skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wow this place has really gone down if people like you feel comfortable expression your ignorance so openly. "Hate us for our freedoms" was the idiotic excuse Bush used because he wasn't intelligent enough to give us anything meatier. Only the simplest of the simple ever actually believed it.

I would tell you to go educate yourself but if you honestly buy this line now in 2013 I don't suppose there's anything more than can be done for you.
i'd like one too please. my email is in my profile. thanks!
In Knights defense they aren't just a high frequency hedge fund that trades their own book to make a profit.

They have legitimate customers that they put orders out on behalf of and allow clients to trade through them.

Part of the reason why it took so long to shut the system down is that if they had just shut the system down, then they'd be in breach of contract for those clients.

So shutting down was more of a business decision that a technical one.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5791981
Sorry, but limited government doesn't mean no government at all. Most of what you describe should be the responsibility of the local government in your area which is far more capable of dealing with such matters as opposed to a massive central government that can care less about your community's well-being.

Most people who speak of limited government are speaking of the federal level, not local or state.
Thanks for asking this - it raises a point that I forgot to make.

You're not going to do as well at a company which hires based on the solution as one which hires based on the problem. Ideally you want to be in a position where you're being held accountable by people for which the specific technical details of the solution are mostly out of their scope.
Developing iOS Video Recorder and Player in 5 minutes
Mercedes was just off the top of my head. There are many businesses that did well under Hitler and still do well today.
Tulip Mania was so volatile and quick that I doubt there was much of anything beyond armchair tulip specialists
The three dots ("...") show an uncertainty. I could imagine someone saying see you tomorrow, even if there is a (big) chance that won't happen.

A form of self mockery.
I'm not sure if English is your first language, but the writing in this article is actually very good. I don't have any problem believing that people are willing to pay Somers for his writing. (And $10K is, by magazine standards, a princely sum.)
> Either he's losing track of his lies, he's bad at math or he has unrealistic expectations about life expectancy.

Hey, you forget how health care is so great in France :p
The Most Under-Appreciated Startup Team Member
On the other hand, it does mean that we were evolved to at least be able to procreate in the presence of a constant radiation flux.

There's such a wide gulf in possible levels of radiation exposure that radiation health physicists are to this very day still unsure whether constant exposure to low levels of radiation is actually harmful at all. They haven't even been able to rule out that it's not beneficial.

But either way, if you're worried about exposure to radiation you should be more worried about coal plants than nuclear plants; coal plants emit so much radioactivity to the environment that their exhaust would generate more power in a nuke plant, if it could be harvested properly.
I wonder about all this talk and arguing back and forth over whether "it's a fake".

What this man is expressing is real. I can confirm it is real, because as a human I can feel many of the same things, as I read it. Whether he will die in 30 days or not, we don't know. And you can, of course, argue about that all day long. You might even be quite put out if he does not. But whether he is having these thoughts and feelings because he is about to die, or whether he is simply exploring these thoughts and feelings because he is a human (and facing death like us all), they are no less real. You may call one fiction because the man does not die on cue, but after reading it, I say it is not fake.
http://leapfrog.io for international development, human rights, and technology news
As many have already pointed out in other comments, it definitely was already a feature. I would just add that I think the author still has a valid point, though, because this new update does bring a lot more light on that feature. I would say before this update, it was a pretty "hidden"/unknown feature. I wonder if more users will speak up about it in their reviews now that it's much more obvious to access that information.
Learn Python in 24 hours, write your code in 12, and then spend the rest of your life refactoring :)
The interviewer doesn't know if your claims are true.

There are lots of people in the world who are impossible to satisfy, who blame all failure on everyone but themselves. They have complaints about everything, justified or otherwise.

By bringing these things up, a person who does not otherwise know you has two possibilities:

- The company you worked for really was that bad. This claim cannot be verified in a meaningful way.

- The candidate you're interviewing is one of these dreaded negative nancies who will disrupt your workplace as they proceed to complain about everything and redirect their own problems upon other people.

Since there is no way to tell which is true, and I have no incentive to trust you, and every disincentive to bring in someone like that into my office, I will not hire you.

Direct, concrete criticism is fine. "We used the waterfall model and I don't believe it works" - but do not come off as bitter, because that's exactly what the Negative Nancy typically sounds like.
Wrong. I voted for Obama the first time. Then, when I learned he had no clue, lied about everything, did not do as promised, plunged us into more debt, is a total union whore, etc, I voted for Romney.

I am a true independent in the full sense of the word.

To be fair, our system is based on political parties. If these were abolished and politicians had to run without party affiliation then one could vote outside clans.

