skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
so what i learned from this is that the developers did not actually get 50% but something that sounded like 50%.

i know a dev at a startup who was employee number 2 and wanted a certain % of the company ( like 2 or 5 or something like that ). anyhoo, he was haggling with the founder about this and the founder didnt want to give him what he wanted but finally relented. later, when signing paperwork, he found that the % the founder relented to was actually a % of a newly created employee pool, and not the whole company.

needless to say, the dev was pissed and had little trust in the relationship from that point forward.
I have to wonder if Steve was just alpha-scum in the right place at the right time.

In the short term, luck can make anyone look like a fool or a genius, even though the reality is usually somewhere in between. However, Steve was highly successful over a number of decades. He ultimately created one of the most valuable enterprises in the history of the world. It seems that he was an unrepentant asshole, but I don't think that all of his success came down to just being in the right place at the right time.
Correct. It also needs a wall wart.
Alan Turing's 'Morphogenesis' Theory Confirmed 60 Years After His Death
JavaScript is conquering the world
This post lists my favourite examples that demonstrate impressively the power of JavaScript.
Good cop bad cop?
"It might seem crazy to entertain, but having seen first-hand that these folks can consistently climb and succeed while being what most decent people would consider scumbags..."

One of my best friends is a psychiatrist at a large academic hospital. He works with "corporate leaders" and top athletes (college level and above). He says in his 5 years of practice, he has not yet seen a "successful" person who does not exhibit a significant degree of sociopathic behavior. He goes as far as saying that being sociopathic is an asset if you are trying to be successful in any hyper competitive human endeavor (politics, business, sports etc).
> Because an acquittal is not a finding of innocence. It is merely a finding that a person was not determined guilty to the level required by law

If you're innocent until proven guilty, and they never prove you guilty....I'd call you innocent.
They actually do that in smaller counties (in CA, this is very popular in the Far North counties). It's a crapshoot; you frequently end up with people volunteering to be DAs for the political advantages, which makes prosecutorial grandstanding and abuses even worse.
Chronic deflation may keep Bitcoin from displacing its fiat rivals
ok, I was going to email you, but I'll post a couple of suggestions here so others can agree or disagree.

You've got just shy of 5000 users, but how active are they? How many daily/weekly/monthly active users do you have?

If you've got a decent number of active users then those are people that can potentially become paying users. So ditch the unlimited free version. Yes - ditch it.

Look at your weekly active users and see how many words they each translate. Presumably there is some kind of distribution, where 80% of users translate <100 words per week, then you have some power users that translate 1000 per week. Start with them and start telling them they need to pay to keep using Readlang once they have translated 80% of the words that they usually translate. A nice pop-up with a simple call-to-action asking them to pay. A:B test the pop-up message. You've then got dynamic pricing that is based on individuals' use habits.

Start with the power users and work backwards towards your regular users. See what happens as you get closer towards the 100 words/week guys.

If completely removing the free option is too aggressive for you, maybe once they reach the word limit they can dismiss the "pay to continue" pop-up but then it comes back every 5 words they translate after that. Try both strategies - experiment - see what works best.

You've only made $1k so far. I don't think there is any harm in being a bit more aggressive. You've build a good product - now is the time to test monetisation rather than adding features.

On the CRM side, you have done a little bit with Mailchimp, and that the reminders are opt-in. Make them opt-out.

Ditch Mailchimp. Make a $50 investment in customer.io - that will allow you to do CRM against 5000 users. Hit them with one email to all (which will use up half your 10k email allowance) with the most compelling email you can draft. Then use your remaining 5k emails to hit those that responded to your first email regularly and based on their actions (customer.io is really good when you get that right). /edit - just noticed extra emails on customer.io are really cheap so it's the user number limitation you really pay for. In that case send as many emails as you need to do some very active CRM experimentation for a whole month.

Reminds users that they have a text they have just started but not looked at again.
Remind them they need to do flashcards everyday
etc etc

Remember - if nobody complains about the price of your product, it's probably too cheap.

Lastly, make an iPhone app that works offline and allows translation of single words via an offline dictionary and includes the flash-cards which then syncs with your account when back online. I'd pay for that! ;)
By doing things Steve's way there was a chance that he actually would get 50%. It would certainly be within Steve's personality to not care whether or not the deal actually went through.
Popcorn Time is shutting down
I remember listening to fountain of sighs on IT over and over again in my youth. Jeffrey and the people who wrote the music were truly ahead of their time. Here's a link to the song: http://youtu.be/XLMqBVhZRWo
Testing web map APIs – Google vs OpenLayers vs Leaflet
If you don't break the copyright terms, I don't think it's unethical.
Love the work you've done with this. The feature I'm always wishing you had was the ability to filter by number of comments in post as it's a pretty fair marker of relevance on alot of queries.
For me one of the most important insights: The reason for the (claimed) failure: It is to difficult to use.

