skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This just happened at work like 2 weeks ago. Someone checked in a large (4g) binary file into SVN repo and it crashed the whole system. Everyone at the company was blocked for half a day before they got it fixed (temporarily to unblock everyone). But it took another 2 days and a lot of heated debates between the release manager and devops before everything went back to normal. There were talks about moving to git before the incident, but this really pushed management to finally pull the trigger.
2 lessons here: 1. SVN is bad at large binary files; 2) centralized source control's one way of doing things also gives you one way of disaster recovery.
Can you provide some proof as to "work[ing] pretty high up at Google"? Just curious.
Sorry if this is true, but it seems too vague and brash to be authentic. Can you describe in more detail what's wrong with google at the moment?
It's political correctness. Nigger in particularly has had a nice and storied discussion on how arbitrary it's acceptability is.

You think you're not being a dick, but your sensitivity is blinding you. I've called my friends things far worse than what nigger objectively means, but the social constructs around it are so bizarre as to make it taboo, but only taboo in my context. Just like sex is taboo. Just like drugs are taboo. Just like homosexuality was taboo (and remains taboo in some areas).

Further, there's an aspect to 4chan you're not seeing, and it's how much they hate and punish the kind of narcissism you accuse them of. A net good.

I've seen openly homosexual people posting on 4chan about their lifestyles with absolutely no condemnation. It is not an exception to a rule. You have mischaracterized this demographic. Badly.
Opposition is against building GLONASS monitoring stations on US soil; not against GLONASS or any indigenous navigation system itself.
What are you linking to? The only comment about what Gthrowaway1 said is about Gthrowaway1 deleting the comment.
This is very weird... I was with the blog poster at lunch and that's when we discovered this issue. And I also tried it with my phone and it was opening G+ directly...

But I just tried it again, and it's showing the full list of places I can share.
Turn on showdead then scroll down to the bottom.
you only have 3 comments, both of them over a year ago, but one just for me this year? I wish we could talk.
It seems simple, honestly. The likelihood that people will stop using YouTube because of G+ is nil.
Except that's not the flow they gave her. The flow she got was "surprise, you're linked!"
So they said no in the interview, huh?

Let's not feed the trolls, yeah?
I feel like some people who claim they want privacy really don't value their privacy, but instead value something else (I hypothesize that it's just control) that seems like privacy.

You can find this poster's name by using Google Image search to link to her Flickr then from there she has her domain registered with her full name and address. (this pattern is pretty common, by that, I mean, given some identifying information, you can find a lot more. Anonymity is only effective if you practice consistent inconsistency.) A pseudonym here, a handle there, these are all things that establish permanence and link together to make an identifiable entity.

Putting your real name into YouTube isn't the problem here. This doesn't mean there isn't a problem, but it's not quite the problem being stated here.
That is odd, at first I thought It was just my fault due to having selected a default for sharing by clicking "Always" instead of "Just Once", but I've cleared YouTube's Default Data, Cache and even its Data (Settings->Apps->YouTube). Then a proceeded to also unlink my G+ account from the app by clearing G+ App data, still no effect, instead of quickly appearing the share view from G+ it was first asking me which gmail account to use to then start G+. The only way I was able to revert it back was disabling Google+'s App, which then causes some things to not work properly such as Google Search.
Wow, it looks like I had a bit too much ethanol last night. sorry.
Well this is going to get interesting, when they start reusing telephone numbers.
So you are saying that we should abandon freedom of expression and attach IDs to anyone who has anything to say, in order to instigate retribution against those who disagree with your worldview? How will this not lead to censorship (and self-censorship) and hugboxing? If you don't want to participate in an anonymous discussion, that's your choice, but don't try to deprive others of it.
Disclosing your relationship to a company in a comment is a fair sight less than disclosing your identity to that company in the same comment. Particularly if you're a current employee.
Mature Optimization Handbook (Carlos Bueno, 2013)
Maybe he/she is asking the non-cogs. Let's see if they speak up forthrightly, or give us another faux surprise "what the..." post.
I see, I've heard Vic is notorious for forcing his own products. But if it's truly an issue, why does Larry allow Vic to exercise so much control? It sounds like the entire executive staff is to blame.
YouTube comments were already a cesspool. Now, with added "shared via Google+", it has become unbearable. I added this rule in AdBlockPlus to block YouTube comments:

youtube.com###watch-discussion
That is why I posted another comment with a link you should read.
Interesting. To be clear, I have the Google+ app installed, running, connected to my profile, and all related apps (such as Google Now) work as expected.
they unified the signon of youtube (which was not google) with google, and coerced everyone into linking the two, and then, later, coerced everyone into retroactively making their youtube content appear with their real name.

