skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Excerpt from comments on blog:

Hello,

(This is Edwin from feedly).

As I mentioned in the email I sent to Nate earlier this morning, the goal of this feature is to 1) help content creators increase their readership in feedly (when a user discovers your content and adds it to his feedly, they are converting a one time visitor into a repeat engaged user) and 2) help user consume content faster on mobile device.

We are early in the design and implementation of this feature. If you are a publisher and want to work with us on improving this feature (we are working on some interesting features around discovery, call to action, analytics), please email me at edwin@feedly.com If you do not want to benefit form this feature, you can also sent me an email and we will quickly opt you out.
> And yeah, Google isn't in the position of competing with companies that it needs.

Why not? Motorola's Moto X is pretty high end and Google is spending $500M on just advertising it this year[1], beating Samsung's and Apple's ad spending. In watching a couple of hours of primetime TV in the US, I usually see 3 to 4 Moto X ads, and almost the same number of Windows 8/Surface ads. However, sales seem to be quite sluggish[2].

Motorola can't be making all that much money on Moto G and it seems to be Google's loss leader just like Microsoft's Lumia 520/521 at $69 to $99 unlocked(Surprised the article didn't mention it at all or compare it against the Moto G, it's a surprisingly fast phone for that price). Meanwhile Motorola's losses continue to grow every quarter and continue to be a drag on Google's earnings [3]
. I guess the pressure is on Motorola to deliver, but even if this phone sells well, I doubt it's going to help them unless they're going to make money from ads and/or Google Play sales on those phones.

[1] http://9to5google.com/2013/07/11/moto-x-would-be-most-heavil...

[2] http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-motorola...

[3] http://mobilenewsblog.co.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Sc...
Bummed out Feedly users: if you’re looking for a no-nonsense slick RSS reader please have a look at https://kouio.com – I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised.
Yep, Bell's Theorem [1] states that it's more than just a question of not knowing which is which ahead of time.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem
Fair enough if you are gay. However, having been in relationships with various women, I can say my experience has been quite different. There is constant pressure against risk-taking and business-starting, in favor of "finding a normal stable job" as a wage-slave and spending more time away from work, so as not to make her feel neglected.

Her concerns are legitimate, of course, and rooted in her own evolutionary strategy, but I would certainly recommend to my sons that they make their fortune _before_ getting tied down, and that they not get married too early, for this reason. Because they are less likely to take the necessary risks. Women, like it or not, tend to be much more risk-averse than men, and in a committed relationship, they will apply pressure toward this end. (And no risk, no reward.)

This is probably the same reason why many trust-funds are designed to give payouts to those who remain unmarried until at least the age of 25. There are many benefits to having a wife, including their perceptiveness and sensibility, which can be very valuable especially while climbing the social ladder, but given what I know now, I would want to make a success of myself first, before taking one on, and I would advise the same to my sons. (Just as I would advise my daughters to find a man who is already a success, versus getting tied down early on with Johnny Football Hero.)

One piece of advice I was given a few years back, is to "be your own inner parent." Which is to say, whenever you find yourself making a decision, to ask yourself what you would advise your own children to do, if they were to find themselves in the exact same situation you are facing. Then do precisely that.

> This is why I'm saying it's outdated advice rather than sexist advice: it presumes a model of marriage and relationships that has changed...

It very well could be that society has evolved, as you say. But it might instead be that the sexes are living in a bubble of wealth that was created by those who came before, enabling them to afford the luxury of a society that is able to constantly subsidize the "new reality" through educational programming, entertainment programming, social programming, glass ceiling legislation, welfare spending, etc which poorer societies are simply unable to afford.

What we see in Kazakhstan, for example, is a society returning to polygamy as the realities of poverty leave them unable to afford such luxuries as we enjoy. Perhaps, as you say, our culture has progressed. But maybe, just maybe, our culture is currently in a bubble, and as our economic freedoms decline, so will our wealth, causing gender relations to resolve back to equilibrium again -- the same mean we see in many other nations in the world.

Dual incomes may actually be a harbinger of this. For we know from the research that many women in our society do not work because they want to, but because they have no choice. A "modern" household cannot sustain itself without those dual incomes, can it? Yet in decades past, households were easily supported on a single income. Our society is becoming poorer.
It can actually be more X-inefficient (e.g spending indiscriminately) , because it has profits in the long run and won't go broke. I suspect the author was looking for the idea of cost, economies of scale lower average cost, hence increasing a firm's profits, not making workers more productive as he asserts.
Here's a weird idea for you. Imagine you could overload the semicolon in C-like languages; you could make it any function you want! This is a little bit of the idea behind monads. You can build a pipeline of chained functions and the monad you choose can make decisions in between stages. One simple example of such a decision is an early return/exit; this use case is covered by the Maybe monad.

