skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Cloud Computing transfers the risks of over-provisioning or under-provisioning to the Cloud Computing provider

Bingo. Plus low cost-of-entry, etc. Sun's Schwartz had a good parallel with electrical plants.

(Good paper, but 11 authors for 20 pages and 43 references ? Envy of high-energy physics, or just a soccer team ? ;-)
The point was that we also measure startups by their cash costs, not their cost+time.
I don't agree with the reasoning he uses to arrive at his conclusion ("a plea for a formal approach in biology"), but it's a good starting point.
Oh no. You've heard of the Protestant marches in Ireland commemorating some battle, that used to stir up trouble. Also, I was in Lexington MA on some round-number anniversary of the Revolutionary War, and re-enactors of the British side came over from Britain. All that way, to be on the losing side! Thanks guys.
In-N-Out Burger's six secrets for out-and-out success
Making the new BBC Weather site
I'll take checkers any day.
You seem to have this implicit conclusion that being results-oriented is the better way to go. You highlight the non-bright people you know who are successful, and declare that they are results-driven. You highlight bright people who aren't successful, at least with the examples of prizes you pick out, and declare that they are not results-driven

What about the other permutations?

I can see some of the valedictorians doing something that you don't account for in your description, nor really in your description of the dumb but successful: after identifying the prize, they determined if it was a prize worth having at the cost it demanded. They became valedictorians in part because there were many other prizes that they identified, but decided not to pursue.

Not every prize is worth winning, and this is where a dumb, but results-driven perspective can get people into trouble. It doesn't matter what they are winning, so long as they have won. This strikes me as just as wrong headed as not caring about results at all.
Don't miss the embedded video, "Ira Glass on Storytelling #3".

I'm so in that "taste > skill" phase!
As a man, I'd like to point out that I really can't help sexualizing basically anything. Studies have shown that straight men will ogle other men if they've got chest. Frankly, I don't like how it can hang over everything either, but I do my best to minimize it. If anyone can actually propose a solution to this "problem", great, but otherwise can we collectively move on?
Last.FM Accuses Techcrunch of Slander Over RIAA Leak Allegations
How Cyberbullying Prevention Act Could Land You In Prison
Obsessing with Google PageRank
Logical people aren't just irrational emotional people underneath who use logic when it's easy. I think really logical people fall back on that as their core behavior, even under stress. That's their nature.

Logic isn't something we abandon under stress, it's something we cling too even tighter because that's when you need it the most. I've had jobs where lives literally hung in the balance; extreme stress. It only made me more rational and less emotional, that's how you cope.
Such a big fan of JSLint. Debugging thing is a lot easier if you de-lint your program first, because it gets rid of whole classes of possible errors.

For anyone using Komodo, there's an excellent JSLint plug-in: http://community.activestate.com/xpi/kjslint-jslint-komodo, though you're limited to the version of JSLint they bundle in the plug-in. If you want to manually integrate the latest version into Komodo, I wrote a guide here: http://www.danhulton.com/blog/2008/01/16/integrate-js-lint-i...

Seriously - de-lint your JS.
I think this guy got it all wrong.

He complains that strict mode warns on `if(document.body.childNodes[10] == e.target)` if it can't resolve `childNodes[10]` for example. But it should! One can check the number of elements before trying to get the 10'th one. Same with other comparisons: he wants to do `e.xxx == this`, but strict mode warns, because it might not exist. Well - that's what `if (e.xxx)` is for.

He mentions the only thing that might be useful is not implemented - warning when using a variable from a parent scope... except doing that is perfectly normal and valid. His whole argument seems to be a complete mistake.
thanks. i think i'm sticking to js then.
The Incredible App Store Hype
There's no doubt you're right about the profiling. I don't know how much they generate from the ads but they're context sensitive. Is it better or worse than ads next to a search? It would be interesting to know.
While not wrong, the author comes off as a self-important dick and I want to prove him wrong because of it. If he's wrong just once, he'll never live it down because of his attitude.
Yet another hit job on LastFM late Friday night before a 3 day weekend.
UX Magazine - Hollywood goes open source, sort of
This is what LOST is about.

