skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Pick a fight.
Architect on tv about 9/11
I don't think that actor guy posts every second, and the average number of followers is way lower than thousands.
Visualizing Music through Canvas (Needs FF 3.5Beta or Chrome 2)
> It makes sense because there can only be a few leaders.

Leaders are followed because they inspire, not because they're arrogant beyond believe. People that act like leaders but aren't are knocked down. The real leaders aren't.
wait how long have you been an unpaid intern? unless it was part time ( couple hours here or there ), anything more than 2-3 months tops should result in the end of the internship.
As wrong as unpaid internships are, you'd agreed to work for the company for a set amount of time on an unpaid basis. Changing your mind after the fact is unfair both to the company and the next-in-line would-be intern whose place you took.

Or, think about it this way - if you are a kid who's been taken advantage of, maybe you deserve to be paid as such. If on the other hand you are an adult capable of making informed decisions and sticking to your commitments, then a couple months at a company whose awesome product you clearly admire shouldn't be that hard.

Take some responsibility and finish what you started. Or at least bow out gracefully by giving them sufficient notice and finding a replacement.
Unlike you, I greatly enjoy articles such as this one.

Let me begin with the caveat that I agree that it is more speculation than science, and it is unfortunate that the author presents it as if it were a scientific paper rather than a blog post. But note that it hasn't been published anywhere, so it is not as if the scientific community is accepting it as science.

You seem to have the opinion that anything that is not science is at best not worth doing, and at worst evil. I urge you to re-examine that assumption.

Now, if there were a scientific way of answering the question that the article considers, that would be a very different situation. In the absence of one, it is ridiculous to suggest that no one should think about it. And if people think about it, they will present their attempted answers to the world. Hopefully, their arguments will rest on logic, even if not empirically verifiable. This is an expression of human curiosity, and I think it is natural and wonderful.

I say we should continue to discuss articles like this, but doing our best to keep in mind that they are not proven theories. As our experimental abilities improve, it might turn out that today's speculation is fertile ground for tomorrow's experimentation as a bed of hypothesis to test and accept or discard.

Finally, even if one's sole concern is the dissemination of scientific knowledge, I contend that the article is still useful if it makes people think and learn more about the fascinating, fascinating phenomenon of Fischerian runaway (to give just one example).
sounds about perfect..the only thing i'd add is actually try and contact individual bloggers wherever possible. In an ideal world, you have already established some form of relationship with a few of them.
I can't think of much to use Alpha for yet either, but I think it represents a significant accomplishment nevertheless, in a frontiers of knowledge representation/interaction sort of way. Doug Lenat describes it as halfway between Google and his Cyc project on the generality <-> sophistication spectrum (see link), which is a fairly impressive accomplishment (it can do a lot more than just 'sin 5'). It may not end up being much more useful than Cyc is at the moment, but it's still an advance. This stuff will get better, but we still have to go through the intermediate steps.

http://www.semanticuniverse.com/blogs-i-was-positively-impre...
I think many of the points tomstechblog is making are wrong. In particular, insofar as I can remember, ms-dos was really the only choice that business was making. Yes, there was cp/m, qnx, Coherent, but ms-dos was where it was at.

If his point about ms-dos is in error, then much of the rest of the article is pretty much off the rails, no?
> I'm still hoping for some sort of disruption that will change the game.

The chance of success is basically zero, but you could lobby for the overturn of the Griggs v. Duke Power Co. decision, the famous lawsuit which resulted in U.S. employers being officially prohibited from using IQ tests in hiring:

http://supreme.justia.com/us/401/424/case.html

This is what gave colleges their monopoly as gatekeepers of the intellectual labor market.
From my experience, the best way to start planning is to give your lecture its structure first. For a start, I'd divide it into 2 parts:

(1) Internal perspective [The bright idea, people, motivation, skills, legal aspects, gtd]

(2) External perspective [Market analysis, funding, communications]

Additionally, I think the key to success is mixing "theoretical frameworks" with real world examples in each session, to keep people motivated.
Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind.
This would be too inexcusable to be true...
What are your pet projects for learning new programming languages?
Wouldn't it be nice if OSX kept its settings in text files under /etc like any civilized OS should?
The Walking Dead: Yahoo 360 Officially Closes, Again
if you don't mind me asking, how do you enforce the site licenses? Is there a setting in creating a pdf that only allows you to make 100 copies or do you lock the pdf and issues 100 unique copies?

Any answer would be greatly appreciated. :)
"And let’s face it: Our culture has lost the ability to usefully disagree." -- great point.

Good article.

The fact is, that kids do "run" their parents quite a bit. This approach might just bring it out in the open.
Blog often and comment on other blogs as well

Sponsor events or workshops relevant to your industry

Give something away for free (we created a free WordPress theme and are releasing some open source projects)

Give your product away for free to influential/VIP customers. This helps a lot if you get the right people. Developing a couple relationships like this can really help you early on.

