skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
...Alcohol tweaks mind wandering in a particularly interesting way, as Schooler and his colleagues report in a new paper entitled "Lost in the Sauce," published in Psychological Science...Drunk readers actually reported less mind wandering than sober people did. That does not mean that you should swill vodka if you want a laser focus on Tolstoy’s deathless prose, though. Schooler has shown that there are, in fact, two kinds of mind wandering: mind wandering when you are aware that you’re thinking about something else and mind wandering without awareness. He calls this second kind zoning out...

...These experiments show that we spend about 13 percent of our time zoning out. But when we are drunk, that figure doubles. In other words, inebriated subjects report less mind wandering only because they are less aware of their own minds...

...Even more telling is the discovery that zoning out may be the most fruitful type of mind wandering...

Is it just me, or did that article conclude that getting drunk doubles the time you spend thinking on big picture problems and increases your ability to solve them, although you're not aware of it and in fact may look like a total idiot when it comes to doing immediate, short-term thinking?

I know I'm overgeneralizing, but I find the connection fascinating. I know I have observed and experienced a propensity for long-term thinking after moderate consumption of alcohol. Not sure if any of of that thinking does much good though. And from reading the article, I am finding that the amount of that thinking is probably a lot more than I (or others) realize.
I used to work for an architectural and landscape designer in the D.C. area in the 80s and 90s, his solution to constant changes was to only work cost plus, on a week to week basis. Every week he met with the clients, let them decide what was most important to them to get done over the coming week, and get a check for the previous week. It also helped the clients feel more involved in what they were paying for.
What is each axis? They aren't labeled.
At least this is just an app, I shudder when I think of the guys who are trying build businesses around Twitter. Good for Twitter, not so good for them.
Looks very interesting since their technology actually measures brain waves instead of just physical activity. However, the cost of it $400 is a bit expensive.
Perhaps the downvoting icon should be one of those old 90s toy trolls, and the upvote icon a light bulb or something similar.
I think the point of the other comment was that this guy's story doesn't ring true...

IOW, it sounds like the guy is either making it up, or was trying to copy the ebook to more devices than authorized (i.e., friends' devices).
You're wrong. You don't have to use a single method or class that is undocumented to add or remove stuff to the camera control's UI.

Here is a link to the documentation of the class in question: http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/uiki...

As you can see, UIImageController is a subclass of UIViewController. UIViewControllers contain a property named "view" (http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/uiki...), which is a reference to type UIView (http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/uiki...). UIViews contain subviews, which are conveniently accessible through the "subviews" property. Every class in subviews must also be a UIView.

Just like in any other modal UINavigationController, to modify what's visible you use the public provided methods to traverse the hierarchy of UIViews. You don't need to know anything about the classes inside; you can remove them at will, just like you can remove any other subview from any other parent. This works in 2.0 and up.

So there's no private API here. The dude even says so in the article. Now ultimately, your application will break if you rely on UIImagePickerController's view hierarchy staying constant (doing stuff like "remove the third view from the image picker's subviews array", for instance) and aren't careful about checking results. In 3.0, the UIImagePickerController's view hierarchy looks significantly different from the way it did in 2.2.1, so a lot of people's apps blew up. (On the flip side, if you were being careful, things worked just fine.)

Forget all the blathering about who is culpable to who.
This guy's app (and presumably others) were defective. But platform makers make changes that break apps all the time; why should this guy get his app banned forever?
"To borrow your analogy of the can of worms module, that it runs well but will become a bomb as soon as someone decides to rewire it fills me with a sense of deep dread. My mind immediately drifts to the scenario where something forces changes on that module, such as the server continuously crashing due to a latent schrodinbug that just surfaced, but in a time-frame where those 47 issues just can't be resolved. I've never been comfortable with the justification that "it works now, so just don't screw with it." It seems to just be begging for Murphy to make a fool of the person justifying a decision thusly."

Yes, so you make that part of the decision. It's all contextual; you can fiddle with this hypothetical this way to make it 'yes', you can fiddle with it the other way to make it 'no', and both hypotheticals will be simplified to the point of irrelevance compared to any real situation that may arise.
Entrepreneurship for Survival at the Base of the Pyramid
Woz was working on interesting stuff from day 1. He also didn't view his start-up as a business. He and Jobs were fucking around to see what they could do, having a good time, and it happened to be an incredible business opportunity.

You talk about "Woz-caliber" people like they're a commodity, or like you can track who's brilliant and who isn't. Fact is, if Woz didn't work for Apple, he probably wouldn't have gone on to be a huge celebrity icon. Certainly his later work never got that much attention. And the traits Woz had going for him - a strong technical mind and a rabid curiosity - are common traits. What makes Woz unique is that he worked on something cool.

