skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The way I understand it (IANAL) is that you need to protect your trademark against people who uses confusing namings on things that isn't you. In this case "tumblr" clearly and explicitly refers to tumblr.com.

If you had to make sure that no one uses your trademark to talk about you, wouldn't that lead to a very strange place?
Regarding your example about 100k and 20k 401k vs taxable 120k, it's probably not fiscally responsible to choose the latter except for certain fringe cases.

Without going into the deep financials, it's much easier to live below your means now in your 20s then when you are raising a family later on in life. It would therefore be wiser to live below your means (even if this means living like a college student in San Fran or NYC) and choose 100k, be relatively frugal, and put away that extra 20k without tax. Starting a solid 401k in your early 20s is one of the most fiscally sound decisions you can make.

I don't mean to criticize your reasoning, I'm just offering another perspective.
Erlang bookmarks
Sorting algorithms in general aren't constants, though. The implementation can have significant impact on running time, memory use, etc. And there are an infinite number of them with various tradeoffs you can tune.

I wouldn't expect an interviewee to know sorting algorithm X because they may just have forgotten. But why wouldn't they be able to come up with a sorting algorithm, and have some feel for the behavior? Seriously, selection sort is about as easy to come up with as fizzbuzz. If they can't think through a simple problem and come up with a solution, is it wrong to question their problem-solving skills?
Back in the early 2000's, it was FuckedCompany.com. It was a daily dose of layoffs and shut-downs amongst (mostly) tech startups.
SAVE THESE CATS - JOE LHOTA WOULD HAVE KILLED KITTENS
The beautiful story of August and Arthur, the little kittens lost in the subway and the mean, nasty man who might have killed them
I used to be like you. I believed in the proper correctness of of markup; proper closing tags, proper nesting. But I've come to see the light. The WWW succeeded and flourished because of it's faults and it's lazy error checking. Thousands of non-technical people writing their own html. Thankfully it didn't have to be perfect and it worked.

I still like tidy clean code, but I don't agonize over it's perfection.
I upvoted you not because of the moralistic call to action ("save the pets" is as old and tired as "think of the children") but because it's true: my indoor/outdoor cat was stolen by someone who seemed to then be in process of selling him. The only reason I got him back is because I kept a GPS tracker on his collar for just this reason, and it led me straight to her house. She was very surprised when I showed up at her door.

So yes, it happens and it's very sad. I don't know whether there's anything to be done though. Bad things happen all the time.
NSA misused PRISM - Spied on Al Jazeera, bugged UN headquarter
Why not just subscribe to some RSS feeds? ...oh!
Pressy, the customizable Android button, raises $300k in 3 days.
I thought somewhat of the opposite. They're not partners unless they have equity. And if he has a great deal of equity, and the company is valuable, his own salary may be less significant than buy-out or IPO money.
Nothing stops you from closing tags if you want to (like me). It is very much allowed by html5.
It's also worth considering Yahoo! the employer or Yahoo! the business partner.
NSA misused PRISM - Spied on Al Jazeera, UN HQ, ...
I intellectually really like these experiments, but one of the things virtually every startup advisor tells you is "only innovate when and where you must" -- basic things like how you do accounting, offices, etc. should be standard, so you don't screw them up, so you don't think about them too much, etc.

This is how a financier would think about it (and I'm not saying it is always wrong). There's some finite risk allowance, and the idea is that you should load up 100% on business model risk-- which means no experimenting with open allocation, remote work, etc.-- because business model risk is what the VCs are good at analyzing and there's a bit of golden hammer syndrome ("when you have a great hammer, everything looks like a nail.")

As a practical directive, I think it's dead fucking wrong (practically; morally, people can run their businesses how they wish) and here's why. If you load up 100% on business model risk, then 0% gets allocated to employees. They get no autonomy, work long hours, and generally get abused because "we don't have any slack in the schedule". Well? If your business model is innovative but the only thing you're delivering to employees is the stereotypical soul-sucking corporate job, you're going to have to give 25-35% annual raises each year (as Wall Street does) to keep anyone good. That's expensive, unsustainable, and by necessity leads to an up-or-out culture that fries the place anyway. Of course, startups replace this with equity options and hope the exponential curve of the valuation will deliver the implicit raises, but anyone who can do basic math on a typical engineer grant (typically $5-20k per year at-valuation) is going to find it weak as a motivational tool.

If people have the autonomy to direct their own careers and work on things that interest them, they're a lot less expensive in the long run, because it doesn't take a 30% pay bump and a newer, shinier management title each year to keep them on. This is even more true in startups. People expect, e.g., Microsoft or Goldman, to be bureaucratic. If people go into a startup and find that the traditional hierarchy and closed-allocation regime are in place, they're going to feel cheated and get pissed.

