skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: Research and the Pain Point Simplified
Dear Gentle Entrepreneur,

The source of your Awesome and Win lies not in your bold fearlessness, but rather within, as you know, that 20 hours of research, and your fear. Entrepreneurism is Fear. Of failure, of success, of repetition, and so on. One could recommend any number of public domain, classic, and contemporary books and lectures toward acclimating you to find and face your fears. Zelda II, Blaster Master, yes, even video games have done it. Poets, Caesars, Queens, and even Kings.

But, for your convenience, let us give an example close to our own heart. We are best at finding our fear and facing it before committing to some five and twelve hours of research.

Simply put, we're pinning tabs in Chrome, placing our beastliest tabs farthest on the left. Right now we're looking at [news.ycombinator.com, reddit.com, growl.info] as the top three most terrorizing (pardon the metonym) pain points.

If you were us, as a thought experiment, where would you begin that twenty hours of research?

All Best,

Grantvote
I think a shell is where running programs is the default, and writing code is secondary. In shok, the code is a DSL for filesystem and job management. I think that's quite a different type of thing than general-purpose scripting languages like Ruby.

My typing barrier for %x(ls) is too high.
It is not compatible to Surface RT tablets. I don't understand how Microsoft is willing to burn its early adopters so much. Surely it is not a technical matter or a matter of resources? If anything, Microsoft should do everything to keep all of them happy.
Regarding the hardware itself - if you have ever tried out a Native Instruments Maschine, which this is kind of modeled on, you know that the haptics of the pad keys are key. This won't work well with the type of switch of the touchcover.
Did you try Googling? :)

http://masashi-k.blogspot.fi/2013/08/nodejs-on-android.html
Well, lets try Haskell syntax

map f $ filter p xs

what, don't like the reverse order? That's fixable.
If we define # as reverse function application, it's

xs # filter p # map f

or

filter p xs # map f

which is quite similar to what you are looking for.
Another language with a simple grammar and partially inspired by Forth & Lisp is Rebol...

$ rebol

>> price: 99
== 99

>> either price > 100 [10] [5]
== 5

>> ;;; and even more interesting is...

>> ten: [10]
== [10]

>> five: [5]
== [5]

>> either price > 100 ten five
== 5
No, backing implies that someone has a legal obligation to supply something in exchange for the thing backed. Gold originally backed USD because paper dollars were literally a contract to pay the bearer a certain amount of gold. Gold and USD now have the same sort of relationship that USD and bitcoin do: neither USD nor bitcoin is backed by anything.

Both are still worth something, at the moment, though, which is all you need for an exchange to be possible.
That little wrapper is a runtime (after all, what does crt stand for?); depending on the platform, it's certainly not so negligible that you can say it doesn't exist.
After all these years of free software proponents advocating for open source BIOSes and getting mocked for their supposed impracticality, we see the truth.
Myself and some of my friends fretted over grades in college a lot more than we should have.

You should aim for a 3.5 or higher on a 4.0 scale. If you're going for a particularly tough job, maybe 3.8. Less than a 3.5 cuts out a lot of more competitive companies, and less than a 3.0 is pretty much death unless you have a very good reason (this assumes you can get past the HR filters).

What will a 4.0/4.0 get you? Basically nothing, except for some extra bragging rights. My graduating CS semester only had about 5 or 7 people who had a 4.0, but most of us had job offers prior to leaving college. GPA will count for your first or second job out of college, then not matter as much.

Note, I went to a top 10 school for computer science. You may have to scale this somewhat if your school isn't as "rigorous" according to the biases of your interviewers.
Indeed, and already submitted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6979457
The terminal isn't that well supported right now. I only use the terminal version on servers or when editing configs. Not when writing code/documentation.

Would love if someone improved this ;-)
I don't understand why Microsoft even calls the two tablets the same, when they couldn't be any different from the software, hardware and price perspectives.

