skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Also, I don't think a quick release will work for this. The motor needs to push against the bike in order to move the wheel relative to the bike. A quick release will slip.

Look more closely at your bicycle. The axle doesn't turn in the dropout. Rather, the hub shell turns around the axle. That's why the bearings are mounted in the shell rather than in the dropouts.

Actually I think their pill-shaped peg that slides into the dropout but won't turn within it is kind of brilliant. A very simple solution, and there is no reason it couldn't accommodate a quick release skewer.

I agree that bicycle weight is a fairly minor consideration for commuting in moderately hilly areas; I've ridden a longtail that's close to 50 lbs. for years. Maybe I don't notice the weight because I am a fat bastard.
So? That's what happens to street art. If he wanted them to be permanent, he would have put them in a museum or something.
Tesla Is The New Bubble Stock
This is just a gut reaction, but this service does not go well with my stomach. I live 4k miles away from my parents and 9k miles away from my grandparents. I see my parents only once or twice a year. But it's a treat everytime I do.

If I were to use this service, I would have to think that my parents think they are not important enough for me too keep up regularly with. Like I'm so mad busy that I can't skype them or email with them, so I pay someone $50 to do it on behalf of me. And I'll have a database of stories stored in the cloud, instead of you know, memories in my brain.

Maybe disregard this comment, but this seems like the technical, MVP, software-eating, wrong solution to a very emotional and personal problem. How much more of human contact and relationships do we want to outsource to technology?

Related: http://vimeo.com/70534716
The only system I know of that truly tracks changesets rather than revisions is Darcs.

But from a more practical standpoint, tracking changesets rather than just revisions means recording ancestry ("commits also have other commits objects listed as their parent commits") such that you can freely create merge revisions and the system will Do The Right Thing with minimal hand-holding.

The internal repository format isn't really relevant here, it's about the way of thinking that the system is designed to support.
Add Some Entropy and Randomness to Your JVM
> When some coder changes the function, it is very easy to forget to update the comments

It isn't.

All public APIs should have documentation, even if you believe it's obvious what they do. This documentation never goes out of date because once you release your API it tells you what you cannot change. If you changed the code so that your documentation is now wrong - this code change is a bug and you should fix it. Because there's other code in the wild that relies on the behavior that you promised.

Of course in practice you do have to change that behavior every once in a while. But this should be a big deal (that usually includes bumping up version numbers, mentioning it in release notes, etc). If you're changing it so often that updating the damn comment is an issue you either document implementation details that don't belong in API documentation or your API is unstable crap and nobody should be using it.

PS. Complaining that API documentation gets out of sync with the code is like complaining that unit tests break when you change the code. Duh - that's what they are there for!
You can always use your own feature branch on the server. The only difference is online/offline access to it. Otherwise - do whatever you want - there are a lot of projects doing private branches (just by namespacing them by prefix) where people experiment.
The October 12, 2013 one is Cooper Union student activism to make it look like Peter Cooper. They added a confessor painting of the Cooper Union president in the next "window"

http://studentactivism.net/2013/10/13/new-banksy-street-art-...
I don't know if this counts but: http://adarkroom.doublespeakgames.com/
You're absolutely right. And I didn't follow up at the time because I was so thankful to get him as a guest on my cast in the first place.

For what it's worth -- I followed up yesterday with Bill by email and he said the following:

"Our political problems are more serious than most people are willing to admit. You look back at history, at nations that are careening into civil war--that is, at the US in 1850, at Kosovo in 1996, at England in 1642, at Rome in 60 BC or 90 BC--and you ALWAYS find that people don't take seriously the POSSIBILITY that they could be creating the conditions of a civil war, until something happens that they didn't expect, and . ..BOOM. . .all of a sudden it is too late to stop it. So what I am trying to say to the country, as best I am able to from my relatively small podium, is "take seriously the damage that you MAY be doing." You don't see a civil war coming. . .well, nobody ever sees a Civil War coming; that's why they happen. Nobody sees it until it is too late."
> "Average earnings in the valley grew by nearly 40 percent between 1997 and 2000"

Taking wage data from the massive tech bubble is some serious cherry picking.

