skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ear plugs and noise-canceling headphones (Bose QuietComfort for example) work really really well.

Turn up the music/white noise to get past the ear plugs just a little bit.

No sounds get past this.
True, I was just pointing out that they do allow for some basic spelling errors.
What's your point? Nobody here is arguing that the client should be able to not pay for services rendered.
Why would you store two versions? Just hash the password you were given twice.
That doesn't count as a spelling error. It only adds one bit of entropy. What matters is if they have anything that lets you hit the wrong key.
It is not necessarily so for C++, thanks to its templates.
I don't know if you can compete on looks because they look much the same as any other resume template in google docs.

Have you tried doing some a/b testing to see if people can tell the difference between a google doc resume and your latex templates, and actually determine which one is more effective?
The UN story, like the G8 story, honestly is old news. The US has been spying on diplomats for a long time now (see the last section in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty for instance).
Would you consider it spam if someone manually went to a site, found their contact information, and sent them an email by hand? It appears to fit the same definition as "unsolicited", and yet, that is one of the purposes of a business placing their email address on their website.

I work in b2b software, where it's common for sales and marketing people to use publicly posted contact information for outreach (both buying and selling products). IMO, the formal definition of spam as "unsolicited commercial email" is somewhat broken in b2b spheres -- it feels a lot like "it's spam if I publish my information and you send me something that I don't want." The problem is the "something I don't want" is only determined after the fact.
So, I guess you don't carry the keys to your rooms and cupboards. Every time you want entry, you use a safe with significant entropy for OTP to the cupboard or room you want access, and the access is revoked 1 min after idle. Every time and everywhere. Ludicrous.
Same here. iPhone 4, chrome an safari.
> Without anonymity, it can be very difficult to conduct useful intellectual discourse, especially if you aren't strong-willed enough to deal with trolls and jerks who say "But aha! Yesterday you claimed A, but today B; which is it?".

I believe being held to account for one's past actions and present views is called "personal responsibility", and yes, that has certainly fallen out of fashion. If you think being forced to be consistent from moment to moment and day to day hinders useful intellectual discourse, maybe we're using different definitions of "useful".
Converting an existing Backbone.js project to Require.js
The post I'm replying to is basically saying, imagine a world where people deny you things if you don't pay for them. I'm just pointing out what the world would be like if that wasn't true.
Nimrod: C + Macros + GC
Plenty of people who are good programmers don't read the book and are fine. Lots of people cargo-cult it and themselves don't understand it, which turns people off.

However, it focuses very much on the principles of programming from a high-level, and has challenging exercises that keep you engaged. It's a programming book written from a Computer Science perspective. It uses Scheme, a dialect of Lisp, which frustrates some. However, I think Scheme works best for the book, and replacing Scheme with something "useful" like Python would be the equivalent of taking a linguistics course that uses Latin as a generic vehicle to explain various grammatical constructs, and suddenly replacing Latin with Latin American Spanish - sure, Latin isn't "practical", but that's not the point.

I did not read it knowing "nothing", as some people suggest you should. I already knew how to get around in C++ and Python, and then read it on my own.

You don't really get Concrete Skill X from reading the book (and working through the exercises). It's a high-level work. What I got from it was a high-level perspective on languages, algorithms and abstraction techniques. I learned to see imperative, OO, functional and other programming paradigms as tools in a toolbox that have advantages and disadvantages, not as the One True Way to program. I also learned to, in general, think about the literal and not-so-literal implications of my code. The latter half of the book is more about language implementation, and culminates in implementing Scheme, among other things.

MIT phased out the book in its introductory course because, "Understanding the principles is not essential for an introduction to the subject matter anymore." Take from that what you will.
Let me note that you are arguing something completely different than you started with.

>> Your complaint is that the media criticism is not proportional to the level of harm. The hyperbole is in your measurement of the criticism

Well, no.

One is at least a thousand times larger than the other in effect.

The criticism (in my local Swedish and from much of the European media) is much larger. See e.g. the UNHRC discussion above. That is all I need for my thesis to not be "hyperbole".

Notes: 1. Since the Syrian situation started it has been very quiet re Israel, the different standards would probably be too obvious. 2. Serious media, e.g. BBC/NY Times, was (well, by definition) more serious than bad media.
Ah, analysts. I do not trust them, most of them just blabber whatever they think people would like to hear. Journalists shouldn't cite them just because they are "analysts". This guy basically spreads a rumour.

They are especially annoying when it comes to Apple, Google or Microsoft. Two thirds offer no hard data at all but try to play Captain Hindsight.

I try not to use them in my articles, but I get so much pressure from editors who think "that readers want analysts insights".
Really? The Surface RT is what drove the board to finally act? If that's actually true, it's much more of an indictment of the board and their absolute negligence than Ballmer at this point.

