skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’m with you. It’s a better name and can really be called a brand name in that it only denotes the company and otherwise has no other meaning. That uniqueness means no competition in search results, as you point out.

Unique-er, shorter, has a cultural history with the company, evokes “Rise”.

Keep in mind that brands really become signifiers of the company, and have little meaning of their own over time. Beatles, Google, Radiohead, Amazon. All either bad or meaningless on their own.
The hype about not using jQuery
Note that per Forbes [1], Brian Acton was Yahoo employee #44.

So it's not like Facebook (or Twitter) was overlooking a diamond-in-the-rough. More likely, it was some other key-role/compensation/fit mismatch.

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2014/02/19/exclusive-...
Everything about this screams that the author was imagining a much lower price point. I especially liked the part where he mentions that they won't have another idea like this for the rest of their lives. Guess what? They don't need anything for the rest of their lives, as they are billionaires. Haha.
Big user base monetization = ads. Are mobile ad cpi's really that high?
Does fear of failure drive success?
Systemd 209 released with kdbus support
For what it's worth, I've never heard of WorkDay.
I created a LinkedIn account and since then my only interaction with is archiving their spam mails.

I use WhatsApp more than I use Facebook or Twitter (and this is true of a lot of people outside U.S).
In general, it may not be as active as Facebook or Twitter but its pretty damn high.
Also - no ads or privacy issues or BS marketing.
okay look at this way on mobile Facebook is essentially a message app spread across multiple apps...

Any message app that threatens to overtake Facebook is worth that amount to facebook
The TOS doesn't say "only for" it says:

"The Service is controlled and offered by WhatsApp from its facilities in the United States of America. WhatsApp makes no representations that the WhatsApp Service is appropriate or available for use in other locations. Those who access or use the WhatsApp Service from other jurisdictions do so at their own volition and are responsible for compliance with local law."
I have heard, and this article makes the case that reaction time for people is relatively constant, but that the pros are better at anticipating pitches. They read body and shoulder movements leading up to the ball release.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/news/20130724/the-spor...
Go vs Node.js for servers
If success is the best revenge, this guy is god-tier.
Voynich manuscript partially decoded by Bedfordshire professor
"We can assume Facebook is paying for the user base"

Respectfully, I don't know if that's the right assumption. Facebook has users. A metric shit-ton of them. :) In fact, many of WhatsApp's users are Facebook users, and vice versa.

This isn't a user acquisition play. It's a user engagement play. Facebook -- like everyone else in the world -- is well aware that it has an engagement problem. It also has a retention problem, especially with younger users (who are flocking to messenger programs). Finally, Facebook has some challenges internationally, where the social networking space is more regionally fragmented. WhatsApp is a lot bigger overseas than it is in the US (largely because it's a free alternative to SMS in countries where SMS carries significant charges).

So what's this really about? This is another defensive acquisition on Facebook's part. Entirely overpriced, in my humble opinion. Instagram was, in retrospect, an incredibly smart defensive buy. WhatsApp at $16 billion? Less clear.
Testflight is stopping Android support in March
WhatsApp founder rejected by Twitter and...Facebook
Wasn't criticizing the sale at all (edited to clarify tone), just found it interestingly related.

I use it myself, but not sure about the 5 years wager. One of the main reasons quite a few people I know use it is precisely because it wasn't Facebook. My bet is FB guts it and tries to {force, gently-push} everyone to switch to their well-designed app. But the FB app is probably too bandwidth-hungry for most WhatsApp users.
People do pay for WhatsApp - the article says $1/yr although I think I paid 69p for life (approx $1) for the iphone app. If they get 1bn people paying $1 then that's a decent income. I was reluctant to pay - I'm tight like that - but I had to because my friends were on it and wanted to communicate. Though I note people are moving to Viber to some extent which is similar but free.
The MtGox Bitcoin deserves to go to zero.
I'm impressed by the Unicode spam comment on the article:

мʏ вυɖɖʏ'ѕ ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­х-աιғ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ мαĸ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ѕ $66 нօυʀʟʏ օɴ тн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ ʟαքтօք. ѕн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ нαѕ в­­­­­­℮­­­­­­­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ɴ ғιʀ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ɖ ғʀօм աօʀĸ ғօʀ 9 мօɴтнѕ вυт ʟαѕт мօɴтн н­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ʀ ƈн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ƈĸ աαѕ $15718 ʝυѕт աօʀĸιɴɢ օɴ тн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ ʟαքтօք ғօʀ α ғ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ա нօυʀѕ. ɢ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­т тн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ ғαƈтѕ SaveJury.com

I wonder what spammers will come up with next.
Billionaire Niel Trains Geeks to Fix France’s Talent Mismatch
Well he turned Surfmark down and decided to follow his gut :)
(Some 'gut' that was!)
https://twitter.com/brianacton/status/1997180708

And I have 'immortalized' this using...surfmark
http://www.surfmark.com/viewsm/GzFRmNKFeUqCGZBiZRzChw#page1
One that generates revenue?
Likewise, I went to school with a very talented person whose dream job was in sewage treatment.
At least this is better than the months where 19 of 30 entries on the front page were about bitcoin.

I'm not going to comment on the quality of posts. What brings me to HN is the user base. It is the people who make stuff.
... and bombed Manchester (1996); Birmingham; Docklands, London (1996); Omagh (1998) at least.
You silently agreed with her, while not realizing it.

Customers (lists/relations/etc) are considered intangible property with value. In the tax and law worlds, IP actually refers to intangible property in general, not just intellectual property (copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, etc.). However, for most companies, their intellectual property is their most value IP.
>percolating down in less than two hours //

How often are you planning on changing your domestic ISP?
They also invested ~$50m last year at a ~$1B valuation, so their stake is worth even more. Probably closer to $3B.
I meant to write 1/100th - still a mental math fail!

Stated in a different way - Facebook could have paid 1,000 teams of 10 (founders + engineers) at 160k/yr per person, for 10 years... for what they just paid for whatsapp. The collective diversity of products developed by said teams would probably be worth more than whatsapp.
Really good point. I really really should have read the full article, not just the title, and the highlighted section. I thought I saw this text almost verbatim before having to do with a licensing dispute.
No touch control makes me sad.

Should call it Threes for PCs.
I'll shake my first and one day see people using open standards protocols rather than this morass of proprietary dribble.

Until then, I'm marginally lonely on my xmpp clients, though the facebook integration really helps.
Thats good.. because stereotypes for people are a stupid thing.. human beings will break all of them..

Someday it will be a elderly woman, a kid, etc.. The Ocidental culture has a severe problem dealing with the impermanence and the unpredictable.. we need to get over it.. more zen-budhism, please?! :)
MKV to MP4 Video Conversion becomes easier than ever
DVDFab Video Converter is a powerful video converter software which can help you to convert videos among different formats, you may convert one video format to another.

You can easily convert MKV to MP4 and enjoy the videos on other devices perfectly, You can learn more about DVDFab 9 at: http://www.dvdfab.com/video-converter.htm
I know What's Up. Facebook just bought the world's largest (and unlisted) mobile phone number directory:

WhatsApp's convenient 'matching by phone number' feature uploads of all of your phone contacts to their servers. Though positioned as one of the good guys, they too had their price.

With this acquisition, FB bought the ultimate data set of users and leads, and with it secured access to the last remnants of your privacy.

Your fake name/profile on FB will no longer protect you. Your friend's contact list spilled the beans months ago...

Uninstalling WhatsApp now, though I realize that after several lovely years might just be too late already.

Cat, bag, out of. Such wow. Much sad.
How about just a logo?
what's an easy way to show fps in Firefox?
Ukraine forces torch IT tent, kill journalist, beat tech protester to near-death
I use it every day and I got my free account expiration date upgraded to "lifetime".
Admittedly, I'm a light user regarding bandwidth usage; I do share some pictures, but probably a lot less than the average user. I honestly don't think I know anyone who pays the annual fee.
I don't know if that's true. How do you explain the success of WhatsApp when FB exists?
You may be getting your stereotypes from the wrong teen-beat outlets!

Koum: No-nonsense immigrant from group persecuted in home country, family emphasis on education, using computers since a teen, drops out of college when career responsibilities grow.

Acton: Early employee at one of the most-successful companies of an era, lots of deep systems experience, takes time to consider "next adventure", cofounds with prior coworker and leans on other colleagues for seed funding.