The only explanation I can come up with is that they're trying to confuse the consume and think that one is just as good as the other (you can do the same things with both), and this title "Surface Music Kit", even though it's just for the Surface Pro device, proves my point.
Yes, worked for me as well. Interesting, same browser, but if you click from HN versus a google search the count starts over? So you can do it 10 times before you hit the paywall again? I would think a different browser would work (different cookie), but the same browser...I wonder what this says about the NYT algorithm?
I don't know where to begin...
Everyone Can Learn Angel Investing Using Kiva
X has had a feature, called backing store, to get around that since the 80s. Individual windows can request backing store, and there's an option you can set in xorg.conf to enable backing store for all windows.

X11 actually anticipated a future of composited windows, each with their own separate buffer to draw into, well before its rivals -- due in no small part to being intended to run on much more advanced hardware than Windows or Mac OS.
They still don't sell it, it's only for contest winners... Why?!
In general paywalls from large, prestigious organizations scare me. For now I can ignore them, as there are hundreds of other sources of interesting content that generate revenue from traditional means (advertising, selling your information, etc.). But if the paywall scheme is successful for such organizations, others will follow suit, and the abundance of “free” quality content will dry up. The rolling snowball effect, I hope the snowball melts before it has a chance to gain momentum.
The key to rnu is having a toggle bound. Once I had that it never annoyed because 90% of the time I want an absolute number I just jump to it. For the rest of the times I just toggle.
I've worked from home for the past 6+ years. I started with several of the routine recommendations below (all good). What I've found over time, however, is that the routine route is -- in most cases -- simply a transfer of traditional office culture to a work environment that is anything but.

My recommendation: embrace flexibility.

Man-made time constraints are no longer part of your world (outside of deadlines). Technology no longer requires that you are chained to a desk. Shake things up to stay fresh. Don't let yourself think 9-5, 5 days. Your life is now 24x7, 365 and you are in control of how you use those hours.

That said, there are some spot-on recommendations here by others based on my experience:

* Exercise. I've taken calls on 50mi bike rides and from roadside taverns. Helps to have a buddy you can draft off during the calls.

* Nutrition. Laptop on counter. Work. Cook.

* Standing desk. You'll find yourself moving around a lot more rather than slouching in a chair and never leaving your monitor. On that, if you have the means, spread devices around your house. Mix up your screen time.

* Get up early. This one took some time, but is perhaps the biggest thing you can do. It jumpstarts everything.

* Sunday night scheduling. I believe it was Tim Ferris' 4-hour workweek that started this. Sunday night, write down what you want/must accomplish over the next week. When it's done, it's done. Doesn't matter whether it's Tuesday or Sunday.

* IM. IM. IM. Some see random IM conversations as interruptions to be avoided. They aren't. They are your watercooler, your vent, your muse. Embrace them.

Good luck! It's a great adventure.
Any chance I can make a push for blog posts to all be literate programming? :)
Ah the joys of worldwide copyright management. Somebody else linked another copy of it that you should be able to view.

It succinctly covers the issue of "masturbation at work" because, if you work from home, suddenly you can. :)
I know a really good restaurant with a non specific name that has made a point to have landing pages at many different sites so if you search for them the top 20 or so results are all about them
You Can’t Run A Startup And Fear Speaking In Public
You can't be serious, like every major site out there will send you an email link with a "password" unique to that user/email that will one-click opt-out. I believe this is due to US regulation, but it's clearly technically implementable and safe.
I don't think that it's something you know, (the last 4 of your credit card or social security are used for that).

My guess is that they have different email campaigns tied to your bank account, credit card or investment account, etc. This is probably the only way to make sure you don't get any emails from that account.
I think a more helpful question would be "in what instances do I need syntax?". Could you build a type-system like Haskell has for LISP? Would it be usable?