If you don't get why this is a problem, then at least do us the kindness of not being obstructive to people who do. Figure it out. it's not hard.

It's like saying "Well, what's the problem? if you don't like it just delete all your youtube videos and discard the years of investment you've made into your youtube identity"

Google is not providing the option of having a youtube account that is not linked to a google+ account, and not providing the option of having that google+ account have a pseudonym. They are saying to all the people who are already established on youtube that the jig is up: You must reveal who you really are, now, or leave. It's an unfair ultimatum to people on youtube who have maintained anonymity for legitimate reasons.
Cool idea. Note though that the bookmarklet is broken. Also, it appears that an hour is being added to the start time of the event.

e.g. http://g.calwith.me/meet-tom-tomorrow-at-12pm-for-2-hours-1N

Should start at 12pm, but starts at 1pm instead.
You're right. I was considering these as two separate requirements, didn't really think of the name part.
From what I heard from Google employees, G+ has been highly prioritized over many projects (and some others which closed like google lab, reader, etc.).

Facing the social network giant that is Facebook, G+ has to become successful after many past failures, and to do so, they try to force their way through, and make it ubiquitous.

However, this Youtube chapter was probably a step too far, since very intrusive and noticeable.
Its a great convenience, I don't have to take adittional actions to find what I'm actually interested in
Thanks a lot! It was "Youtube Settings" for me, but that may depend on the exact route one takes.
Execute better, and you'll win anyway.
It's so much more than this, though. Even if you're ethically obligated to disclose your relationship with your workplace when discussing said workplace, are you ethically/legally obligated to connect your identity to your views on education policy, or on criminal incarceration, or on musical genres, or on the future of a programming language that happens to be your boss's favorite programming language? To reduce it to company criticism is to create a straw man out of the entire case for anonymity.

Now, all this said, I fully expect to be "doxxed" publicly at some point on my various accounts, so I keep that in mind when making commentary, and I hedge my bets. The fact that it was Google that has prevented me from discussing things on YouTube without doxxing myself, though, is truly disappointing. Maybe they're not losing any money by losing commenters like me, but if I'm ever inspired to create viral content that could make ad money, Vimeo's getting that ad money now.
... and now we have completely useless and inaccurate results from google just about every time you search.

There isn't an hour that goes by that I don't search for a few keywords ... like ... freebsd openvpn push ... and guess what ? Results 1 and 3 for that query do not contain the word push.

Every day I am running into this and every day I miss altavista.
I use it a lot less, tbh.
Maybe Google is trying to do us a favor, and spare us the illusion of anonymity when true anonymity is dead. That's my most charitable interpretation. Less charitably, they simply don't care how their policies happen to burn x% of their user base: "we'll you probably shouldn't be active online if you can't deal with a few stalkers."
There is also the "allintext:" modifier. Any words after that are searched for verbatim, not even stemming (which is applied to words in quotes).
Eben Moglen on Privacy: The Union, May it Be Preserved
Thanks for posting this. I'd written my own ad-hoc version of _.debounce for a web app, but the difference between throttle and debounce was totally lost on me. (If anyone else is slow today and doesn't immediately get it from reading the Underscore docs, there's a very clear comparison here[1].)

Empirically, I can't type fast enough (sustained) for throttle to be better than debounce here — there are frequent 200ms gaps in my key presses. This is part of why I was confused. I thought I was typing very quickly, definitely faster than 43wpm == five keystrokes per second, but apparently I slow down to think now and then. My code seemed to behave like _.throttle already, but changing the timeout from 200ms to 2sec made it clear that it wasn't.

But I'm switching to _.throttle, partly in case someone is a faster typist than me, and partly because it makes a leading-edge call, which may give a feeling of greater responsiveness.

1. http://drupalmotion.com/article/debounce-and-throttle-visual...
Ask HN: Should I take the time to create this side project?
Hi,

I was wondering what some of you may think of this idea I have for a side project... In terms of actually developing it, it is very simple so I don't mind sharing it, as it's all in the execution. I'm just not sure if it's worth the time. So, the idea is this:

Allow struggling companies that sell a good, whether it be digital or tangible, to buy a plot of pixels on my site, that would link to a big discount of their product. So, a company can pay lets say, $60 to have a 30X30 banner of their logo, and that banner would link to their product, but at a discounted price. As a result, they would get more sales, and users of the site would get really good deals.

The idea is that users can "click anywhere to get a deal."

Thoughts? Is it worth looking for companies to try it out with?
I think of it as the million dollar homepage meets daily deals...

thanks
Why are you using one year extrapolated to eight? For an eight year comparison you should compare investing $100 in the two stocks in 2005.
To those tempted to downvote/report for the domain name and its connotations, the linked comment is actually insightful. I'll copy-paste an excerpt here to archive/make this available to viewers who might not want to click; please direct any upvotes to the parent.