If you want good people and you want them to be motivated by the work instead of an exponentially growing paycheck, that means you have to experiment and give them unusually high degrees of autonomy.
> They have access to food pantries, soup lines, and other community support.

In many places, these resources don't account for all of the demand and have absolutely no chance of matching it.
Well said. A company can either continue on as before, which makes us associate them as bullies, or can correct a mistake. The real test is what comes after.
Vindicated:

http://istumblrdown.com/retraction/
I spend between 10 - 20%...

Kudos. I'm working my way up to 10% of my money. Mostly food banks and shelters.

(I do this, because apparently my taxes have already been fully committed to unnecessary wars and enriching cronies.)

... not shown any initiative or drive to seize opportunities.

Having had plenty of self-destructive behaviors, I only ask that you go easy on people who are on this path. Abuse (e.g., sexual, domestic, drugs, PTSD) very much warps people's brains. As in changes people brain chemistry and wiring. Very much an altered state of awareness. It takes a huge amount of effort for an individual to back away from the abyss.

my wife asked me to cut back for the sake of our family"

Agree with your wife here. We must cover our own needs before we have the excess strength, resources to help others.

I was simply unable to get most people to accept the help they needed.

I believe we're on this rock to help each other. More specifically, help people help themselves and help those who can't help themselves.

A truism from the addiction world is that you can't help people who don't want to be helped.

So that means you're opening the door for others to walk thru. And some people will walk thru.
I love threads like this because it brings people like you out of the woodwork. It's like gazing into the abyss.

An appeal to nature (an untenable one at that) and a lack of understanding of scope on how natural selection works is just the beginning.

>If we artificially remove any appearance of shortage, of a need to struggle, we remove the incentive to work.So we need to imitate nature at least in some respects. But that goal cannot be achieved if we "improve the circumstances" of everyone in need.

Approaching this from a different perspective, it removes the need to do the bidding of others for sustenance. People don't, in general, want to fall to idlery. It opens an opportunity for organizations not solely fueled by the profit motive. The thing about society is that it doesn't necessarily have to model a romanticized return to natural order, especially when we have the ability to overcome obstacles like 'worrying about where next meal will come from' or 'having no clean water'. I will argue that today, we have the ability to eradicate the circumstances in which poverty develops either through minimum income initiatives or a more drastic change to how society is structured.

>In short, if we try to fix the problem of poverty, we will make everyone poor. That's history's lesson.

I'd absolutely love for you to provide some examples from history. I have one for you as well, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome
People who won't walk through the TL have over-active imaginations. The TL has an over-hyped reputation.
PhD.
You don't want to be "could this get us sued?" guy. Lots of people have run into the type that uses it as a go-to passive aggressive way of opposing things. It's superficially reasonable because literally anything can get you sued in the US, but it's also a completely counterproductive attitude to actually making correct decisions.

Even if you, personally are asking the question in a reasonable context where the answer is probably "yes", just saying it gets you bucketed into the "toxic people who must be contained or avoided" bucket in a lot of otherwise reasonable people's minds. Unless you are actually employed as a lawyer, it would probably be a good career move to strike discussions of legal risk from your vocabulary.

ps: Yes, I know you were asking more about what Tumblr needs to do to keep the right to stop others from using their trademark, but nobody read past "legal problems"
AskGolang.com: traffic stats, hosting details, and open sourcing
Because maybe we would not have to reinvent the wheel (making it oval, by the way) for each and every "new" feature that come along HTML5 (I'm looking at you, Web components).
The day I got the MirageOS app for my calculator was magical.
Those who know/have cause to/have manifestation of paranoia that manifests as turn off javascript completely are certainly more likely to see the appeal for the slide show. I only made it about halfway through. Not that it's not an important topic, but not my top priority right now. A syllabus would have been useful so that I may see if I have missed something without having to spend another 10 minutes.

It can be quite useful for someone to make a suggestion that can make the website have larger appeal. It just can be. I count my suggestion for a syllabus as one.

But as a stronger example, aljazeera.com recently started redirecting ips from the US to the subdomain america.aljazeera.com. I couldn't get around it without a proxy. I wrote them an email suggesting they make the old site ("english") an option from the front page (I pointed to CNN.com as an example). They wrote me back saying they changed it and, when I went there, they even had a pop-up that allowed me to have the english site as my default. They had deliberately put in the functionality but didn't realize that some of us wanted their European coverage, not their America coverage.

In this case maybe the site will offer alternative formats. Maybe they hadn't thought of it.

I also have sites that ignore non-javascript enabled browsers- but they are web-apps and are explicit about the need for js. If I had a normal site with a widget that broke for certain people I very well might take such a comment into serious consideration. It is more helpful, as I said earlier, if such criticism also suggests something that might work well. Otherwise it just sounds like bitching.
That post says Q's stack traces are fine if you set a flag, and that generator-based libraries also pay extra for full stack traces. I expect ClojureScript does better because it can compile its own code, and the same would go for a promise-based language (or JS preprocessor).

