skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
also, composition is so much more clear and intuitive than abstract inheritance of objects. one should favor simplicity over sophistication always
From the article: "Amazon has successfully fostered the idea that a book is a thing of minimal value."

Adam Smith discovered the Paradox of Value: "Nothing is more useful than water: but it will purchase scarcely anything; scarcely anything can be had in exchange for it. A diamond, on the contrary, has scarcely any use-value; but a very great quantity of other goods may frequently be had in exchange for it." See An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter IV,
"Of the Origin and Use of Money," Paragraph 13.

Like water, books may have a high use-value, but a very low exchange-value. Ditto for free open-source software.

It's unfortunate that the dominant school of economics today--Neoclassical economics--equates the value of a commodity with its price, whether the market is competitive or not.

By contrast, Classical economists like Adam Smith distinguished between (1) value, (2) use-value, (3) exchange value, and (4) price. Prices are further distinguished between natural prices and market prices--

(1) Value: The amount of labor necessary to the production of a marketable commodity.

(2) Use-value is the amount of discomfort or labor saved through the use of an object. Use-value does not depend on the existence of a market.

(3) Exchange-value: What quantity of other commodities an object will exchange for, if traded. It does not need to be expressed in money prices.

(4) Money prices: There's a distinction between "natural prices" (long-run cost-of-production) and "market prices" (price you actually pay for an object in the market); and these are only equal under conditions of market efficiency, equilibrium, and rational expectations. See the blog post "Adam Smith on Equilibrium" (March 26, 2013) at http://somrh.blogspot.com/2013/03/adam-smith-on-equilibrium....

Canadian poli-sci professor Robert Albritton claimed that capitalists (like Jeff Bezos, presumably) are indifferent to the use-value of the commodities in which they deal, since the only thing that matters to them is the money they make. Source: http://www.nodo50.org/cubasigloXXI/congreso/albritton_31ago0...
I'm not sure what you think CSS grids are, but you should probably read up a little more on them…
> I don't see why people need to use Bootstrap at all.

So you can get your product to market faster.

In many cases, stock Bootstrap ends up being fine to keep even when you're up and running, as 99% of people on the internet don't even know what Bootstrap is, or care, as long as your site works for them.
1. It's decentralized; email providers provide the authentication. Google doesn't directly support Persona right now, so Mozilla is supporting them via an Identity Bridge that hooks into Google's OAuth functionality. Google doesn't see what site you're signing into, just that you logged into a thing using Persona. Before Identity Bridges, you had to click a verification link in an email; this is a lot better.

2. I don't think Google exposes a way to use OAuth and skip past the list of accounts.
Ask HN: Why would a founder sell his company in an early stage?
If a founder gets an offer to sell his company before he even has a product and/or raised money from investors, what motivations would he have to consider the offer?
Indeed it does.

> Each participating team will receive:

> $120,000 in investment capital

> Access to stories, characters, resources and relationships from across The Walt Disney Company, such as The Walt Disney Studios, Disney Animation, Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilm, ESPN, ABC, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Disney Consumer Products, and Disney Interactive
The EU tax on digital sales really is hard to understand and comply with as a small developer. We're also thinking of blocking EU sales until we are big enough to afford to comply. How are people dealing with this?
I think you've got the right idea, but you've overgeneralized the critique of subclassing by suggesting that it is contradictory.

Here's where you're 100% correct: a subclass should not change the specified behavior of its superclass. To do so would be a violation of the contract established by its superclass's API.

This does not, however, apply to all use of subclassing. Rather, a superclass's API can be specified in such a way that subclasses may change behavior without breaking the contract. Dog and Animal fit this mold -- the Animal API may specify that Speak() will "cause the animal to speak", intentionally leaving this behavior up to subclassers. This is core to how subtyping-based polymorphism works -- the superclass underconstrains its API in order to allow subclasses to later tighten those constraints while still providing valid implementations of the superclass's contract.

Good API design requires that interface behaviors are properly constrained. Overconstrain them, and you box yourself (and consumers of the API) out of useful abstractions. Underconstrain them and it becomes impossible to work with the APIs because consumers of the API can't count on subclasses to have the proper behavior.

It's very, very easy to accidentally underconstrain an API, as you aptly pointed out. UIView does this with its subviews array. By exposing this mutable list, it broadcasts to its consumers a huge set of APIs that make promises they can't keep. If more thought had been put into how UIViews should be subclassed, they might have further constrained it so that (for example) a UIView is responsible for maintaining and keeping internally consistent its set of subviews. This is a promise that subclasses can keep (probably by not publicly exposing subviews at all, since making it public is likely to, again, result in underconstrained APIs and more API promises it can't keep), and assumptions that are useful for consumers of the API (e.g. "I don't have to worry about managing subviews that aren't explicitly called out in the contract" or "a layout container can't accidentally mess up its contents' subviews").