> I do think there's some truth to the idea that anonymity can put more focus on content than the creator. If you make something that's good enough to get you a decent-sized fanbase, and you use a recognizable identity, people are more likely to be forgiving of weaker work you make in the future. If an online community already has recognized favorite content creators, that also makes it extremely hard for new people to come in and get recognized for their own content. Basically, a community based in anonymity can override the whole "argument from authority" fallacy, because no one has any authority. Anonymity is an equalizer. It can even benefit people who would normally do well even with an identity, because it leaves them free to experiment without being criticized for deviating from their earlier work.
As if the Russians can use that spying for any great effect...
if you react to a negative social appeal emotionally, you will react to a positive social appeal in the same manner.

Basically, if I can get you to react with misogyny, I have a level of control over you.
> History is history, what happened happened and there isn't anything we can do about it.

We can't change history, but that doesn't mean we can't look to history to understand how the present got to be the way it is. Moreover, just because history has happened and we can't change it doesn't mean it doesn't have ongoing repercussions.

> But the problem is not that they were disadvantaged, but that they stay disadvantaged, much of it through somewhat self-sustaining social processes.

The problem is that they were enslaved, and then actively repressed. Those are facts that have repercussions in the present. Anecdote: my grandfather was trained as both a doctor and a lawyer, and was a wealthy man. My family didn't inherit any money, but my mom inherited an education from a private tutor and I grew up hearing about him and being shaped by those stories. Well the grandfathers of black people alive today were systematically repressed, denied education and denied economic advancement. What kind of stories do black kids grow up hearing, and how do those stories shape them in the present? The problem goes far beyond economic disadvantage. It's one thing to prevent a group of people from accumulating capital. It's another to destroy their social structures, actively prevent them from bettering themselves, and use the authority of the state to segregate them from the majority population. That results in cultural devastation that goes far deeper than simple economic loss.

> The three strikes law hurts these communities the most not because they are black, but because the economic situation is such that people are compelled to steal or commit other crimes.

Crime isn't a simple function of economic status. There is a wide variety of crime rates within communities of identical economic status. Crime is a function of social cohesion, the vitality of social structures, community respect for authority, trust, etc. Those things are deeply tied up in race as a result of the legacy of segregation. You don't think there is a difference between a poor black community and a poor white community when it comes to respect for authority? When that authority was, until just a few decades ago, fighting tooth and nail to maintain segregation and repression?
I disagree with this completely. Experiences we engage with are mostly novelty, and I suspect that most of what the author considers previous generations to have considered to be 'social validation' was also based on the experience. Owning a house, civic protests, journeys to the moon are also experiences (even if you're only watching those experiences on television, you are having an experience).

The trend in increased sharing of photos is a result of both the ability take and view photos instantly, and the ability to share them with large groups of people.

People used to go on trips, take as many photos as they dared, because they had to have the film and then get it developed, then they would make a slide presentation to share with friends and family.
It's quite the opposite for me. I've started moving my stuff off of Google as this was one of the last straws in my book. I'd already switched to using DDG and Startpage for my searches and am currently in the process of moving my Google apps email to my own server. When that's done I plan on deleting my Youtube and Google accounts.

This latest Google+ push has made me realize just how far Google is willing to go to capture more data on their users instead of focusing on providing the best service possible as they used to.
one of them just crashed a car that burst up in flames, like every car that crashes, amirite?
Sarcasm. Don't worry, it's new. You'll catch on.
That bit from the Underscore docs is only a suggestion, and one that Google, for example, certainly doesn't follow. Try typing a search query so fast you don't get suggestions until you're finished. It's hard to do!

Right after your quote, the docs add: "For example: rendering a preview of a Markdown comment, recalculating a layout after the window has stopped being resized..." These operations can both be very expensive on the client side — layout is slow — and can also distract the user if they make stuff jump around on the page. The downsides of doing these updates too often are more clear than for a simple autocomplete.
Nope. Not what I said, at all. I said that several people on 4chan are assholes, and there's a culture that supports that assholery.
Comment is against the larger point being made in the article, and I quote:

>“They don’t want to be reliant on the American system and believe that their systems, like GPS, will spawn other industries and applications,” said a former senior official in the State Department’s Office of Space and Advanced Technology. “They feel as though they are losing a technological edge to us in an important market. Look at everything GPS has done on things like your phone and the movement of planes and ships.”