In terms of syntax, I think there's a divide between the needs of static type-systems, versus dynamic ones. LISP is at its core a dynamic language. It makes sense to treat code as being data that can be manipulated. Getting rid of all that syntax gives you great power in terms of what you can do. And personally I find Clojure code to be much saner than code written in Ruby or Python, but that's another discussion.

However, the other side of the coin are Haskell or Miranda (its predecessor) or languages in the ML family or Scala. These languages go to great length to achieve much of LISP's expressiveness, while ensuring a great amount of static type-enforcement. Haskell is especially notable because Haskell is lazy and has many goodies, such as type-classes or rank-2 types. People say that when a piece of Haskell code successfully compiles it is usually correct. LISP can't do this, even though there have been experiments with pluggable type-systems.

For an excellent rant on the choice of Scheme for SICP (and not Miranda, Haskell's predecessor), checkout: http://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/dat/miranda/wadler87.p...

So IMHO, syntax helps if you want static type-safety, because the language and the type-system exposed need to be expressive. Whether static type-safety is useful or not, it's a matter of debate, being highly dependent on the problem domain. One could argue that static type-safety is very useful if the shape of the data you're manipulating is well defined and doesn't change much, otherwise you're better off with a dynamic language, but that's another discussion.
You are confused. It's compatible with non-pro "Surface 2" (second generation Windows RT based device). It's incompatible with "Surface RT".
I had a Canon CAT. The praise for it is overrated. It was never as simple as people claim nor really any joy to use. The hardware itself also tended to die suddenly. When mine died I went to repair place where I happened upon the Canon rep. He said the CAT's motherboard was prone to suddenly dying and the only solution was to buy a new CAT.
why is it that we sleep better with the sounds of a rainstorm going on?

Because we evolved as animals being preyed upon by large predators, big cats, packs of dogs etc.

When our preyed-upon ancestors heard the sounds of a rainstorm they knew that they could sleep because the predators don't usually hunt during a rainstorm, and that the predators could not smell them during a rainstorm.

Evolutionarily, selection wise speaking, those who slept during a rainstorm got rested and were better rested afterward, and so were more likely to pass on their genes.

The rainstorm is the friend of the prey animal.
> Scala's features don't really overlap. Defining extension methods (with the new implicit class construct) is just syntactic sugar over implicit conversions.

Point taken, for this particular case. But subtyping and implicits still cover a large part of each other's functionality, and the former is a subset of the latter when you take into account the Liskov substitution principle.

> Also, I find implicit parameters in general to be awesome.

It is certainly better than having no way to do general ad-hoc polymorphism, but...

> Because of implicit parameters, Scala achieves the best marriage available between OOP and FP. Scala doesn't just pretend to be FP. Scala is FP. Think of languages like Ocaml or F#, which have 2 type-systems in the same language.

... I beg to differ here. Scala is biased towards OOP: you can do Java-style programming with no inconvenience and awkwardness, but Haskell- or even ML-style programming requires imperfect encodings in Scala. How do I do the equivalent of a ML signature ascription? (That is, assigning a signature to a module that possibly hides some members and/or makes some types externally opaque. This requires structural subtyping for modules.) Why is type inference unavailable precisely when you would most need it?

On the other hand, OCaml is biased towards FP. I still dislike it for other reasons, though: functions being eqtypes makes no frigging sense; the syntax is heavily biased towards imperative programming, so I end up having to parenthesize a lot; applicative functors are leaky abstractions in an impure language. And, unlike, Haskell, which may be huge but is ultimately built on top of a small core, OCaml strikes me as intrinsically huge (just huge, though, not full of warts like Scala). I dislike F# even worse, because it ditches the ML module system. When I want to use a ML, I use Standard ML.

> Scala also doesn't side-step covariance/contravariance problems when dealing with generics, like other OOP languages do, providing the tools to deal with both. And we could agree that covariance/contravariance is a problem created by OOP subtyping, but if you've got OOP in the language, then you can't really pretend that all generic types are covariant or invariant and it's just awful to have two type systems in the same language.

