skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The best office layout ever is the one that allows me to works from home.
> And he's 100% accurate, it has been 25 years, and there is an open source WYSIWYG word processor, called Libre Office these days, but that isn't what RMS wants. He wants someone to do the work to make his tool of choice into something which can do what he wants to do in it.

It is not that RMS simply want his tool of choice, but rather tool that has the work flow and features he needs. Its like someone comming from git, and wanting that workflow in cvs. Its not the name or code base of the program that matter. Chuck's post however implies NIH and a stubbornness in using other peoples tools, rather than a need for a specific work flow and feature sets.
Almost as much. Only difference is that SAP is actually making a decent profit, while Salesforce is loosing money...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2013/04/26/2013-cr...
Hell no. Hacking together a crappy throwaway minimum viable product with no tests is one thing, but if this company is "quite successful" (as you say) it is probably past the time where they should have started writing tests.

In the even slightly long term, tests don't slow things down, they keep things fast. It is MUCH easier to change and maintain code with good tests. Think about it this way: when you write code, you damn well better be testing that it works as you write it. Why not test it with other code, and save that so that other people don't have to do it over again? Manual testing is slow, error prone, and very expensive. Better use it judiciously instead of making people track down stupid programming errors that could have been caught in 7 seconds with a decent unit test suite.
A good friend of mine did exactly that for a network some 15 years ago. He called it his "waterwall".

It was for some kind of internet-cafe. But that we seem to need this nowadays for our private homes, troubles me.

What is this with the attitude, that it is ok, to view into the innermost privacy-sphere of your customers? Sorry, but LG is dead and gone for me. A company, that converts its paying customers into a product, ready to be sold to some advertiser just sickens me.

What comes next? Automatically detecting, when people no longer look at the screen, via a camera, to stop the showing of ads and resume, when people return in front of the screen? Or to detect how many people are watching (as Microsoft had patented)?

What happened to good old: We build one thing, sell it and that is fine. Why does everybody have to be an advertising-company, trying to maximize this revenue stream on the back of the live(data) of its paying customers?
Its not related to the discussion, but where can I get the rest of those articles? The links to next/previous appear to be broken.
Like ANSI, DIN is not a branch of government, but a self-regulated non-profit institute (an e.V.) Their FAQ describes their relationship to the government:

> What is the role of the government or the European Commission in standardization?

> Standardization is a form of economic self-regulation, relieving the state of the responsibility for developing detailed technical specifications while ensuring that a standard reflects the state of technology. Because the state has an interest in standardization, particularly in the occupational safety and health sectors, it funds DIN projects in sectors which are in the public interest.

http://www.din.de/cmd?cmsrubid=55343&menurubricid=55343&leve...
A New Party Challenges the One That Has Run India for Most of Its History
I am still, still not liking that title

it is that way on the linked site too =/
I'm curious, why didn't you just tell the operations guy to piss off?
3 Massive Trends and Opportunities: Boomers + Mobile + Social
You rail about TDD, but the OP is talking about tests in general, quoting, "They don't test their code at all." I personally thing that TDD is totally backwards and braindead, but unit tests... you just have to have them. The only acceptable time to eschew basic unit tests is if you plan to throw the code away SOON (and have a blood pact about killing it for sure).
It's quite a farce. One can excuse not launching the app (it would require some setup for each individual app), but not looking even briefly at the video is inexcusable. But I'm guessing they already picked the 5 finalists for PR-value well before the entries were submitted, so they didn't want to spend their party-time at Dreamforce doing something so boring as looking at hackathon entries.
I don't actually have a comment regarding E.T. ... to be honest I just wanted to complain about the new star wars
World-wide?
Congrats ! Looks like a big release.

Some pain points from using Foundation (4) in our latest project:
* topbar sucks
* custom forms are horrible (they seem to have been removed from 5, or maybe justs the docs are missing)

Also, using under_score instead of camelCase in javascript is a questionable choice with no real benefits.
Professional courtesy suggests I should not confirm nor deny that. Let's just say that AmaGooBookSoft all have surface areas larger than the Death Star, and it is highly, highly unlikely that any of them have found all the exhaust ports yet.
Actually, you can't really fix the 'feel' problem, because the 'feeling' is mostly imaginary. The problem with condoms is part education, part laziness and part men actually wanting women to have more kids.
Depending on how one gets in that position, Of course they are.

http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-a-illegal-monopoly
:( I was going to say something like "So if you consume enough nuts, there is a 99% chance of not dying etc.."
Studies show that consumption of air prevents death. As long as you are consuming air, you will be alive.
> "more or less"

... on 6 Oct 2011.

They announced their plan. It was perfectly reasonable, and Ruby 1.9 was available way before that (2007) and at that time 1.9.3 was around the corner, so the clock was obviously ticking way before this announcement.