> The Russian effort is part of a larger global race by several countries — including China and European Union nations — to perfect their own global positioning systems and challenge the dominance of the American GPS.
I wasn't familiar with this rule until a few months ago, and I'm only starting to implement it. What I find interesting is that it makes code easier to test and initially, simpler to read.
What I am not getting here is this. I get why people may want to be anonymous. Google says - no can do, you can not be anonymous with us. We insist on identifying you. Why keep using Google services and complain instead of using some other service more respectful of one's privacy? It's not like one cannot live without commenting on youtube videos.
>He was making fun of facebook's $6.5b valuation (or maybe it was $10b). The fact that he was completely wrong (fb is now over $100b) doesn't stop people here from thinking that there's wisdom in this nonsensical post

Errm, how does the fact that FB is "now over $100b" prove that he was "completely wrong"?

How about: he was right that such valuations are crazy when FB was at $6.5b, and he is even more right now, as $100b is even more crazy.

It's not like FB somehow PROVED it deserved to be valuated as $6.5 at that time -- it just bubbled up even more in the stock market since.

If his premise was that such stock valuations are BS, then that's even more ammunition to his argument.
If they put it in a programming/design portfolio I'd be pissed otherwise it's not such a big deal. But they should leave your credits in instead of stripping them out...

I hope employers are aware of this stuff though. Would be sad to hire someone based on a site portfolio that was actually a bunch of ripoffs. I guess that's the employer's loss then though, & they need to learn how to be better at vetting candidates.
I don't know what you were thinking when you added those interjections to every other sentence but this post is condescending as hell.
I could generate $8bn of revenue by selling $100 bills for $10.

Profit now, that's another thing.
Hmm. How are you defining a meeting? Is a meeting a pair of mice? Or is it a pair of mice with a time component? So a pair of mice + the duration of time they were together?
The nicest git workflow I've seen so far
In addition to what other people have said: Googlers love Google Plus. I haven't met a Googler (and, I know many) that doesn't love it.

After all, for them, it's not a barren wasteland. They have a very active network (coworkers/friends). I don't think this answers your question, however most Googlers like G+.
Strictly speaking, GPS refers to the US military's GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System). The Russian GNSS is called GLONASS, not "GPS".
>>Google says - no can do, you can not be anonymous with us.

Where does Google say that? Is it as direct as you put it, or is it to be inferred from a constantly changing variety of experiences with Google services and settings?
I mostly agree with you, but disagree that snapchat is about deletion of data. They may delete the content of the data, but who you interact with, when, and when those messages are retrieved, may have some value. The idea that you are sending messages that can't be retrieved when compared to messages that are kept, may have some value as well, but likely only if you have the ability to compare these 'secret messages' to 'non-secret messages'.
Can I ask if you have any views about voting and hierarchy display of comments? What sort of commentary culture that produces?
I'm not sure if reproducing a dead comment violates some kind of unwritten HN guideline, but here it is:

===============================================

Gthrowaway1 2 days ago | link [dead]

The Google bashing is well deserved. Even people at Google despise Vic Gundotra (just check memegen.googleplex.com today), yet this incompetent figure is allowed to continue alienating users and driving Google's brand into the ground.

Vic, do us a favor: Go back to Microsoft and never return!

Disclaimer: I work for Google.
You are not a target user for google products and services, thats why they are not too worried about how you or users like you feel about it.

See also: Facebook. A lot of noise was made about facebook privacy (inside the HN and other tech eco chambers) and a lot of noise was made about people quitting facebook because of privacy. But in reality probably only .00000001% of facebook users probably quit because of privacy reasons, which is probably a drop in a bucket compare to the amount of new users they get everyday.

Google is doing this because they can. They are in a market dominant position with both youtube and Google search that they can afford to make decision, which in hindsight might not be popular with some users, but will close to nothing to harm their bottom line.
Well, not everyone here is ripping off existing products and adding Bootstrap to them. :)
A few startups working on other things are...

https://angel.co/boosted-boards

https://angel.co/counsyl

https://angel.co/crowdmed
I'm sorry, but hearing geeks talk about quitting google as if it's some personal triumph (in nearly every google thread) makes the sentiment seem even more tone deaf and futile.
It's a much better product than Facebook.

But a better social product means nothing without an active network of users.
MS PR in action?

They've got previous: http://m.slashdot.org/story/181735
I didn't take it that way, for some reason. I interpreted them as friendly, and I thought they were helpful in making what I think is a very good point.
It also doesn't strike me as especially expensive. A dumb, brute force query (that is, something in 0(N^2)) wouldn't take so long with only a few million rows. So I would just try doing through each row, doing a full table scan to find meetings, and just let that cook for a little while.

It's not like you're ingesting gobs and gobs of data in real time :)
> Imagine where you'd be forced to go if HN didn't exist, for example.

Outside, maybe?
Wouldn't be surprised if this was true. On their other hand, there's a 4chan thread on the front page :)
Whats so sad about it?

HN beats any other news site out there hands down and the comments although having declined in quality slightly it's still better than most out there.