That is one trouble I see so often in the computer business. Some invention is made with bright ideas and good intentions, but it is doomed to fail or at least to produce unnecessary additional costs, just because of one reason: It is unnecessary complicated.

Some bright guy (I don't remember who) said: Make it as simple as possible, but not simpler. That is the art, to find the right measure of complexity and make it as simple as possible. Somebody else said, that something is only than finished, when there is nothing left to delete from it.
Sorkin is deeply conventional. He will almost certainly replicate the pre-existing myth, in an edgy way and with glib zingers.
"the faintest clue"? "a different opinion" is probably closer to the truth.
So Portland has the temerity to block AirBnB in residential neighborhoods? That's called zoning. I guess the author thinks zoning is a "hitman" and should be eliminated?
The wild frontier of innovation intelligibility: an edgy video
Not exactly the same approach. The separation of power means that politic shall not use this spying for their own interest.
It's also worth reading this:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3171647/errors-in-c-fqa
Meet The 52 Hottest New Stars In Silicon Valley
Pakistan erased an entire International New York Times cover story
Great article, Ted. It's a pattern we've all seen before - whoever nails the core utility / experience (Google->search, FB->friending) gets to build a massive platform around it.

And messaging is clearly at the core (if not THE core) of the smartphone.
There are two UI libraries for openfl, HaxeUI and Stablex:

http://haxeui.org/

https://github.com/RealyUniqueName/StablexUI

btw: There is Objective C target in haxe, so you can develop native apps for iOS in Haxe.
That's a good metric... but often investors have more information on the start-up that potential employees.

This is the purpose of asking your own questions about the company in interviews... but I think there will always be more information asymmetry for potential employees than for potential investors.

Also investors can spread risks in ways that employees can't. Depending on your risk tolerance this may also change your judgements.

However, if you think its a bad investment, then you certainly shouldn't work there.
- The arrows point in the direction of references to other commits. Each commit (except the first) will reference one or more parents (in the case of a merge). Commits do not reference their children at all (because then adding commits would modify the previous ones). You can point the arrows in the other direction but that is not the direction in which git reads the commit graph.

- If a commit can't be reached from a branch, then it may be deleted after a time (I think 30 days or when you manually run git gc). Before it is deleted you can recover it by adding it to a branch, checking it out, or otherwise making it visible again. The command 'git reflog' will print a history of commits so you can recover them from there.

- Reset moves the current branch to a given commit. This changes the 'history' of the branch. 'revert' creates a new commit which undos another commit, which does not change history

- Merge and rebase are only semi-automatic. Part of git's philosophy is that they are 'stupid' and will produce an error if they cannot figure out how to apply a commit, and prompt you to do it manually (which you do by editing the files in question, git adding them, and then either commiting them or running 'git rebase continue'). They do occasionally mis-apply a patch automatically, however. It's good practise to inspect the result of a merge because of this.

- There's many different approaches you can use, which one is most appropriate depends on the project. A common one is 'feature branches', where you create a branch for each new feature you add, and then merge the branch into master when the feature is complete.

- remote tracking branches are just local branches which are associated with a remote branch, so that git pull will automatically merge changes in the remote branch to the local branch

I recommend using a GUI like gitk to visualise the repository (running gitk --all gives you a full view of all branches, and F5 will refresh the view with new changes). I still give git commands on the console, but gitk will show you a graph very much like on this website, which I find very helpful when manipulating the repository.
Is there a tl;dr for that post? On skimming it, the story sounded so harrowing, I'm not sure whether you are planning on keeping the site open or not. Bottom line: Is it still worth signing up?
Indeed, Steve may have sent him to deliver the message that it needed to "look" like 50%. However, If you read Panic's experience with Steve, you'll see he was generally an asshole when it came to negotiation.

Problem is, that's exactly what Apple needed to deal with the music industry and exactly what it needed to deal with the wireless industry and exactly what it needs now to deal with the cable industry.

Except... he's not here to fight the good fight against the cable industry, and based on the rumors I've heard Apple is having troubles nailing down good terms with the content providers.
I'm talking about what the HN policy has always been. This is a factual question, and it's not as you describe it.