Another cool one is the continuation monad. This lets you stop a pipeline and return a partial result, along with a function that lets you resume where you left off. This approach is commonly used in parsing, where you want to stop and restart depending on the availability of input. Another use for the continuation monad is to transform a chain of nested callbacks into linear code, eliminating callback hell.
I love this "puts a floor on how bad the low-end phones can be" -- YES that's the really great thing about this. Very good for consumers, and competition, and the mobile ecosystem, and keeps pressure on Apple and everyone else involved to keep cranking up the awesome.
Lost, as in you've invested N+8000 USD, and were down to N, or as in lost out on the opportunity to cash out?
Could this have anything to do with the fact they partnered with Redbox to provide a streaming service? Seems like it would be a very useful thing if they wanted to make a bigger push.

http://thenextweb.com/media/2012/02/06/verizon-and-redbox-en...
As a daily Windows Phone user, android user, and former iOS user, I'm curious to hear what apps you think are missing? I moved from my iPhone to Lumia and am only missing a google hangouts app (due to google choosing not to support the platform).
I'm going to try it out but you should definitely be on the lookout over the next few hours/days/whatever. I had to go thermonuclear on a Textmate QL plugin that was causing all kinds of trouble without being immediately obvious about what it was. That being said I'm looking forward to using all of these.
Can it really be zero? I mean, the average startup might not manage to break even. But the insight, experience, and knowledge gained should not be understated. Plus startups have to buy hosting, equipment, domains, etc. They do not generate profits, but they do help keep other businesses running. By doing so, they do contribute towards meaningful impact. It might not be world changing, but might be life improving for a small set of people. Reason that the people who get paid from the money paid by startups to cover operation costs is used to keep a roof over their head, put food on the table, send their children to school, etc.

I could also argue that failed startups help others by weeding out businesses plans/ideas that might not exactly work (at a given moment in time/space). Look at the many failed startups from the dotcom bubble. There are plans/ideas from that era that will not approached by the current batch of startup entrepreneurs. All because they have the historical data/evidence from the past bubble.
I've had this with this my personal take of 750words ( can be found here and it's in french so I doubt it's interesting to anyone here : 3pages.fr ), I'm getting a lot of feedback :

* There are people who love you because your application is changing their life

* There are people who gives you pertinent feedback.

* There are people who just don't get it and are suggesting core modifications.

I often ignore the last kind of people because I have a principal view on how I want things to be and making something should be about that. You cannot please everyone and you should focus on pleasing you first.
As I understand it the EPC requires that certain parts of national patent law are read to agree with the convention. So patentability, novelty and the basic building blocks should therefore be harmonised [to some extent] across member states.

The patent courts therefore take in to account rulings in patent courts of other member states and ruling of European patent boards (I forget the exact terminology, sorry). Such rulings are not binding however. So they form what might be considered a weak precedent. (See for example S6(iii)-(iv), or indeed all of Section 6, http://www.ipo.gov.uk/2006ewcaciv1371.pdf "Aerotel/Macrossan"; it's almost boilerplate in these decisions actually as in "Symbian", http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/1066.html)

In this case it is novelty that is at stake. Novelty is novelty, the same tests are used in Germany as in, say, UK because they rely on the European rulings that provided a series of tests to establish that the novelty lies in a suitably technical part of the invention (this born out of interpretation of the non-patentability of "computer programs as such" in Europe).

IANA(P)L, this is not legal advice.
Just a technically inaccurate colloquialism. And yes I missed the sex selector, even though I had explicitly looked for it. Don't know how I missed it.
I've been using http://www.feedbin.me for months now, and have been generally very happy with it. Not the least of all reasons why is that it has a very easy to understand business model: pay $3/month.
linky http://wishgr.am
Hm, and here I thought I'd read all the double-winners... thanks for the extra information :-)

(Might have actually read it, just long ago -- but I don't think so -- haven't read that much by him).
I think the idea is that domain logic is encapsulated in functions, while the objects themselves only contain metadata. So if you have an class of objects named 'COW', then the objects themselves will contain information about cows. If you simply delete the object, the cow will still exist.

However, if you run a function called, "slaughter_cow", then that should actually do something, maybe it will mark that cow for slaughter. Running functions should have real-world effects, directly manipulating data objects won't. (except maybe to cause confusion)
> add signup fee to limit spam

- this assumes that there would flood of users on this site and a chunk of them will actually pay for it. Will you use HN if there is a fee? Instead, why not just write an algorithm to limit spam Or a 'report spam' button?
not an invention: the people whose land is scheduled to store nuclear waste in australia are subject to laws that target them by race, and deny them basic social services (roads, health, housing, community safety) that others take for granted. the people on whose land uranium is mined (or was until this week's accident!) are subject to a specific federal law that compels them to abide the presence of this dirty industry on land they own.

it must be nice for you to live in this imaginary world where institutionalised racism, racialist legislation and the exploitation of indigenous land owners is 'garbage', but unfortunately for the rest of us, its your story that is mere invention.