I want an intellectually honest limited government that is fiscally conservative and socially, well, gets the fuck out of our lives. As an atheist it pains me to sometimes have to vote for uber-religious Republicans. Sometimes I have to choose between social and fiscal policies. Obama promised he would deal with all of it, and here we are we have wasted four years and are about to waste four more.

None of the extreme's are good. Extreme left, right and yes, extreme Libertarians are deranged and delusional lunatics who ought to be nowhere near our government. As an example, I love Ron Paul but some of his foreign policy ideas were nutty. I still think we need to quickly shift into something that is closer to a moderate Libertarian concept.

Beyond that, we need major structural changes in order to have a shot at recovering in FIFTY YEARS. Yes folks, do the math, recovery will take twenty five to fifty years. We've done a lot of damage to our country --all from the inside. Unions, entitlement programs, patents, tax code, Obamacare, IRS, Patriot act, NSA, EDUCATION, spending, political whore politicians, ignorant voters, budgets, OSHA, etc.
"Facebook makes it extremely clear that they never give away this information"

Not a quick learner, I'm afraid.
Remote consulting exists, but it's harder to find work that way -- infinitely so if you have no reputation.

The only advice I can really offer on how to get started is to network. Talk to people about their problems at work and take genuine interest, even when they're not a potential client. Where possible, help people out in meaningful ways and show (don't tell) them that you're smart and that their problems are important to you. You'll probably end up doing some free work this way, but you'll make friends who trust you and that's far, far more valuable. As long as you're clear that you're looking for consulting work, it'll find you eventually. Just don't belabor the point.

One trick of mine is to focus on selling the minimum amount of complexity. Figure out exactly the value that the customer is looking for - often times they don't know what it is. There's a saying that a person in a hardware store looking for a quarter inch drill doesn't need a quarter inch drill, they need a quarter inch hole. But more importantly almost nobody needs a quarter inch hole -- maybe they need a new shelf. If they need a new shelf, maybe they just have too much stuff. No matter what it is, get to the bottom of their problem and sell them the simplest solution with the maximum value, even if it doesn't make you any money today.

Also consider trying to tackle some stickier problems in well-known open source projects. PostgreSQL is a favorite example of mine for this as they make it very easy to contribute. Why hire someone who "knows" PostgreSQL when you can hire someone who helps write PostgreSQL?
This has been part of the product since launch. Not a huge mistake.
A thing is worth exactly what another is willing to give for it.
Aside from geeks, who cares that Android is 'open'?
Try Elixir online
Humans typically communicate in a way that resists shallow logical analysis. In a real conversation, people use words rather than terms, make utterances rather than sentences, and employ a wider variety of inference methods than modus ponens. A great deal of what is communicated and inferred in a conversation depends on context; the speakers and audience, their history, their shared knowledge and confidences, the feelers they lay out to establish mutual trust and rapport. Poking into this with your ad hominem stick betrays an ignorance of the way people actually communicate, and ignorance in general.

Well said. And it's a lack of awareness of this point that often frustrates me about discussions here on HN. I understand that most of us try to be mostly rational, most of the time, and that we want a high level of discourse here. But too often, you see people acting like every discussion is high-school debate-club practice, and they start slinging "ad hominem" and "fallacy of the excluded middle" around like a high-school kid with a brand new super-soaker, eager to spray anyone in range.

But not everything that is said here needs to be treated like it was uttered as part of a debate. Sometimes opinions are just opinions, sometimes anecdotes are enlightening, and sometimes generalizations, metaphors, analogies and other abstractions come into play.
This has been circulating in my mind for some time now. It seems to me that Silicon Valley is so obsessed with "home run" start ups that we've lost track of caring if they make our lives better.

I'm not necessarily making a moral judgement on Snapchat but I do think it is something to consider. You can see the same mentality around Chatroulette. I realize the value of something is not concrete at first; Twitter comes to mind. I think we all agree that Twitter plays an important role in society today, yet that was unclear a few years ago.

As a society, are we rallying behind an app that helps people engage in extramarital affairs as this post suggests? Without getting into morality, don't we agree that affairs impact not just the two participants but the families surrounding them?

Are we simply justifying our obsession with "success" by attributing some theoretical benefit when the drawbacks seem obvious?
Not sure where you are located but I'm in the middle of nowhere Ohio and my experience is fairly close to the Author's. Salary is scaled down but not a ton. I have had three emails for jobs this week and it's been at bit slow this week. Being involved in the community and active on different sites like linkedin help though.
Interview with the creator of the BDS C Compiler
> The problem with that is that "fully developed" is a meaningless phrase.

Even if that were true, that would justify pointing that out and/or seeking clarification, not simply making up your own strawman to argue against because the person you wanted to argue against hadn't posted something for which you had a canned argument handy.

