skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why do you think that "much shorter" implies "more understandable"?

I think we have a lot of experience to suggest otherwise.

Anyone who has had to maintain old Fortran or C code will likely know what I mean. With some early implementations limiting variable and function identifiers to 8 characters or less, we'd see a proliferation of short identifiers used. Such code is by far some of the hardest to work with due to variable and function names that are short to the point of being almost meaningless.

Then there are languages like APL and Perl, which make extensive use of symbols. APL has seen very limited use, and Perl code is well-known for suffering from maintenance issues unless extreme care is taken when initially creating the code.

Balance is probably best. We don't want excessively long identifiers like is often the case in Java, but we surely don't want excessively short ones, either.
Ask HN: How you find interested people for your Side-Project?
Hi All,

Looking for pointers on forums/sites where you can find interested people to collaborate on your side-project's? Dev's/Designer's etc..
Absolutely. Indeed, I think it should be an accessibility requirement for every site to have a "[name] is ..." sentence somewhere on the front page.
It's implied that the participants were told in advance there were 60,000 total predicted fatalities.

Regardless, the programs are not equivalent.

A: 100% chance of 20,000 saved, 100% chance of 40,000 dead
B: 33% chance of 60,000 saved, 66% chance of 60,000 dead

If we allow 33% to equal 1/3 and 66% to equal 2/3, we can see that the expected value of the options is the same, but that does not mean the options are equally attractive. In gambling terms, the variance [0] of B is much greater than that of A. Which option is more attractive depends on the risk appetite of the chooser, which in turn should depend on their circumstances.

If, for example, there has been a great catastrophe and there are only 60,000 people left alive on Earth, and the government has to choose which option to pick with the goal of ensuring the survival of the human race, A is far more attractive, because it minimizes or eliminates (to borrow from gambling terminology again) the risk of ruin [1].

If, on the other hand, the 60,000 predicted fatalities constitute the standing army of a small country that is under threat of invasion and is protected only by the size of its military, B may be preferable, as a chance at preserving the entire army may be more attractive than the certainty of reducing it in size by 2/3 and being vulnerable to invasion.

But this is all a little off-topic, as I don't believe options A and B were ever meant to be equivalent. The point is options A1 and A2 are equivalent, yet the change in wording between then leads to people choosing A1 over B1 yet B2 over A2.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_of_ruin
It solves the really interesting issue of data integration. When you need to combine and analyze data from various sources having things expressed as triples really makes a difference. You can merge two datasets that never knew about each other's model with ease.

How would you solve data integration issues at a large scale (the web)? The web is full of triples: in webpages (RDFa), in APIs (json-ld), and as large data dumps (freebase n-triples dump).

So it does solve a quite realistic issue that is currently driving thousands of different people around the world insane. That is people trying to combine and analyze large quantities of data.

If data providers exposed triples instead of their own data model, it would make life easier for everyone.

Ps: remember that RDF is not a format but a data model. You can express RDF using json, xml and even csv.
Nope. 50% is 50%. It doesn't matter how big the market is, and that's Norvig's point. Once you penetrate 50% of the market, you're done.
Some brands are fun or interesting. Some I'm willingly give money to. Not all brands are faceless corporations.
Here's the other article I was referencing:

http://blog.eat24hours.com/how-to-advertise-on-a-porn-websit...
Yeah - interesting to see what they'll do about fb comments.
http://www.paulgraham.com/progbot.html
This is not a business. You don't want to see "competition" (competition in what?)

Variety is nice and having choices is nice, but when there's compatibility and man-hours to be spent in ensuring that compatibility/support across all the possible flavors of Linux distributions, I'm not sure we really want "competition".

It's APIs we are talking about here, standards. How would you feel if there were dozens of TCP/IP protocol standards (not just implementations, mind you) and if you wanted to develop any simple networked application you'd need to write a compatibility layer for each and every one of them?

Competition is definitely not what we need in this case, sorry.
Could someone quickly recap what DDX and glamor are, and how they relate to XWayland, Xorg, Wayland, and nVidia binary drivers.
The Rise of Fashion E-commerce and Man's Escape from the Mall
Essay with thoughts and stats we collected in the early stages of dashhudson.com
This isn't just a free software problem. Assigning credit is hard. Mathematics arguably has this problem, too. Important problems take decades or centuries, and a long series of discoveries are necessary to put us in a place where the final step is in reach for a single person or team. Perelman rejected the Clay math prize for exactly this reason. And this is in a field where citation and attribution are carefully recorded in the literature.
Is this baseline you speak of a personal baseline for each participant in the study? Or is it like a canonical brain state that all other brains are compared to?

And pardon my leap of logic here (I'm not a neuroscientist), but why would a personal baseline affect the results? A personal baseline, intuitively, would not add to the goal of the study and could negate results that they're looking for. That is, a logical person will probably be more logical in his baseline, too. So, logical_observation - logical_baseline = 0. But what they're looking for is simply whether logic is being used in response to the experiment. And I wouldn't think the goal of the study is to find out whether people are more logical than their baseline, just whether they're more logical than other people who make different assessments.