But this is not what HN is about...
Well it would be a very boring world if we did not comment on what occurred. It does not hurt you to take a minute to say hi, how is your wife and children before getting to the facts!
Thanks for the feedback.

Yes, there is a bookmarklet and we'll be adding it to the website soon (or straight into the app). If you want it now, add this to your bookmark bar:

javascript:document.location.href='evom://'+escape(document.location.href)

And we'll look into getting those popups fixed.
Time travel is a very popular topic among hackers. It doesn't matter if it isn't possible yet.
The key question for any time travel sci-fi universe: can you go back in time and stop yourself from going back in time?

If you can, you can build a super army and have infinite resources. If you can't, you're probably going to cease to exist or other bad things will happen.
But it does warn you if you do not use the var keyword the first time you assign a value to a variable. In JavaScript that is not really necessary since it will automatically create a variable in the global scope anyway. Still it doesn't hurt to do things properly and declare the variable using the var keyword. But since the only time you are really interested in that sort of error is when you overwrite the variable from the parent scope, it becomes useless for the one thing it could have been useful for.

What about, y'know, enforcing the non-use of globals?
Is there any particularly good, JavaScript-specific reason why the braceless version of if statements is discouraged?

if (foo)
bar();

Or is this just a matter of taste as it is with C, C++, Java, C#, etc.?
It says "LAWL!". Enough said.
I've just been blown away reading this fantasic debate - thank you. I really hear netsp's point. I am the author and It makes me feel like apologising for being so judgemental.

I started out on this road as one of the "people who do have a preference to live this way without any eco-political agendas", at least not that I was consciously aware of. Then I think two main things happened.

1. I was subject to a positive feedback loop that goes roughly
- the more time I spent in nature
- the more I loved and understood it
- the more concern I had for ecological issues
- the more i wanted to live more harmoniously with nature
- the more inclination to workwith and care for the land
- the more time spent in nature
and so on

after some years seems i've inadvertently drifted into a position where i'm questionably become a radical and i definitely do have a concious eco-political agenda

2. I have experienced the resistance to the sort of thing we're doing. It simply goes against the status quo which there are many vested interests in preserving. So I see that whilst the construction industry is causing investment and in turn economic growth it must be preserved and expanded. Where it's business can be made more complex,there are new markets and room for growth. Then I see the industry satisfying the needs of growth and profit before its customers needs for shelter which could actually be achieved more effectively in simpler ways.

So if I sound critical or angry its the part of me that feels like people are being conned into expensive, unhealthy houses without being allowed or even told about the alternatives.

I am critical of conventional modern houses. I am NOT critical of people who live in them. I would like to be sure that they have the choice and that they understand the implications of their choice.

I am critical of modern construction techniques and of modern agriculture because they are not sustainable ie. they cannot continue to work in this way - this is a practical problem for us all regardless of whether or not it is a moral one. Finding systems to provide food and shelter for the long term are important problems that will require good design and judgement. I hope that in trying to practice and share good judgement of these systems I don't come across as judgemental of the people who use them.
I have yet to find something like JSLint that supports ECMA-357 (SpiderMonkey, TraceMonkey, ActionMonkey, Rhino, and Tamarin). Does anyone know of one?
How to create commenting icons for websites and applications
This comment is not precisely "on topic," but when I took an AI class at university, we used Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (AIMA), by Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig.

I thought the book (website: http://aima.cs.berkeley.edu/) contained a good discussion of Rationality vs. Intelligence, which ended up coloring my views on AI in general.