Earlier in the same paragraph:

> "in 2005 the [San Jose] metro area approved permits for only 5,700 new units"

Again, this also cherry picking, as the area was just coming out of one of its biggest busts-- the aftermath of the tech bubble (the number of tech jobs is still not as high as it was in 2000). Although one would never know it from reading the piece.
BSD Conference and vBSDcon 2013 (Dulles, VA; Oct 25-27)
Why didn't the author didn't just suggest mandatory voting? It seems like he was building up to it but never got there. Not like it's politically feasible to implement, but it appears to be a solution to wash out ideological extremes all the same.
You are assuming that HFT profits come at the expense of investors. In fact, they were taken from insiders.

I'm old enough to remember trading on US stock exchanges in the mid 1990s when prices where quoted in 1/8s and 1/16s and NYSE specialists were the only ones with visibility into order book. Think about it: you as an investor had no idea of the depth of the order book, but the specialist who took the other side of the trade from you had it in front of him. The specialists were minting money. They would lose money maybe one day per quarter, and their ROEs were ludicrous.

HFT and ECN trading killed them. Labranche, Van der Moolen, Susquehanna, Spear Leeds, all gone. Goldman Sachs bought Spear Leeds for $6 billion in 2000 (it is now no more); Labranche specialist business fetched only $25m when it was sold to Barclays in 2010. Van der Moolen went bankrupt in 2010.

Investment bank trading desks, true champions of customer front-running, are shrinking fast. Cash equity trading has become so tough for the banks that they are starting to think of it as a cost center, a loss leader to promote their equity underwriting business.

These were multi-billion dollar businesses, with tens of thousands of middlemen living high on the hog from the spreads and front-running. They're all (mostly) gone. Good riddance.

If you want to relive the old days of trading before HFT, go execute a large trade on Karachi Stock Exchange. Put the order in and watch in amazement.

I would like to see the data showing total revenues of specialists, market makers, bank trading desks, brokerages, and HFT traders, over time. I would bet they have been going down for two decades. This is undeniably a good thing for investors.
ClearAnalytics
And then his second comment was, "The essential fact about civil wars is that they happen less than once in a lifetime, and, because they happen less than once in a lifetime, the events leading into the civil war are not a part of anyone's experience. Our perception of the arc of history is like our perception of the world: it APPEARS to be flat, because it is bending so slowly that we can't see the curve. We are bending very slowly toward dysfunction leading to chaos, AS EVERY OTHER COUNTRY PERIODICALLY DOES, but because the curve is so gradual, we think that the world is flat, that the conflicts of today are merely repetitions of the conflicts of years past."
Celebrity get's pushed down Lol
I'm in the market for this type of product but I'm not going to sit through the video. I need something I can read and look at in detail at my own pace and without the sound right now. The chances of me remembering groove exists the next time I do have time to sit through a video are pretty slim.

edit: Sat through the video and it's just walking through forwarding an email from gmail for the setup. Not even what I was looking for from a video. The "what you get" tab has more info but still not enough for me to waste time on a free trial. There is also an overlay on the video that show steps and prevent you from using the video controls which was super annoying.
Thankfully Prof. Waldo from my alma mater set things straight. "Naturally, he listened in. Naturally, he was horrified."
Ah, I should have made it clear. Yes, I agree with your line of thought. :) I think we do have a problem. I should have stated that above, hehe.
I wonder what the OP's previous experience with psychedelics is, and if it would have any effect on this sort of experiment.
ok then: "A paintbrush in hand doesn't make you Monet"
What would be nice is some kind of simple Git that consolidates some of the multiple command sets that I have to use to do things that are just one command with SVN.

