skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is sarcasm. I don't disagree with you on it. In terms of its effectiveness, I don't know. I contrasted a strong comment by singling out a single point about it. I certainly didn't intend it to be an attack and I hope its not seen as such by jusben1369.

In terms of its appropriateness, I guess that's debatable too. If me and jusben1369 were having a chat about this person to person, I'm sure we'd know that its a hearty debate and we could debate the merits of our opinion while still respecting each other and knowing that we have differing viewpoints. Not to say that this is always easy to do.

With only the written word, I guess these types of comments can be seen as verbal jousting. If this is viewed as such by everyone (especially jusben1369) then this was not my intention.
Sarcasm is a tool for someone that can't actually come up with a counter-argument. It's an appeal to absurdity combined with a strawman. Exaggerate the other side's point until it sounds ridiculous and pretend that's an argument.
What war was Genetics (Device: Micro Arrays, PCR Machines, etc) built off of and applicable to?

Or do you count that as 'medicine'? In that case you can reduce everything all the way down to cave men battling over fire.

I don't disagree that war time has pushed science for the vast majority of history... But there are fields that were not created initially with offensive or defensive purposes in mind.

Edit: Added devices to example
It's mentioned in the article that mutually assured destruction due to each side having nuclear capability is a big difference between now and WWI.
Same reason it made sense for the U.K. to prevent Germany from invading France and consolidating Europe. A China fearless of its near seas is a China more ready to secure the energy and natural resources it so desperately needs in central Asia, the middle East, Africa, and South America. The realpolitik angle is that it's simpler to balance a consolidating power versus a consolidated one.

Japan's utility is not only as a strategic launchpad. It also represented, in 2012, $216 billion in trade [1]. That is a $5.5 trillion asset when discounted at the U.S. 30-year rate.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_par...
Agree that's sometimes happens. The site also incentivizes every single word to be explained, which makes for some pretty mundane, very little explanations. But there are times where I just don't get the reference and someone's been kind enough to provide it.
"Prove that you're not a witch"
I think that the cultural impulses that exclude women, minorities, and older people might come mostly from on-the-ground male immaturity ("brogrammers"). But I blame the VCs for encouraging that cultural tendency instead of muting it. They're supposed to be the adults, and they fail at that.

One of the issues that software development has, I think, is the combination of hard-to-audit work with a short audit cycle. Most professionals get a couple years of work done before they're subjected to a serious, "are you capable of moving up?" audit. Lawyers are tracked for partnership or out at 4 years, which means they get a large number of chances to prove that they're partner material, and the long audit cycle takes out a lot of the noise. In software engineering, especially with the fast-firing culture, there's less time to prove oneself, and you have to start beating your chest and looking impressive before you have time to actually do something impressive. This tends to favor people with large egos, which turns a lot of women off to the industry.
NSA 'hacking unit' infiltrates computers around the world
I am not sure if PG is an ageist, I don't know him, but I do know the funding levels that YC provides and most 40+ founders I know would be able to simply draw that amount out of savings easily, so it would not make sense for someone like that to bother with YC. I know a couple of 40+ entrepreneurs and most of them had no trouble getting funding on their own. I think YC is designed more as a micro funding source which would naturally target the young who typically do not have much money as they are starting out.
The issue is Google has become the only way to discover content on the web. Before Google, there was much more competition or alternative ways to make content discoverable. Now people basically only "google" stuffs up, and that's not going to change. And search capabilities on most websites are provided by Google too ,that's insane and dangerous. Google has become the WEB and if you are not on Google , you dont exist.
Google is now an institution thus "too big to fail",and so much for anti-trust laws.
So drones are good because they are less bad?
There is no need for such talk. We can at least pretend to be grown-ups and have a discussion.

Violence is not the key difference.

Dying when a plance crashes into your home or dying from a rocket fired from a malfunctioning drone are just as violent and just as "meaningless" to the next of kin. However, in both cases we learn something and we progress.

I'm sorry, but the world does not work in the way that Disney has made you believe.
It isn't. The problem is, "interest" isn't the only concept he's talking about; he's actually referring to a tuple that includes interest, opportunity, and support.
"Prove that you're not a witch" is a very old tactic - and it's the opposite of the modern standard of guilt.
This sounds like a vast improvement over most normal hiring processes. A question though - how do you avoid legal liability from (4) and (5) in the event that they cause a disparate impact (see Griggs vs Duke Power, etc)?
Does M:N imply shared memory for all tasks on a thread?
Among others:

https://twitter.com/RapGenius/status/417348237222113281
I think that the RJS way is a perfectly good way to sprinkle some ajax magic into most applications that are, more or less, CRUD applications. I've done this in numerous simple CRUD apps and it allows for very rapid development.
If you need something more complex you can build the API in Rails and then use whatever javascript front-end framework you like.
Another interesting point about globalization is the meaning of WWI style globalization was colonialism, every European power had overseas colonies (other than Germany). Another example where world trade didn't seem to help much.
None of this is based on facts or study. I like the fiction you present though.
All kinds of sites regularly get penalized for this type of behavior.
That's not all that's happening here.
This is the type of article that makes HN worth reading regularly. Eloquently written and accessible but at the same time going deep down into fundamental issues.