Worth the read if you're into that. (And for those who may not know: it's a textbook, and very code intensive. Not for general consumption.)
It's just a matter of Douglas Crockford's taste and he doesn't like them so you have to live with it.
Cookware: The Perfect Gift Option | Cookware Buzz
It's amazing how well this strategy of hyping the extreme cases has worked for Apple in terms of getting a ton of people to develop for the iPhone. A number of my coworkers have been busily writing iPhone apps in their spare time, and they keep at it no matter how many times I point out that the market is oversaturated.
Why Gene Patents Are Unlawful
You have a point, but I meant that mostly as condemnation of the rest of the peninsula, which is a cultural wasteland. I do get out more, but it's in SF.

I've had pretty fancy meals here and there in the peninsula and South Bay but the experience was that we paid a lot for well-plated tiny morsels. Never been to this Chez TJ but from the website I suspect it's something like that.

I used to live in Vancouver and there were far more options for interesting, delicious, satisfying food, and you didn't have to be a millionaire to afford it. It's always mystified me why the valley is so bland, given the amount of money available. I wonder if the valley literally attracts blandness. I've had Indian engineers recommend Amber India to me, which is sweetened de-spiced Indian cuisine, about as authentic as "American" Chinese food.

Of course I've had way better meals that Google's cafeterias. But if you compare Google to the fare that's available to a person of reasonable means in downtown Mountain View for breakfast or lunch, Google does very well. Or at least they used to (I have not been there since 2006).
Did you read the article?

According to the article, you are acting rationally if you are behaving in ways that maximise achievment of your goal(s). So rationality does (tend to) correlate with doing well in the fields you mentioned (excluding law-abidingness, perhaps).

The article seems to be using people's susceptibility to the cognitive biases identified by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky as a measure of rationality.

The author states that there are methods of "fixing" these errors, and that they should be a priority in education, instead of focusing on "intelligence".

As mentioned elsewhere, the community blog http://www.lesswrong.com is dedicated to the pursuit of instrumental rationality.
What are you suggesting - that Intel's Pentium D, Core Duo, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quadro and Core i7 are all exactly the same computing power as a similarly clocked Pentium 4, just with more cores?

Clock speeds in current aircooled personal CPUs are sitting where they were several years ago, but branch prediction, pipelining, caching, size reduction, dedicated MIMO/SSIMD units, integrated memory management units, and I don't know what else have all resulted in the ability to compute more in the same time (i.e useful speedup).

Why are we still excited about this?

Why not? It's exciting.
patents are idiotic. capitalism worked before patents were invented.
Lacking a leafy back garden where fricking hummingbirds visit (tweetingtoohard moment there), I'm reduced to getting my occasional insights in the morning shower. But I still agree with the first 90% of the piece. Too bad about the (lack of) conclusion.

Ah, well. Weren't I so deprived, I'd eventually think of an insightful comment mentioning McLuhan's electric external nervous system, and feedback loops working at ever higher frequencies. Besides that, I'm sorry oppressed by the 7-line HN comment box. That's, like, 3 tweets. Fermat's syndrome(TM).
Computers allow us to violate the economic laws and collapse the financial system.

computers are fast complex calculators. they magnify stupidity, they dont create it.
Why doesn't Alpha let you actually browse the synonym network? Why does it show the sixth-level relative of a word but won't let me see all of its immediate synonyms?
>Lacking a leafy back garden where fricking hummingbirds visit (tweetingtoohard moment there)

Yikes, I think I might be guilty as charged.

http://twitter.com/purrp/status/884420908
What I took from it as the conclusion was that long stretches of time without distraction are perhaps a necessary condition for deep intellectual exploration. From my experiences i've formed the same conclusions and this is the reason I live alone, don't own a TV, and am currently trying to limit my use of the internet as much as possible (ironic I know considering i'm wasting my time here, but i'm getting better I swear!).

I'm starting to believe that any important intellectual truths have to be discovered for oneself, and that the only way to do this is to be alone with only your thoughts.
Not javascript-specific, but it's well-enough documented that leaving out braces in if statements is a source of possible error. It's clearer and safer to use them.
"I'd die for a medium that gave me just the facts and remained silent when it was done delivering (or still in the process of hunting for) them."

