skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Her profile picture is a woman coyly putting something vaguely phallic in her mouth. If it was posted to reddit the slobbering masses would be tripping over themselves to tip their fedoras in her general direction, so imagine what it would be like on YouTube.
The (JavaScript) Question I Bombed In An Interview With a Y Combinator Startup
Dear Google,

Thank you for all the free services you have delivered over the years. Please do not listen to all those complaining about stuff they get for free. As free as they were to sign up, they also have a choice to opt-out at any moment.

They blindly agreed to the Terms of Service which warned them, yet now complain as if they are entitled to anything.

Look at them and laugh
"...It's logically consistent for a CEO to desire to layoff dead wood and simultaneously expand the company with strong hires..."

"...A friend of mine, a recent grad was offered $135k base... and he's no stellar candidate either..."

???

I've been reserving judgement... but the more I hear... the more I wonder what exactly the plan is at Yahoo.
I think Google is choosing a particularly terrible point to start alienating users of YouTube. It seems like everywhere I go online these days, the YouTube hatred is universal. It's regarded as uncool, boring, obnoxious, and just generally yesterday's news. This is merely an observation, however a few years ago I rarely saw the kind of negative sentiment toward YouTube that is now very common.

If I were a betting person, I'd say that YouTube's days as the champ of their segment of the online video world is nearing an end. They'll straggle on with massive volume, courtesy of the barrier to entry that is the cost of streaming zillions of petabytes, but their product will be strongly disliked, and competitors will flourish. I believe users are desperate for a high quality alternative at this point.

I personally don't see that YouTube presents an overwhelming value proposition any longer, compared to the hassle that it's becoming. As it is now, I use a separate browser, in incognito mode, to view YouTube because they're scumbags about trying to force a connection.
Yeah, practically speaking, a remake of SCTP on top of UDP is what is needed if there's going to be any adoption.
Do you know how to start posts without a hyphen?
That still seems like a very awkward migration path. I'm not sympathetic to the trolls on YT, but some people need a "stuff i will leave behind" model where they don't end up outing themselves.
Actually Fly the M400X Skycar Into History
How Amazon Is Entirely Remaking Computers For The Cloud
I wish they were as innovative in their marketing practice as in apps. They seem to replicate whatever Facebook is doing to milk more users for more data. And something Facebook doesn't have to do - frantically coerce people to join Google+ on a massive scale.

I think it's a result of a lesson learned with Buzz. There was a lot of media hype about it, but very little push to the masses (compared to Google+). And, rightly so, it died off. Cause on its own merit, it kind of sucked and got no traction, despite the formidable Google force behind it.

With Google+ - the last hope of the Empire in social media battle - everything goes.
ps4 "blinking blue light of death": https://google.com/search?q=ps4+%22blinking+blue+light+of+de...
I understand her discomfort with harassers, but it seems to me that it's a trade between crude come-ons from people with real names attached and murder/rape threats from people without their real names attached.

I prefer a web where pseudonyms are allowed, but if anything, real names could reduce harassment.
The fact that he's not a "stellar candidate" says nothing about how he compares with the people laid off. Also, this is a sample size of 1 - any hiring process has false positives/negatives.
Google to Pay $8.5 Million in Buzz Privacy Class Action Settlement

http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2050437/Google-to-Pay-8...
> "We take this approach specifically because we don't do any affirmative action or bias our admissions process in favor of specific groups."

You're giving grants to women specifically because they are women. That's a bias. You're favoring a specific group. What about the men who haven't applied because they can't afford it and aren't women? You should be giving grants to underprivileged people regardless of sex. But that wouldn't get you or the companies sponsoring the grants nice press release, now would it?
I doubt Google is that dumb.

The estimate without quotes for "PS4 blue light of death" is 34M. For "Xbox One blue light of death" is 2.7M.

Although requesting the highest page (990) shows ~288 pages, so estimates are probably not that accurate.
I think it's time -- Google or elsewhere -- to realize that anytime you post anything on the Internet, it can and will be used against you by anyone who dislikes you.

So the strategy is to not make enemies or to not post things that you can imagine, even in the slightest, being used against you. Not sure which is easier...

Of course, it's not all or nothing. You should take the minor inconvenience of using multiple browsers, one for your public name and the one in which you want to, for some reason, gain a following through participation, a la one of the Wiggin kids
How is it inevitable, my launch xbox360 has been running nearly continuously since it hit my porch on launch day.
"Or if you truly want to be horrified, make an ad on Craigslist pretending to be a woman. You will get pictures of penises."