Q explicitly says that you don't want to enable stack traces for production, which seems like a fairly high cost to pay. Neither core.async nor ES6 generators need to do anything special to have clean traces - it's fundamental to how the system works.

I'm not sure what you mean about async streams, but I wasn't seriously after more changes to JS syntax, just wishing (1) E had taken off and (2) new languages learn from it.

Sorry for not being clear, my posts are all part of continuum. My point is hardly anyone uses promises for fine grained asynchrony because of the costs and debugging indirection. My point is that you can do both coarse/fine grained asynchrony at little cost and without obfuscating your errors during development or in production if you move beyond promises.
This is where Dr. Evil's colleagues snicker and he counters his demands with "100 BILLION Dollars", right?

Seems a bit much to have people set their own salary. What happens if you have an engineer who decides their worth $190k when in reality they're worth $100k at best?

I prefer the idea of providing other benefits like flexibility to work from anywhere and a sane vacation policy (take as much or as little as you want, but make sure your shit gets done).
Glass apps are the web app backend. You push HTML cards to the user's device, by contacting Google's REST API (authenticated by OAuth on behalf of your user).

Those cards are your app's UI. Actions on the device (acting on cards, sharing content with your app) result in REST commands to your backend.

So with something like this, you don't need to care about the nitty gritty of Google's API, you just focus on your application logic.
Tired of stepping through Windows problems over the phone?
Lawyers basically say until a cease and desist is received (confirmed received), then they've spent money and are serious.
Glad you got your cat back! The GPS collar is a brilliant idea.
from Slashdot: "...I'm a co-founder of AntiPolygraph.org (we suggest using Tor to access the site)..."
For a non-public company, offering the company's own stock as the only retirement plan is borderline fraudulent in my opinion. For a public company, at least stock is as good as cash. But for a startup, that's akin to paying your employees in lottery tickets and in any case where you can't sell the stock, it's an unacceptable level of risk--if the company goes south, you lose your job and your nest egg disappears?
At our place we don't bother eating instant noodles unless they're Shin Cup or Mi goreng.

You can actually eke out a decent meal if you're willing to add additional nutritious items (eggs, greens, etc.) to otherwise bad instant noodles.
Those statistics say that there were 11,568,000 German casualties out of 18,200,000 total. And while blowing off a leg isn't quite the same thing as killing them, it has the same effect for the purposes of war. The stats show about 1 in 3 Germans killed and 1 in 4 Japanese killed vs 1 in 50 Americans killed and 1 in 25 British killed. The focus of modern war is causing physical harm to the enemy troops, not merely destroying their capability for making war.
Your comment was not a rebuttal. It was a logical fallacy, and you haven't shown what you think you've shown ("universal healthcare will NOT fix a lot of this").

Canada's healthcare system could be making the situation in Vancouver much better than it otherwise would be. The OP can be correct, even if homelessness is getting worse in Vancouver.
The problem with the methodology is that it's based on density, which is far from all that matters. The fact that a startup industry exists within a larger industry doesn't really detract from the vibrant startup community. If anything, it enhances it.

It's pretty telling that New York isn't even mentioned in that report despite there being areas in the city where every other office is a startup.
Xtranormal was absolutely hilarious, hoping this reaches the same heights of unintentional comedy.
Fan! (according to the hilarious and magnificent http://youtu.be/AkJf0md1kG8 )
The indirection is useful when exit time rolls around. If you directly finance a bridge in a city that wins a major new factory, you have to figure out how to market and sell your share of their improved taxing ability. If you bought a government bond, you simply issue a sell order priced to account for the lower risk of default.
I'm pretty sure they tested this out and modern refrigerators don't act as Faraday cages:

http://mentalfloss.com/article/51597/does-refrigerator-make-...

Older ones might have been lead-lined or otherwise different; you might have better results with a microwave. That said, it's a pretty good guarantee that the phones are not surreptitiously recording a conversation.
[NOTE: There's a bit of negativity here. But I'm not trying to be anyone's enemy. It is hoped that this will be taken (esp. by the author, if he's around) as the respectful critique it is intended to be.]

I'm wondering about this. It's a heck of a lot of text to get a across a couple of simple ideas.

It feels like the author has been stuck in a little a corner of the programming world for some time, and he thinks that everyone has been doing things the way he has. So if he needs to learn something new, then everyone else must need it also.

People have been writing interactive, event/message-driven programs for the mass market ever since the Macintosh came out ~30 years ago. Sometimes interfaces between internal components have been written in that same style; sometimes they haven't. Doing a whole system that way is a nice idea, but hardly a revolutionary one.