What's interesting is how the opposite gets repeated far more often, usually in an authoritative tone, as if the speaker had just consulted a rulebook.
Right, and actually I've opened a feature-request about that a few days ago (https://github.com/algolia/hn-search/issues/24). Gonna work on it in the next few days.
It is an interesting insight that a VC can improve their internal rate of return by investing in open source. It seems like a continuation of the process of outsourcing manufacturing engineering for hardware.

It will be interesting when this becomes pitch material, something like "Hey all your portfolio companies need an HR resume/lead management system, fund us to build an awesome open source HR system and they can all use it for free!"
You're right, the point of the article was to reflect on her, not on Jobs. But that doesn't mean we can't analyze his behavior.

Presumably the number was "important" in an absolute sense because a number that high represented a fair amount of money, or at least taking margin from the publisher, because of the super-high quality of the software (remember, he made the promise trying to flatter the development team). Instead, the deal was structured strictly worse (less transparent revenue stream, same amount of money - and I'd be surprised if it was actually the same amount of money). Because he made a grand gesture as a status move, first to his team, and then to his vendors.

There's no way in which "make an outrageous promise, make an outrageous demand to fulfil that promise, accept a strictly worse settlement that saves face" reflects well on his end of the negotiation.

"He wanted to be able to tell everyone he got what he wanted."
Actually, HaXe, Neko, mtasc and MotionTwin projects of one person: Nicolas Cannasse. Dude is a legend, and community surrounding those projects is amazing.
So if we were (for example) sure a person had committed rape, and had good evidence they also committed murder, it is up to the prosecutor to decide if they should risk pursuing a murder charge, risking a person going free for a rape which they would certainly be convicted for?

Also, if you do murder someone, you may as all rape them too, as it can't lead to any more sentence?
I think Bill Gates is a good counterexample. Microsoft was not the nicest company around, but as a boss he seems pretty normal, even good. And I'd say he's just as successful as Jobs, if not more. (Also difficult to imagine a sociopath being a philanthropist like Gates).
Decoding the parameters of a thrown C++ exception (0xE06D7363)
I wouldn't say he's in his own bubble. Each of those companies has a good head start of 100's of millions of DAILY ACTIVE users + apps that actually are great at what they do.

Could Facebook still enter? Sure, but they've bought a few other messaging apps and done basically nothing with them.

Could a fresher startup come in? Sure, you can never discount that. But the listed messaging apps are (a) not a zero sum game / mutually exclusive, and (b) already have a huge head start.
Best Recipe Search Engine Launched
>they demand that drivers have things like a commercial drivers license

Not really relevant, you're essentially saying normal carpooling should require a commercial licence on the driver's part.

I agree on your sentiments, there are regulations for a reason. However, these apps are simply put P2P with a third party responsible for platform legitimacy; not the legitimacy of the clients (other than by extension.)

I haven't personally used Uber, mostly because I doubt it's got much traction in Norway anyway, but if the ranking system is as effective as, say, ThePirateBay's VIP/Trusted system then what we're having is fear-mongering and not an actual problem.

As for liability, whatever happened to accepting "at your own risk"? I suppose it's a problem of perspective for me, being guaranteed not to pay more than an equivalent of $700 a year no matter how badly my body is mangled.
Exactly. Reynolds deliberately lies about the what the prosecutor said in his first paragraph. The prosecutor did not state that the on-air violation was clear. What he said was that the device "meets the definition" of the statute.

Gregory was displaying the "device" during a newscast.

bran·dish
verb
gerund or present participle: brandishing
1.
wave or flourish (something, esp. a weapon) as a threat or in anger or excitement.

Did he "brandish" the device? No. Reynolds knows that, but he decides to draw a false equivalence anyway.
I would not touch the code and copyright terms. We just add metrics and visualization layers.

Question is more about linking to the GitHub project and creating "mirrored" profiles. I personally hate when some what-ever-app would copy my public social media profile to "add some value" to it publicly without asking me, but I wouldn't mind if they take my OS code and make it easier to consume.

That's my dilemma.
In the case of unsanitary food preparation, it very well could be a killer idea.

By the way, none of those other ideas are illegal (in the US). Taxi drivers can own their own cabs; some do but most do not due to the expense of acquiring/maintaining an adequate vehicle. It's always been okay to rent your "spare bedroom" to strangers--just as long as you occupy the remainder of the unit (though whether your lease or HOA agreement allows this is a separate issue). Sharing your physical copy of an artistic work has always been allowed. Private mesh networks have never been illegal. Cryptocurrencies are legal forms of exchange (or in this context, "consideration") between two consenting private parties, just like any other form of property.
Jobs's ego could certainly have been a large part of it. But doubling salaries isn't a solution because the competition will raise salaries to counter their people leaving and you'll be back in the same insecure position while paying twice as much.