FWIW, XAML's UI framework does draw these types of distinctions, making _most_ of its subtyping sane (take a look at UIElement, FrameworkElement, Control, ContentControl, and Panel). Every now and then you can find examples where the abstractions are leaky due to under/overconstraining the APIs (e.g. the subtle differences between UserControl and ContentControl... UserControl looks like you could use it instead of ContentControl in most cases because the Content property is publicly settable and probably shouldn't be -- an API decision that every UserControl subclass has to live with and usually chooses to ignore).

Anyway, my point is this: subclassing is _not_, at its core, contradictory. But API designers _must_ design classes to be subclassed. In order to properly answer the "is X a Y?" question, subclassers must also be able to assert that X's implementation meets all of the constraints of Y's API.
WWE SMACKDOWN REPORT 14/02/2014 – Report Show and PPV
Not the human body, but the human brain.
I think it's fundamentally wrong to model a team as a list of players. It isn't a list of players, and having a data structure representing the players as a property of the team seems more meaningful in terms of communicating the idea of team members. Even then, the most useful data structure to represent the member players would probably be a set, in my opinion. Then, the whole history of the team could be expressed in terms of simple operations on that set.
Nice! I have an XP running in VirtualBox for testing, so I just tried what you wrote - that was fun! :)
I have no idea what I just did, just that it felt good, to make that impact on the screen with that little code, knowing it was done directly ;)

I will have to set some time off to understand it (better)!

Re. progress, I just have this feeling, that we are just doing the same, over and over again - then creating another language to do the same over and over again.
In electronics we have components that does 1 thing, usually with different values. In the worst case, we take a standard component and program it.

I would really like to have a process, where I can architect a system and the data flow and finally code a couple of non-standard functions/classes/methods/whatever and be done :)

Good or bad, Apple is trying to do it in Xcode and several IDEs, give you a glimpse of this. Maybe they just create your HTML for you, but that's a step in the right direction.
Of course it would be best to be able to re-use your own code, for the "automated" parts, instead of relying on someone else's idea of what HTML and other code should look like.
These guys are trying to do it for Node.js: http://noflojs.org
I think it looks really promising. It would be great to be able to concentrate on solution specific code, rather than "everything".

Re. Go, it is my one big regret, I chose Node.js over Go, a couple of years ago.
I didn't have the time to understand enough of both languages, so the choice was Node.js, due to the fact "it's javascript" and that it seem good, when I did some prototypes.

The reality is, you client-side developer, should probably never touch your server-side code! It is far from the same. Same syntax, same way of creating classes, less scope problems, there is only 1 environment, so you can remove some code.
But from there, it's totally different! Which of course should make sense, since it is two completely different purposes.

Currently we are maintaining our code in a way (APIs), that ensures we can change either side without problems. So they future will probably be Go, as that seems like the best fit for multi-platform (BSD/*NIX) web-service development.

I ran into Qt years ago, when I was trying to get away from Java for a desktop app. I actually ended up with Python and Qt :)
It was really a much horrible experience, than I would have thought! :)
Qt just worked as supposed, with it's limitations (at that time at least), which wasn't to big of a problem.
Have you tried on Mac?..... :)
This would have been useful during my years in secondary school and high school. :D
I take it they're preconfigured divs that clutter up your code and that are trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist given the basic nature of CSS.

If you absolutely need a grid, what about http://hashgrid.com/?
It gets you going quicker than writing it yourself.

I was a heavy BS user a couple of years ago. I built my biggest project to date using BS: http://angrybirds.tumblr.com In retrospect, I wasn't really getting anything other out of it than the grid. Nowadays, I take a much more modular approach and pick an appropriate grid system, roll out my own headers as they are often heavily custom anyway, and pick some resets for the forms.
That blog post is exactly the reason why people automatically assume anything coming out from someone who identifies as an 'advertising expert' is instantly dismissed. Lots of words without actually addressing a single point from the original video.
The phrase is "for all intents and purposes", although your variation also fits, very interesting!
> So you can get your product to market faster.

So basically it's for people not too familiar with HTML and CSS? Ie. like a WordPress theme?
How to build FreeBSD EC2 images
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8o5FkN6...
An Economist’s Perspective on Tech Money and Housing
I've done it both ways and it's just faster with grids. When you don't want to spend too much time in the CSS part of your website. Especially for avoiding testing it with multiple browsers, using a framework like BS is really useful.
Sixty hours a week is fine if the only thing you enjoy is your work.
And what about when you have two jobs - 40 and 20, when they are unrelated lets say - front end development to pay the bills and number crunching side project for fun - they exhaust differently. There are a lot of developers that put more than 20 hours weekly on side projects or professional level hobbies.