If we could have one article of this quality a week we'd be very lucky indeed.
I did the same!
There are people that prefer the extra step of Photoshop and there are those that don't see the need. However, in most agencies the people drawing pretty pictures in Photoshop don't know the slightest bit of HTML/CSS - someone else does that for them and someone micro-manages that process. This introduces efficiencies and results in difficulties delivering the deliverables on time and to the designer's satisfaction. So, if you can do at least a bit of CSS by yourself then Photoshop is fine. Reality though is that many shops don't do this.

A lot of the points in the article are not strictly correct. Again, presenting a big up front design to the client and saying it is going to look exactly like this is not fair on the client or whomever has to code it up. It is far better to be honest with the client and say 'your logo goes here' and the design will be iterated on to suit user requirements. Casting it in stone is wrong. It is not like you are designing a bridge or something else that needs the big up front design.

Who says Photoshop is easier for playing with the design creatively? If I want to see what the side column looks like on the right I can go in and put 'float: right", bam it is there. If I want to change the font sizes globally, I can do it in CSS just like that. With Photoshop there is quite a disincentive to trying such things: therefore it is a less creative tool in many respects, particularly since the text is shapes on page lorem ipsum rather than content.

Ultimately though, we all work with other people, in teams and externally with clients. The main reason for using one approach or another is for that cohesiveness.
/shrug

It's pretty clear he realizes that he has no idea what he's talking about and can only resort to stereotypes and name-calling.

edit: And apparently has no idea how throwaway accounts work, I guess.
I've read quite a bit about WWI, and that's a very good analysis.

Although, as a nitpick, I'd reword "the dangers of multicultalism" as "rising nationalism that made old political boundaries obsolete". The Austrian Empire worked well enough for hundreds of years... until it's various peoples started identifying more and more with their language and ethnicity.
Then people should stop claiming that RG is the best "lyrics" site. Lyrics are simply lyrics and RG does no better than AZlyrics in that regard.
They can claim they're the best annotations or song meanings site instead.
I think it's pretty clear that, the US army looks out for one nation only the U S of A, they are definitely making it clear that humanities best interest is not their long term goal. They look out for their own, I think we all live in a world where we all look out for our own. The US army are no better than the terrrorists who took the innocent lives of Americans. Honestly the US is just a big bully and what it all comes down to is media, they've brain washed the entire nation to make it seem like all these drone attacks are ok, they're not severe, they're not as bad as it sounds, justifying it through fancy words the common people can't understand. The fact is its usually worse than it sounds but most people just choose to switch off from it because no one wants to think about these depressing things, and by switching off their brains they are empowering the politicians that pull the triggers.

It's never ok when innocent people die, innocent civilians of the US don't want innocent civilians of other nations to die. The fact of the matter is it's not these civilians who are pulling the trigger.

The way I see it we all follow a pattern. In the US you have 2 big political parties, democrat and republican. I mean no one ever questions why we let these dickheads stay in power? Why isn't there a third, fourth or a fifth party? They have fabricated a world and a media were they have basically brain washed the entire world. I mean honestly do u think having 2 parties take turn in power is a democracy? What it all comes down to is to not give them the power. I think in every nation all around the world not voting is as powerful as voting. Breaking that pattern and having that critical thinking, to call the politicians bullshit, and impeach the shit out of them when they fuck up and lie, that conviction to get up and do the right thing. But that will never happen, because it's too hard, because we've all been brain washed, becuase everyone is busy living their lives.

I think the American people have forgotten that their government exist to serve them not the other way around, when you pay tax your paying for a service, when you not getting the service you asked for, you should get up and do something.
Thought provoking books that everyone must read atleast once
I keep seeing comments like this and thinking about how easy it is to caricature any effort; for instance, people manage to do the same thing to Watsi, which should be an unimpeachable project. Are there do-nothing "Social Justice Warriors"? I'm sure there are. What's your point? By focusing on them to the exclusion of all else, what you're really demonstrating is that you're not interested in understanding the complaint. Why is ignorance supposed to be a compelling argument?
You bring up an important point. The people pushing code.org assume people have the same 'operational' level of knowledge that a standard power user has.