And scalability? One can't really design a scalable architecture until it is clear how a system will need to scale. Will it be huge number of app instances talking to a central data store? Will it be a huge amount of data managed separately by each app instance? Will it be huge numbers of P2P connections between instances? Etc. And information like that is sometimes unavailable until a system has been in existence for a while.

And let's not forget Knuth and premature optimization.

OTOH, the resilience ideas are definitely worthwhile. Reliability standards for computer systems are rising like crazy. Architectural ideas for improving reliability, robustness, etc., need to be thought about more. So good for the author on this one.

Now, put it all together and clear out the fluff, and I get this: A good way to design computer systems is to use modular components that talk to each other using non-blocking interfaces, in such a way that component failure does not bring down the system. That's a fine thought, although not a terribly revolutionary one. And it hardly needs an 18,000-word essay with 4 figures to get it across.
Google Maps is updating for the Bay Bridge upgrade in near real-time
Please pull your punches. TallGuyShort clearly has good intentions (deeds speak louder than words) and is simply expressing his frustrations.
Ask HN: Will they hate me?
I wrote the following letter to my team (only peers, no managers). Does it have a chance of being productive? If so, would I become hated or viewed as a superior jerk? Is there anything that would produce a better letter if it were eliminated?

http://pastie.org/8287095
No Linux version?

Edit: Got it installed on Windows. Note that your installer window doesn't display quite right under Windows 8 at higher DPI settings (http://i.imgur.com/GXQA3uz.png). I like that the application does automatic camera work; last time I tried Xtranormal (admittedly, a while ago) they didn't offer that. Is there a way to use a custom speech synthesis engine for a character in Windows? Ellen's voice is disappointingly synthetic and I would rather use a nicer third-party voice I have installed. Edit 2: At least Ellen's voice is like that when saying "Joe" -- you can hear her show a bit of SHODAN heritage at http://vocaroo.com/i/s00J7Zud8UnB -- but not when she says other things, apparently.

Nice as it is, I don't see this program gaining mind share without a video made in it going viral. I would recommend allowing some form of movie sharing in the free version (perhaps watermarked or limited to a direct upload to your own website) to make that happen.
Even if you, personally are asking the question in a reasonable context where the answer is probably "yes", just saying it gets you bucketed into the "toxic people who must be contained or avoided" bucket in a lot of otherwise reasonable people's minds. Unless you are actually employed as a lawyer, it would probably be a good career move to strike discussions of legal risk from your vocabulary.

This is America. We're here to make money, and to win. That means operating in a legal system that can work for us or against us depending on the law. If a startup is too immature to see my question as anything other than a straightforward request for information, then I wouldn't want to work for them anyway.
Mhh a download of payed software. Too bad, with an open model and proper integration of social media this could have been a billion dollar start-up and one of the things that could take on Hollywood in a couple of years once their tech has matured a bit (no this won't compete with Michael Bay and yes most movies will be crap and/or porn, but it now means that every half decent writer will be able to gets or her work on the big screen).
So all food is equivalent! Following your maxim, we can replace food stamps with an unlimited supply of strychnine and just let people choose a healthy dose for themselves.
<p xmlns:ex="http://example.org/vocab#"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
Two rectangles (the example markup for them are stored in a triple):
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
property="ex:markup"
datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral">
... svg ...
</svg>
</p>

Does `property="ex:markup"` and `datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral"` seem to anyone else like a phenomenally bad idea? Don't inject namespaces in values! How would you escape that anyway?

Is there some reason we don't have e.g. <svg ex:property="markup" rdf:datatype="XMLLiteral" />, or can you not do that with XML? And if so, why not? It seems like it would be very useful for mixing in data like this.
Build it and they will come? No, ask them if they would use it — in fact ask them if they would buy it right now and for what price — then build it.

Any talk is cheap. Charge them for it as a pre-sale to really lock this down. Give them a reasonable discount if they prepay during the development period, of course, and refund everything if you can't deliver as promised for any reason.
Some mobile browser caches have an upper limit of file size. I know the iPhone did at launch, but I haven't kept up with the limits.
It exists even in WHATWG HTML. It it just not encouraged.
You showed a scale, but there was no relative basis. Just sharing percentages would be interesting as it would help us understand what the variance is. Did you want to give everyone a raise of about 10% and they wanted 15%?

BTW - I love the experiment and may use it for my next hires, your transparency is commendable and while it may not work for everyone I love the idea of making new hire salary negotiations into true salary discussions.
Yes, I mean at worst you could say it's better than nothing but certifications do certainly light a fire under some people who otherwise wouldn't bother to learn. And yes certifications can be abused by some, some people have photographic memories (a surprisingly large number!).

I see some CompTIA certifications have implemented performance based testing which is more knowing than memorization, which I like. Passing scores were creeping up more every year maybe that was a response to people passing due to memorization or sheer luck?