Ubuntu (and Debian) choses to stick on versions with releases, and maintain security as backported patches if need be, so the onus is now on them to secure their system.

It is a double edged sword to choose to rely on a system that favors sticking with older releases and rely on its own patches for bugfixing and security. One one hand you get tight integration between packages and platform stability, but on the other hand you get bitten back in such cases, and you can't blame upstream for that.
Tomorrow: "Nut consumption linked to obesity and depression"

Please, just let me live and die without reading another <some food> linked to <some health or disease> article. I don't mind stuff like "tuna shows elevated and unsafe mercury levels", but this constant stream of weakly correlated, never conclusive, always contradictory shit is mind numbing.

I don't understand why this is on HN front page...and getting upvotes!

[EDIT] ah, pg posted this.
So let me see if I understand this right.

The EU has created several safety laws that each countries must follow. The laws then in turn reference proprietary written standards by DIN, which people need to buy in order to actually follow and understand the law.

Is that correct?
Some of the redacted data is visible still, for example by inverting colors (my default)
>For example, WebRTC lets developers integrate real time audio/video/data awesomeness into websites and its readily available in firefox and chrome, but not safari.

And how does WebRTC matters for everyday use at the moment?

I haven't seen anything that is not a tech-demo or similar relying on it.

It would be nice to have it in Safari too (and I use Chrome myself), but it's hardly a deal breaker (or even relevant).
I am missing the game aspect here.
The 11 Hottest Startups In Northern Europe
Applets are very different from web extensions.
Show HN: UrlExt - Open multiple tabs with 1 URL
I came here to say exactly that.

If you want privacy and focus, nothing is better than remote work.

In my current company, I work from home and go to the central open space something like once in a month or couple month. My productivity is way lower in open space, but I get to know my coworkers and share thoughts way easier (those thoughts being wild ideas, because written asynchronous language is always better to make very specific suggestions).

In my previous company, we were working remotely too, and twice a year, we were joining together in a villa next the sea. Those sessions were unambiguously called "team building", and it did a very good job at that. We were chatting a lot, laughing, and at evening, we were playing videogames together or having a beer in a bar, and we were becoming closer that way. I think this is very good to raise solidarity and friendship between coworkers. And once at home, we got the real job done.
>3) Gay Sex

It is not 1988 anymore, and it's called AIDS not GRID anymore. What else? 4) Bi sex 5) Threesome sex 6) Lesbian with strapon sex?
I don't know about ANSI, but the IEEE is a US non-profit standards body, and you need to buy its standards to claim compliance with them.

This, and fees for testing products, is generally how non-governmental standards institutes fund themselves.
This study sounds like a waste of time. How you could ever follow up and prove that nuts have all those protective effects is beyond me -- as is why you would even think they do in the first place.

However, we excluded participants with a history of cancer, heart disease, or stroke at baseline...

Sounds like multiple regression, which is used to make insignificant statistics sound more plausible, by reducing the effect of a handful of confounding variables that the researchers happened to think of. That leaves behind any significant correlations plus the infinite number of confounding variables they didn't think of.
Freedom software?!

I use a lot of FOSS software, but I never put religion over convenience.

Plus, as someone that earns money selling software developer skills, I tend to look down to companies using FOSS software as free beer.
Or perhaps you're just older, so your grandparents were from a different generation?
Whats the big deal? I'm not necessarily on Microsoft's side, but I'm DEFINITELY not on Google's side.
Mmm... Haha. Not for me. I'm allergic to all the tree nuts they list.
Thanks for the info. Now if only we had customers asking for TypeScript.

I really like its design as a JavaScript superset.
InFORM: Dynamic Shape Display that can render 3D content physically
the "who's memory is this anyway" type checking thing in Rust is one of the most interesting advancements of the state of the art of low-level programming that I'm aware of in my lifetime.

... I sort of think we should just port it to C.
Perhaps, but it does make it moral to publish the work.

And law ought to follow morality rather than the other way around.
no. that web page is terrible. a company having a monopoly is just a state-of-affairs that be used as a justification for prosecuting certain actions that company takes. having a monopoly is not illegal. Microsoft was found guilty of abusing their monopoly in the PC operating system market, not of having a monopoly in the PC operating system market which was all but self-evident at the time and not a crime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
If you pick a small enough sample from a large enough population, you can link anything to anything. I'm pretty sure I could find that eating veggie foods is linked with mass shootings if I try hard enough.
Thank you for the explanation.

Let me offer a tl;dr: Standards bodies found a bureaucratic loophole allowing them to make their standards into de facto-law while avoiding that those standards then become part of the public domain as they ought to be.

Sounds like a classic case where the law has not caught up with morality.
Maybe they're comparing eating nuts with eating nothing. I would not doubt that nuts reduce risk of death under those circumstances.
Why is MS doing this? They should just leave WA alone.