Also I miss the deterministic nature of SVN Revert, when I run that in SVN it really makes my working directory exactly as it was that morning before I started typing. With Git, well with EGit this isn't too hard, Team | Reset | Hard | References | ORIG_HEAD. It works for me.
Virtually all trading volume today consists of buying and selling old securities -- essentially, legal claims on existing assets. The sale of new securities issued to finance the creation of new products and services -- for example, a company selling new shares via an IPO -- represents only a minuscule portion of total trading volume.

--

Leaving aside for a moment the question of the value of HFT, this is a skewed view of the world of finance. The equities markets may be the most visible to the public (quoted on the news, associated most directly with companies and products we all know, etc), but it's just one market.

In fact, the size of global bond markets is almost double that of equities [1] and is a huge source of funding for companies (and governments), and has more frequent new issues for the same entity than in equities. Similarly futures markets are hugely active and important as both a source of price discovery for commodities and as a way for businesses small and large to hedge risk.

I mention all this not to pick on you in particular, but because it seems in the wake of the financial crises of the past few years, this "finance is bad" mentality seems to be pervasive. There are absolutely problems, but I think it's important not to lose sight of the fact that much of what financial markets do is hugely important to modern businesses and governments.

[1] http://finance.zacks.com/bond-market-size-vs-stock-market-si...
If you have git style branching available, you can commit half-finished ideas and save ALL your backup versions. Almost all my directories are littered with files called sourcefile.v1 sourcefile.v2 sourcefile.old etc. etc. With git if your current version hits a dead-end, you can easily switch back to an earlier branch before you went off the deep end.

At least, that's how I code. I generally just jam code in down different paths, often refactoring whatever I'm doing when a new understanding of something comes along, but often this results in another incorrect branch and I need to back up to 'semi-working' code.
Yeah, I had to switch to Vmware player due to crackling noise, VirtualBox devs commented somewhere that it's all very specific to hardware and not in their "main focus", so they don't seem to be very interested fixing it.
I don't know. I see that currently due to the recession. My siblings and I have been supporting our parents in some form or fashion for years (and they aren't even close to retirement).
Couldn't this just be safeguarding against more EU court cases re: monopoly/competition/etc when bundling software that has third party competitors?
BlackBerry begins selling SIM-unlocked smartphones online
EME is requiring that we close off parts of the HTML5 spec to licensing restrictions to where they won't be subject to public access.

As far as I'm concerned, i'd be more contempt with Flash or Silverlight over not having full access to the HTML5 spec.
That comment doesn't seem well informed given the casual way that it references the strychnine myth, nevertheless it's true that there is uncertainty about the dose.
How to be a Travel Hacker
This was really interesting as an economic look at migration. I moved from LA to Austin because I couldn't stand the city and have loved it here, but one of the things I've loved most is starting from scratch and being forced into meeting new people and doing new things. I've loved it so much that I can't see myself staying in one place for too long until I am ready to have a family.
If you feel like going "neo-retro", try some modern text adventures / interactive fiction http://www.ifwiki.org/index.php/Recommended_games
Overall you're right, this is what irritates me about almost any PHP thread as well. Almost no HNer would go into, say, a C++ thread, spit on it and advertise Python. But yet the same thing is happening regularly with PHP. Then again, I was pleasantly surprised we don't have that in this thread (yet).

However, I don't think this is a worthwhile URL to point to on the grounds of near-irrelevance. There are no major new features being released here.
you are right. vs wizards were mostly limited to visual basic. now vs is vb.
I'm upvoting this, and I hate to be cranky asshole guy, but something's been buggin' me and I'm not sure how or where to provide this feedback.