Rewind three years: Microsoft ships the Kin, its lackluster pseudo-feature phone 'built'[1] from the acquisition of Danger, Inc. Microsoft spent $500mm acquiring Danger and then killed off all of their products, and managed to send all of their best employees running to the exits.

Microsoft spent two years building the Kin phones, only to cancel them within months of their release. They probably spent in excess of a billion dollars on the whole thing when all was said and done, and for what? Windows Phone 7 was always going to be the iOS/Android competitor. Microsoft would've been far better off hauling the original $500mm to the middle of one of their campus soccer fields and lighting it on fire. At least then they wouldn't have had divided focus on smartphone operating systems for two years.

http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2010/07/kin-fusing-kin-clusion-...

Even worse was the aQuantive acquisition. $6.2 billion flushed down the toilet: http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/02/technology/microsoft-aquanti...

And Computerworld thinks a $900mm writedown for a product that—despite its flaws—is really a decent v1 is the straw that broke the camel's back? If that's true, the board is the real problem.

[1] My understanding is that Microsoft acquired Danger, canned their entire technology stack, and then rebuilt everything from scratch
One more finger annoying than the power button which is what you would do on any other laptop. There is not a desktop Linux user alive who has not put up with more annoying things than hitting two keys to boot.
I've worked with a sufficiently smart compiler before: The HLSL (shader) compiler for the Xbox360. It truly is a grand experience. The general recommendation was to not try to outsmart the compiler. Write everything as straight-forward as possible. Just watch out for work done on values that influence the result but aren't really necessary (ex: multiplying by an input that will always be 1).

There were several occasions where I'd write out some elegant math and think "Yeah, that's pretty. But, it would run 30% faster if I transposed everything. But, then I'd have to hand-interleave the internals of all these functions..." Then I'd check the assembly output and Bam! the compiler was already producing exactly what I had in mind!

The downside was that it took several minutes to compile <100 line sources that produce <1000 instruction programs. That's with a language completely specialized around small-scale linear algebra that maps very directly to hardware that is completely specialized around small-scale linear algebra; with branching highly discouraged, all functions calls expected to inline away completely, no recursion, no pointers, no heap, no imports, tiny-if-any headers and a tiny standard lib.

It's my understanding that most of the smartness of the 360's HLSL compiler came from using O(n^3) analysis algorithms that were simply impractical at a larger scale. Our game had thousands of shader programs that were mechanically specialized for different situations. As a result, recompiling all of them after changing the tiny shared header took many hours. "Thankfully" the C++ of the game took so long to compile that we were already using Xoreax Incredibuild to distribute the compilation. We adapted that setup to distribute shader compilation and brought the turn-around time down to 15 minutes by leaching cycles from several dozen of my co-workers' machines.
Off OP's topic but I find this post on every HN post about Google launching something and frankly this post adds little value to the discussion.

Google Reader is dead and it's not coming back. Reader usage was extremely low and it made no business sense for Google to run it. If Reader actually had enough users, Google wouldn't have shut it down. Many entrepreneurs, including me in the past, have had to take this decision to shut our services because they did not have enough traction. Failure is part of taking a risk and you should be more appreciative of the risk.

I was angry at the Reader shutdown too as I was an avid Reader user. I was quick to switch to Feedly but lately I find myself being infrequent checking my RSS feed. I seem to be getting more and more of my news from techmeme and hacker news. When I talk to tech friends about this, it seems the they were already doing this. The rest of the world had already moved on and I was just late to realize this.

Was I angry at first? Yes. Am I still angry? No.

PS: I'm an engineer at Google right now.
This keeps popping up again and again. The source code for Tor is public.
Do we really need to get this kind of comment every single time there's an article about Google? This is getting tiring.
While there have been some good points brought up here, I think the author misunderstands what the purpose of Facebook is.

Facebook is not in the same category as Reddit. Social network used to be a very specific category of website, now almost every consumer facing website is a social network. Reddit is a content creation and discussion community, basically a centralized version of the forums and bulletin boards of yesteryear. Facebook is a photo, link, and life sharing network.

If I'm sharing pictures of my family and friends, I'm giving up anonymity by default. The whole point of Facebook is to give an online pin board of what is going on in my life, who I am as a person, and what I think and I enjoy. It's the online identity of my human self.

Reddit is an open platform for all types of discussion and interaction at a macro scale. What happens on Reddit will rarely if ever affect my actual day to day life. The phrase "hive mind" is all too true when you consider the mass amount of meaningless content there is. It's the brain vomit of millions of people and that's what makes it awesome and interesting. For every thought or idea I have, I can find someone else who agrees with me and someone who doesn't.