IMO, every passing day SME-sized consumer software companies are going to find it harder to survive. I wish there was a consumer market for well written compact software that just does its job well, doesnt mine your data, doesnt try to push some shitty subscription model or advertisement crap onto users.
Ask HN: Why do we not see Apple, Google or MS people discuss on HN?
If it doesn't violate the company principles (though I cannot see why it would) We would really like to see the inner guys share their opinions here.
Yup I like that.
Yeah, it's not about TDD, it's about having your testing be a non-automated checklist (without unit tests where useful)
This happens quite often. Something similar happened to Bjorn Lynne, who some might remember as "Dr Awesome" from the days of .MOD files. Bjorn posted his story via updates on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1015166480...
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1015166480...
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1015168726...
That's the kind of talk that will lead to lawyers being the first against the wall when the revolution comes, right after the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.

The morality of the situation is very clear: Those standards are de facto law because they are treated by common practices as if they were the law. Hence they need to be in the public domain.

This is not an arbitrary sentiment either. You can draw a parallel to how trademarks can lose their protection by becoming part of regular language.
Its disappointing that your complaint was about WebRTC. I was really hoping it will be something else.
Shamelessly Genuine.
I use the Etymotic HF3s with Comply tips.

"The world is dead to me" - sums it up nicely :P
Are people angry about building an OS that incorporates Chrome? Or are they angry about Web apps shipping on the desktop, turning Chrome into an application platform? These are separate things (Linux does not ship with your desktop browser, for example), and frankly, criticizing either is ignoring the couple of years' worth of successful desktop applications running mostly in embedded WebKit. Making this environment useful through a centrally-controlled and sandboxed runtime and, now, a development toolkit, is simply not worth being angry about at this point.
Dear Firefox, I feel sad about you.
I have been in web app development since 2008 and have used PHP, Python, ROR, Javascript, HTML, CSS etc with my most favorite browser Firefox and I always loved it. But now FF is not in my favorite browser list instead I just use it for testing purposes to see if things working or not just like you keep testing your app on IE7,8,9 etc.

I did not even realize that since last 18 months or so I am using only Chrome and dear Firefox I was not missing you. I got everything in Chrome I needed (speed, dev tools, no browser crashing etc. etc.).

I did a bit of research and I did get to see rants about FF not doing well (and for chrome as well :P).

And now I don't need Firefox anymore. I just want it to die like IE7. Some of you might say that I am cribbing and not helping FF to make it better.

I don't know if there are more people like me who just use chrome as default browser and feel sad about FF.

I keep running both latest stable & dev/nightly builds of FF and chrome on my multiple machines but chrome outperforms everytime and at least I don't feel the slowness.

Overall chrome ROCKS!
Using Browserify with npm modules
At first I thought it was odd and weird too. After some more thought, and correct me if I am wrong, there weren't any differences between them. They both are tokens that are generated and verified by the server, except a CAPTCHA actually requires human interaction.
I suspect that this is the result of incompetence on their part rather than an actual intent to log private data. Either way though, obviously not good.
Sounds like it would be a good extension to Data Protection / Computer Abuse/Misuse Acts depending on what it allows access to. Anyone pointing out a failing in your system should not be prosecuted unless they've actually committed a crime.
Do I really have to spell things out in legalistic precision to make what should be a very obvious point?

Are you really going to argue that native apps and web apps are equally secure because web browsers can occasionally be compromised to give you the permissions that native apps give you by default?

Are you really going to argue against the security of today's web browsers because security of browsers used to be comparatively atrocious?

If I give you the choice of either running my malicious native app or visiting my malicious website, are you really going to say that they are equally risky?
So Genuine. Almost made me cry.
> You're jumping around a bit.

In that case, anyone who uses more than one example to make his point is jumping around. If allowed to prevail, this non-argument would cripple debate.

> Did the four-color map problem use numerical results?

Yes, emphatically so. There were a certain finite number of possible maps (1936 to be precise), and each of them had to be tested explicitly. The reason for the requirement for full disclosure was that the tested set needed to be examined to assure that nothing germane was excluded, nothing included on specious grounds, and the manner of testing had to be closely examined. None of this could be reduced to a simple equation, and none of it yielded to a formal, concise mathematical proof.

> I imagine it was just a pure combinatorial enumeration problem (I have not read the original paper, I may be wrong about that).

If that were true, there would have been no role for a computer program -- it would have been published as a pure and formal result, like Fermat's last theorem. No one would have cared about the role played by computers, because a formal and pure proof could be examined by anyone sufficiently versed in mathematics.

> What kinds of actual fields of mathematics are you thinking about, here?