This might initially seem like a silly question, but as someone who wants to understand the perspectives of both sexes I wonder: Why can this behaviour generally be observed only in male to female exchanges but not the reverse?
IMDB (which is a 10-star system) has a 'secret algorithm' that fiddles with the raw data to come up with a computed score. It's been suggested that some of the factors involved include reduced weight for 1 and 10 star ratings (as well as the age of the user's account - votes from new accounts don't get as much weight, etc).
Do you have any price quotes re: execution vs life sentence to support your assertion that money are to be saved?
Netflix does a great job by showing hint text of "Hated it" for 1 star. It certainly helps calibrate people, rather than having individuals come up with their own meaning of what 1-5 means.
This is the route I'm going. I plan on waiting till sometime next year and let the war play out for a little bit. Maybe the steambox will be my choice? Too early to tell right now.
I'm not quite sure they're all about programming, huh http://i.imgur.com/xixID8k.png
Even given that data, he could still be stronger than the people laid off. Also keep in mind that there's some degree of luck involved in the interview process, and this plays an especially large role when you're looking at a sample size of 1 person.
I'm not Google's biggest fan, but I don't see how they're to blame for developers removing semantic meaning from their pages.
Google just did not get the point up to this date. They want to press us into their ad-network, but the way they do is just annoying. I am also planning now to drop my Google account, because it just does get to much. Every time, I have to log in, I am asked about telephone number or to "add some little extra information" -- I nearly got trapped recently. Just at the second look, I saw it was not "just some extra information" but they wanted me to sign up for G+. I will not and I will never. Because privacy is more worth than some candy they will give to you in return.

Facebook and Google don't care about your privacy, but you should, if you don't want to be abused in the new world of lost paradise.
Stack ranking makes managers irrelevant to employee performance: The lowest employee is going to get sacked, so there's no reason for the manager to work on that person's performance. The highest employee doesn't need a manager. The remaining middle can be dealt with next year.

Maybe stack ranking replaces low performers with high performers, but only if you make managers irrelevant to the hiring process, because we keep hearing that managers don't know how to hire.

All that's left is for the manager, once a year, turn in a ranking list.

I wonder if all of that could be automated. SRAAS. ;-)

Now, there remains a place for managers, because stack ranking is a "guideline" and there is always some flexibility. So it's each manager's job to negotiate the budget of rankings for their team. This is why I've commented before that a vital factor is having a boss who is liked by others, and who has the leadership ability to stand up for his or her team.
Kind of unrelated question: Do you guys see comments on YouTube videos or it is just me? I don't see anything.
I took the article to mean they were "reaching for Silicon Valley" in the sense that folks at the top (e.g., the Board of Regents or whomever is responsible for managing GT's endowment) were interested in establishing the kind of reputation for public/private collaboration that Stanford is known for, not necessarily that Stanford was constantly on the minds of Georgia Tech's students and faculty or that there was kind of "Stanford envy" at Georgia Tech.
- I really don't know but here are some links that can help you:

a. http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-make-hundreds-of-thous...

b. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061121202548AA...

c. http://www.bloggerheads.com/porn-report/

d. http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo/4460...

e. http://howtostartpornsite.blogspot.com/2013/01/starting-a-po...
Apart from all of the questions that arise from applying a single measure of "performance" to individual contributors (and not managers) and assuming that this index is distributed in a bell curve in small teams, stack ranking has an even bigger failing. It assumes that the success of a company is due to management carefully shaping the situation. I'm going to guess that really successful companies are successful because employees are empowered to do what they love, and management largely sees its role as playing enabling and protecting functions rather than a shaping function.

Mid- and upper-management are liable to imagine that they have a big hand a company's doing well, but my bet is that they have a much larger hand in a company's doing poorly. The best managers are often ones that step back.
> due to firewalls and routers refusing to route anything that's not TCP or UDP

If "The world is on fire because we're almost out of addresses" doesn't get residential ISP's to support another protocol for home users (IPv6), somehow I doubt "We can improve the performance of online games that work reasonably well right now" will convince them to support SCTP.
PS4 "Blue light of death" ~ 18k results.
I've been loyal to Google's products, across the board, for over a decade.

They push another inch forward in terms of trying to force me to cross-link products or use something I don't want to, and I'm going to abandon their entire product suite, permanently.

I'm just one consumer, but that's how I'm going to vote, with my feet heading out the door. I don't like being abused in exchange for my decade of loyalty. Fortunately it's really trivial to switch off of Google for about 95% of what I use them for.
The bandwidth issue is a small obstacle for a potential competitor (solvable by venture capital) relative to the issue of video copyrights and offensive content moderation.
- Yes, I do.
>I see he's excluding the 100 most popular addresses. Is there any justification for that?