If your thing isn't interesting enough to attract a programmer, then hire one. Don't expect magic to happen because it shouldn't. When I worked on boring projects, I had to deal with incompetent people who didn't care about my ideas. Once I began working on cool things, I got access to the cool programmers, and they were as into the work as I was, because it really was cool work.
Well there are at least a half-dozen valid unaccented capital a characters in Unicode, but there is only one LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A, which sits at U+0041.

You are correct that there are many ways to encode U+0041 in a stream of bytes.
Washington Metro Train Crash Kills Six
Pretty much all code can potentially be run for a long time and be subjected many alteration requirements, making high quality dev practise worthwhile. But if you want a archetypal example: libraries.
Digraphs: Theory, Algorithms and Applications
Psyklic, our UW QSE group felt the same way, and to remedy these problems we wrote a 96-page "Practical Recipes" article on quantum simulation, which appeared this month in the (open source) New Journal of Physics.

This length permitted our QSE Group to explain practical methods for quantum system engineering at a mathematical level that was well-matched to our quantum system engineering students.

On the other hand, the peer review of articles of this length is a lot of extra work for all concerned---reviewers, editors, and authors ... to say nothing of the effort demanded of the readers.
You're wrong. You don't have to use a single method or class that is undocumented to add or remove stuff to the camera control's UI.

No. You do everyone reading a remarkable disservice. The UIView hierarchy itself is undocumented. The contents and ordering thereof are undefined, may change at any future date, and can not be relied upon. The application did, in fact, break when the OS was upgraded.

Apple's use of "Private or Unpublished API" isn't intended to leave room for semantic arguments about the true meaning of "private", "unpublished", or "API", and they've clearly applied the standard industry definition in this particular instance.

But platform makers make changes that break apps all the time; why should this guy get his app banned forever?

Apple guarantees that their published, documented behavior (eg, API) will work across releases, and they strive to meet this guarantee. Where they fail they assume responsibility for fixing the issue -- file a bug.
Does anyone have a master list of the words You Can't Say on Facebook?

I wonder how much it intersects with the 'Green Dam'/Chinese censorship list.
So they are basically combining google + digg, indexing pages while taking account of user feedback through a recommendation system. Actually... I don't see what the big deal about "realtime search" is and the whole article sounds a little like PR material rather than a technical explanation of the inner workings of their search algorithm.

Also keep in mind that this is the same company that was me.dium, the company which got 15 million dollars of funding with like... (20k ? ) users, somewhat a poster-child of the web 2.0 bubble. I guess their original idea didn't take off and they started this instead.
A type-centric redesign of Twitter.com
"The UIView hierarchy itself is undocumented. The ordering of the contents is undefined, may change at any future date, and can not be relied upon."

This is exactly what I said above. If you expect a certain structure, your app will almost certainly blow up, and is defective. However, you can rely on the fact that the UIView hierarchy can always be modified, with public methods, regardless of what's inside (or not inside) it. Because that fact is documented.
Not entirely true -- the presumption now is that the company owns the IP for stuff done on behalf of the company. Of course, this is just a presumption, so it's easily rebutted, by example, showing that you received no compensation (no one works for free).

But the legal uncertainty would discourage investment.
You don't find Woz, he finds you. If what you're doing is cool enough, he quits HP and stays. Anyone who tells you different is likely selling something.

The advice part is to hang out at hacker gatherings and demonstrate in the least poser way possible what you've got going on.
Think of the hashtable as a defaultdict or the fold as having an initial value for when the key doesn't have a value yet.
What Old Software Do You Still Use?
I found this firmware update increased my disk performance by 58% on reads and 15% on writes. Not bad. I'm now averaging 105MB/sec reads on my 13" macbook pro.

http://sam.bluwiki.com/blog/2009/06/performance-numbers-on-a...
In fact, it is immensely important that the problem states that Monty Hall always reveals a losing door. If the problem merely states a particular series of events without specifying the rules -- as both Jeff's problem statement and Marilyn's problem statement do -- you can't know the probabilities.

Suppose, for example, that Monty has the policy of only revealing a losing door if the player has chosen the winning door; if, on the other hand, the player initially chooses a losing door, then Monty reveals no door and makes no offer to switch, sticking the player with the loss. In that case, if you encounter the same sequence of events in Jeff's problem description, then switching always has zero chance of winning. With the opposite assumption -- that Monty only reveals a losing door if the player has initially chosen a losing door -- switching always has a 100% chance of winning.

Both Jeff and Marilyn nevertheless press forward with the unstated assumption that Monty has no choice in the matter. It turns out that this assumption is not only faulty, but it's also unrealistic: on the actual game show, Monty was under no such obligation.