It is probably the more of the same that makes the quick decline after 40 hours.
I'm not so sure about the goodness of public transportation in Bangkok. There's a few trains, one metro and a completely chaotic bus system. Take a taxi and you'll be ripped off because you're a farang. Chiang Mai is almost as chaotic, but in a smaller scale. Still you really can't walk everywhere as easily as in a big european city.

My advice for people going to Thailand would be to go to the north, small towns like Mae Hong Son are amazing places. Rent a motorbike and drive around the mountain villages. It's much cheaper than in the south and people are way more friendlier.

The other option is to go to the southern islands. Koh Samui is the most expensive place, made for couples and families. Koh Phangan is the party island where you can buy some marijuana and end up spending 20 years in a Thai jail. There's some nice hidden places in that island with less drug tourism. Most of the locals really despise tourists though and I can really understand that. Koh Tao is the diver's island, but my friend who was there when we were in Phangan told us, that it's getting more touristy and turning into another Phangan with young and recless party people. The best islands I visited were in the Andaman sea. Koh Lanta, Koh Ngai... Much more relaxed places and the locals really are more friendlier there because the party tourism is missing.

I was there for six weeks and I'd go again anytime.
Your viewpoint is almost certainly in the minority here.
> anyone can freely make use of BSD licensed code, as they see fit.

Anyone but the users of "improved" versions.
>> ""Don't leave the house haw haw" is not a valid response to objections to Facebook's unethical operations."

My point was that this is nothing to do with Facebook. If you go out in public people can take your picture and they can put it on any website they wish. They can publish it in print media too. Facebook preventing you from taking down any photo you appear in isn't unusual - it seems like the best option they have. If group photos started disappearing from my account because one of my friends who voluntarily appeared in them was paranoid I'd be pissed off. For a lot of people that's the only copy of the photo they have. To Facebook it's a choice between pissing off users and satisfying the paranoid who don't even use Facebook. Seems like a simple choice to me.
> The holy grail of database clustering!

Thank you for pointing this out, I would have missed it.In fact, thank you everyone who has answered with helpful technical details.

I have a couple of use-cases in mind where logical streaming replication could solve a number of problems. A personal project would benefit from a database-level setup due to easier data migration, a professional one would benefit from bi-directionality and logically straightforward clustering. (I also have some future designs in mind where replicating only subsets of a database would be VERY useful.)

Owing thanks to the replies, I now have some extra reading to do. :)
I'm always fixing stuff. Simply because I hate throwing away tech due to some shitty design flaws or a minor component break. So far in the last 12 months: MacBook Pro disk failure (easy), Nokia 820 glass (easy), Sony Vaio VPCJ1 overheating (hard work - about 50 screws and levering plastic), two ThinkPads overheating and fan failure (easy), XBox 360 overheating (easy), Toshiba laptop CMOS batt failure (medium - soldered battery on motherboard), Nokia Asha drowning (easy), disk failure on another Toshiba laptop (easy), numerous software problems on 50+ machines.that looked like hardware, numerous iPhones with broken glass, knackered batteries galore.

I don't even do this for a living being but it's extra cash and quite fun.

The big thing that always pops up if you look at the above is: broken glass, overheating and clogged cooling systems (dust) and soldered on disposable components.

All this was fine until someone brought me an iPad 2 as well with a smashed screen. Was a total bastard to get inside, just like it's suggested in the article. Took me 20 minutes but I'm less forgiving and know how the materials all feel and how durable they are.

Absolutely terrible that Apple are guilty for making this situation even worse with their shoddy design. It's annoying because I've got a 2011 MBP I'm using as a workstation at the moment and I'm wary about upgrading it to an rMBP when it's no longer supported and not repairable as there's nothing I can do to an rMBP apart from take it back to the Apple Store and get a replacement (or sue them for our statutory 6-year fit for purpose in the UK).

Total disaster on the horizon. Give me a thick, repairable laptop over some thing disposable trinket.

My only choice is to go and buy a Delll or a Mac Mini next time.
The UI is nice, but I think nothing beats automation. I use RescueTime [1], which is surprisingly _accurate_ measuring my time. I use it for years now and I'm very satisfied with it. No need for "administrative overhead".