Probably because most of the top 100 are things like SatoshiDICE.
We are having a ThemeForest Hackathon where we share a lot of details.
So what? Statistics is not about fitting data points on a curve... And arguably HR is even less about that!
8.5 million is just a rounding error for Google.
This is annoying indeed. I don't have a G+ account at all, and it seems that Youtube created one for me, though it has no real name in it.
Google is simply doing the noble thing. It is fucking-up so that it can pave the way for a better company to dominate. For a while. This is the way of Silicon Valley. Amirite Vic G.?
I've been using Linux for more than 10 or 15 years and I'm fairly sure Mandrake nailed most -if not all- of those things back in 2003. As did SuSE (things went downhill for SuSE desktops after Novell signed a deal with Microsoft which meant Novell went all purist about removing non-free and patent encumbered libraries from their repositories)

And I certainly wasn't recommending Ubuntu back in 2008. I'm sure some developers and sysadmins may have been, but I wasn't (but then by that point I'd been running Slackware and FreeBSD for a few years, so I definitely wasn't Canonicals target audience).
Ordinary people don't live in the kind of circumstances where
they might wander into a felony conviction

Ohh I think you should be shocked at the number of felonies a person could commit on the course of everyday life. Felony is not just used for serious crimes. Almost every state have what are referred to a "catch all" felonies that can be brought against just about any one at any time if you piss off the right person in power.

dont fool yourself into think the legal system is anything other than a tool for oppression and control
in the US, yeah.
I won't say the article is wrong exactly, but I barely heard Stanford uttered in my time at Georgia Tech. MIT was the competition and the role model. I graduated a few years before this incident happened, but I would be surprised if the entrepreneurial climate improved much.

Like Chris Klaus, I dropped out to start my first company, as did several others in my year. Unlike Chris Klaus, I returned to finish my degree, but entrepreneurial spirit was not high on the priority list at the school and I was now an outsider.

Doing research on a massive scale was always the goal at Tech, so I did what everyone else who wanted to start companies did: I moved elsewhere (Cambridge) after graduating.
I think anonymity on the internet is a great thing. It's a place where you can socialize and share ideas with strangers without having to give them your name/address/home phone #. You can even start honest, more controversial discussions and do some high-level reasoning that you couldn't necessarily achieve with close friends.

If Google won't allow that on their services anymore, I pray everyone leaves them & moves to services that understand this. The market giants think they can bully us into behaving the way they want us to rather than realizing that they are privileged by having our business. I would recommend giving business to alternative sites as much as possible to break internet monopolies that are setting the stage for these forceful policies.
Serious question: Can someone recommend a program or type of program to code for my example that would show I'm capable? I'm a self-taught beginner but I want to tackle something that would be more intermediate to demonstrate I have gumption.

Right now I'm coding an entire redo of my state's legislative site because I find it lacking in too many ways but there's not really any JS in there that I would say is impressive (plus that's how bad their site is).
So SCTP will be useful the day after IPv6 has wide adoption.

Well, shit.
What is the frequency with which these prompts to connect show up? I use youtube daily, G+ not at all and I've only seen them twice. These instances were at least a few months apart. In both cases, I opted out of connecting my profiles and nothing has happened since. Are some people getting these prompts more often? Why? Maybe someone on the G+ team can explain this.

without deleting my entire G+ account and profile

I don't use G+/FB but even if I did, I have a hard time understanding this mentality. I wouldn't think twice about deleting any of social media profiles and even in places like HN where it's not possible to delete profiles, I just throwaway old profiles and start from scratch. Maybe I'm just paranoid but the last thing I want are my random musings being psychoanalyzed by nutters on the internet.

And as far as Gmail goes, you should be backing it up offline so that you can take your data and leave any time you want. This literally takes only 3 minutes to setup if you already use Thunderbird.
Georgia Tech is meh for entrepreneurship.

-GT Grad
The easiest way to solve this is to get rid of your G+ profile.
Women tend not to have penises.
Have you done any start ups? Is 30k enough to start your own? And how would you invest in a ramen noodle start up? Where would you find those contacts?
Really? Charging $60 for Jump Point Search? I'm almost inclined to copy the API and implement it for free just out of spite.
> Perhaps they just have no one thinking about networked applications besides the Web at the moment. Sadly lack of forward thinking is something that bugs the Windows team a lot I feel.

If you found out about the wide range of networking protocols and services they provide in Windows, you wouldn't feel that way. For example, P2P. A few years ago, while working on P2P applications, we discovered Microsoft has a lot of technologies in that area. Things like Teredo (IPv6 transition and NAT traversal) and a complete P2P networking API -- which gives you encryption, self-organizing overlays and DHTs out of the box -- have been around since around 2001, and have been built into Windows since Vista. They also had lower level protocols for things like link-layer topology discovery and automated device (printers, etc) configuration.