Its also not really true; while "fully developed" may be somewhat imprecise, its a fairly decent non-technical characterization given the research showing the course of physical development of the relevant brain centers and how they track with age.
>And this is not counting sick sad stuff like unfair incancernation: nazi concentration camps, gulag in the USSR, camps in North Korea

This is what I was getting at. Things like Nazi concentration camps, starvation in Russia, etc., count because governments did this. It's an important thing to keep in mind for the people who believe democracy is non-optimal. Of course it's non-optimal, but in my mind I'm not looking for optimal, I'm looking to avoid situations where people are murdered unjustly by the government with no recourse.
This article is horrible. 3,500 words of overwrought circuitous handwringing about the frontend dev job market.

I wonder if his code is as self indulgently bloated as his prose.
This is what I use with Tmux: https://github.com/sorin-ionescu/prezto/blob/master/modules/...

Basically a daemon session is started (if it wasn't there before) and every terminal you open automatically connects to that session.
This means that you can close every terminal, the session is still open and new terminals will use the already existing session. As long as tmux itself isn't stopped (reboot, etc.) you'll stay in the same session.

Which is cool because everything is de facto detached.
Networks give you an unfair access to success
Likewise. London.
"In today's world, web developers have it all: money, perks, freedom, respect."
Cannot relate at all.
"5 horror stories in what, thousands and thousands of transactions?"

No 5 horrors stories that rose to the level of being interesting enough to make a good newspaper story. There is most certainly a higher number of fail transactions, the exact number of course is the question which we don't know the answer to.
I don't think there is a reason to be insulting. If you are legitimately asking a question - don't be rude. If you just don't like it - use the flag.
Well... you only live once, so you know, infringe whenever possible.
Exactly. They wouldn't give it away. They'd sell it at an exorbitant price. That's not giving it away.
White House defends NSA collection of phone records
Well said. Joseph Gordon Levitt isn't actually facing death in the movie 50/50, but I can assure you the anxieties expressed in that movie touch me profoundly.
I've been noticing these a lot recently, and I think the algorithm needs a lot of work because these companies can essentially be paying to damage their brands. When I see "So-and-so likes X" at the top of my feed every day, I get annoyed, and I instinctively direct my ire at the advertiser (or worse, my friend) rather than Facebook. I've seen a bunch of comments like "why do you keep posting this shit," and the reply is of course "I don't know, I'm not doing anything!"

I mean, even the first time I see one of those ads, the whole thing just rings cheap, and I dislike that my friends (and possibly myself) are unwittingly participating in these ad campaigns. It really doesn't seem like effective marketing (but I'm no guru, maybe getting the impressions turns out to outweigh the annoyance?).

I wish this article had continued to the conclusion of "what if I put very negative or outright offensive text in my sharing of this page, which could then be propagated as an ad?"
Agreeing with other people in here: <big company site> cost <big company> more money and time than your client is paying. It's fair to tell him so. Possibly he'll agree and re-negotiate your rate up, but I doubt it. This sounds like one of patio11's pathological customers, whom you're better off without. I'm not sure what that does to your Elance reputation though.

Now, I don't have any Elance experience so take the following with grain of salt. If you're still interested in trying to source clients there, you might try raising your rate to something you'd prefer. In fact, raise your rates to something that seems outrageous to you. If you're competent at all you're probably undercharging. The higher rate will attract a different breed of client who won't balk so long as you have a portfolio of work you can point at as an example of what you're capable of.

All this advise is obviously colored by my current situation. I've got a great day job, but I moonlight occasionally. I bid much higher rates than most people who come to me (by word of mouth) are expecting. Because I value my free time, I bid high enough on projects that if the prospect actually engages me I won't regret losing the free time. And if they walk away, hey, more time for me to work on my own stuff.
seems like http://www.snapchat.com/sexgod696969 is doing really well.

on a related note. it would be amusing to trace all these relationships by scraping the site for common usernames and then following jumping down through their friends list.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this but a really good option is Prismatic (getprismatic.com).

You basically just follow topics/sites and it suggests to you more sites/topics which are similar.

Browsing from there I get all the big articles on hacker news and from other sources which I wasn't aware of previously.
Wow, props for going "all the way".

I have to wonder though, is this a wise choice? If the product alone, e.g. the code, is what drives investment it surely is.. But I would guess that's only one of many factors. People are scared away from others that are too different when it comes to things like behaviour and clothing.

How long can he live in the forest before he's too "weird" to make meaningful connections to customers and investors? My guess is 2 days =/

Unless you're running a b2c SaaS, this might not be a good idea.
One-time, few clicks effort to build your own business, earn residual value and avoid paying percentage of your hard earned sales to middleman.

