skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If Im shopping for clothes I go straight for a salesperson. I use them as personal shoppers and ask them to go find jeans in my size that meet some loose criteria. If I find a shirt in thats too small I'll ask them to bring the right size. Sometimes you can be brutally honest with the "can I help you?" and just ask them what looks good and is on sale. They'll grin and point you in the right direction. If you're buying dress shirts I've found the salespeople to have insight into which brands will fit your unusually wide shoulders without looking awkward.

Don't feel uncomfortable rejecting their suggestions either. It's an iterative process. Once you don't need them say "alright, thanks so much for your help" and they'll leave you alone.
I started a new job only six months ago and it feels like I have been there for more than a year already! Probably all the new experiences: 2 international trips and one domestic and lots and lots of learning
May I quote George Orwell: "thoughtcrime" [1]

By the way, a very relevant username :)

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime
I was providing the largest estimate, fewer than 200 000 means less than 10 million, which is even further from the articles 25-30 million.
How do you know to objectively value feedback sources? Why and how does it depend?
Yea, I don't expect their random customer service people to give much of a shit. I assume you'd have to notify them in writing that you're terminating the contract per the price change and see if they balk. If they do, they'll force you into arbitration.

I'd oddly consider all of this, as I consider this a ploy to increase their revenue and see who notices plain and simple (as opposed to other contract changes they pull sometimes that might be arguably necessary) but given that I'm still relying on the good ol' 2007 unlimited iPhone contract, I'm hesitant to risk them agreeing with me and terminating the contract so they can modify the unlimited access.
I'm the same. An email address isn't an identity.

Some people use many email addresses and so could create many accounts. With one email address they can still use the '+blahblah' method to sign up unlimited times, unless you prevent that which would annoy people who use it legitimately for filtering.

Some people have a garbage or throwaway email account that they sign up for everything with, and only ever look at to find the confirmation emails.

If people don't want to give you a valid email then there's no reason to be sending them anything.
Thanks. I think I should do that, take a break and do depth post mortem. But I have no clue on how to do a good analyze of myself :/
If you're doing software in Europe like me, patent protection is not available. And that's a good thing.
Depends on where you live. Many neighborhoods have private security forces. The area around Wayne State University also has police protection from the University's own security force.

Outside of those areas it can get pretty dicey depending. But ymmv. You have to know your neighbors and in some cases rely on their eyes in the neighborhoods.
I think the NYT is overboard in saying that scrollkit can't make any claims...but the takedown of the video seems legally justifiable.

Before you say "Fair use!" and "it's educational!"...consider this example: What if I were to release a "How-to-Draw-Awesome-Cartoons" which was composed completely of examples of me redrawing the most famous Calvin and Hobbes strips? I'm not even physically copying Bill Watterson's assets, I'm redrawing them and telling people, "Hey, this is how you do it!"

Would you argue that Bill Watterson (who, for a time, was pretty vigilant about protecting the C&H brand from any kind of merchandise, a la Garfield) has no claim? I would argue that he does, because the reason why my How-to-Draw book is remotely interesting is because it exploits the appeal that Watterson worked to create.

If I were to make this How-to_draw book using only characters I've conceived myself, I might still be successful...but only if those characters have the same appeal as Calvin and Hobbes...and, as you can agree, that would be far harder than the actual how-to-draw content.

So I can see why the NYT is peeved that scrollkit is showing off their service by exploiting the goodwill and excellence that the NYT poured its resources into. However, I don't think NYT legal has a right to say "Don't use our name or compare yourself to us in any way". Scrollkit can make its own false claims (but then, they may be sued by a different stakeholder)
Your investors believe in product-market fit and huge markets at that. Your patents alone are not going to solve that, though. (edit: grammar)
The Python project has a special "mentorship program" designed to increase the amount of core contributors to Python. See - http://pythonmentors.com/
There's always exceptions.
I know you're the type of person who publicly tells their former employer, "Choke on a fucking taint, Google. Choke. On. A. Taint."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5508058

I also know you think there are easy and free solutions to the problems that every company on the planet struggles with every day (measuring and rewarding performance).

I think you're arrogant, disrespectful, and that you over-simplify problems to an absurd degree.

I can conclude that if I worked at Google, I don't think I'd appreciate working on your team.