That's about as stereotypical as real Valley founders get.
I guess I'm confused because there are lots of messaging apps, eg http://personalweb.about.com/od/mobile-messaging/tp/8-Mobile... and indeed Android's built-in messaging. I'm not trying to dismiss whatsapp, just having a hard time seeing what makes it distinctive.
There is a sucker born every minute, and a rich one every 20 minute.
I'm looking into ways of using that waste heat. It's a feature :)
Redux: Why You should Always Use ===
Can someone enlighten me why WhatsApp is popular, and <INSERT ANY MOBILE CHAT/IM APP> is not? Why not Google Talk? Why not AIM?
If in this "what if" scenario we assume the 2014 freshman Zuckerberg has the same drive as the 2004 one, then I would say that the odds of him becoming decently successful (whatever that might mean) would be pretty high.

If you look back at his history, he had a string of very college-student-useful projects before Facebook. He knew he was onto something. Assuming that he would have the same kind of curiosity/initiative/wtv in 2014, chances are he would find new problems to solve.
That is just sad.
and the faces/voices.
Proprietary messaging apps have a huge advantage in cutting down spam. Solve that and your open standard might just take off.
Neither. Learn Go.
Why not saying: another 230 million may be added in the next nine months... If you know qq or wechat, you will understand IM has serious market value...
You're comparing apples and oranges.

Everpix is an instagram competitor--it is a photo sharing app--and should be compared to instagram. BTW, in case you haven't noticed--Facebook bought instagram last year, and even before that it allow users to attach meta data (location, etc.) to their photo uploads.

Whatsapp is a text messaging app, and should be compared to iMessage, Google Talk, Skype, and SMS. In that regards, its clear why WhatsApp succeeded--it was the default messaging app in dozens of countries.

The price is baffling, sure, but the reason that Whatsapp survived and Everpix did not is pretty clear. Whatsapp scaled, and Everpix did not. Text messages take up a few bytes; pictures take up a few megabytes. They could probably fit multiple users' entire messaging histories in the space that a single photo took up. Bandwidth costs--also a fraction of Everpix's. Rent and other fixed costs--definitely a fraction of Everpixs, which chose to situate itself in one of the most expensive locations in the world for a business with minimal revenue.
Absorbing upstart threats worked for Rockefeller!

And yes, social threats that have half-a-billion active users, and still-accelerating adoption, definitely deserve Facebook's acquisition attention.
Interesting to note that WhatsApp had started circulating some overly broad and ill-formed "DMCA takedown" notices a few days back: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-02-12-WhatsA...

By this email, please accept this formal notice and takedown request for the following content on the GitHub site. I am starting with these requests to ensure you will take action on our request. We will have follow-on requests, as the list of infringing content below is not exhaustive.

Specifically:

The following URLs use of the WhatsApp name and logo, use of other WhatsApp content, unauthorized use of WhatsApp APIs, software, and/or services, and provision of software and services related to WhatsApp infringes on WhatsApp's copyrights and trademarks, including those related to WhatsApp's name and logo. WhatsApp's trademarks are registered in the United States and countries throughout the world.

Note that:

• Trademarks aren't subject to the DMCA.

• APIs aren't copyrightable.

• TOU violations aren't subject to the DMCA.

Given that the letter isn't clearly formatted as a DMCA takedown (though it uses some sample language) the effect is ... curious.
I read all the comments, the whole time thinking about how crazy this number is.

I read why people use it, because it is cheaper (free?) than the ridiculous pricing of SMS.

So, I looked up the revenues generated by SMS, and it is estimated to be, according to a very cursory search:

150 Billion USD per year

This is the number that Facebook is using to compare their offer against. It is not crazy if they can capture even a few percent of that money.
Indian telecom sector is highly regulated by the Govt. And it is very competitive. So there's no way such an all-or-nothing deal can be introduced so late in the game.

Edit: Moreover, the telecoms do make money on the data plans don't they?
A user on reddit quickly came up with a free Web, Android, Windows exe, and a mac app for this. Hackers of this world, I tell you. :)

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1y9m6w/a_neuroscien...
> My advice: Try both languages. See which language you like better, then learn that one. After that, learn the other.

