skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I've applied to Hacker School twice and found them to be short, impersonal and sometimes even rude to me during the interview process. They asked questions that struck me as inviting me to participate in "dickwaving" rather than talking about the nuance of my work or the problems I've engaged with. Such as "what's the hardest thing you have ever done?"

I've never seriously thought about the work I've done on any continuum of what's hard and what's not, I think about my code in terms of the other people that have to work with it, and whether it addresses the problem. And for me personally, what I have learned from individual projects. Sure some things are more challenging than others, but what do you really learn from the answer to that question? It's also an intimidating starting point coming from someone putting themselves in a position of authority to decide whether you are "good enough" for their program. And surprising from a group of hackers who in their pitch to potential applicants emphasize that your experience isn't as important as your love of programming and attitude about learning. I'm usually eager to try out new things and look forward to new stuff to learn rather than dwelling on what my "conquests" are. It struck me as the engineer bro equivalent of "what's the hottest girl you've ever hooked up with?" Maybe the point isn't to do "the hardest thing" but to learn and to do cool stuff that serves the people who interact with your software?

Also one of their interviewers called my code "shaky" after pairing, which could be true, but it's not very constructive or specific is it? It could be that I got extremely unlucky because the things they write on their blog are very uplifitng and intelligent. And one of my friends did Hacker School and generally had positive things to say. But I really felt like I was treated terribly as an applicant, and the facilitators came off as having a high regard for themselves and engineering arrogance rather than being interested in helping people and being constructive.
Maybe you're blocking apis.google.com or plus.googleapis.com?

Even more unrelated: NoScript users who allow apis.google.com might want to add an Adblock Plus 'Ad Blocking Rule' ||apis.google.com/js/plusone.js to prevent spying via G+ buttons.
If you're a rockstar, why would you go to Yahoo when you could have real infrastructure to work with at Google or Facebook? You'd rather be job hunting in 12-18 months when Yahoo tries again to figure out what it wants to do?
The prompt used to show up everytime you log in. If you use multiple computers, an authenticator or multiple accounts, that is quite frequently.

Since YT comments are now G+ comments, I believe it now shows up every time you try to interact with anything, such as like/favourite/comment etc.

I turned my YT account into a G+ page when the option became available as a way to get rid of the prompts without using my real name on YT.
To clarify:

1) We judge male and female applicants on exactly the same scale. We in no way lower the bar for women or any other group. Nor do we give women or any other group a leg up when making admissions decisions.

2) We offer grants to women who need financial assistance. By offering these grants, we do bias the pool of applicants, because we (hopefully) increase the number of women who choose to apply.

3) We have put a tremendous amount of time, energy, thought, and effort over the past few years into making Hacker School free for everyone, and we continue to work very hard to continue making this possible. We effectively give all our students a $10-15k scholarship by not charging any tuition.

Our great crime appears to be the fact that we have not yet found a way to additionally give money to everyone who can't afford to come to Hacker School.
I think it is great when needed, but that don't mean it should be needed. Which reminds me of http://slashdot.org/submission/1778830/google-is-gagging-use... (noticed I mentioned the irony)
A bit of a bait-and-switch in that respect as well. I probably wouldn't have signed up for Gmail if I were making the choice today. But years ago, it was just an ad-supported email service, and seemed like a pretty reasonable choice. It was better than Yahoo Mail or Hotmail. When I signed up for it, there was absolutely no indication that it was a social network or going to become one, and in fact their rhetoric around it strongly suggested that it would not be (there was a lot of reassurance about how the only use of your data would be for the automated ad-targeting).

And as a webmail service, it's still pretty good. But I'm uncomfortable by all this stuff I've now been involuntarily opted-in to as a result of opening a Gmail account. And as these things go, having accumulated several years of use of it, it's now going to be some hassle to move away from it.
You can find many open-source projects that are looking for contributions on OpenHatch, and more specifically Python ones here: http://openhatch.org/search/?q=&language=Python
Emacs and Tmux (2012)
I had the same question. From "Table 1" of the linked article, they have 72m X 72m pixels, and they are trying to detect a 3m X 3m fire (burning at 1100K) within that pixel.

To bring up a related matter, it seems like they are not proposing to do the detection on-board (see section 2.2.2, where they talk about a database of past images). If they are not, they have to transfer all the data to ground. The data rate can be very demanding (and the high orbit makes it more so). Accurate pointing will be another issue (high orbit, small pixels). They have a longer way to go than the press release indicates.