I'm a little surprised that Jeff, who apparently has read up a little on the topic, didn't bother to grab the much better problem specification from the Wikipedia article.
This is exactly what I said above. If you expect a certain structure, your app will almost certainly, and is defective. However, you can rely on the fact that the UIView hierarchy can always be modified, regardless of what's inside (or not inside) it. Because that fact is documented.

No, you can not rely on that undocumented assumption:

1) You can not know what to modify in an opaque set of views, because the contents of that opaque view hierarchy is undocumented.

2) You can not know that it is safe to modify the opaque view hierarchy, as doing so may break the undocumented invariants of the opaque view hierarchy.

3) You can not assume that the members of the view hierarchy meet your assumptions regarding structure, subclass, or nature, as the view hierarchy is opaque and not subject to declared API invariants.

If it's not documented, it is not a defined invariant, and it can not be assumed.

To claim otherwise is to simply fail to understand the purpose of defined invariants. Software development is no place to rely upon empirically-derived knowledge.
Completely agree. I should have elaborated more on that, thanks for bringing it up.

In many cases you can have a significantly lower memory profile. In a worst case it's the same as MapReduce (as you said). I think having the additional flexibility with memory, in addition to the simpler architecture and performance attributes, makes HashFold an attractive alternative.
Disagree. I think he wrote this and stayed professional. He was very understanding of Martin's situation, he never made personal attacks, and stayed factual.
Maybe Tesla should have done a mass-market product, or maybe not, but your argument is exceptionally weak.

Iff you're right, and Tesla could get their unit cost down to $25k (a final BMW sticker price, FWIW), they'd still be left with the challenge of bringing a mass-market product to market. They'd have to build a sales and delivery channel, create a supply chain that could sustain the volumes required to run a lower-margin business, and, after all that, be competing in a segment that services value-conscious buyers, many of whom are already confused about the difference between hybrid and PEV.

That's iff you're right. But you probably aren't. Because you're swagging materials costs out of thin air when talking about a product that went from $140k in materials alone to $80k in a span of months. That was apparently a harrowing crisis for a product with a six-figure sticker. For a car that would go up against a BMW 3-Series, they'd have no such margin of error.

In the end, you have to ask yourself what the world should be getting from Tesla. If it's technology, then who cares who they sell it to first? Why would you ask them to pursue a business model that increases the chances that they'll go out of business before they ship rev2, rev3, and rev4? Why does the final product even need Tesla's badge on it? Maybe, like many other luxury manufacturers, Tesla's badge will always be prohibitively expensive, but their components will OEM to much more cost-effective platforms from Daimler.
Twitter founders should get the Nobel Peace Prize
That's fine but then people shouldn't complain when the DRM bites you in the ass. I realize you're not complaining but that seems to be the crux of this article (and the number of comments agreeing with it).
When you buy 98% of a company, you aren't "a controlling guy". You are the controlling guy.
The screenshot looked really good. Running live, it's way too cluttered and there's not enough of a relation between relevant pieces of information. I strongly dislike the lefthand column, and the lack of contract with the righthand one. Finally, the "What are you doing?" box doesn't have nearly enough prominence.

Type-centric means using size to emphasize relevance. When everything's the exact same size your design is flawed.
I would be more interested in their search infra, specifically scaling that "highly optimized in-memory index".

I'm guessing it's similar to LinkedIn's Zoie (http://code.google.com/p/zoie/).
Take matters into your own hands: http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/

Instapaper is good for mitigating the viewport creep too
It is downright goofy that you'd get curmudgeonly about this deal but never have anything to say about Raytheon, Boeing, Texton, General Dynamics, or Lockheed Martin. Welcome, I guess I mean to say, to America.
Steve Job back to work.
Interesting enough but his "exercise in simplicity sans cell phone" hardly seemed an exercise in simplicity, nor one without a "cell phone" (just replaced with another digital device).
Thanks for amending my laziness :-)
True, this is clearly based on a Brockmann-like grid. Though Brockmann emphasized the importance of headers set off and differentiated from the body text.
The SQL Trap
Something like TipJoy (even if TipJoy isn't the first to find the right formula) should eventually work for these free-floating givers-of-value.

But, somewhat as with musicians, there may be a lot more people who would like to follow this path than the market needs -- meaning the financial appreciation will be spread pretty thin.
You can empirically determine exactly what's in an opaque set of anything (NSArray's various public access methods) and exactly what part of the area of a view is covered by a subview. Then you can call the public removeFromSubview method on that view, and it will remove it from its subview. Then you can attach your own. Apple doesn't say you can in the documentation, but they say that UIImagePickerController is a UINavigationController, and you can do that to any UINavigationController.