Submit your app/site to magazines for review.

Check out HARO. I made some connections there ... to early to tell if its valuable though
http://www.helpareporter.com/
Samsung D830 Red Unlocked
Samsung D830 Has come out and the phone has very good and beautiful dimension of just 85 gm. you can easily download and store your images at its 80 MB of internal memory and can be expanded with microSD card port. 2 MP of camera.
Agree - I was thinking about having 6 main points and do 2 lectures on each. This, as you point out, makes it more structured and people know what's coming.

What I'm trying to do right now, and with this post, is to find out what the 6 main points should be. I'm thinking about the following: The idea, you as a person, partners and employees, financials, sales and marketing, and legal.

Is there something missing?
The honor system.

We talk in the beginning of the book about how buying the correct license is supporting us creating more awesome stuff, including the upcoming Scriptaculous 2.0.

If people are going to pirate, they're going to pirate. Nothing is going to stop them. Except maybe LOOOOOOVE. :)
Make something awesome.
frankly the reasoning in this article is so weak, it gives credit to a "design" approach. Imagine this equally plausible statement:

"God so loved man, he created beautiful features on woman for his happiness."
It's definitely difficult. As you lose momentum, it quickly diverges into another job and that can quickly lead to burnout or lack of motivation.
I would imagine he is speaking of his book "How To Win Friend's and Influence People". An excellent book that should be on every entrepreneur's bookshelf (hopefully read then put on the bookshelf...and occasionally reviewed!).
A true classic, and wonderfully funny. Though I prefer tea.
We tried this recently with Browseology. It backfired.
> Secret instructions wouldn't work on emulators

This would be a good point were it not for transparent (in every way save for slowdown, which would be dwarfed by the slowdown of using an emulator in the first place) fall-back. All that must be done is for the OS to hook the invalid-opcode interrupt and run a short routine which emulates the instruction in question. So apps will still work, but without the magic speed-up of the secret instruction. This assumes that the OS vendor is in on the conspiracy, as Microsoft was found to have been on two separate occasions. (Read about how they killed OS/2.)

You could still find the "evil" code by monitoring the invalid-opcode trap using the emulator's debug interface.
You mean people can just detect awesomeness out of the blue and flock to it?
The cool stuff is stuck on a limited and half-baked platform...
Oh, I can definitely sympathize with that position, having been in it myself, and I didn't mean to belittle the efforts of those currently trying to escape.

I was speaking as someone who is already doing a startup. I've made the mistake of trying to have "serious" side projects at the same time... it's not a good idea.
He's wrong for a simple reason: Breasts are expensive. They are expensive to maintain, and no other animal maintains them. So even if it had an advantage at some point in time, as he describes, rather than maintaining an expensive evolutionary line, this "fashion" would change quickly.

I think that breast serve a concrete purpose that is essential for our society. And the fact that we have breasts is strongly tied in with the difference between us and other animals. We are different from other animals in that we are more clever and more social. We are also different in that we have breasts. It's likely that the two are tied together.

My theory is this: breasts are an age indicator. In traditional human societies it's difficult to judge the reproductive health of a woman. A woman can hide her true reproductive health by various means (like body painting or ovulating on the sly), so as our societies grew bigger and bigger, it was neccessary for the society as a group to make non-hideable means of judging how fit the particular woman is.

Breasts benefit the community more than they benefit the woman according to my theory. I.e, humans are supremely social, and the best evolved human is the one that works the best to move the entire community forward. A society of very selfish people will not survive.

Humans have certain traits that help the community more than they help themselves. Breasts could be one of them.

Small, large, medium, the size of breasts is not really critical. However, perk and 'young' breasts would always be judged more attractive than long sagging breasts. It's clear that the function of breasts is correlated to age. And that sexual attractiveness increases the more attractive the breast is.

Similarly, if a young woman is starved for a long time in a sand blown deserts, the first things to go are the form of the breasts. She is not in an ideal reproductive state, as rearing children requires a lot of water. Old women who are past reproductive age often have their breasts change to a different less attractive form.

Conclusion: Breasts, and some other female parts are a simple indication of youth and reproductive health for a society that is clever enough to fake the other things usually used by other primates.
No, because then there wouldn't be such a nice API for managing live settings from within the programs themselves:

http://developer.apple.com/DOCUMENTATION/Cocoa/Reference/Fou...
This was an example to show pathos. He had covered logos earlier. And this isn't a quote from his daughter, it's a quote from a theoretical daughter who employed pathos to get what she wanted.
> Men, meanwhile, are stuck with a sub-optimal instinct. Their desires are fired by a pair of useless bags of fat. Men cannot afford to lose this instinct, however. Non-lactating breasts are like nuclear missiles: we only need them or want them because other people have them.