[1] https://www.rescuetime.com/
The chemtrail nuts? Come on.
Not at all. It saves you from writing the same boilerplate code you write nearly every time you start a project. Familiarity with HTML and CSS has nothing to do with it.
right on that!
Or people who are not interested in dealing with the cross platform complexities of HTML and CSS over multiple browsers, mobile, and so on when someone else has kindly solved the problem for them. Maybe they have other things to worry about such as marketing or work on the rest of the product.
Yep. 10 pages cover automata and 15 pages cover graph theory.
Yes, I really have no idea WTF MIT was doing to itself between Vest and now. Aside from cogen (which started before her time), every other decision she made was horrible.
Best programming language to get your startup up and running.
Thanks so much for sharing your perspective. You've put words to some half-formed thoughts I've been having since a recently failed relationship. Live and learn
>> "VAT, for example, is used in many European countries, it’s included in the displayed purchase price, and it’s complicated."

It's not that complicated. It's basically equivalent to the US sales tax except it's shown in the price (consumer doesn't have to calculate it themselves). In the UK I believe you don't need to pay it until you are earning over £69,000 per year.

Overall it seems like the problem here is how the Play Store works. With the Play Store you are collecting direct from the purchaser. With the App Store sales are funnelled through 5 or 6 major regions (Europe, North America etc.) and paid out to developers. I think this solves the issue of working out tax for every country you do sales in.
So for a low traffic Web server like application, we might be running the OS itself (/) from a read only filesystem (e.g. making a 'live' CD-ROM or USB image) and having read/write only for user files and logs?

End user here: I just have a Linux laptop, interested in servers on the 'wild' web
Their tech would be a great addition to Google's Smart-Auth mechanism.
Summary of article: "No, because that would be awful for my business".

I suspect Fang Digital has pushed this terrible notion on their clients for years and now look like idiots, so they are doubling down.

FYI: The marketers I work with have near universally dismissed FB as anything but "brand building for when you have more marketing budget than sense"... well before this video (or the 2012 BBC one) put it into the commons.

> Calling Facebook and its advertising “a fraud” because you choose to run a “like campaign” in a part of the world that is known for fraudulent clicks

He ran it in US, CA, AU, UK targeting cat lovers (see: http://youtu.be/oVfHeWTKjag @ 6:00) -- additionally, this is a full on admittance that fraudulent clicks are a huge issue.

> astute among us know that measurements such as “Likes” do not constitute anything

Then maybe facebook shouldn't be selling them as the metric?
Uhm, "And gets it all wrong" why exactly? Other than being a wall of text pissing on veritasium, there's no explanation or debunk of what veritasium actually got wrong, none, zilch, zip.

There's a saying that, extraordinary claims, require extraordinary proof. Now, I saw the video, and it's pretty well done and goes to some length to underscore veritasiums claim of fraud with plenty of proof.

This blog entry however, just claims that veritasium has got it all wrong, but provides no proof whatsoever, no argument.

But I assume that kind of "argument" is probably pretty common among "advertising professionals", after all, these are the same people who "advise" people to put more and more annoying ads on pages, with end result that everybody will have to install adblock. There's an industry ripe for extinction.
Chrome -> Settings -> Search Engine. I see Google, Yahoo, Bing, Ask, and AOL on my US Nexus 5.
Terrible example. Amazon is a store - not a product search engine. If amazon suddenly started selling Amazon made products and putting them at the top of their listings then we'd have an accurate comparison. Google is abusing their power in one market (search) to push their products in other markets (Youtube videos, shopping results etc.).
Very good question. The only thing I can think of, at least in the EU, is get them to consider repairs in electronic waste legislation. If a device is not repairable, it becomes waste. I know people are going to chip in here and crow about Apple's recycling policy for example, but its not the right solution. It takes a lot of energy to extract and recycle materials which could be avoided by not throwing as much stuff away.

If it hurts the manufacturers' bottom line, so be it. They've had a free ride for years.

Also I think that companies should be forced to issue internal service manuals for all out of warranty products.
Same with iOS
It's a joke guys. I left it at +4 if I saw the downvotes I would have deleted it.
or http://wakatime.com for tracking programming hours
> Absolutely terrible that Apple are guilty for making this situation even worse

That's what their mission is: Sell as much as possible. (That's the very "clever" idea our economic system is built on.)

You're not supposed to keep your stuff for a long time, you're supposed to buy a new one every 1 or 2 years.

(The fact that the First World is burning trough several planet Earths on its own (resource-wise) is not of the concern of business leaders of our generation/time, they won't be here anymore when brown stuff really hits the fan.)
I recommend watching this video of an Oculus converted into an AR (augmented reality) headset:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc_TCLoH2CA
I am using timecamp and it is sufficient.
Couldn't agree more.

Not many of us can afford to put down £65/month on a device that lasts a couple of years though. If it lasts 4 years, that's £33/month. Much better.

Edit: I expect 5 years daily 8 hour usage from any kit I buy apart from phones and I expect 3 years of the same there.