I do appreciate that it provides tools for managing the mess, but I still prefer languages that do not create a mess.

On a second though: does it actually manage the mess, or does it just make it worse? When a language's object model makes C++'s look simple by comparison, that is a sign that there is something wrong going on.

> That's what they are trying to do with SIP-18. Scala 2.10 emits warnings if you use implicit conversions without importing language.implicitConversions and they plan to transform those warnings into errors in future versions.

The whole subtyping via inheritance is far more ugly than that, and that is not going away anytime soon.
This has not been a problem for a very long time now. We have spam filters and ad blockers -- basically, marketers do not get to show you anything if you do not want them to.
> For everyday usage the core ash shell is perfect for scripting

In my experience, most people have great difficulty correctly writing a simple loop to renames a set of files in a directory. I sumultaneously appreciate UNIX philosophy, and think the shell can be much improved by moving away from POSIX.
This is it.

Literally everything is infected.

Again, either the NSA goes (and you know that won't happen) or information technology goes or democracy as we know it goes.

Everyone, take your pick now.
In an ideal world this would be the case. In my experience, and that of many guys I know, it is not so clear.

I'll have to choose my words carefully. 'Not raping someone is pretty easy' in itself is correct. The rest of the paragraph, in my opinion, is simplifying the situation too much.

> It's not difficult to gauge what someone is comfortable with

Yes, it is. I am pretty good at reading body language. Better than most, I'd say. No worse, at least. And yet I and many of my friends have experienced a number of situations where a girl seemed 'comfortable' but later ended up expressing that she wasn't entirely. This seems to happen too often and with too many different types of people to be just an anomaly, in my view.

> and, if you can't gauge it, simply ask them.

That assumes that you have a suspicion and that there's no downside to that. It's really, really awkward to constantly ask a girl if whatever you're engaged in 'is okay' if it all seems okay. Not only can it actively curb any positive sexual energy in the situation, it's a bit odd to have to do this to begin with.

> They'll actually appreciate it. If they don't, then you dodged a bullet.

I think every single one of my female friends has, in moments of unguarded conversation, expressed a dislike of a guy constantly asking 'approval', and a strong fantasy about a guy 'taking charge'.

Now, that said, a number of my friends (including myself) have 'dodged bullets' with girls who seemed completely up for sex, but after repeated inquiry 'weren't really that into it'. The bullet that we dodged was the girl feeling shit about it the next day (at the very least). None of us want to be the guy that makes a girl feel violated (or at least shit about what happened), but on the other hand we also want to engage in sex and are actively taught that girls like us to take initiative and charge. It's a difficult issue.

My optimal solution is just err on the side of caution, and, as you say, 'just ask', and ask all the time. I wish it wasn't necessary, but it seems that in the current sexual landscape there are still many more cases were a woman feels like she was pushed too far, compared to men (although I have actually had this experience). So in that sense I agree with your approach.

But it's not as simple as you make it out to be. Sexuality and male-female interaction rarely is.
As is often my habit, I skimmed the voluminous commentary here before reading TFA: I've got to stop doing that. I clicked through expecting a massive paper and got four original paragraphs, along with quotes of stuff we've already seen on HN.

I'll ignore the moralistic Stross material, both because that is wise and because Krugman takes pains to emphasize the positive nature of his argument. The tentpole of that is that there is no theoretical floor for the exchange value of BTC. This is roughly true, but I don't think it entails the disastrous consequences that excite so many BTC antagonists.

Even if it's difficult to imagine hyperinflation of USD (although I'm not quite so confident as Krugman in the Fed's dollar sink policy: if this is not a new policy why didn't it work in the 1970s; if it is new why shouldn't we expect it to change?) we've seen hyperinflation of many other currencies, a number of which were held by more investors than currently hold BTC. If such hyperinflation was disastrous, then it was mostly for those who held the affected currency, and mostly in proportion to their holdings. No tinpot dictator has decreed the use of BTC; if you think they're overvalued then just sell them.

