature because of blah blah blah" and you don't have to just say "No.". Instead you can say "Removal decision is based on (INSERT LINK TO ABOVE), if you disagree (INSERT ACTION TO CHALLENGE)".

What people want is something that gives the impression of a uniform set of decisions. They don't want to feel that people/developers are just being petty dictators.
Does Your Web Content Make Readers Angry?
> Software designers should aim to offer the smallest number of options they can get away with.

That's should always be second to providing solutions. Solve the problems that transparency solved first. If you aren't aware of the problems that transparency in terminals provided, then removing it is purely an act of ignorance.
No it's also when transferred between registrars.
Ruby: #new vs #initialize
The article implies that line kernel workers interested in optimization for the sake of optimization are ideally situated to judge what matters in the long and medium term, and that Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer, despite being the two largest share-holders and more than three decades of experience running a software company (apiece) are incompetent to recognize long and medium term strategies.

The fundamental assumption of the article - that the Windows kernel should strive toward the Linux kernel management model is patently absurd.

FOSS is free as in "free to break software that depends on your code."
Since its just static markdown files and got you could set up a post-receive hook on your public facing server that renders the markdown to a www directory.
Having a professional logo gives it a more polished first contact. For a tool that makes disparate bits easier to use it's part of the contract. Who cares how it's made when it brings convenience to the table?
You know, I understand wanting to put a little pressure back on the "make everything configurable" crowd; there are a lot of software engineers who go a bit overboard on the "just make it an option" approach to design, and then wind up with big, bloated, buggy software that tries to do everything but fails at most of it and is frustrating to configure.

However, "choice is poison" is a rather extreme over-compensation for this problem. Sometimes, options really do provide value. And many times, if they are designed correctly, they don't substantially increase cost; if the features are orthogonal and implemented independently, the additional complexity is only linear with the number of features, not quadratic or worse as happens if they are too interrelated.

I understand that we want to get away from the "you need to spend hours customizing your environment to make it usable" approach to design that plagues some open source project, but going to the other extreme and saying that "choice is poison" is just as bad.
Are you sure you're aware of how it's implemented?

In a good terminal (e.g. konsole) the text remains fully opaque while only the background becomes transparent.

This is more difficult than simply setting a window-wide opacity, which is why the terminal must have its own support for it.

So you maintain the readability benefit while still being able to see major changes to the window behind the terminal if necessary (something which I have found occasionally useful).
I believe Clojars at least supports package signing, if not requires it. Was extremely useful in a code audit recently.
I much prefer ksh myself, in particular for scripting. Fun fact about how bash is broken:

export a=0
cat $file | while read line
do
a=$(expr $a + 1)
done

Bash will fork the while loop as a separate process, inheriting (copying) its own environment, and the variable will only update locally, not in the parent process.
Not if it's done subtly (5-8% transparency) - if you've got multiple windows in a screen, it greatly enhances context in terms of what windows are where.
Whoever downvoted this guy was wrong. hjkl are useless. I gained vim proficiency through a few years of using it. Funny thing is that I never, ever used these keys for navigation: at the beginning I mapped arrows to them and later I just stopped using them altogether, outside of a few rare cases like block selection.

Commands for moving around are listed here: http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Moving_around. Note the profound lack of any of h, j, k, l :)
Thanks, I'll get a copy of your book. BTW, you might be interested in the work of media historian Bob McChesney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._McChesney), if you haven't checked it out already.

One thing he argued is that before professional journalism, the media was much like today's blogs; everyone knew their content reflected the owner's biases. Then with the consolidation of newspapers (due to economic reasons), to the point where a city might have only a couple dailies, overt bias "stank like old fish", so professional journalism arose. (And journalism schools along with it.) With it came a neutral-sounding objective tone, which hid a number of biases (like what's covered — and what's not, reliance on "official sources" who are elites, and so on). But of course, the content reflects the owners and advertisers' general interests, as we'd expect from media corporations which like staying in business.