Notwithstanding all this griping, it's an interesting concept.
I am sure you were joking, but to clarify and expand: Why do men seek contact with the opposite sex more frequently than women? Why do they tend to do so in a way that seems to bother the woman in question? Why are women not doing the same to men?
Why do you say that? I had IPv6 native with Comcast and there was no NAT.
Reform in China : The party's new blueprint
I was wondering if the explicit naming of the weapons was supposed to refer to that exact scene in the Kubrick movie. Which, given it was one of the triggers of the slave rebellion make the original email seem possibly quite weird.
I _think_ this has happened because I have seen comments on Youtube with real name (or at least appearing to be real names) that I can't believe someone would leave with their real names attached to it. But still speculation on my part
Deleting my Google+ profile
There was an open source HTML 5 A* with Jump Point Search and others. Forgot the url for now, but I am sure others have seen it.

Though this still looks nice.
I just liked and commented and nothing happened. I even left the 'post on G+' checkbox enabled and it still doesn't show up on my G+ profile. I've setup youtube to use a pseudonym, btw.
Here on the East coast we have LaserShip, which sounds like pretty much the same deal. They once delivered my package to a city 30 miles away to a family with a completely different name. Amazon loves to use them here too. It's a bit distressing that they don't exercise better oversight over their shippers, given how central that is to their business model.
> several studies performed in the last years indicate that the bell-curve ranking system has a number of flaws.

Related studies have also recently confirmed that water is wet, the Pope is Catholic, and what the fuck is wrong with you people.
And now that I checked again, I get them. This is weird... I use AdBlock Plus, maybe it updated its filters?

Thanks anyway!
Summary: In Python, functions are objects.

Summary of part 2: Function objects have a code attribute.
False. You can delete just your G+ profile here: https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1044503?hl=en
>I'm sure he would have left them in if the chart looked right.

Really? You're sure? Actually, the top 100 addresses would almost certainly have supported his thesis even more, since they include high-transaction rate addresses from the exchanges, and the betting companies.
I'm not sure "it may wreck all our shit, but at least it wrecks our shit quickly" is a point in favor. Rather the opposite, really.
The problem is that anonymity leading to great conversation is disproved by reality.

This move, though short sighted and ill advised, is precisely to combat the cluster fuck that is YouTube comments powered by anonymity.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but one look at the quality of anonymous unmodderated comments calls for one.
It was revolutionary better. Non-techie friends were saying to me out of the blue "have you tried Google?"

But that was, you know, over 15 years ago.
-
a. Have I done any startups? ~> Presently, Im working on one.

b. Is 30k enough to start your own? ~> $30,000 is more than enough, because presently Im more like a college student paying $400/month for rent. Add $100 for food and $30-$50 for internet and $30,000 can last me for a long time. It can last me until someone buys my startup for a good price.

c. How would I invest in a ramen noodle startup? Where would you find those contacts? ~> Now I've never had $30,000 but the best place so far for me will be AngelList ~> https://angel.co/ and sites similar to it. Doing a HNSearch can also get you in contact with people who have posted their apps/startups here. I'll email them and see if they are interested in me investing in them.
We're not taking about Facebook.

And Facebook does same thing doesn't justify anything. It just means they're same. Also Facebook has a lot better configurable personal policy.

Anyway, that's awesome finally we have two options. If we can make them compete, we will get the service in cheaper price - with less personal information. Currently Facebook looks obvious winner in this field, because users don't even realize they're offering stuffs to Facebook, and Google has big resist.
The article title appears to be a clear attempt to bait people into reading by making some connection to silicon valley.

Mention of Silicon Valley comes way down in the article and the point they almost seem to be making is how whatever was done wrong wouldn't have been a problem if GT was more like Stanford.

In any case try and think of what the title of the article would be if not the one listed? "Academic at Georgia Tech's house raided?"
The problem remains that we have a prison system that serves to punish, not rehabilitate.

If you take a defective part & try to fix its deficiencies, it has a better chance of fitting back into the machine it was intended for.

If you toss it into a box full of other rusty parts and let it sit neglected for several years, it is more likely to come out rusty & more defective rather than useful. If we were discussing machine parts, no one would ever argue otherwise.

If your entire policy is based around putting that part back in the box over and over, then blaming the part for being bad & eventually throwing it away, then you're not being honest about trying to fix the part.

A country that is as full of smart people as the US is, that has accomplished as many things as that country has done, and that cannot come up with a system better than what it has, cannot be honestly trying to "fix its parts".

I say it is that way because people are not interested in fixing the parts; that they simply want to throw them away. They want punishment, not improvement.
One of the great strengths of Lisp is in how much support it gives the developer in dealing with BBoM architecture. It helps make the ball smaller (maybe not fewer lines or characters--Lisp identifiers are often long--but fewer symbols) and easier to change.