Saying Facebook should learn from Reddit doesn't make much sense to me. Reddit not a new concept or idea. Historically, social interaction online had always been "anonymous" in one form or another. Facebook was the first truly successful community that did away with usernames and forced people to use their real names. To get a billion people to do that is an incredible feat.

In my humble opinion, Reddit is not revolutionary at all. The "moat" around the site/business is not near as big as Facebooks. All it would take for a Reddit killer to emerge is for a site to hit critical mass in terms of content and provide a better more targeted form of curation to the user than subreddits and karma. In contrary, Facebook has built a massive moat. Your friend list, your photo history, your about page, your Facebook connected sites and apps...this is a huge fucking moat. I'm not saying it would be easy for a Reddit killer to surface, I'm just pointing out that it's more likely than a Facebook killer.

I think it's important for us to recognize that Reddit's social network is not Twitter's social network which is not Facebook's social network and to understand this when making comparisons between them.
Just for edification, the "up" functionality was to click on the folder in the navigation breadcrumb.
Go to the site: About as much time as going into settings

Download: Less than five seconds

Run: If it's a custom tool, less than five seconds to have passwords displayed

Delete: click the 'remove' button on the downloads list, less then five seconds

In terms of bike locks, this is one you can take off with a pen and no previous practice.
Find the source code and you will have your answer. Click on the installer help link on the download page - I could not find it there.
That's a pretty good idea, customers might even appreciate the "thank you" note. You do need to get their address though.
22 Young Women Entrepreneurs and Their Companies to Watch
Google's Admob is shutting off Paypal as a payment option a month from now. It is already shut off for new Admob customers.

https://support.google.com/admob/v2/answer/2772061?hl=en
The definition is not "unsolicited commercial email", it's "unsolicited and bulk." In your example, if you send the same email to every address you collect by hand, it would be spam. But if you send a different email to each recipient, actually making it relevant to the recipient's identity, then it is not spam[1]. (You're likely to get a much better response rate too!)

If the OP's service wasn't focused on email addresses, and instead enabled the user to research similar blogs and tailor an individual outreach to each one, then it would not be a spam enabler.

[1] Edited to add: this is per the definition from Spamhaus. According to lutusp's comment below, the legal definition in CAN-SPAM is different. IANAL.
1:30, Austin Epps "The quality of the analogue process used during the 1960s significantly degraded the actual quality of the images that were taken onboard the spacecraft, they didn't have the computing power necessary to do this as an all digital process back then whereas right now, you can basically do what was impossible to do in 1964/5 on a $2000 computer"

2:36 Dennis Wingo "I really want this material to be to be conserved, part of scientific validity is to be able to go back to the original sources."

Nice catch. I am a 'vicarious lunatic' and look forward to the publication of this material.

Please, anyone with budgetary power, pause for thought about the preservation of raw data for the future
> but I think the whole legal system is so horribly behind technology advances in general

I don't think the legal system is "behind technology advances" at least usually. I think the reason technologists think that is because they see technology as unprecedented and game-changing (and all those buzz-words). As a result, they think that technology should get special treatment, instead of being analogized to existing practices and concepts.

That's certainly a reasonable way to approach things, but it's a liberal interpretive doctrine. But, right now we're in the midst of a multi-decade conservative trend in the judiciary. The conservative concept is that there is nothing new under the sun, and even though things change, they can be tied back to enduring principles and basic concepts.

My read is that the judiciary doesn't really fail to understand technology. Judges are smart people. People explain all sorts of complex things to them all the time. Explaining most technology is far simpler than explaining, for example, the complexities of a reinsurance agreement between commercial parties. Rather, the judiciary has consciously adopted the conservative tack of not treating technology specially.

So in the cell phone context, it's not that judges don't understand that you can store all sorts of things on your cell phone. They have kids, they know what people store on their cell phones. Rather, they look at the underlying principles behind the rule: the potential for a suspect to destroy evidence in his possession. Well, that potential exists whether we're talking about a cell phone or a day planner. I.e. you can tie the technology back to a timeless concept (people write down their schedules and a suspect might destroy those notes if arrested). That's not a failure to appreciate the advances of technology--it's a conscious decision not to treat technology differently than existing things.
It's very similar. There are major differences with how functions are typed, however. Namely, in Cat, they are, and in this, they are not. There's a good reason for that, though!

Imagine you write the program "(add print) call". Clearly that function takes two integer arguments. Right?

Well, that's only because you're looking at the high-level version. Compile it down and you get AE 1D B0 88. If you run it on two integers, you get the sum, as expected.

But what happens if you run it with a list on the stack? Then it happens to run the program "(arg-min arg-a) call". Why? The arithmetic-decoder just sees some bytes, and it decodes them to match the correct types.