Would you?

Thing is, there are many mediums that do give you just the facts and then shut up when they have no more facts to report. The Edgar database at the SEC gives you the financials and relevant business information on every publicly-traded corporation in America. The Congressional Record (and more user-friendly sites like govtrack.us) gives you the full record of everything that our legislators discuss. API documentation and the source code gives you all the facts about most software libraries. Many scientific academic journals give you just the facts on recent scientific discoveries.

How much time do you spend reading these, vs. time spent listening to mainstream media, blogs, forums, social bookmarking sites, and other opinion-based media?

Problem is, we're not wired to make sense of "just the facts" without overlaying some sort of interpretation on top of it. Except for people with full-blown autism, facts themselves are generally quite boring. They become meaningful only when we overlay some sort of story on top of them. But coming up with stories that can explain a set of facts is mentally exhausting, so we'd very much like to outsource that to some other person.
Corporations shouldn't be allowed to hold patents. All they ever do is abuse them. I think that only individuals should be able to hold patents.
Hey, if buying one ticket makes sense, then surely buying more than one ticket makes more sense. So you should spend all your $65m buying lottery tickets for the $49m jackpot lottery. If each $2 has an expected $3.50 return, then $65m's worth of tickets will have an expected $113m return! Bingo. Safe as houses.

Or perhaps this is an absurd argument, as proven by the above reductio ad absurdum, and you should keep your money to spend it on things that make sense.

But don't let me stop you. After all, the people who run the lottery need to eat too.
Find city name of a mobile number in pakistan - PakMates place to TALK
Actually, many rich people got rich by leveraging debt, not shunning it.
Don't sweat it. Just casually observe it did not carry head-mounted micro-lasers ;-)
Optimistic concurrency control - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You were arguing for the sake of the argument, that's why I ignored most of your bullets as unrelated. You broadened the scope to "but what if his chat system needs to record all messages, brew coffee and babysit my dog, too"? Well in that case, yes, you'll need a database and lots of other things, too.

But as long as you're looking at a chat system with functionality like the one the original submitter presented, then there are good reasons for datastores (aka databases) and message brokers to remain separate entities.

I can only repeat: Twitter is not cool (it's an anti-pattern), people who don't understand IRC will keep reinventing it poorly, and a messaging system that hits the disk for each individual message needlessly (i.e. without being held to strong delivery guarantee requirements, which would be quite uncommon for a chat-system) is a waste of ressources.

We can't stop people from peeling their eyes out with forks, but we should at least refrain from defending such idiocy.
Is it oversaturated? How do you know this? What data is this based on?
Hey, don't they realize that us little people (at least in U.S.) don't play because we want to win. Having such big hearts, most of us just like having an additional way to funnel money into state government (since they allow us to pay so little in taxes). [/tongue-cheek]
The chances of winning are close enough to zero to safely consider them zero. If it is entertaining to you to buy a ticket and dream about winning then go ahead and buy one ticket. But never buy more than one thinking you are increasing your odds of winning. 5 tickets * 0 is 0. 100 * 0 is still 0 - any practicle number of tickets * 0 is still 0
zero
Your comment reminds me of a group which, I apologize for being vague on the details of, planned to buy as many lottery tickets as needed to have a 1/1 chance of winning. I can't remember if that meant just getting enough individual numbers that their odds "went up" or if they were actually planning to purchase all the possible number combinations. Irrelevant I suppose.

Probability math aside, they were able to raise the funds required to purchase the necessary tickets, but were eventually undone in a rather unexpected way... turns out, it's harder to procure 2 million lottery tickets than they had anticipated. The day of, they simply weren't able to get enough tickets to make it happen.