The reality of most projects is that they are a rapid iteration of a prototype patched to the umpteenth degree. When we get off our high horse of architectural grandiosity we can start looking for tools that support how things actually happen.

Of course Lisp has issues, but what matters the most (to me) is what makes the best mud balls in the end.
> I don't want to make websites for Google I want to make them for the users

Well,most of your users come to your website through Google, which is just another website.

I dont see why Google should adapt its stack to yours, since Google is actually the one who brings you users. It doesnt have to do anything for you, especially when you abuse javascript and dont provide a bot-readable fallback to indexable pages.

You cant have it both ways.Make readable html documents like you are supposed to and you'll be fine. Make a dynamic scripted mess and you'll lose some potential custormers because of bad ranking. You cant expect Google to do your job for you.
YEAH! Because developers shouldn't get paid for their work!
If the failure rate was as high as the Amazon reviews suggest it seems like there would be more news about this even from the mainstream non-tech media by now. Lots of people get pretty fanatical about video game brands so I personally wouldn't trust any of the Amazon reviews good or bad. Remember Amazon allows anyone to write a review of any product -- purchased or not.
Maybe she, like many of us, simply did not see a point to "stopping terrorism" through airport security checkpoints. All they achieve is inconveniencing passengers and creating extremely attractive targets by concentrating large numbers of civilians.
For me that whole scene was topped off by the music which was by God Speed You Black Emperor! if you haven't listened to these guys check them out.
New Medical Device Treats Epilepsy With A Well-Timed Zap
Hmm, how about if you build some kind of API to the legislative site's data somehow? Bills coming up, etc.? Or whatever data is there. Then a widget could display the data on other sites. Just a (very conventional) thought.
I'm curious about your footnote. Toothpaste falls under the liquid/gel ban, so anything over 3oz is not permitted. Absurd, but not a surprise.
Ceylon (Programming language)
Youtube's strength has never been as a portal, but as infrastructure. They tried feeding video bloggers with video responses (though that feature is going away), there are channels, which were always terrible to navigate, and there is of course the cesspool of comments. Youtube grew huge because it was easy to embed stuff and link to and upload with.

So what's the high barrier to entry that you're talking about? Vimeo has its creative community and Wistia has great embedding tools, but what other sort of niches do you see popping up that steal power users away from Youtube? What sort of business plans even make sense without Google's infrastructure and deep pockets?
The colors are not entirely accurate, but the fact that it's bluer near the sun and redder farther away is accurate- the image just exaggerates it.

The reason is that red dust particles in Mars's atmosphere scatter red light just like gas molecules in Earth's atmosphere scatter blue light; there isn't enough atmosphere on Mars for the blue-scattering effect to be significant, so red scattering off of dust particles dominates. That means that when you look near the sun, you see the blue part of the spectrum shining through while the red parts have been scattered off-axis, while in the parts of the sky away from the sun you see the off-axis scattered red.
Has the quality of the comments gone up? No. Now, they are giving people who don't mind bullying people under their own name access to people that dare to call them out on their shitty behavior.

Edit: is the quality of the comments on sites like 9gag or those others that use the facebook comment system better than that of youtube that they should've felt inspired to make this move? Is it less racist,misogynistic or less of any kind of hate towards anyone?
Here's a comparable lib that is MIT licensed:

https://github.com/qiao/PathFinding.js

Demo page here: http://qiao.github.io/PathFinding.js/visual/
Maybe you get a chance to build real infrastructure at Yahoo, instead of having to be a small cog in one that's already built-out.
I thought you don't have knowledge about PS3 reliability?

How can you say that every Playstation generation has been "plagued with issues"? You're ignoring their most recent efforts.
> That's much more persuasive, to a rational thinking person, than a few examples of people who fell into the edge cases of the system.

The problem is not convincing rational thinking people. Are there really some nontrivial group of informed rational people without an ownership stake in a private prison company who genuinely believe that three strikes laws are good policy?

The problem is not the rational thinking people at all. The problem is politics and rational ignorance. It's the swarms of busy people who don't have the time or the education to understand the statistics, who consequently go back and vote for the people who enacted these laws.

I get where you're coming from. The world would be a better place if all policy decisions were based on evidence and reasoning rather than emotion. But when you have the prison lobby heaping the corpses of teenage girls on their side of the scale, you need to put something visceral on the other side to shock complacent people into realizing that something is very wrong here.

Politics is a popularity contest. It's important that the side with the best argument wins, but how do you get that to happen when people have limited time and limited resources and the winner is decided by voting rather than correctness?
"shantytowns solve the habitation problem of many people more adequately than if the same people had to wait under the bridge for the market to provide beautifully architected villas at affordable prices."