We should be teaching people how to run virus scans and backups before writing an application that prints a colored letter to the screen.
I plan to continue building community around Huginn (https://github.com/cantino/huginn), and hopefully to start blogging about different ways to use it.
I will join the channel and'll contact you...
To the list of shibboleths that includes "third wave feminism" I will now add "social justice". Thank you. It's convenient that people that hold views like yours are so willing to mark themselves.
Here is a chart from my tech site on which people troubleshooting tech things go:

http://i.imgur.com/KqYcypZ.png
We don't even have to speculate whether x% of women can be as good as men. We know that for some time, women have been among the elite in computer science.

You argue that it's as simple as just doing merit-based analysis, which implies that because women are so scarce in the field, it's because they've failed these impartial merit based tests. I'm arguing that it's quite possible that these impartial merit based tests don't exist.

They don't even exist for men -- i.e. "it's not what you know but who you know".
What Makes Girls Fall In Love With Computers And Code?
People lose their jobs for this kind of shit, it is ridiculous.
Just another reason why we need to start getting direct access to the underlying flash instead of relying on vendors to provide a bunch of unupdatable translation software. This is particularly the case with SSDs where the end result of all this is "just buy Intel SSDs if you value your data" with the corresponding price premium.
This is the definition of FUD. You're arguing that the Guardian shouldn't be trusted because the government should be trusted because war is hell, issues are complex, truth is helpful, and lies are not helpful, and Fox News.
It can be damaging to talk about what any one group is better or worse at, statistically, because it leads some people to stereotype all members of that group. And I believe that most people that talk about things like this don't actually have statistic to back them up. For example, it's a pretty common to joke about "women drivers" and yet insurance companies, the folks with the most information, tend to charge women less because they're less likely to be in accidents, get speeding tickets, or DUIs.

Bone-headed people say bone-headed things and try to back them up with "common knowledge" that's just misinformation rooted in traditional views.

In regards to your wife, that can be different. I assume you're aren't saying things like "she's good at juggling because she's a woman" and instead just "she's good at juggling because she, as one individual, is good at juggling." My wife is amazing at art. It's not because she's a woman but because she's spent time practicing.
And whenever you wish to test if your browser can be "hard-tracked" (not just by probability), you can use this tool: http://www.canyoutrackme.com/
That has not worked too well for the Internet companies. These guys are just as guilty in this.
What makes it saner than clojure? The type safety?
Raganwald's post:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130116103105/http://raganwald.p...
Meh. The only total languages are used for formal verification, you'll always have to settle for less to get Turing-completeness.

> Of course it is strongly typed! All expressions have type Univ.

Have you used PHP? You'll come to appreciate the differences between the different "unityped" languages.

> All my C++ programs are commonly written in a way that preserves referential transparency, and clearly distinguishes between objects that are meant to be mutated (non-const) from those that are not meant to (const). That still does not make C++ a pleasant language to program in.

Does that say anything about Lisp? Nope, not at all. It isn't like C++ is comparable to Lisp, despite the efforts put by C++ programmers to wrest safety from a language designed as a superset of the language of cowboy-coders par excellence, its true nature as an imperative language with raw pointers may rear its head at any point. Not to say that Lisp has had more facilities up to this point than C++ to write referentially transparent programs.

> Spooky action at a distance. Me no like. :-(

Depends on the Lisp. Common Lisp's global variables are mutable and dynamic. Me no like either. In Racket and Clojure you can declare variables to be explicitly dynamic, and they can be rebound within special blocks, locally, sort of. Not that it's something anyone should use frequently.

> Will the result typecheck?

Does the if keyword typecheck?
Also on

http://30c3.ex23.de/fahrplan_d3.html (search for bunnie)

or directly

http://30c3.ex23.de/saal1/30C3_-_5294_-_en_-_saal_1_-_201312...
Except in this case he's only quoting John Levine.
I don't think about it at all, and for good reason: nothing that our process does could possibly be more risky than the crapshoot process other companies use. To wit: I know for a fact that my process isn't going to be dumb enough to ask a woman whether she's going to be able to manage her child care responsibilities and still be able to answer emergency work calls.
Here's an animation of a hinged dissection: http://sylvester.math.nthu.edu.tw/d3/thesis-2003/yang/dissec...

It was linked to at the bottom of the Wikipedia page.
War is the only way forward. The funding of war machines comes from a desire to survive. A fear to die. This will always take precedence over any other kind of progress.

Stop investing in start-ups and a couple of people will be a little less wealthy. Stop investing in the military and we and/or our way of live dies within a decade.
I'm not seeing much warmongering as a cultural phenomena.

In the U.S., perhaps not. But nationalism and remilitarisation are flaring up in China and Japan, respectively.