Whereas, if we understand, based on previous work, that X things happen in an MRI when thinking logically and Y things happen when acting emotionally, why can't we simply correlate observations to these known states?
Did anybody else think of fair people as pretty people and not just people as the article states?
Depending on my workload sometimes I do that.If the client has more then enough work to keep me busy I wont hesitate to make room from them. As for how long, some have been short as a few months, others 4-6months+ the longest was around 2 years.
JXcore combines SQLite and Node.js for Raspbian
It seems to me that if the company's goals are the same as that of their users, then innovation will lead to profits.

But if your users are not also your customers, then you are likely to run into these counter-innnovation corners.
He does admit that you can sell more than one item to the same customer, so you can have > 100% if you compare units sold to potential customers.
git is a digraph though, so it's not as complicated as an arbitrary graph. Every commit has a single parent, making a previous button trivial. The next commit is difficult, since that's where branching happens, but that's not so hard to represent: show all options and let the user continue along one path or another.

The implementation probably just involves walking backwards through history until you reach the initial commit, maintaining a bidirectional linked list as you go.

Github already allows users to walk forward and backward though history via the commits page[0]. It seems reasonable to provide the same "Newer", "Older" buttons when viewing an individual commit.

[0]: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commits/master?page=1
Why isn't it default behavior to route dns through socks?
This post is gold.
Because engagement with the people who like your page is purposely being dropped to 1-2%. So, those 10,000 likes you have won't really matter because only 100 or 200 people will see it. Unless you pay $20 to get all 10,000 to see it and get you another couple dozen likes.
A Fight Is Brewing
Would you be willing to detail said life hacks a bit?
GTA V Hot, Naked, Stripper Girls
The new TLDs are here, do you really need Yourname.BLARGH?
Yes, I thought the title "Fair people are driven by reason, not emotion" refererred to pale-skinned or white people ("fair-minded" would have been a little bit clearer). The actual headline on the linked article is "Brain scans link concern for justice with reason, not emotion".
If you're on *nix, sshuttle is the tool you want. It's ssh tunnel on steroids, and it works with every program even if they're not configured to use a SOCKS proxy (such as Flash). It's also faster because it avoids the TCP-over-TCP problem that the usual SOCKS proxy entails.

sshuttle --dns -v -r username@servername 0/0

https://github.com/apenwarr/sshuttle
I would agree with your position only if we could assert that Wayland is the best protocol we can ever have.

But can we affirm that? Can we suppose that there is no way to make a better protocol? What if Mir in the end will become better or will work better or will be more adopted? What if the guys of wayland will fail in making something really good? What if they take some wrong decisions and we will have no alternative in which rely?

We need everywhere competition.
ahahah, visakanv, you smart guy! that's a nice comparison.

Capitalism without democracy is what we want!!! /s
>Every day that goes by I am more convinced that the Twitter stream is the best way to communicate, as a brand and as a consumer

As an avid Twitter consumer without a Facebook account, I agree with you...for now.

But until Twitter actually makes enough money to support itself, let's not get too far ahead with the "they're doing it right!" argument. I see no way that they don't eventually end up in the same boat as Facebook, forcing promoters to compete for limited space.
I think one of the reasons for NIH is that, unlike mathematical theorems, programs are not customarily explicit about the domain over which they hold and therefore are just pseudo-theorems. The few programs that do have that explicitness, such as compilers and small UNIX utilities, tend not to get reinvented. Also, the domain can become obsolete (e.g. ascii vs utf8 or unstructured text vs XML).

Thus, NIH may really just be a want of a theorem (sometimes merely a stronger one).
One should be proportionally more grateful to the original Mesa developers, surely?
Or "greener" path, as RouteRANK does?!

http://lca.epfl.ch/projects/routerank/
DNSSEC wouldn't stop this... unless the resolver knew to require DNSSEC and ignored unsigned responses (which is unlikely).

DNSCrypt could help here... but chances are their middleware would just barf on it.

You need something more evasive.
You're right, but you didn't point out the other obvious thing that some people aren't getting: it takes effort to properly post things on Facebook. Add that to only 1-2% of your hard-won subscribers are actually seeing it and it makes it really not worth it.
> Every commit has a single parent, making a previous button trivial.

Until, of course, you hit a merge commit. Which most projects have a lot of regardless of whether that's a good thing. I suppose you could always pick the parent which is on the same branch, but still.
And it still scares me that python 3 has hackery to fake unicode dirlistings on unix. (surrogate escaping - pep-0383). I guarantee that will bite people in the ass and cause security bugs.

'explicit is better than implicit' - hah.
The US Government could probably save substantially more by not printing blacked out pages like this for public hearings: http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnbfetnw5V1qbqm2bo1_r1_250...

900 pages of this at 5:10 in this 2011 Daily Show clip. http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/1mdpat/the-fast-and-the-fu...
> we are actively working on support and
this certainly throws a wrench into things.

That's what happens when you do work in secret.
It sucks that I see news like this all the time and realize that my own government has probably known about and participated in these activities, yet I'm finding it out through corporate media/organization that have probably known for a while and still know things that they're not telling us. I've pretty much given up all hope in the US government (or just about any government) to fix its self without some sort of major upheaval.