And please note, I'm certainly not defending any of this behavior, just examining possible motivations.

(And well that's how exploration of different narratives goes, it's a constant struggle compared to simply picking from the limited two-sides-max of mainstream press)
Opera Mini does the rendering server side so that isn't beholden to that rule.
SE sites are heavily straightjacketed. There's way too much procedural cruft that makes it very hard to just have a straightforward discussion: arbitrary standards of topicality, complex voting mechanics, distinct answer-acceptance mechanics, distinctions between comments and answers, reputation badges, multiple types of reputation scores, convoluted hierarchies of participation privileges dependent on those scores, excessive moderation, etc.

By attempting to heavy-handedly shoehorn discussion into a very narrow Q&A paradigm, SE drastically limits the kind of open-ended discourse that makes online communities worth participating in.

And the reality is that I can find answers to specific, objective questions just as easily on Reddit or the myriad topic-specific discussion forums across the web, without having to jump through hoops to do it.
I'm not sure you grasped the parent comment's point. The idea was that there would be a penalty to include charges that could be struck out at a preliminary hearing.

As it stands, there is incentive to threaten a defendant with onerous charges that would never stand up in court. Most cases are settled by plea bargains. I'm not clear on the statistics, but I think this means they never reach preliminary.

Under the parent's proposal, the prosecution could not introduce spurious charges without risking losing their actual legitimate charges.

I don't know what the unintended consequences would be, but striking off the charges is not a "bizarre" part of the proposal. It's the point of the proposal.
The exchange of payment is precisely what makes this endeavor subject to food safety/preparation laws and (in many jurisdictions) illegal. It changes a social event into a commercial transaction: you pay someone else to eat food they prepared.

This is not remotely the same thing as friends splitting up the cost to buy food, or reimbursing one friend for purchasing food for a social gathering. We don't regulate social gatherings between friends because they have other means to deal with issues that could arise, even, if necessary, the tort system.

There are different expectations when dealing with commercial food transactions--and some of the major expectations are that the food be safe and prepared safely.
Could you please put a summary of all the available search options right on the search page?
Bill Gates' first act could qualify as intense to say the least [1] [2], and second act is indeed saintly.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gates#Management_style

[2] No judgement on him because not everyone can pull off a Microsoft.
> Either both processes must have the same ownership or the copying process must have the CAP_SYS_PTRACE capability; otherwise the copy will not be allowed.
> The reason so many people are content with being employees,
> rather than striking it out on their own, has to do (at least in
> part) with their risk tolerance.

I'm a happy employee, and for me the reason I'm not founding my own
startup isn't a matter of personal risk at all.

It's that now pretty much all day I can do what I like doing
(programming) and come home at the end of the day and wind down from
work.

If you're starting your own company you have to worry about everything
involved in that tiny company from acquiring clients to managing staff
to building the product, if that's something you want that's fine, but
it's not something I'm particularly interested in.

I also very much enjoy working on programming problems at the scale
you can only find in bigger companies, if I were to start my own
company now and it grew like crazy at best I could get back to the
level of problems I solve at work now in 10 years or so.
Physical and psychological abuse are morally equivalent.
http://www.mainstreetsites.com/
http://yourvirtuoso.com/

I've also seen some for real estate and others.
Also a filter for vegan only dishes will be great.
There are a bunch of things which (IMO) are in this family of problems. Prosecutors discretion , everything is a crime is certainly one problem that seems to exist to a scary degree in every modern law system. Sodomy remained a crime long after it stopped being prosecuted. It had always been prosecuted selectively anyway.

A related issue of selective investigation and arrest by police. Perhaps more scary because of the Polices’ greater exposure to the public. This comes into play a lot with discrimination and political oppression.

Then we have judicial discrepency. That might be the trickiest one. Among its many effects, it allows plea bargaining to create a very big gap between a negotiated plea and the potential outcome of a court case. Take one year or risk five. Just confess and take the reduced sentence. A defining feature of show trials is forced confessions. Confess. Beg forgiveness and mercy. That is using incredible pressure to deny accused their day in court and a trial where both sides present their case.

Then after a sentence is passed, the actual length and severity of prison sentences is in practice determined by the prison system which has its own arbitrary and/or discretionary powers.

Rule of law is hard, genuinely. Could courts even handle a system without plea bargains?
The only thing "essential" about FQA is that someone absolutely has to drop a link to it whenever there's "C++" and "FAQ" in the same sentence. It's known for being known. The actual content is utter junk - just try reading through it once.