Any field that would benefit from use of a computer. By recent count, that's nearly all mathematical fields for one reason or another, including areas we once might have thought would have no use for a computer. Computer mathematics has gotten to the point where computers, laboring independently, come up with new theorems that humans have overlooked.

> I know that error analysis is a deep and arcane subject, and personally I have no idea how well or badly we do in that department, but I'm struggling to think of where the details of how we get it wrong or right is crucial for the development of published academic mathematics.

Most struggle with that, and part of the struggle is being able to see the detail of the algorithms used to arrive at a result. No detail, no trust, no science.

> "Most" maths is totally abstract these days ...

Not relevant. Relevant would be whether that abstract mathematics is or is not fully revealed in its details. For science, it must be.

This article --

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7286-computer-generate...

-- discusses the role of theorem-proving software like Coq, but includes a misleading statement by someone at Microsoft: "Microsoft hopes to develop a similar system for checking the logic used in computer programs, which could pre-empt some unforeseen bugs that cause programs to crash."

I hope this is an error on the part of the journalist who wrote the article, because it implies that Turing's halting problem, and Gödel's incompleteness theorems, which lie behind it, are potentially soluble. They aren't. All the more reason for full disclosure.
It's ok, most of us, men, would stick our penises into anything.
50 years since the Kennedy assassination
there's no such thing as a free house?
update: I just tested this; if you're on 1.8.7, you can manually apply the patch I linked in the parent comment and recompile. There is nothing preventing a backport.
Thing is, and most engineers don't like to hear this, to climb in payscale, you have to take on more responsibility and risks. And just staying a pure engineer (no management / leading people / deciding company strategy / client and contractual responsibility), you don't take on much risk or responsibility.
You also have to pay for ANSI/NIST standard texts, ITU, ISO standards, and for EU industrial standard texts. It's nothing out of ordinary.

EDIT: I see ITU has made their standards free of charge since 2007.
It might be relevant to mention that Hamburg's district court is the court of choice for copyright holders - this court has quite a long history of ruling in favor of media corporations when it comes to issues of piracy, copyright disputes and similar subjects.
2x3D - Viewing 2D and 3D on the same screen simultaneously
Of course they do. They just don't point out that they are Apple, Google or MS employees. And I think it is pretty obvious why. One wrong comment from a "google employee" and the media will be all over him/her with headlines like "google employee admits NSA blah blah" or even worse, titles that end with questionmarks: "Google working on Antimatter Energy?"
I don't know, to have to pull back the foreskin and have it immobile during sex, is a pretty big difference.
وظائف خالية بجريدة الاهرام اليوم الجمعة 22-11-2013
Pause the Cloud
If your point is that these standards are in fact de-facto laws and should be treated accordingly (free access and all), then make that point directly. It is unclear to me how copyright violation helps here, apart from publicity.
I'm not sure I fully understand - clearly this is a LinkedIn competitor, but is it pulling data from their API or is it a standalone service?
It's not.

R vs some Python alternatives in Google Trends: http://bit.ly/1fpOR57

Pandas is looking good, but then we have Julia, Matlab and probably some people still using SAS.

edit:

Comparing statistical packages by: Kaggle.com usage, Job posts, Activity on blogs, mailing lists, Stack overflow, Google Scholar and a few more..

http://r4stats.com/articles/popularity/
I made an assertion and now it's my "job to support it"?! How is that for an assertion. Stating that everybody is not entitled to get a free copy of copyrighted material is hardly an assertion in the first place and I think you maybe have a very strong sense of entitlement if you think you should tell me what my job is ;-)

I am not a German lawyer but a Danish one. The Danish copyright law doesn't have such provision but in Denmark charging manufacturers 100 euro for a standard would not upset any judge. 100 Euro is the price of a meal at an average restaurant, 20 minutes of lawyer time or a text book on insolvency law (if you can't pay for it). Things are cheaper in Germany so maybe 100 Euro is too much. I don't know.

Lawmakers often prefer that technical standards are made by private and semi private bodies because politicians and government clerks have absolutely no clue about technicalities. manufacturers prefer it for the same reason.

Even if these technical bodies sell 1,000 "baby pacifier standards" all over Germany, and I doubt they sell that many, the proceeds barely cover the direct cost of creating the standards, including hiring lawyers, engineers and other experts, negotiating with different interest groups, printing etc.

If the alternative would be to let the taxpayers bear the full price I think it's fine to have manufacturers pay a few hundred euros yearly to get the standards they need.

In most of Europe compliance with product safety regulations is not ensured through the courts by lawyers hired by those who have suffered damage. Yes, these cases exist but in much smaller numbers than in the US. The real enforcement of the rules is carried out by public agencies that control that the rules are followed, issue fines and bans, close factories etc. So there are very few readers of most of these standards.

As for court cases, I don't know of any on this subject.
Responsive Design Newsletter