I honestly don't remember if they won or lost, but I remember expecting them to fail through having to split the winnings, throwing their math off... as if it weren't already off anyway.
Good point, but I don't think TBL or whoever else started building the Web with him at the time thought about advertisement or how content providers could make money. Same story now. I think we can leave that problem to those interested and surely enough ads will find their way to any new medium. It's a technical problem literally.
We'd each need to customize our usage highly. Do you think capable (fairly autonomous) virtual assistants are 50years out, 20 years out, closer?

If it would take hundreds of my hours to train one to do something really simple it may not work out too well. But if millions of people can collaboratively train one and somehow share the core upgrades with personalized variants it'd be pretty mind blowing.

Ideally part of the utility would be like the web "knowing" about
1) what it contained in real time
2) what you're interests are
3) and letting you know when "interesting" updates were made.
This of course assumes you could keep up with a fine enough data stream. My interests per time spent are too diverse to be bleeding edge anything, so I do my best in trying to reach for patterns across my favorite topics.
sometimes the auditability of being able to say you sent the message is as important as sending the message itself, banking / telecoms etc.

You keep intermixing a user-to-user chitchat system (which the submitter presented) with banking and telco applications. They are not the same, they are not even closely related. ISO 15022 does not apply to twitter.
Is it true that Apple has made more money from developer signups (600,000 developers I heard) than from sales from the app store?

There's money in shovels and picks...
Don't be obnoxious. He was clearly stating his opinion (Apple would have to release comprehensive numbers for anyone to know for a fact how saturated the market is).

The very term connotes opinion (how much saturation is "over")
Are they all trying to get rich, though? I write iPhone apps in my spare time, but more as an exercise for myself than anything else - have yet to release anything for money. It's a nice platform to develop for, and coming from a Mac dev background in the first place it's a natural segue for me - plus being able to take your work with you and show your friends is nice :)

That said, is the market really oversaturated? I feel that there's a lot of niche apps yet to be made. Sure, you have a million iFart's and its clones, but that's only one side of the market.
Better for what? Valedictorians will suffer and sweat under an overseer of their own making -- goal from the future. Failed intellectuals will enjoy the immediate fun of solving a complex problem or satisfying their innate curiosity yet rapidly changing priorities as soon they get bored. At what price?

I personally enjoy the carpe-diemishly failed intellectual's path; I don't deem myself smart but I do enjoy hacking C++, Ruby and LISP out of pure fun and my college GPA is around 2.4 with several failed classes. I never finished high school due to bureaucratic crap I haven't liked to deal with. I've done drugs too, just out of curiosity. I probably look like a typical failed teenager but I can't look at myself with a pair of eyes other than mine.

My friend is a totally different story. Before his freshman year of high school he set a goal -- get a 4.0 GPA and get into a totally awesome university.

I watched him -- it was easy since we shared schools -- months and months, digging into assignments, spending nights at the library, working a part-time job and paying an SAT tutor. He was like a bulldog; he grasped the system by the very throat (yet he seemed like a prisoner of his own mind). He got 3.99 GPA and 2200 SAT (up from 1680). He kept focus for four years. I consider myself lucky if I keep focused on something for more than two months. He went to Berkeley.

Me? I consistently skipped school, learned stuff on my own, been the typical slacker, failed classes, and somehow picked up programming contracts while in high school.

Now he's finishing Berkeley and I'm taking classes in community college, just for intellectual stimulation, working part-time as a C++ programmer and towards my goal: frugal passive income from web-startup that would give me freedom to explore and learn, not being stuck in office (like he might).

My friend has prestige, respect and he is very succesful but I wouldn't live his life even for a second. I value the freedom from all that crap too highly :)

Different people want different things, I guess. Hope that answered your question.
Wonderful yet purely Hypothetical iTunes App Store Guidelines
The original article. I'll delete this comment once the author's web server catches up...

[The site seems to be back up]
I totally agree with you, actually. I was not meaning to make a value judgment.

However I think that it would be nice if everyone thought about what they really wanted,... such that they became more self-actualized, not necessarily better able to pursue the various gold stars that society offers.