(pete- throw away acct cos I'm away from my creds)
The only point that this guy has is that working for a big corporation is a safer average payout than starting your own firm.

Paraphrasing the logic: the 10,000th engineer at Google adds more value, which is why he is paid more than the average startup person. It's a meaningless statement. Google has a magical core business, which the 10,000th employee had nothing to do with. the core business throws off a lot of profit, which allows them to pay for all kinds of stuff. There's just no way to say whether the marginal Google engineer creates more value than the average startup, and using salaries as the sole benchmark drives us to lazy conclusions. Most likely, the google engineer is working on something that will go nowhere - perhaps it is Google Wave! - but the company can afford to overpay him for his trial-and-error, because search has a >25% operating margin.

If anything, the average startup, even the failures, contribute more value in the sense of social outcomes because we have a massive decision tree of trial-and-error of all the possible permutations of business. Some of them work, some of them don't. (...important that we try...)

> Corporate can be fun.

I am chuckling that this is a Bloomberg guy who is way into the culture. Depending on who you talk to - others describe it as the most political, micro-managing environment they've ever experienced. I don't think it's a particularly innovative company at this point, but like Google, they have a magical core business, basically a monopoly on a segment of financial terminals, which allows them to do all kinds of ridiculous stuff. Does the 10,000th employee of Bloomberg add more value than the average startup? No, chances are he's trying to figure out how to copy a competitor - with a 5% chance he's doing something legitimately new - but the company makes so much money on other stuff, they can afford his efforts.

The reality of major corporations is that the strength of their legacy businesses allow them to throw off a lot of cash and their employees don't need to do that much to improve the situation - they just jockey to make sure they are the one who gets to sit in a big chair. M&A is a huge factor in the long term positioning of major corporations for this reason - swallow the competition.

Procter & Gamble uses MBAs to figure out how to shrink a toilet paper roll while raising the price by $0.05. Is that innovation, or "value", that's objectively better than even a failing startup? Probably not, but they can afford to pay.
ISP cache stuff and can sell traffic, cross-domain tracking is nothing.

I think we worry too much. We should focus on making our cryoto stronger, not about some cross-domain tracking. If third-party cookie is already a mess, cross-domain tracking is always a mess. Let's focus on something more practical and more important. Half of the websites nowadays probably add Google analytic and Google knows a lot about users for you (even if Google only stores the statistics).
Yes, Apple did get an large share of the market simply by being first to the "fully-touch-screen phone market" with the first iPhone. It depends on how Apple views this. Will they start introducing sub $200 (no contract) products?

Personally I wouldn't buy a 5C over a 5S....
> I can think of any number of reasons why it might still be a win.

You write all that as if the next few paragraphs didn't have all those caveats already.
Does it have mobile readers and multi-device sync?

If not, then I'll continue using Feedly (and pressure them to change the link hijacking policy).
Thanks.

Are you saying that the shell (or C or assembly) is a language closely tied to a system, e.g., a CPU, a kernel and utilities - a system that can produce various types of errors?

Whereas APL is not tied to such a system, other than mathematics?
The problems with side effects have been fixed for a while: http://pybites.blogspot.com/2011/07/behind-scenes-of-pytests...
If they only did it for their users it would just be a sort of SaaS browser. However simply republishing entire feeds like this makes it feel more like a blatant copyright violation.
Lots of late night programming, then lots of late night paid programming. It all boils down to putting the time into learning. The difference from self-taught coder and professional developer is the paycheck. Though the self-taught coder might have experience writing code, it will not have experience developing software. Two different things altogether. That is why you need to put in the time in both scenarios.
> There are many successful companies that have been built upon cheaper rather than better, eg Walmart.

In addition to what everyone else said, Walmart owns a market other companies don't seem to want: Poor people. Both Costco and Target go after a much richer clientele, and KMart, which is otherwise very similar, is dying. Walmart is the go-to one-stop shopping experience for people working one or more minimum wage jobs.

Related to this is the fact Walmart builds stores where other companies don't. As a result, Walmart owns some very rural markets nobody else is touching.

Edited to add: My point: Given the above, for Walmart, 'cheaper' is a necessary element for success. They're chasing a market that straight-up can't afford 'better'.
dtrace would catch the leak in 10 minutes!
Essentially yes - the web interface is mobile first, we wrote about it when we released it:

https://kouio.com/blog/kouio-your-mobile-rss-reader
MBA here...I take offense!
Why is that bad?