Gwern's articles are, well, deep. There's usually huge wall of text with lots of allusions and footnotes. Looks like a term paper somebody would write for a college course, (only extremely well done, btw)

My problem is that I'm finding it difficult to actually consume the articles. Sure, if I had an extra hour everyday to lounge around studying the intricate details of his self-experiment with LSD, such things might interest me. But the sheer volume and technical facade of the piece works against it. At best it engages my natural inclination to nit-pick. At worst it's just boring. In either case, I'm not left with a greater understanding. Having said that, if it's something I already agree with, it does make me feel like gee, I'm really smart for feeling this way. Here's this well-researched article that agrees with me!

I freely admit to being an outlier, so take my feedback for what it's worth. I am interested, however, that my feelings validate what newspaper editors found out centuries ago: state your conclusion in the lead, then supporting evidence. Write in a pyramid fashion. That way people can review the point at their leisure, then dive down if they feel it's worthwhile. Articles for the general public should not read like mystery novels. Say what you want to say, punch them in the nose. Then make your case and impress them with how smart you are.

Since I'm playing grumpy old guy already, I'll also note that these essays are getting upvoted way quicker than it's possible to actually read the things. I'm not implying a voting ring, more like a bandwagon effect. (Same result, but without all the sinister implications)
Well, maybe you are mixing it with Google's Traceur-compiler?

https://github.com/google/traceur-compiler
Mercurial storing deltas is just an optimization (sometimes it stores full snapshots): all manifests [1] refer to full file content, not deltas.

Let's put it this way: the key feature of DVCSes is that they store explicit relationships between a particular commit and its parents. This makes it trivial to reconstruct actual changesets as per my definition, which in turn makes merge machinery much more reliable.

[1]: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/Manifest
At its best, documentation (or a subset thereof) can and does serve as a cross-reference -- like a cross-reference in an important calculation. If the two results don't correspond, you know you have a problem. (Even if you have to explore both paths to learn what the problem really is and where it lies.)

Something to consider, the next time you find yourself inclined to complain about documentation. Is it the documentation, or the fact that it's not useful documentation?
99 Pages to Linux Free eBook
Ever wanted to learn Linux but couldn't find an easy way? Here's the 99 Pages that will get you there. Best part: It's absolutely FREE, No Signup, No Catch!
Rubbish. TypeScript is more of a way for Microsoft to develop large scale JavaScript apps productively, hence its rather quick adoption internally. Channel 9 has quite a lot of information about who is using it.

It does help Visual Studio and other tooling, but to say it is only "to sell Visual Studio, nothing more" is ridiculous.
Documentation does not exist for your own benefit. It exists to help other people on the team, or the programmer that inherits your code, quickly understand your code. The key word here is quickly. Yes, a programmer can trace code & figure it out. On a large chunk of code, however, that is exceedingly inefficient. Whether or not documentation is obvious to the person that wrote it is a very poor test for the documentation's utility.

I used to hold a similar opinion -- "Document the non-obvious". The problem is that in a project of sufficient size, almost everything can slide towards non-obvious. Is price the base price, or unit price * quantity? Is the method name cancel_subscription_and_notify_customer really effective? Of course, I could use cancel_subscription, but then I'm not telling programmers about the email that goes out, or cancel_subscription_and_notify, but who am I notifying? The marketing department? Generally I find really descriptive method names to get unwieldy very fast. Further, if you say document the non-obvious, the tendency is towards zero documentation.

The value statement depends on how fast your team grows or changes, and the expected lifetime of the project.

If you are working on a project alone, and that will never change (e.g. it isn't something a business relies on), then you probably do not need documentation. This is also true if you are bringing on a dev a year, and the team size will always remain relatively small. Similarly, if the project is relatively short-lived (like a game), then dropping documentation could be a good idea. Maybe, I'd at least concede there are merits to doing so. Documentation isn't free, of course.

On the other hand, if you are working at a company that's trying to rapidly grow, needs to bring on devs quickly, or has developers moving from one project to another frequently, then I'd say documentation is very important. You are going to save your team a huge amount of time by taking a little time upfront to explain what you are doing, why, and the consequences of each method. Even simple methods deserve documentation for consistency sake.