Representing the actual type of functions would require more bits, make programs longer, and so I haven't implemented that. I'm still pondering things to do here.
New J.D. Salinger books coming, biographers claim
>My favorite part is his earnest naivety in somehow thinking he wasn't the mark
Sorry, I meant in the title.
Accidentally voted you down rather than up, apologies.
Homepage Visualization and Statistics on the YC(S13) Startups
Ask HN: What will entertain us in 20 years?
Television was cannibalized by the internet, the internet is becoming cannibalized by mobile and tablets. So, what's next?
Being responsible has nothing to do with not changing your mind. What in the world are you talking about?
> That certainly may be a reasonable argument to make. But they already lost. A court found that this was, after all, not reasonable.

The 1st Circuit does not state the law of the land. It's a reasonable position, up against another very reasonable position, and it's up to the Supreme Court to decide to adopt one or the other.
Wikipedia talks of its birthday here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebM
There is no reason at all to use MySQL: MariaDB, MySQL founder Michael Widenius
Let me note that you are arguing something completely different than you started with.

Yes, I started off explaining why there is relatively unbalanced coverage.

You made it clear that your argument is based on hard numbers that you've basically made up. So now I am pointing out that making up hard numbers and not accepting arguments that don't precisely fit your arbitrary numbers is just a form of rhetoric. Measuring the effect of coverage is even more arbitrary. "Effect" is something so vague that there aren't even any units to measure it.

You will not receive any satisfactory answers because you have designed the question to be unanswerable so as to advocate a position rather than seek an explanation.
I think that might very well be the most reasonable rule.
It's all related. Probable Cause is keystone.

When they have evidence of wrong doing, government should be allowed to search when all three branches agree (legislative passing law, executive investigating, judicial granting warrant).

They can't go fishing. They can't violate privacy to find wrongdoing.

It has all been eroded overtime. Really need a reboot...
Health from above: a drone to deliver defibrillators to heart attack victims
Not a css framework, but this is a fantastic ebook on the subject: http://practicaltypography.com/
> Let's put it this way: we have more prisoners than any country on the planet. I do not think we should be concerned about the difficulties police and prosecutors face with evidence collection.

I shouldn't have to tell you the illogic of this argument.
Miami Fashion Goes Head to Head with Gilt on Glass
> But if you send a different email to each recipient, actually making it relevant to the recipient's identity, then it is not spam.

Don't mislead your readers on legal issues. If the e-mail is unsolicited and doesn't contain an opt-out link, in most cases it meets the legal definition of spam and violates the Can-Spam Act.
The Popular Advice That Could Kill Your Business
Given the petulant tone of your response, I'll leave it to you to do your own research on the basics of copyright law. But I will note that, under the law, the contents are owned by whoever created them. If the client failed to pay for the work, and did not secure a clear transfer of title, ownership of the IP remains with the author. This is Copyright Law 101.

The domain is a seperate matter. Presumably, this could happen because the designer was hosting the site. The owner of the domain is free to host it elsewhere, but would need to populate any sites they publish with content they actually own, and not work stolen from people they didn't pay.
Gotcha, thanks for the clarification.

I agree with you on the email personalization, btw -- response rates skyrocket when an email is personally written, even if it has common snippets.

My personal hope is that we're entering an era where bulk and unsolicited email has such a low response rate compared to sending personalized emails that people will realize this and go for what's more profitable.

My cynical side says there will always be bottom feeders who take the easy route, even if they make less money.
Does anyone know: Will Windows 8.1 be a free upgrade for existing Windows 8 customers?

Edit: Did some googling, it will be a free upgrade (for anyone else wondering) through the Microsoft Store.
Pretty lame for society to be so intolerant of children. Was everyone just born into adulthood complete with manners?? Smh.
I think you are supposed to pirate windows 8 if you live in Bolivia.

By the way, do you know if Apple "supports" Bolivia?
Phew - 24 hours without sleep! At least I'm getting a little better at the Mirror API. Making cover cards with pictures from inside the bundle, etc..
The comment was not just about Reader - it is about fact: http://jensenbox.github.io/timeline/
Totally. Just like gmail, calendar, chrome, android, search, images, drive, and analytics have been.

Disclosure: googler.
See also Rust's emphasis on zero-cost abstractions [1]. The current compiler doesn't emphasize specialization (though it does specialize generics), but the ability to abstract in source code without leaving any trace in the actual compiled binary is a design goal.

[1]: http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Rust
I travel quite a bit for my job and I never leave home without my foam earplugs, and by the way, I have found that for me, the foam earplugs open up the ear canal and help with the cabin pressure changes on the plane. Also, they work great for getting to sleep in noisy hotels.
What a fantastic way to devalue other people's reasonable opinions. They hate what Israel is doing in Palestine territories because they hate the Jews. Brilliant!