Argh, I hate the "learn both" conclusion. It doesn't help anyone.

If doing web programming? Ruby (+Rails).

Desktop / scientific computing? Python

As a general heuristic, just look at the types of projects you want to build and what they're built in. Then use that.
> How the HELL did Everpix die?

Dropbox? It's a place to store photos. Who cares really?
I dunno, the definition of intelligence is biased by our own ability to comprehend and therefore profoundly slim (even IQ can be gamed, and most people puke at emotional/lizard brain intelligence) so large chances "science" either under or overshoots its "stakeholder aware" analysis and doesn't know functional self preserving, iterative enhancement intellect when its looking it in the face. You know us monkeys, running around derping science with wacky wavy hands going 'Hai Dolphin What You do jump hoop!'. AI, rockin the casbah. Maybe one day!
$1B isn't a small offer, though.
In the first document you linked here's an excerpt:

"Wireless carriers have taken the reduce and reuse approach a step further with the use of directional antennas, illustrated in Figure 5. Rather than using a single omni-directional antenna that covers a circular radius around a tower, carriers introduced directional antennas, to further segment cell sizes and enable the reuse of additional frequencies. For example, placing three antennas operating in separate frequencies on a tower allows sectors to be created within a cell, essentially tripling capacity per cell."

And a clip from a wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_network#Directional_an...):

"Cell towers frequently use a directional signal to improve reception in higher traffic areas. In the United States, the FCC limits omni-directional cell tower signals to 100 watts of power. If the tower has directional antennas, the FCC allows the cell operator to broadcast up to 500 watts of effective radiated power (ERP).[7]"

Furthermore here is a diagram of how this is done: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CellTowersAtCorners.gif

The picture that you linked to on the wikimedia site shows what are clearly referred to by another wikipedia page as "sector antennas". See for yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sector_antenna

Here's what a single one looks like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sector_antenna2.png

And here's what many of them at the top of a tower look like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Transmitting_tower_top_us....

Compare those with the picture that you linked which you claim is of simple dipoles. I see very little difference between the two. Which is more likely? That they're making dipoles which just happen to look exactly like sector antennas AND that they're putting up well more than they need to (since dipoles are omni they'd only need one) or they're actually sector antennas?

Finally if you're going to invoke the "I was doing this before you were born" I'm more than happy to quit now. I had this foolish idea that you (as most people on HN do) wanted to understand the world as it really is. I see now that I was mistaken, you simply want to be right. That's fine, I can't fault you for it. It's human nature. But please take that kind of corrosive attitude elsewhere. The reason this community is so great is that people here listen to data or evidence. Please don't dilute those values for the sake of "winning" a stupid internet argument.
Hell, I'd take a 1.9M acquihire, with 10 year golden handcuffs :P
N-body problem
Google needs to bring Google Fiber to Australia. The coalition have plans for a fiber/copper hybrid in which the fibre runs to a box and then you connect via outdated copper from the street to your house. It's like driving a sports car 90% of the way and a horse and cart the rest of the 10% — I think what Google are doing is great, they need to expand though. I know New Zealand could use something like Google Fiber as well.
My Day With the Pandora (Klumpen)
I'd want a "Steve Jobs" Apple to buy Tesla. The current Apple... I'm ambivalent.

Why? Well, Steve Jobs was a perfectionist and in some aspects, an idealist. Elon Musk is the same way and he has complete authority over product. That's why Tesla exists and is so damn good.

If purchased now, I think anything could happen. I'm not a Tesla groupie, but I would like to see the company succeed and succeed in making an entry level vehicle and I'm not sure its possible under the current Apple executive infrastructure. They have different skills.
Both of those criticisms post-date Jobs.