You can do this at run time for any UIView, even those which are part of so-called opaque types. Those methods are documented, and you can read about them above. I'm done trying to tell you that.

I can't imagine how frustrating your iphone app development experience must be if you rule out experimentation of all types. How did you ever get past the code-signing step?
The funny thing about this issue is that if you are a vendor of products for sale, you are not allowed to sell your wares in Iran, yet the united states govt is more than happy to let twitter help them stage a revolt.
When Musk was interviewed in Wharton's podcast, one of the key points he pushed was the ability of a startup to keep burn rate low. It appears that his philosophy on spending is genuine, and not just lip service, which I find pretty refreshing.
How To Write An Ebook Without Writing A Single Word Yourself
Many individuals have caught onto the ebook frenzy which is going on these days. No matter what topic you search online, you are sure to find an ebook which describes your desired subject matter in detail.
Writing Like a Doctor
Einstein and Newton 'had autism'
I had a very similar reaction to the most recent facebook re-design - I felt that bottom line, I was able to view much less content/information at a given time. I never understood why facebook would want to do such a thing - to increase clicks, perhaps.

(Note, I only skimmed the article)
Your logic makes sense, but was there an opening for more negotiation at that point, as in: "I understand there's no speaker budget, and I won't charge for a cozy mutually-beneficial conversation, but the giant audience and video cost exactly $X?" (A formal price sheet could help them conclude "it costs what it costs" rather than "he's angling for more".)

Alternatively, though it is also distasteful from a "give away and trust" perspective, you could overfill the talk with teasers and upsells -- that is, to speak to a larger audience uncompensated, it will necessarily be more a sales pitch than open conversation. ("I can answer that question on a 2-day consulting contract." "I cover that in my low-priced video series.")

Or, the condition for them videotaping could be you get a copy, they can't offer it on the open net, and you have the right to use/sell the video elsewhere. (This might get gummed up in their legal process and thus be a de facto 'no deal', but it's another way to propose splitting up the gains from your talk.)

So while there's always a point you may have to withhold your full output, there could also be other zones of agreement. While a Bigco can be obliviously greedy in some dimensions, in other dimensions they don't mind throwing off value others capture.
Price - Virtual Medical Receptionist - Online Scheduler - Reminder
Prices and service Description： for 24/7 virtual medical receptionist ANGELA, online appointment scheduling, appointment reminder, medical answering service.
You can empirically determine exactly what's in an opaque set of anything (NSArray's various public access methods) and exactly what part of the area of a view is covered by a subview.

The facilities necessary to modify the hierarchy are defined.

The content of that hierarchy is undocumented and may change at any time. The behavior of modifying the opaque view hierarchy is undefined.

You can do this at run time for any UIView, even those which are part of so-called opaque types. Those methods are documented, and you can read about them above. I'm done trying to tell you that.

The contents are undocumented. You can not assume any behavior whatsoever if you modify the contents of the entirely undocumented view hierarchy.

Having been in the position of dealing with customers foolishly relying on internal implementation details, you honestly make me want to beat my head against the wall. It's one thing to make the mistake, it's another to proudly celebrate it.

I can't imagine how frustrating your iphone app development experience must be if you rule out experimentation of all types. How did you ever get past the code-signing step?

You still misunderstand. It's simple: you can not firmly rely upon undocumented, empirically-derived knowledge without a vendor documented invariant.

The contents of an opaque view hierarchy -- and its behavior if modified -- are entirely undocumented.

My capacity for civil dialog is exceeded, and I'll stop here.
ANGELA - 24/7 Doctor's Receptionist - Appointment Scheduler 
24/7 Virtual receptionist ANGELA handles appointments, emergency, and patient appointment reminder calls.
Better Django models
You mean compared to Chrome + Firebug Lite? http://getfirebug.com/lite.html
How to work with progress bars, part 1
Part 2: http://andrewtrumper.blogspot.com/2009/05/how-to-work-with-p...
Could a Dose of Ether Contain the Secret to Consciousness?
I like the concept. But it could have been explained with half the words. A third if he deigned to use bullet points.
This just in, all geeks show some signs of autism...
Only costs a few bucks to register a own domain and have a unlimited supply of throw away email addresses.

There is no prevention at all... it's not even making it hard.
Microsoft Office ;)
Sure. Why not? After all, Kissinger, Arafat and Gore have won the Nobel Peace prize. The prize does not mean anything, and it's awarded solely for political reasons. The "good" Nobel prizes go to physicists, chemists, biochemists and medical doctors.
I think scrubs get washed much more often than white coats. That makes them more hygienic.
A Burnt Out Programmer
The author has been answering questions here: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8ujgx/dear_prog...