And you're right, my post didn't have very much to do with yours. Did yours have a lot to do with Google Maps responding quickly to an emerging tragedy? No, it did not.
OK, I was just asking, because Chai is also e.g. the Turkish word for tea. (I guess it's just that some cultures we use the chai-based word for tea instead of the tea-based word use more milk. In Mongolio it's chai as well, and they have lots of milk and butter and salt and pepper.)
Angular7min - open-source hybrid mobile app built with AngularJS
With the implicit assumption that there is any expectation or obligation for Google to conform to some level of openness, especially in (relatively) new products, as if it were paid for with taxpayer money and they owe us something in return. We can say that we wish it were more open, or that we won't use it because it isn't open, but I don't understand the attitude that they are committing some colossal ethical lapse or failing some social contract by not having it be more open at this stage.
Show HN: Pagoda, a Zen-mode Jekyll blog editor
Is the produced code open sourced or publicly downloadable? That's possibly what BBC should do, providing £100M actually produced something worth open sourcing.
People adapt pretty quickly to that kind of slimy tricks. A few years ago, banks in my town would offer credit cards to everything with a pulse. They would put kiosks at the mall with sales people harassing passing customers, and they were trained to approach you exactly like this.

In a few months, everybody would know exactly what to do: Avoid eye contact, speed up when passing by, do not listen to them, do not even let them finish their sentence, and just say "No, thank you".
I thought it was about making a very risky investment in a hope for a really high return.
I would think the following would be best practice:

1) use LPeg or something similar to validate the actual text of the email (here's some LPeg that parses the headers of an email, certain one can pull out the email address portion: https://github.com/spc476/LPeg-Parsers/blob/master/email.lua).

2) Take the domain part and do a DNS MX lookup on it (to be pedantic, if that fails, then one should do a DNS A lookup). That will check if the domain is at least valid.
I use 33mail.com for the same purpose - it gives you a unique wildcard subdomain (and also a shortened domain (<yoursub>.33m.co) so you can create uinque addresses per signup etc, without the problems of + being rejected (or gicing away your real email address)

You can then block any address with a click if it's being abused.

If you're feeling generous, enough people using this link will earn me premium features: http://www.33mail.com/rj37w3
I'm against all of the complex regex as well, having learned through trial and error that it is usually way more trouble than it's worth. That being said, there are many cases where the email address being verified is not the user's email, but maybe someone they are doing business with, and they don't want the system sending a verification email to every email address they are saving with your software.
I wish OP had provided some actual A/B registration fall-off data. For me client-side validation is more for catching user error than to do any actual "validation". That's always been the job of confirmation email.

I think there is going to be a very low percentage of users who will register again if they don't receive a confirmation email, unless you're giving away free iPhones. Granted regex can not catch most of the user-generated errors, but it can catch a few which could still increase you registered users.

To that point a better UI/UX (font size, spacing, etc.) might do a better job in lowering typos in email.
You might benefit from Amy Hoy's 30x500[1] workshop.

[1] http://unicornfree.com/30x500
When I was working at an electronics shop, we would ask "have you been served yet?" It's a much harder question to get out and customers responded better.
Ask HN: Does anybody else like the syntax of Algol 60?
I was reading the syntax of Algol 60, and I personally think that the syntax is very readable and easy to understand, and I am surprised that it isn't used as a template for new imperative programming languages in the same way the syntax of C is.

It also helps that most textbooks, when they need to describe an algorithm, use an Algol 60 kind of syntax as opposed to a C kind of syntax.
I signed up for Google Plus today to +1 this.

Irony?
> the initialization can be done at compile time, or (sometimes, in C++) on program startup

With ELF binaries for C programs it's done at startup as well. The data segment is created as having memory size SIZEM and file size SIZEF. If SIZEF < SIZEM, memory from SIZEF to SIZEM is set to 0.
Yeah I feel that way about a lot of articles on the web. And this article for example I didn't read until it had several hundred points on HN which implies it would almost certainly be worth the read.

I skip over tons of articles on news websites and have been wondering for years if it would be possible to filter the headlines on news sites to avoid even seeing the 'human tragedy' stories that fill the news these days.
When you say"support clients", I assume people already paying for what your startup is offering? For clarity, I'm explicitly talking about sharing for pre-product-market fit, pre-validated business model startups. (edit: sloppy fingers)
So you flagged this yet you made other comments on this thread, indicating that you're interested in the topic.

Could you please explain that?
Ask PG: Would you (have) fund(ed) Kim Dotcom
Just curious, I believe on occasion you said know you would have funded Zuckerberg. I am sure Kim is different on a lot of levels, even before the MEGA legal troubles Kim had a pretty colorful background. Though I am not sure how that would influence any funding decisions, if at all, but I could see arguments on both sides. Also, unlike Zuckerberg you may have never met or interacted with Kim, which may make the hypothetical unanswerable.
I agree on most of your points. A gene that is a burden under present conditions might prove a gift in a different environment or against a future disease, and anyway nobody should choose for someone else if they can have children or not.

However the question is not if someone should have children or not. Genetic screening technologies are moving fast, as is our understanding of the human genome. The real question, that will take more and more importance in our society is Do I want to screen my sperm/ovum/embryos when I decide to have a child? and maybe Should genetic screening be mandatory in certain cases?
That's true, but I would posit that you need a registration email anyway (assuming you even care if the email is valid) because even if your regex is perfect there's no way to detect people simply mistyping their email address in a way that is technically valid.