Your mileage may vary.
My point was there is no danger and no down side to being politician [1]. And it just seems odd to me to call a job that consists of literally nothing but talking "hard". Obama is president and the most work he did in congress was being present. To call it hard work is controversial. To call it the hardest job on the planet is utterly outlandish.
Most of the comments are focused on the author's trivial mistake (when was this information surfaced: now, or at launch?). His substantive point is more valuable to bring to light.

Perhaps the fact that there are top-users lists highlights the tension between what Snapchat says that people use it for (sharing brief moments with friends) vs what people actually use it for.

In fact, I actually use Snapchat for sharing photos with friends, and I still would prefer that this network information disappear. The existence of a top list suggests that there is quite a bit of metadata retained long after the photos are (ostensibly) destroyed.

It implies that the company is building a database that could be used to reconstruct an enormous network diagram.
Stop being sketchy and it won't be a big deal.
I'm sure it's been done, but I know there is a place for longer term automated trading as well. Computers have an advantage over the super short term, but even on the short, mid, long term, there is money to be made in finding holes based on human behavior over time, which still drives a big chunk of the market.
>I love emacs to death, but the singlethreadedness is such a pain. Especially if . . . or just a blocking external process (when you're trying to run two or three or more).

I am having trouble imagining how you end up in a situation where Emacs is waiting on a blocking external process while trying to run other external processes.

There two kinds of external processes inferior to Emacs: those that communicate with Emacs synchronously and those that communicate asynchronously.

The inferior shell process in a shell-mode buffer is probably the most familiar example of the latter. (Any mode derived from comint mode is an example.) Your Emacs is never waiting for an asynchronously-communicating external process, is it?

The prototypical example of a process that communicates with Emacs synchronously is when Dired forks and execs the ls command to get a directory listing. I never find myself waiting for this ls command. The only external process I notice myself ever waiting for is the movemail program distributed with Emacs -- and that never took more than around 10 seconds (and usually a lot less) even on early-1990-vintage computers like a 386. So I am having trouble imagining what your "when you're trying to run two or three or more [external processes]" refers to.

Parenthetically, I could eliminate the delays caused by movemail by rewriting vm-get-new-mail to use async io when it is finished like M-x man uses. Adding threads to Emacs would not be necessary.

But then I have very little experience of or knowledge Windows. Is this waiting you refer to a Windows-only thing?

The OP maintains that it is probably a good thing that Emacs is not multi-threaded, and after 20 years of using Emacs and hacking on Emacs I tend to agree -- but my experience is almost all on Unix-like systems.
As a society, are we really rallying behind an app that helps people engage in extramarital affairs as this post suggests? Without getting into morality don't we agree that affairs impact not just the two participants but the families surrounding them?

I use SnapChat daily and its starting to cannibalize a lot of my other methods of communication: its fast, more personal, more affective, and a lot more fun to use. I only have ~forty SnapChat friends compared to the ~1200 on Facebook or ~300 phone numbers I have, and it makes it a lot more intimate: you're not gonna send a goofy face of yourself to that study partner from freshman Biology who you never talk to.

(Honestly, it reminds me of what Path could be if Path wasn't so pretentious.)

Oh, and email helps people commit extramarital affairs, too.
Deductive logical systems cannot reliably find truth. That is the lesson of the scientific revolution and the revolution in mathematics that is most closely associated with Godel.

Yet when people invoke "logical fallacies" they are almost always fallacies in deductive logic. Hey Internet--how about catching up to the 19th century and employing some inductive reasoning in your arguments?

The problem with that, though, is that the starting point is facts. The arguer actually needs to possess domain knowledge/experience. It's so much more convenient to mock an inferred deductive structure...no real facts required!
Microsoft, FBI Take Down 'Citadel' Botnet Targeting Bank Info
Asking for Salary
I remember at one point there was a FB app that told you who spent the most time looking at your profile, then generated a photo and tagged people in it. Hilariously I was the top person on my GF's sister's one, not sure why. Not sure where they got the data for that...
Honesty, when someone asks why you're moving on.

I'm afraid I don't consider a well reasoned and well thought out criticism to be 'whining'
No kidding, do they think Verizon doesn't keep track of your phone calls? What the NSA did isn't illegal and it certainly isn't new.
> As a society, are we rallying behind an app that helps people engage in extramarital affairs as this post suggests? Without getting into morality, don't we agree that affairs impact not just the two participants but the families surrounding them?

I think that line of reasoning is projecting far too much onto a photo sharing service. I use it to share silly photos with friends. Just because someone else uses it to conduct an extramarital affair doesn't make the service per se immoral.
Agreed. Just throwing it out there since I've encountered it before, more than once, where others assume there will always be a response, regardless of status code.
Transloadit now offers lossless image optimization, up to 80% reduced filesizes