If I had a promising new drug, I'd want someone with years of experience in getting a drug approved helping me out and the billions in capital to get it done wouldn't hurt either (which of course is available because Novartis sold a number of profitable drugs).

The professor who came up with this science is going to get a cut of that, as will the university.
Newsblur[0] is a great open-source[1] feed-reader that not only beats Feedly in ease of use, but also has a bunch of great additional features over the standard RSS reader, with apps for both iOS and Android to complement the killer web-app. I highly recommend it.

[0] https://newsblur.com/

[1] https://github.com/samuelclay/NewsBlur
Lets start with an example, imagine that you are writing code to control a robot. You want to be able to do something like:

forward(5)
raiseArm(5)

however, your program needs to be single threaded, and needs to quickly respond to the shutoff command. One solution would be to make every function exits quickly, and gets called in a loop until its done. This means that every function is essentially an object with the methods: init(), step(), where step returns true when the action is finished.

Suppose we define forward(int) and raiseArm(int) as described. We would like to be able to easily define a function that moves forward then raises the arm. This new function would be combined(a,b)=forward(a) >> raiseArm(b).

Now, imagine we have a function that moves forward until it hits a wall, then returns the distance traveled. We want to move forward until we hit a wall, then return to our initial position. If we could block this would look like:

x=forwardUntilWall()
backward(x)

Instead of having forwardUntilWall() return x, it can store x in itself and let the bind operator pass it to the init function of backward(). This would let us write the above as:

forwardUntilWall() `bind` backward.

Using do-notation (which is just syntactic sugar), we could also write that as:

do
x<-forwardUntilWall()
backward(x)

Which looks a lot like our blocking version.

Imagine that you have a function setArm, and you want to set your arm sequentially at variuas posistions. Normally you would do:

for (each x in posistions):
setArm(x)

Using monads, you could do:

forEach (posistions) (setArm)

or using do-notations:

forEach (posistions) $ \x-> do
setArm(x)

In Haskell, forEach is called "forM_", and needs to be imported from Control.Monad.Loops. Of course you could avoid importing it and simply define it yourself.

Also, we are not restricted to combining our specific monad with only the general monadic operators. For example, we can easily define a function that will take 2 monadic operations and return a monadic operation that runs both of them concurrently.
Which is dead. Rather, most HN satire currently goes on at http://www.reddit.com/r/programmingcirclejerk
That makes no sense at all. You do realize that developing a cure for a disease can be even more profitable than just trying to treat it, right?

Look at the new HCV treatments. Previously, you'd have to take two drugs for most of your life. Three different companies have developed treatments that cure HCV in 90%+ of the patients with only 12 weeks of treatment.
I disagree with your assertion. As a developer and entrepreneur, I get why you'd say that. As an artist (I have a B.A. in Fine Arts), I believe that sentiment is something we need a LOT more of.

Not everybody has the ability to make something new. That ability is powerful, empowering, and affirming. I believe that if someone, by virtue of creating something that didn't exist before, ended up feeling better about themselves, then frankly, that's PLENTY worthwhile enough. We need MORE people who feel good about themselves in this world, not less.

That, my friend, is where Wil is coming from.
The Repurposed Ph.D.
It depends on how complicated the drug is. Some drugs are actually kinda pricey to manufacture while others can be made for pennies a dose.

Yes, you can make many drugs at home with the right setup and technical knowledge. No, robots don't actually help that much.
End of an era: Microsoft quietly discontinues the sale of Windows 7 to retailers
On http://newsblur.com users have two options for sharing links. They can either use a Send To feature, which uses the story's original URL, and hook it up to any number of third party services like Twitter, Facebook, Evernote, Tumblr, Instapaper, etc.

Or they can share to their blurblog, which is a shared stories blog. When users share links to their blurblog, the tweeted link goes to the user's blurblog, like so: http://samuel.newsblur.com/story/family-feuds/4e65d5. It includes their commentary and offers a place to reply to the user. Alternatively, you can turn on a setting that takes you directly to the story.

I think Feedly's intention here isn't what's best for users, since you don't have the option to comment on the story and have people reply to you, which would necessitate its own page. This is more of the Send To feature described above, and I think it's part of their drive to find additional revenue where there isn't much.

RSS is not a growing market and I think only independent developers with small costs will end up alive in a few years. Feedly will either have to evolve and find a bigger market, or pare down the cost of hosting the majority of Google Reader expats. And that doesn't square well with taking investment.
Could he try applying for asylum somewhere else?
The Incas that followed them had recorded language. I doubt it is really known positively that Chimu had no recorded language. There are quite a few peoples groups in the western hemisphere for which it is commonly asserted by outsiders they had no recorded language, but once you start studying them at all, you find they have a recorded language.