If your documentation rots, then you handle it the same way as test rot. Make sure the team knows that docs are necessary, they need to spend the time on it, and if that means more time for features, so be it. I can say from experience that writing documentation after the fact is pretty gnarly.
PCI Compliance - The Good, The Bad, and The Insecure
People and Pine Cones: URX’s Y Combinator Story
What if Microsoft never made a Silverlight Player for Linux? Oh, right. What if all future "Hollywood" content required a new Flash Player Player plug-in version (say, with an update to the DRM bits?)

Are leading members of the Linux community really betting on Adobe and Microsoft support for the next decade? No? Then what's your plan?
Thank you for saying that, I sometimes feel like I'm taking crazy pills when I hear some of the inane arguments against thorough documentation.

I was hoping this was going to be about the real "documentation fallacy:" 'Documentation tends to be of low quality, therefore it is best to avoid writing much documentation.' One common instantiation of this is "thorough documentation is bad because it will inevitably fall behind the code and be inaccurate."

People fall into the trap of assuming there is something inevitable about bad docs. Yet they never assume there is anything inevitable about bad code, even though most of the code in the world is, objectively, complete shit!
I've had a quick read, and I think this is a pretty comprehensive post and I suspect it'll be useful in the future. Especially inclusion of "a bunch of other posts to read on various blogs in a spreadsheet" - that's awesome.

Another thing that's awesome: "There's no magic bullet".

Thanks for a good read.
Docker is eating the world! It seems you just mentioned two big things? :)
The Secret to Making Board Meetings Suck Less
Dear god this has been fixed? Upgrading right away.
Every time, these releases get later and later!
If we didn't protect the border between North and South Korea with several tens of thousands of troops each year for the past 6 decades; there are many popular brands of electronics and cars that would probably not exist today.
Though he may not mean it this way, he has a point about federal power causing this inability to compromise. As a voter in Kentucky, if you get fed up with Kentucky politics, you can move to Oregon or Tennessee.

But when all laws are federal, the stakes are higher for everyone, so drastic measures will be taken.
> In the US, we don't vote for parties, we vote for individual people.

Proportional representation doesn't have involve voting for parties (party list proportional is one mechanism for achieving proportionality; another method for acheiving proportionality is using voting systems like Single Transferrable Vote in multimember districts -- the latter method is just as candidate-centered as the FPTP-in-single-member-districts system used in the United States, yet provides proportional results [the degree or proportionality varies with the size of the districts.])

While its less proportional, in partisan terms, than party-list proportional (assuming usual sizes of legislatures and manageable numbers of seats per district for STV), it counterbalances that by being more sensitive to general election voter concerns in selection between candidates of the same party.

> The FPTP system we have is a reflection of the framers' desire to avoid parties.

No, its not. The framers were familiar with FPTP, and familiar with the way that parties operated under it. It wasn't a new idea that they were trying out expecting that it would avoid the formation of parties.

It's inaccurate to even say that "the framers" had a coherent desire to avoid parties -- Washington certainly did, and this certainly got more urgent for him as the First Party System took hold during is term as President; Hamilton may have initially opposed parties in the traditional democratic sense since he was more inclined to a life-term aristocracy (remember that he wanted both Presidents and Senators to serve "in good behavior" -- that is, for life subject to impeachment -- the way that in the Constitution-as-it-ended-up federal judges do), but he seems to have readily accepted political parties as the second-best choice; Jefferson clearly saw parties as an inherent part of democracy, and the absence of parties as a feature of despotism, and actually seemed to see a two party system divided on a particular axis -- which he referred to as Whig v. Tory -- as fundamental and inherent in the nature of mankind, though he also was clearly opposed to tribal adherence to parties.
The only decent look cross-platform app I found is Transmission (http://www.transmissionbt.com)
I have a suspicion Banksy is the one behind the vandalism too. The vandalism has been so consistent, and it would be in line with his MO.