This must be one of the most braindead sentences I have read in a long time. I dare you to count all the fallacies involved.
It's actually much easier than manual stitching.

Take 3+ shots on a tripod then take the median value of each pixel. Anything that is moving (pedestrians, cars) will vanish.

Example: http://www.creativetechs.com/iq/photoshop_cs3s_automatic_peo...
Faking Remote Services with Rack::Test
Thanks Jeremy. You're right and the point is obvious in hindsight.

I think the end of your comment should be shared with others; for those that are eager to try, but not fully aware of the consequences of client-side rendered apps.

I'd like to include your statement somewhere in the post to further emphasize the point; I hope that's okay. Thanks!
Personally I think the problem is the concept of comments in the first place. You see, way back in the day, if you wanted to respond to a post or whatever on the web you went to your own website and posted a response and linked to the source you were responding to. Comments sections on websites are data islands; comments and conversations held captive in walled gardens. Youtube is the biggest irony of all as it has the concept of video responses, yet they prefer you to respond in tiny teeny little comment boxes. I say scrap the comments section and prove a big red "record a video response" button next to each video.

Of course I appreciate the irony of my comment about comments appearing on a site with comments, but I've always regarded sites like hacker news and slashdot as "forums where the post is a link to an article".

I'd much prefer it if everyone has a wordpress site or equivalent and posted their opinions on that. At least the web would be more webby and you wouldn't have greedy centralised sites gobbling up content and demanding control of the conversation.
You're missing 50% of the picture here. Anonymous, unmoderated discussion in an uneducated crowd is the worst of both worlds. Obviously.

But anonymous, moderated discussion in a forum of disciplined and/or informed, educated users is better than the same discussion in a forum where all the identities of the participants are known, precisely for the reasons fat0wl outlined. You can look to any of the heavily moderated reddit communities for a great demonstration of this (AskScience, /r/sex, /r/fitness etc). Even cherry-picking the good parts of 4chan will make it blatantly obvious that anonymity, in a controlled setting, is a very good thing for the level of discourse.

The comment quality on many of these forums far surpass anything that you will see on politically correct Facebook, which is the opposite end of the spectrum: Most people, apart from a few loudmouths, will be exceedingly polite and well-behaved when all their friends are watching. And this leads to poor debate and boring discussion.

Even on Hacker News, I would refuse to contribute if I had to post with my full name. There are many reasons for this, but the biggest is simply that I do not wish future employers to be a Google search away from a detailed record of all my personal, political and professional opinions. This is simply a reflection on the fact that the reality of public discourse has changed in the world of search engines. Anonymity (pseudonymity) and moderation is the only way to resolve this problem.

In short, Google has the complete wrong idea. Which is actually quite shocking; Google should know better than anyone the realities of public discourse on the Internet.
Google Bank satire video (Belgium)
If I found $1 on the ground right now, I'd leave it for the next person to pick up.

If I found $10 on the ground right now, I'd use it to buy next week's coffee.

If I found $100 on the ground right now, I'd use it to buy some Christmas presents and not have to hit my bank account quite as hard for Christmas.

If I found $1000 on the ground right now, I'd report it to the police. Then if it ended up coming back to me I'd probably put it towards rent for a month, and watch my bank account grow a little more cushion.

If someone gave me $10,000 today, I'd pay off a couple student loans, and feel a lot more comfortable financially each month.

If someone gave me $100,000 today, I'd pay off all my student loans and finally be able to enjoy my actual income level. I'd stop renting and find a home that my family could make our own.

If someone gave me $1,000,000 today, I'd do a few things. I'd pay off my student loans. I'd rent the house I'm in until I found the house I actually want for the rest of my life. The house would have some modest guest quarters, probably in the form of a mother-in-law apartment. I'd buy a truck and a boat, and invite friends and people I admire to come visit for 2-4 week blocks. I'd keep teaching because it keeps me young and because I've learned how to teach pretty well at this point, but I would reduce my hours. I'd travel with my family, to Iceland and Patagonia, and a few other places.

If someone gave me $10,000,000 today, I'd do everything I would with a million, and try to give most of the rest away, buying similar freedoms for a few people I've looked up to all my life. I'd consider them genius grants for people who have given freely of their time and their experience, with little financial gain.

With a little more freedom, I'd teach really well, help other people figure out how to teach well and hopefully revolutionize public education. I'd develop some really important open source software projects.

But I live quite comfortably in southeast Alaska, where every time I drive to work I look up at the mountains and give a little thanks for living where I do. So while I'd make good use of any money sent my way, I'm working on all these things little by little, and thoroughly enjoying the journey as it is playing out.