This is going to your dominant type of failure.
Besides that this completely missed the context, that we are talking about the American mass media, and American nostalgia, I'd argue that time will have to tell on this matter. 2000-2010 started well for most of the world, but major faults were revealed in the global economic system. We may well look back on this time period much as we would with the Roaring 20's. What if most of the growth was fake? What if it really were all just financed by deficit spending on the part of the West, and that China, India and the rest of the developing world cannot uphold their current levels of infrastructure, let alone their level of prosperity?
wish I wasn't such a noob. good job on the typography and thanks for contributing.
The thing that confuses me more than anything is that the original pitch is so strange- "we made a replica in an hour!".

OK. If you showed me an advertising poster you really liked, I could fire up Illustrator and give you a decent replica in a couple of hours. Does that mean you should hire me as your new ad agency? Of course not. The actual act of piecing together a creative is tiny compared to planning it. Anyone who works in the startup industry ought to get that- the coding is often the least of your problems.

So, Scrollkit never claimed that they made a Snow Fall, they claimed that they were able to throw together a copy of it in a short time. So what? Why would that make me want to use it?

(also, fun to see that the founder of ScrollKit is no stranger to lifting UI concepts other sites have pioneered: http://codybrown.name/timeline/)
Is there anything that isn't "design", then? Does it then mean anything?
Vonage: "Unlimited" minutes capped at 3000 minutes.
Was looking at Vonage to get "unlimited" calling minutes until I came across this:

http://www.vonage.com/reasonable_use_policy/?refer_id=WEBHO0706010001W1

Read this paragraph specifically

"Over 95% of Vonage's residential unlimited calling plan customers use less than 3000 minutes per month and do not have any unusual usage patterns in terms of unique numbers called, high call forwarding/transferring usage and so on. A customer's aggregate usage may be considered outside of normal use if it exceeds 3000 minutes per month IN COMBINATION with one or more of the following, including, but not limited to, excessive:

unique numbers called;
call lengths;
call forwarding/transferring;
conference calling;
short duration calls;
number of calls made during a month,
number of calls made to a conference calling service during a month;
number of calls made during business hours;
number of calls terminated and re-initiated consecutively, which, in the aggregate, result in excessive call lengths during a specific time frame; or
other abnormal calling patterns indicative of an attempt to evade enforcement of this Reasonable Use Policy"
On the type of projects I work for, license costs are rounding errors.

When you do big enterprise projects, and finance is such a case, there many higher costs associated with the project than what is paid in licenses.
Informed people know the BATF never made any attempt to track the guns whatsoever (unlike the previous Boooosh "Wide Receiver" where they put tracking and transmitting devices in the stocks of the guns, but abandoned the effort after about 200 guns since the approach wasn't working).

There's some telling emails that have surfaced that indicate the sole purpose was to generate more statistics about guns of American origin fueling the drug war, there's also indications this was supplying one faction, the Sinaloa Cartel, since their opponents, Los Zetas, are by far the most dangerous and a potential existential threat to the Mexican government). And all during this period Team Obama were telling lies about the fraction of guns that fuel the drug war down south that come from civilian US sources, trying to make a case for more gun control in the US, and illegally doing so by ordering gun shops to report multiple rifle sales.
I wish I'd done that too, in retrospect. I could obviously have done much more research around my opinions, and there's one use-case in which what I'm advocating simply does not work: when you are _paying_ to send those emails. In that case, yeah, you're gonna wanna do some validation.
Facebook’s Head Of Brand Design Paul Adams Joins Intercom
I saw this link and didn't bother to check it, but I think you hit the jackpot:

Palace of the Grand Master Explosion, in Rhodes

On 4 April 1856, the Ottomans had storaged a large amount of gunpowder in the palace and the adjacent church, which were also full of people. In that time, it was considered that the ringing of bells could prevent the formation of storms. Unfortunately, a lightning hit the gunpowder, triggering a huge blast that killed 4,000 people.

Thanks.
Because it's not obvious. Ask developers to recite the rules for correct email address, and most of them will get it laughably wrong. I blame the standard, which is far more "featureful" than is actually required, but that is the way it is.
Hmmm I dunno about this... "Don't wear a suit if everyone else is wearing jeans". I mean I understand the value of building a culture, but I just don't think the essence of culture lies in people's sense of style or what kind of clothes make them feel comfortable (ESPECIALLY during a job interview).

To me this is equal to a company whose culture places importance on the kind of shoes you wear to an interview. It's just not important... if you want to rise above the "big shop with an HR department" then don't follow the same rules.