Of course if there is eventually a giant terminal sell-off of BTC for reasons, investors might just choose some other set of cryptocoins, some of which might have an appropriately theoretical floor. Would Krugman care to opine on the positive fate of those theoretically worthier assets?
awjr has put all the points and they are worth following.

I will only emphasize that never think you are working from home. Always assume you are working as if from another building than your own home. And always act as if you are in that building.

The moment you realize, you are in your own home, it would get harder for you to stick to the 'normal business routine'.
Types of Indexes in MongoDB
Or maybe mutual assured destruction prevents the potential murder of millions giving an atomic bomb positive moral value
Great game indeed. I remember translating it later all to Polish changing all the British premier league teams and players to local teams. My dad could not believe that was even possible :)
This is probably a good discussion point

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/functions-aggregat...

Not only as an example of "single line in a table" but also as an example where a huge volume would not add much value.

I'm struggling at this time to figure out how to produce multiple pages of boilerplate explaining "min()" that would be any more useful than the table.

On the other hand the explanation about nulls really sucks. Its important enough to put in the single line. For those too lazy to click and read, when a noob thinks he wants "SUM(bunchastuff)" what he probably wants is along the lines of using COALESCE or a homemade function that smells like COALESCE. There is a meta discussion that whenever NULLs are possible, and its more than just table definitions for example an overactive WHERE clause, then the NULLs will be a PITA. Defensive SQL coding can be tedious.
All countries do this. Most Australians have no idea about their holocaust. Most Brits have no idea what they did to the Irish and other 'lower races'. Most members of the Commonwealth have no idea the extent to which their nations committed crimes against humanity (racial cleansing) in a lot of the regions they call home today.

It should come as no surprise that a nation built on its national identity should want to whitewash history. All the other nations - America included - have been doing it for centuries ..
1. This oversimplifies the relationship. The ultimate transaction is from the AdWords customer to Google but in most cases a lot of that money will have come from Google searchers wallets.

2. Well, that's not quite right. The government can limit the actions of a monopoly to prevent abuse, but demanding arbitrary shit isn't really something that's in the statute books.

One thing's for certain, the "white hat" "SEO"ers paying bloggers to write thin articles about them to increase their organic search ranking are certainly not Google's customer and they have no obligation to please them.
It is fascinating that if they just would inform vendors on their security vulnerabilities and have them patched, that this would probably make us more secure than the eavesdropping they can do with the exploits.
Absolute complete ignorant arrogant rubbish.

First, an opt out is a declaration of perversion or subversion. And opt in is a genuine choice, which IMHO, should be available.

IMHO, every router in a home should have in its config a tick box which concerned parents can tick if they want to. Along side that should be an "advanced" button or link for more knowledgeable parents to tailor the the filter as they see fit. In a home parents should have an easy way to chose. And dont give me nonsense about installing firewalls and what not. That is way out of most normal people's scope. Even I can't be arsed with that, so I dont see why some single mum who works in a supermarket should either.

I also think there should be a simple system for parents to control mobile devices for their kids too. Not hard to work out something reasonable.

While I despise national and ISP level blanket filters and censorship, I fully respect the choices parents might want to take. I have 6 kids, aged 2 - 20, but personally dont and wont filter or censor. However, I am not arrogant enough to tell other parents what to do. I might be very wrong.

Look, on one level I do not want censorship. If I, as an adult, want to watch porn I dont see why I should be humiliated to do so. However, I also see that parents are left in the shit and are expected to be responsible, but have no help to be so. And no, its not good enough for hackers to offer hacker solutions that are not practical for anyone other than hackers.

There has to be a reasonable balance here. And I say it comes in the form of a simple tick box in the router.

Either that, of we agree to free parents of parental responsibility in both law and society.