Almost all proprietary stuff, of course - except Teredo, which has an RFC and an open source implementation - but quite interesting nonetheless. We talked to the team working on this, and they claimed it was even being used by some customers in 1000+ machine deployments.

For some reason, these things are not widely marketed. Maybe because it's a niche market. However, I wouldn't say they're not forward-thinking, at least when it comes to networking.
I use mine to create annotated recordings of lectures. It works quite well for that purpose. Clicking on my notes skips the recording directly to the relevant part of the lecture.
They don't care about abandonment because anyone can game A/B testing.

Users are easily persuaded. A majority of users will give in just so the damn thing shuts up. They probably use the metrics to hand out bonuses or engage in pointless contests leading to gamification.

It doesn't take a village to make a Picasso, and any attempts to try are going to result in failure. Google needs leadership.
Also, people are different in different situations. People are different on youtube than they are on tumblr than they are on pinterest than they are on twitter than they are with their family than they are at the DMV than they are at a night club than they are ....

People aren't a personality attached to a name they're who they want to be at any given time and personalities change.

This kind of forced identity is not only dangerous for at risk individuals but is plainly anti-social and anti-human-behavior.
I wasn't asking about how could technology help these poor people (I agree that it could possibly help, or at least holds that promise), I was asking how helping the court system build their software would help them.
Unfortunately, I don't see NATs going away even after IPv6 gets here.
I definitely agree on the copyrighted content problem.

The VC issue is interesting. It would probably cost... hundreds of millions of dollars in capital over a few years to compete with YouTube properly (requiring HD, long length video), given the time it will most likely take to get up to speed on revenues / build a functioning business model, and the speed at which adoption often happens these days with successful products (wake up tomorrow with 50 million users wanting to stream your brains out).

We live in the age of pervasive offensive Internet content. Reddit is half offensive content, and then there's Tumblr and Snapchat, which thrived partially due to 'offensive' content. I view that as a trivial problem.

Whatever replaces YouTube, will likely be built on the back of sensationalistic offensive content. Nothing sells like sex / sex appeal, and that will never change. Indeed, people get accustomed to it, and then it takes even more dramatic content to get that sensationalism buzz.
You cant. That's the problem. You automatically get that profile by having a gmail account. They're trying to force you to use that profile for YouTube as well. Google has these incredibly valuable products and that work great separately but they're trying to mash everything together.
Awhile ago, I was robbed at night while walking in what was presumably a well-surveilled area, in lower Manhattan. There was no CSI/"24" computer system here, the detective had to spend part of his day going over to the location and individually getting camera footage from the nearby businesses.

I know what you're thinking: "Well, that was just for a dumb robbery". But it was an unusual case and, anyway, if the police had a centralized repository to get camera footage, even after a significant delay, I think the detective would've gone there rather than hoof it over to the crime scene.

Another incident comes to mind: A woman was brutally beaten in a subway station and the incident was captured on film...within hours of the cops posting the footage on the Internet, commenters recognized the fraternity logo and the suspect was arrested almost immediately. The problem was that the cops waited almost a month to post the footage.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/investigators...

> "There are lots of different systems out there you have to make it compatible with our system, so there are some challenges in putting out these videos as quickly as possible," Kelly said.

So yeah, far from "real time" access
What is an example of a service* or product* that is served better with cryptocoins than with cash, bank transfers or credit cards? What are people spending bitcoins on and why?

That would be nice to know and definitely more informative than a graph of daily activity within the blockchain.

* preferably something mundane and totally within the boundaries of the law
Sorry I did not reply sooner, I to not read HN everyday.

The Red Cross is very good about covering their tracks... but they do very little to actually help people. Any money you donate today will never make it to people in need. Most of the "help" the red cross is/will be credited for is provided by the US Government via federal programs (FEMA, Local Aid, etc), military aid, Or Local VOLUNTEERS not from the Donations of Citizens.

Most of the money will be used to pay for more marketing for the Red Cross, and to pay their Executives High Dollar Salaries.

Here is a 20/20 Story
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123956

However, to be honest the Red Cross is VERY good about keeping their name out of papers. Paying just enough to people to make most complaints seem like "conspiracy theories"

If you want to waste your money, go head.. But Giving to the Red Cross will help people about as much you burning it in your fire place

And do not get me started on the Massive Scam that is their Blood Selling business, where you are legally prohibited from "selling" your blood so they take it for free, then flip it for a massive profit by selling it to the hospitals for those in "need", or in reality for cosmetic and elective non-emergency surgery which is where most of the blood supply is used.
So what is the next coup? Linking all the comments from the past that you wrote when you were thinking it was pseudonymous to your real name?

My only recommendation: Get out of such services as fast as possible.