skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I really doubt you have worked with designers at all, let along great ones. Any designer, junior or senior, that I've worked with, won't ignore the small stuff, and the better designers are more likely to be perfectionists.

> Usually these sorts of requests come from mediocre designers who feel professionally threatened by a rapidly evolving scene and then feel the need to create a sort fake value for their role by insisting on such things.

This is such an immature comment I don't even know how to respond. A designer that was so deferential to developer to not sweat pixel alignment would simply not even get hired in the design studio I've worked with.
>>> My previous job (web shop) hired supposedly "rockstar" designers on several occasions.

In my experience, you can have designers who know the web and you can have graphic designers who don't have a clue about the web, yet decide they want to be "web" designers.

The latter seem to pop up more frequently these days and I would agree it is frustrating, time consuming and incredibly worthless. Worst yet, are graphic design firms trying to get into the web and use your company as their guinea pig. Again, completely worthless.

As such, I've taken quite a bit of time to learn design myself so I have at least some authority to call bullshit on stuff they try to pull and head them off at the pass. It this point, it's been my only defense and has been somewhat successful in not allowing these types to poison the well so to speak.
Can't forget to delete the facebook...
The best example I can think of is this ad for the original iPhone back in 2007: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=37f...

I don't think I've ever seen a phone advertised by just showing someone using it. I know video wasn't what you came here looking for, but it is worth your consideration.

As far as screen shots go, http://www.kaleidoscopeapp.com/ is really nicely done, as is http://www.getjustlanded.com/ (more of an animation than a screen shot, but you get the idea).
This is a hilarious collection of historic "facts". Thanks for posting.

"1964 - John Kemeny and Thomas Kurtz create BASIC, an unstructured programming language for non
-computer scientists.

1965 - Kemeny and Kurtz go to 1964."
Mercator is conformal. Angles are accurate, that's all. It provides accurate navigation, which is great if you are planning a boat trip with middle-ages technology, but not fit for any other purpose.
http://www.minoritygames.com/index.php?link_id=sx3i9j0lbl
The conclusion that runtime correlates with rating is not quite clear to me. It looks to me that the scatter plot gets just more sparse as runtime increases and the rating distribution remains more or less the same.

Somehow the number of movies exploded last(?) year.
It varies from person to person, also varies with the amount smoked.

If I smoke any amount I just zone out and get paranoid, while I have friends who get high and do their discrete math homework.
I think (s)he was being sarcastic...
>"Hmm 45+13=... 45+13=..."

I always do something like this and it just turns into a spiral of anxiety. It's like my brain shuts off and wants to panic
Reach out to 100 strategic people individually.
> It's exactly the same thing git branches do. If it seems hacky, it's also hacky in git.

I more meant that it seems hacky to add a feature that's mostly-sorta like Git branches to Mercurial now.

> Stick with what original? The originals in mercurial are branches (where the branch name is part of the commit metadata and thus of the repository's history forever, save for history rewriting) and "anonymous heads".

I meant original as in Git vs Mercurial. Like if you want Git-like branches, then why not just stick with Git?

> Erm… you can also clone repositories in git.

Yeah, you could, but I've never seen anybody recommend cloning a Git repo on the same computer for the purpose of separating out work from the main branch. At least for a while, this seemed to be widely recommended way of separating code out in Mercurial.

Where things get kinda weird - in Git, if you want to commit code somewhere that doesn't go into main just yet, there are only 2 options - branches and stash, and stash is explicitly meant to be a very short-term, local thing, since you can't really share them easily and they aren't really part of the commit hierarchy. That makes things simpler, as you never have to wonder what the right feature to use is for keeping separate work somewhere and sharing it with other people. You can create complex structures with branches, but at least there's only one 'type' of thing to keep track of.

I'm not as familiar with Mercurial, but for ways to keep temporary work somewhere, it seems we have named branches, anonymous branches, bookmarks, cloned repos on the same system, and apparently shelve too. According to this guy[1], the workflows for sharing bookmarks around don't seem to be fleshed out all that well either. So how do I know which one to use for what tasks?

[1] http://www.kevinberridge.com/2012/05/hg-bookmarks-made-me-sa...
lol, from the comments - "locking yourself away from vision and sound in an apartment or house makes you ripe for burglary and rape."

Why do people jump to this worst case scenario for new tech ?
tried it on mobile chrome on android, controls are extremely laggy which makes it pretty much unusable, nice idea though.
Kickstarter breach
I was answering his question of why he was getting down-voted, no more no less.

>> If his points are valid then that should be sufficient.

In theory, yes, in the real world, appearances matter. Being right is only one part of the equation.. if you can't convince the other person then it doesn't really matter whether you're right or not.

If you're giving feedback and it sounds like you're demolishing someone, chances are your feedback won't be listened to. It's not the end of the world, obviously, but you're losing your time and the readers too.

>> His criticism was legitimate, there is no reason to waste time nor energy on his "tone-of-writing".

The irony here is how by not having the right tone his feedback weren't understood correctly, and hence wasted the time and energy of most readers.

>> Replies like yours contribute nothing.

The irony, again.