Who exactly is supposed to invade China next decade if they don't invade today?

China, with good reason, perceives itself as being surrounded by U.S.-allied countries looking to suppress its growth. Since growth is the currency the Communist Party trades for its seat of power, this is a potentially existential issue to the elite.

The root cause of the war being the ottoman empire decaying and almost dead and everyone wanted a lucrative piece of it.

The American Pacific alliance would be a loose analogue today. China may think it can establish a suzerainty over, say, the Phillipines, betting the U.S. will balk at another costly intervention.

The Economist's point isn't that we're going to have a war in a mold of WWI - all the seats need not be filled. It's simply warning that while we're watching the S&P 500 soar to record heights on the back of booming productivity and resurgent globalisation we shouldn't ignore the fireworks that are playing out over a handful of unmanned islands in the East China Sea.
Absolutely, and I know this feeling. Getting your product ready enough to launch it publicly is just the beginning. You need to become a hustler and push forward relentlessly. Built the marketing and sales plan - and execute, execute, execute. This is where the real business adventure starts.
>"How many soldiers have you seen die on the side of a road in Afghanistan because our ever-so-accurate UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicle] were unable to detect an IED [improvised explosive device] that awaited their convoy?"

Right from the start the author veers of into things that have absolutely nothing to do with the viability of drone warfare.

Using the authors logic, every single piece of equipment we have that wasn't designed specifically to prevent death by IED should be abandoned. Guess we don't need guns, uniforms, canteens, body armor, etc.

The author does have some valid criticisms, but they are obscured by ridiculous tangents like this one.

As for my own thoughts, I think that drones are a valid tool, but I also think that our government needs to use them in a far more responsible manner.
That's true but that is just one query, I'd assume an overwhelming of RG's organic traffic didn't come from searching the company name.
Care the clarify so I can proof you wrong?
The author agrees with x=10 based on the 10,000 hours hypothesis as she states in her article. She didn't base her agreement on pg's "hackers start at 13" statement. She agreed with it due to the shear number of hours it takes to get competent in a highly technical skill.
Apple & Samsung Resume Patent Negotiations, After Apple Presses On The Jugular
If RG thinks they're so great (and all the bandwagoners on HN), then they should prove it by playing fairly.

My suspicion is that the vast majority of people who search for lyrics don't care about song meanings or annotations. Azlyrics does just fine, which is why they've always been at the top. If people wanted song meanings they would search for song meanings.

My theory is that RG wasn't able to grow as fast as they hoped and have to resort to these methods. How else can RG justify a $15 million investment? Their biggest competitor, songmeanings.com, is bootstrapped with only a couple employees, which shows the true market size of the song meanings / annotations market.

Remember that most consumers want things that are insanely simple and give them immediate satisfaction. I'm not surprised that most people on HN think otherwise as they tend to be deeper thinkers than the average consumer.
Did you detect an argument in the OP to be responded to? The argument that people die in war, perhaps? The Fox News argument? The argument that if they're bombing weddings now, they were probably bombing villages before?

The sarcasm seemed to be based on the fact that you can agree that truth is good and falsehood is bad and not see that as a reason to dismiss the Guardian piece.
I considered linking to that same page, but it seemed overkill.
"Pauley is essentially saying that the targets of the order have no recourse to challenge the collection of their personal data because Congress never intended for targets to ever know that they were subject to this sort of spying."

No.

Pauley is saying that the targets of the order have no recourse to challenge it. That Congress never intended for them to know about it may be true, but it's otherwise neither here nor there.
I wonder if this penalty would have been this severe if their "apology" was an actual apology. If I was in Google's position and had waited to see the RG response, I would have been less forgiving after the tone of that letter. But that is just my opinion...
> We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read.

Agreed. Let's start with the basics: WTF is doing a UK/USA-driven drone in the middle east anyway?
On Biological Sex Differences
1) All major currencies can already be easily exchanged. The only reason they depreciate rather than appreciate is that we have decided that depreciating currencies are good for the market.

2) Bitcoin maintains a public record of every transaction. There are still ways to anonomize yourself (mixing services, proposed extensions like Zerocoin), but cash would still be my first choice.
This was essentially my point. If PG is "ageist" in funding decisions, it's because most credible 40+ founders can already cover a few months of living expenses.

I do think that PG has been tied in (probably not through any fault of his own) with the age-discrimination culture of the Valley. But that's not PG's fault and he can't really do anything about it anyway.
Amazon’s best-selling products this holiday season
Danielle Morrill life story as a coder (unedited)
How a simple Node.js project turned into Iron Scheduler
12 Signs You're Too Tech-Savvy For Your Own Good