I get that if someone doesn't conform to the "cool" trends set by the majority of the employees, and they don't have a closet full of sarcastic and/or slobby t-shirts that person will initially be judged and will have a hard time fitting in.. but if their personality and input rise above all that surface nonsense, then your "culture" is safe and that person is going to be a valuable member of the team.
Hi Eliezer, what are your thoughts on people not as smart as you, working on lesser problems with the aim of donating heaps of money to fund your work?
Actually monolithic regex are bad in general.
So then what is Fox? They seem to be trying pretty hard to reduce the power of certain elements within the government. Whatever your political stripe, I think we can agree that Fox, MSNBC and similar do a great deal more than simply "inform the public". So does Fox even have a right to complain by your standards?

The problem with involving things like "intent" is that it makes the line between "journalism" and "not journalism" murky and impossible to define clearly. This means that true protection for journalists is impossible since they will always have an uncertain status.

What was widely considered to be journalism on September 10, 2001 was considered by many to be borderline treason on September 12, 2001 (remember when GWB had a 90% approval rating?). The intent might not have changed ("inform the public") but the public perception of the intent changed radically.

Further, if the effect of the dissemination is taken into account in the definition of "journalism", then it is impossible to know a priori whether disseminating a given piece of information will be considered journalism or not. How can the NYT be sure that they won't accidentally spark a revolution? Further, isn't there a fairly extensive history of newspapers directly calling for various forms of revolution?

So the only way to really protect journalists is to define journalism broadly and objectively. Disseminating information, regardless of motive, must be considered journalism then. This means that Wikileaks must qualify for protection just as the NYT does.

Note: I'm not saying the government can't go after people who break their various responsibilities related to keeping secrets. I'm also not saying that simply making crap up and publishing it should be protected, but the laws related to these things are well-established and relatively uncontroversial.
By the way, a very relevant username :)

I'm just waiting for thoughtcriminal[1] to post in this thread, actually.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=thoughtcriminal
I usually bundle feedback in two groups - first one is my target demographic, the second one is professional. First one is pretty straightforward to parse, the second one is a kind of a double-edged sword.

Whatever your methodology is, at some point you can't parse more feedback, and it's then noise, whatever its contribution is.
My body language will tell you if I want help or not.

What phrase is used to initiate that interaction is completely irrelevant, but attempts to entrap me in an interaction I don't want will always yield a negative response. Just the level of awkwardness may very.
IANYL, but I'm not sure I buy the it's an "administrative fee" argument.

First of all, the section that attempts to discount this random $0.61 as a supposed "fee" is discussing whether or not AT&T will provide notice, not whether it constitutes a price increase.

Second, at best, that sentence would mostly seem to be discussing only that AT&T doesn't consider this fee increase material, but that's not necessarily conclusive.

Fact of the matter is that this is an increase in the amount due to the provider for the Service, so without the surcharge directly relating to some change in circumstances regarding the contract, I'd consider 1.3 applicable. AT&T's fees page basically tries to couch the Administrative Fee language in terms of some sort of mandatory obligation that AT&T is paying on behalf of its customers, but it's farcical: AT&T has to pay rents to operate its cell sites, that's the whole reason consumers contracted for the Services in the first place.
Good stuff! Thanks for posting.
If you own any domain you can forward <anything>@yourdomain.com to the same inbox. Then sign up for unlimited accounts that way.´
Because most users couldn't type their own email address, or even a properly formatted email address to save their life.

"My email address is joe.aol or was it aol.com@joe? Wait joeaol@com?"
Two things.

(1) Developers tend to be more aware of secure programming issues than they were in the 1990s, when you could coerce a shell out of a lot of SUID programs and network daemons with a well-placed pipe filter or semicolon character. But that doesn't make them better at implementing more securely. Case in point: Nginx, a codebase that was designed from the start for modern C secure programming, had an integer overflow just a couple days ago; a couple years back, our team found another serious Nginx bug (that time, an info leak) stemming from their attempts to be extra-cautious. So simply being aware of secure programming issues isn't an assurance that code is actually more secure.

(2) More importantly: it doesn't matter so much if there are fewer memory corruption vulnerabilities in C programs. Like I said before: what matters is if there are any of them, or at least any that can be discovered in a reasonable amount of time. In (say) C# or Java serverside code that doesn't call out to C code, we can say with some assurance that there aren't any such flaws; we don't have to stare at the same 10,000 lines of code for a month to prove that to ourselves. You simply can't say that about C codebases. There could be a memory corruption flaw in Dovecot right now, or in Postfix, or (less likely, but still...) tinydns.
"You only need one Watergate to bring down a Republican president."

Fixed it for you.
BeauCoo: Building An App With Lasting Power
Well, it could be worse, right?

At least you have a lot of the skills that are in high-demand, whether on the job market or as a founder.

Why don't you create something just for yourself once? Just something that you think you would like to use or have. Worst case, you only have something nice that you like. Best case, some other people like it, too.