Gruber's coverage of the Foxconn deaths was truly something to behold. I stopped reading him about that time.
What makes it amateurish?
I don't think Bionic is really suitable for this. It's unlikely to even work for building apps that weren't specifically designed for Bionic, since it's rather deficient in its support for many of the standard functions, and also differs moderately from glibc and other more popular libcs in the extensions it provides. Really Bionic was just created to be the minimal libc needed to run Dalvik (Google's "JVM") and everything else looks like an afterthought. I'd really like to add Bionic to the comparison table, but I haven't found a way to build it outside of building a whole Android development environment, which is a huge headache...
There are some similarities, and a lot of differences. Most households have a fixed demand for power and water. Meanwhile, bandwidth demands have exploded in just 10 years. That's a blink of an eye in utility timescales. 100 year old water pipes are still usable. 10 year old network infrastructure can be obsolete. Public institutions simply aren't able to bring to bear the kind of capital investment necessary to keep up with changing internet technologies and growing demand. People complain about telecoms not investing enough in infrastructure upgrades, but our public infrastructure is has accumulated trillions of dollars in maintenance debt. Even as demand is stable, its a challenge to just maintain existing levels of service in our water, sewer, and power systems.
And if they were, I hope they were also smart enough to have prenups.

This brings up a question: Is it even possible to make a prenup that covers future windfills? E.g., a prenup that protects your wealth in a company that hasn't yet been founded.
From the page:

> Usage

> Python can be used for web development, sys admin, statistics, and scientific computation. Meanwhile, Ruby is used primarily for web development. Python has the upper hand here, but if you are looking to only do web development, Ruby is the way to go.
lolhackers
They won't hire you but are begging to get more H1b workers...
The messaging part isn't the problem.

The value in Skype, WhatsApp, etc. is the vast amount of work and codebase that goes into punching holes in routers/gateways/NATs to make the internet actually work like it was originally designed.
Click the big yellow "feedback" button on the right.

Include what platform you are using, what version of what browser and which specific icons look like what.
Just for good measure................

Activison-Blizzard – $13.9B

Alcoa – $12.2B

American Airlines – $12.3B

Akamai – $10.9B

AmerisourceBergen – $15.9

Blackstone Group – $17.8B

Campbell Soup – $13.6

Chesapeake Energy – $17.2B

Chipotle – $17.1B

Citrix Systems – $10.7B

Coach – $13.5B

Consolidated Edison (ConEd) – $16.2B

Discovery Communicatons – $19.1B

Dr. Pepper Snapple Group – $10.2B

Expedia -$10.2B

The Gap – $19B

Fidelity – $15.8B

Harley-Davidson – $14.1B

Hertz – $11.5B

Icahn Enterprises -$13.1B

The J.M. Smucker Company – $10B

Kohl’s – $11.1B

Kroger – $19.4

Loews – $17B

Macy’s – $19.6B

Marriott International – $15.4B

Mattel – $12B

MGM Resorts – $12.7

Monster Beverage – $12B

Moody’s – $17.08B

News Corp – $10.27B

Nielsen – $17.6B

Nordstrom – $11.4B

Progressive – $14.3B

Ralph Lauren – $14.2B

Red Hat – $11.1B

Royal Caribbean Cruises – $11.4B

Ryanair – $15.5B

Sherwin-Williams – $19.4B

Southwest Airlines – $14.7B

Starwood Hotels & Resorts – $14.9B

Symantec – $14.4B

TD Ameritrade – $18.4B

The Carlyle Group – $11.1B

Tiffany & Co. – $11.4B

Tyson Foods – $13.1B

Under Armour – $11.4B

Whole Foods Market – $19.3B

Workday – $17B

Xerox – $13.2B
That's the best way to deal with this situation.
I would happily make $16 billion mistakes.
So I guess the answer is Python.
Oh that's nothing. At Penn State, Social Security Numbers were your student ID numbers. I think this has been changed. I hope, anyway.
Currency shouldn't be risky. It's a means of transacting. People shouldn't have to assume risk just to transact; they'll simply choose a less risky vehicle. It's fundamentally why Bitcoin won't succeed unless and until it gets its volatility under control.
Yes, but it's destroying what's left of their reputation. It would be of questionable value in the end. I already wouldn't touch then with a stick after past experiences, and I think most everyone feels that way now. There are better options with real customer service. Coinbase, by comparison, has been a pleasure.
Also XMPP is non-performant and verbose - these things matter as far a protocols go.
University of Maryland security breach
Beyond Slush, Strays and Stalin: An Alternative Sochi Story
> So, what's the point HN, and why all the upvotes?

I guess SV types get a little hot for AI based utopian/dystopian succession when they're the only ones who could possibly gain from such an outcome.