That has to be the least sexy description of why breasts are sexy. Love it.
I'd never heard about the skeleton crew and the engineers finding their way around the memory limits. Anyone care to expand on that?
1) find a problem
2) solve a problem
3) optimize the solution
I'm trying hard finding something missing, but I think your points are very good already. I'd also choose this sequence.

Just brainstorming on the things I wish someone had told me before:

(1) Be careful when picking friends as business partners:
Having good friends as business partners can be tough, especially when things don't go as expected. I think this is a personal thing, as some people can argue on a business level and still stay friends. Thing is, you have to be sensitized to that fact.

(2) Endurance
It takes longer than you plan. Period.

(3) Set quantitative, measurable goals.
When I started a project with some friends :) two years ago, we had a great product (e-commerce), but never implemented any "controlling" into our application. Of course, we could track units sold, but the whole idea would have given us much more data points that could be used for analysis and further development - only had the scripts to read them out never been implemented. Use numbers whereever possible to make your decisions.
Does techcrunch, mashable, etc. actually write about it? I'm thinking it's hard to get them to actually visit a site unless you have some credibility.
It also sounds like the first step is to make connections and get some relationships going. It's like highschool all over again ;)
Don't forget Twitter and Friendfeed. There are lots of very nice and approachable influencers on there too. Surely you must have had a conversation with one or more of them at some point.

By the way, as with all kinds of approaches like this: Do NOT abuse the relationship. Be kind, thankful, and don't pressure/harrass them.
I see a lot of suggestions and ideas, also looking for real stories of how you did it, and what came out of it. Just out of curiosity ;)
-- In the absence of one, it is ridiculous to suggest that no one should think about it.

I'm not saying that no one should think about it, I'm saying we should have a better filter that immediately separates garbage science from good science. It takes about 10 minutes of reading and a few paragraphs to realize that this is absolute garbage and doesn't need to be voted up.

-- but doing our best to keep in mind that they are not proven theories.

Now that I think about it, what really irks me here is that I know people are actually reading stuff like this (which throws around enough scientific terminology and academic quotes to sound reasonable) and then some of those people go on believing that really is the answer to the hypothesis presented.

That is what has happened to a lot of science these days. There's so much semi-believable trash and conjecture like this tossed out in so many different fields of study that I just wish people would get a better sense of what even has a remotely logical basis for validity. It pains me to know that even one person is reading this trash and coming away thinking that "Gee, science has solved another one!" when in fact it has not.
I liked this:

"Nicklaus Wirth, the designer of Pascal, gave a talk once at which he was asked, "How do you pronounce your name?". He replied, "You can either call me by name, pronouncing it 'Veert', or call me by value, 'Worth'.""
It would probably disturb me, but I'm not sure I'd truly be disappointed. People are going to try that sort of manipulation on the child, and it's important that they be aware of the technique. It increases their resistance to it.

The "advertising inoculation" mentioned in the article is an example of this.
Why not just two different prices? Just make sure to call it a cash discount, instead of a credit card markup.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm virtually certain that this violates the merchant agreement with the card networks.
Google Wave: Another step toward XMPP powering the real time web
When you go to every comment thread discussing Google Wave and say that your service is the same idea, when clearly the only thing they have in common is sending real-time data back and forth, people tend to get annoyed.

Honestly, have some respect for your own product. Don't try to piggy-back on others' popularity. And try to look at things objectively. I understand that you may be excited of your app's real-time features, but just because something else does real-time updating doesn't mean they're the same thing.

Honestly, you're not Google, so don't try to make it look like what your project is as big as theirs'. You don't need to do that for people to be interested in your site. Just advertise it as what it is, a real-time way to shop with someone else online.
Forget maintenance, what about flying drunk, or tired, or without years of training? You say "flying cars" and people think "driving in the sky," but it's not like that at all.

Basically, there are many different reasons why flying cars would be unlikely to be as common as normal ones.
For starters, there's a few interesting links at http://highscalability.com/scaling-twitter-making-twitter-10...

summary: "Rails and Ruby haven’t been stumbling blocks... The performance boosts associated with a “faster” language would give us a 10-20% improvement, but thanks to architectural changes that Ruby and Rails happily accommodated, Twitter is 10000% faster than it was in January"

They're dealing with duplication, consistency, searchability, etc. across distributed storage systems and a variety of service mechanisms (more than just protocols). The 1 000 000 follower user has every message duplicated and cached at multiple layers up to 1000000 times. The message can show up on the web, API, or across any of the protocols, and it has to persist.