Given that, I'd wonder if good, carefully-researched professional journalism is more insidous than yellow journalism. I'll look more closely at your (and Sinclair's) work.
Open source projects have to prioritize resources, too. It's not like open source projects are known for their lack of cruft.
No doubt I've nothing better to do but stare aghast at "care's to upload code". It's a matter of deep mystery to me that folk adept at using languages demanding absolute grammatical precision treat their native language so carelessly.
> I have a cheat sheet open behind my terminal, for say c-vim > keybindings. Instead of switching windows continuously

Drag the windows side by side with the snap feature.

> RTFA it does not make text less readable

The text would be more readable with an opaque background.
If accurate, this comment by Tobias Wolf is the craziest part: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698544#c19

"He hid the removal among very unrelated changes (gtk to gsettings switch) and spread the rmeoval across more than one commit. Such that you cannot easily revert it. I strongly assume this was done intentionally."
This is very true. The clients we have had to date which are prepared to spend good money on a website have done so to differentiate themselves from their competitors with great success.
Because you're talking to inexperienced clients! So if your client owns a small store and wants a site like amazon.com that client will have sticker shock pretty quickly. On the other hand if your client is an IT manager who is looking for a specific widget that client will have a very good idea what things cost. In fact that IT manager may even assume that costs will go higher than your estimate.
Facebook’s Latest Data Science Insight
Bash isn't really "minimalist" compared to the likes of dash or mksh. [rob-pike]Completion is a compromise, the Unix Way is to make your commands short and simple enough that you can memorize them all![/rob-pike]
It makes me sad how prone programmers are to condescension and dismissing attitude towards other programmers. Especially leads of open-source projects. Something about having all that influence gets into people's heads.
I see why this is interesting, but how or when would it be practical or useful?
Add them on and some people still fit the definition.

You're right, I think; compilers, machine code, operating systems, every single part of the computer down to the silicon (really, understanding the germanium doping that allow the transistors to work) including the electrical engineering, then the physics, and even chemistry that allows it to happen—that's really all part of the "full stack."

I think the true 21st century Renaissance Man (or Woman!) will have a broad generalist understanding of the entire technological craft, beyond even that which he needs to know to do his work. Will he ever need to understand the properties of silicon to make a web site beautiful? No. But he does anyway.

That's the point: the breadth of knowledge for the sake of it.

Having the knowledge and respect of every part of the stack allows you to know what you're doing in a way very few people can. It allows you to say Yes to so many more opportunities, to find the correct answer to thousands of possible questions if only by knowing the right person to talk to. It's the musician's flexibility of being able to play jazz and classical—it opens new doors and makes you better at both, in some unquantifiable way that no one quite understands.

So, put them on the list, and we'll talk Abstract Syntax Trees and A/B UI testing in the same sentence. Do they ever touch? Only at such a distance as to be nearly inconsequential to each other. But somehow, it makes you better at both to understand exactly how you get there from here.
Yearning for the days when we were all disengaged consumers
+1 for zim, I actually had the very same problem as the OP, and I've found zim to be the best fit (uses Markdown under the hood, the sync, FOSS...)
Regarding the removal itself, this is an unfortunate trend that, as far as I'm aware, started in the last couple years with Firefox and Chrome inappropriately and unapologetically removing features and options (and changing standard behavior like the image view background color) that had previously been present and in use. I don't think it's really curable, as it always seems to be the result of inconsiderate people having too much sway over what gets pulled/committed, and that's just a risk of open source.

The dev's attitude here is also shit... if you're not willing to reasonably address valid concerns related to decisions you've made that were obviously going to affect regular users, you have no place making those decisions and forcing them on others in the first place.
I feel kind of the opposite, where I've seen wordpress used to create what is effectively a static brochure site - what good is a Content Management Solution when the content isn't being managed? The only reason they're using it is that's all they know, and it allows them to create the site without looking at any code. Plus, giving customers a wordpress site opens up the door for user error, plus the inevitable security issues (even though I insist on using HTTPS, but now I have to explain what HTTPS is).
My solution so far has been to build static sites with Middleman. If they need a couple other features (like a contact form), I can use third party services called client-side. Ultimately, my turnaround is about the same as a wordpress site with the same features, and is quite a bit less complex, at least in my opinion. Of course this only applies to very basic websites, if they want a more complex app and will update the content regularly, I will use a CMS. I guess I'm just not sure what's wrong with this solution, but then again I'm pretty new at this.