They're not incompetent code-monkies, they just guessed way low when they designed the architecture. It looks like the big move was from a CMS model (not at all unreasonable for a "microblogging" service) to a messaging model. In hindsight, targeting messaging to begin with would've saved them some down time, but wouldn't have been practical in the short term.

From http://gojko.net/2009/03/16/qcon-london-2009-upgrading-twitt... it sounds like the insertion number averages around 9600 messages per second. That's avg follower count * avg tweets inbound, and that's only the input.

Edit: real, solid numbers are hard to come by. I suspect it's proprietary.
(200 hertz) * 140 bytes = 27.34375 kBps
I have your second point in my notes already :-)

Your first and last points are great, and I'll definitely think about how to get them into the lectures.
First one to solve the error gets a million dollars?
Yes. I think Google has to do quite a bit more per query than Twitter per message.
There's a lot of merit in what the author calls "argument by the stick", arguments in which convincing the other guy is not the primary goal. If you argue with someone in public, as in most online arguments, simply making your opponent look stupid can make the onlookers more likely to agree with you. I've seen this happen in creationism/evolution debates: the only way to win a debate with a creationist is by trouncing them so hard that the peanut gallery silently drifts toward accepting evolution. And, invariably, someone claims that this strategy is completely ineffective because it fails to convince the one hard-line religious nut that you're arguing with. (I'm sure other examples exist, but I'm most familiar with this one.)
NASA has been working for years on aviation-for-everybody concepts. The basic idea is that the vehicles will self-navigate. See "Highway in the Sky" (HITS)
Growing up I was usually given my way if I could make a good persuasive case for it.

I like this approach and one day when I have kids I'll probably use it with them.

However I was never encouraged to be manipulative, only clear and logical.

As a result, I expect that most people will respond to reason, which is far from the truth of how the world works.
If they ran at peak for 24 hours a day during an entire month. Which isn't what peak means.
Funny how often Real Programmers deride ______ while using _____ - 1. The Real Programmer's objection to ______ is always that it isn't performant or practical or available on the right platforms. In other words, Real Programmers stick to mature, widely-deployed technologies and become prodigiously adept at dealing with their (well-known) shortcomings while the idealistic Quiche-Eaters fight against the shortcomings of immature, incomplete systems that have unknown and often show-stopping flaws. It doesn't sound to me like Quiche-Eating programmers (distinct from Quiche-Eating pundits/academics) have it any easier than the Real Programmers. They may even be a little bit braver. (You might not want them working for you, though. Let some other company or project bear the burden of polishing immature technologies.)
I believe its dangerous to assume that the jobs we're losing as our technological abilities advance will continue to be replaced by new ones. Keep in mind, we're not just talking about losing manufacturing jobs (which is all the author seems to focus on here). We're also talking about losing human resources departments, which previously had to track all the other human employees in the company, and managers, who had to manage the underlings and the human resource department.

Robots aren't going to stay confined to manufacturing plants. CAT is heavily invested in robotic trucks. One of the coolest videos that I've seen that's been posted to this site showed a robotic fulfillment center. There was one just today (admittedly, kind of silly) about a robotic garbage man. This is only going to continue.

Then there are the jobs that aren't necessarily disappearing, but that aren't growing, either. Software is letting accounting and finance departments ramp up their productivity per worker. A company can these days grow in complexity and revenues but only needs to staff at replacement levels to keep up with the increased work load. And, as it becomes more and more obvious that there are very real benefits to offloading to service providers rather than maintaining your own data centers, ops teams, and IT departments, companies will.

This isn't surprising. This whole community is formed around the idea that these days, starting a viable business is completely in the power of small teams of smart people. We've talked about the real jobs that are coming along with these companies as they become established, but I would bet that they're running at a level of productivity that shames companies of their size from just 10 years ago.

It's a real question: where are the new jobs coming from? For the next few years, we'll have a nice little bubble in the healthcare industry as the Baby Boomer wave crests, but that's hardly sustainable.

I think the real question is, how are we going to restructure to deal with high levels of unemployment, so that we stay stable and productive? How do we incentivize the smart and capable to keep pushing us forward without completely dropping everyone else?
The mistake most people lecturing about entrepreneurship make is to talk about the mechanics of starting a company. And in fact a big mistake inexperienced founders make is to focus too much on the mechanics of it.

In practice the most important questions are things like how to maintain morale, how to find and get along with cofounders, how to push investors' buttons, and so on.
I've always assumed that most people don't get every tweet SMS'd to them. So most of the time, a tweet isn't sent to anybody, it's just returned when people request the tweets that are relevant to them.
I wouldn't feel disappointed. I'd be delighted at the clever twist she put on the answer. The response would be to out-clever her answer: "Sure! You're inviting me so you're buying, right?"
How to Buy a Business