The digital age came too fast for our politics to keep up and now the age of automation is soon to sweep through, along with a lot of other major advancements when it comes to interacting with digitized goods and services. Whoever controls the main communications vector in the future will be controlling reality, and no one is planning for it.

I believe the transition from the reality we know today to a reality based around augmentation is going to happen extremely swiftly and there wont be time to make fair laws (and figure out what laws we need to make), and the laws that are made will be many, and they'll be hard for the average user to understand, and they'll be authored by legal representatives hired by corporate institutions.

What we really need is a digital bill of rights written by and for the people, and rather than corporations and web sites shoving their TOS down our throats, they should be adhering to our TOS.

It's unfortunate.
I don't understand the downvotes. Did everybody just had a bad day or completely lost their minds?
the right title should be: "The World's Top 10 Most Innovative Companies In Big Data according to their marketing team."
The article I would like to read is about the real advantages they made, not just "they are applying BIG DATA to the X,Y industries". No description on the size of the problem nor the advantages or details.(I'm especially looking at you AYASDI... )

I've been to Big Data conferences where the main application was mean and standard deviation on a huge datasets, I'm just sick of companies inflating the Big Data bubble (and this comes from a "data scientist")
Google Cracks Down On Deceptive Ads Found In Android Apps
That's a huge misconception. XML has nothing to do with RDF. It's merely a serialization. Please take a look at JSON-LD, it's another serialization of RDF. Or perhaps Turtle which is more human-readable. Or HDT which is a binary format of RDF making it extremely compact.

I've met lots of people that thought that RDF was something you could do with XML and along came all the despise they already had for XML. But it's not, RDF is essentially all about expressing and modelling data as statements of triples.

And this allows for all kinds of interesting interoperability scenarios such as data integration.
Ask HN: Anybody using RethinkDB in production?
I've been playing with RethinkDB (http://rethinkdb.com) today and am thoroughly impressed, especially by the web-based admin interface and the query language.

Are any of you HN'ers using RethinkDB in production? What is your experience with it?
Clickable: http://rethinkdb.com
> Compiling Node.JS on Raspberry PI unfortunately takes lots of time (approx. 4 hours!!)

Can't be cross compiled ??
As somebody who spent some years writing Perl code, I don't feel that having a few well-defined ASCII symbols were such an issue. The problems with Perl are that symbols change depending on the context (eg, an array @items needs to be accessed via $items[$i] to get an item at position $i, to tell Perl it is a scalar context), and weak typing. Even with changing symbols, it makes it easier to distinguish between scalars, arrays and hashes, especially with syntax highlighting. As opposed to languages like Haskell or Scala, in which library designers are free to display their creativity with such immediately obvious operators as '$$+-'.

Edited to add that I agree with your overall point. Shorter is not always clearer. It can be a benefit to have a few Unicode symbols displayed via 'conceal' but it's not (at least in my experience) a major productivity gain. And the number needs to be kept small. If I want Unicode symbol soup, I'll play a roguelike.
AFAIK it's a legacy thing. SOCKS4 didn't support it, SOCKS5 did but using that functionality changes behaviour depending on which SOCKS version the remote end happens to use.
I thought it meant 'fair' people as in people with light hair, skin and eyes.
Ask HN: In front-office (finance) tech; how to become less technical?
Hi HN - throwaway account because I have a few coworkers who also read HN.

I'm 26, graduated University in 2010 with a BSc in Software Engineering and am currently working in the front office of a tier-1 IB in London (in the City).

Through the day I'm exposed to the business a lot, and have learned a great deal in around 18 months. I'm currently working in FX, but am enjoying learning about equity research in my evenings and weekends.

Recently I've been thinking of a slight change in the direction of my career - the most concise way I can say it is that I'd like the code to become more of a tool than the end product. Equity research, and ultimately portfolio management interest me a great deal.

I'm wondering if anybody has the experience to advise how I can begin to make this change, or where I should look for positions? I would love to move to a buy side firm in the next few years if possible. I've begun to study for the IMC exam also. Many job postings I've seen even for junior equity analysts require much more business experience and a different academic background. What kind of firms should I be looking at?

Any help or advice would be appreciated :)
We have already lost so many years of work in the competition between Gnome and KDE.
Aha, I see. I'll look this up in addition to what kijin said (sshuttle).

It's not like our government is blocking anything (there were rumors it was blocking Facebook in 2011, but it wasn't true as I was able to log in without any issue. It was just slow, but it's not like we have the fastest internet here).

But it's nice to know. Thanks for the clarification.
Just for posterity, here is the list of backers from Paypal; I have removed the names and other sensitive information. $500 was from my family ($100,$200, and $200 entries). The total gross is $759...totals are at bottom.

http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgaotKT7v5hNdDNL...
> I really enjoyed reading someone far smarter than I am presenting these arguments clearly and concisely. I only wonder, how is it that more than 25 years later we still need to be making roughly the same points—how is it that they still feel fresh, mainly uncharted, and in need of advocacy?

Anti-intellectualism is a symptom of our age and prosperity, and it infects development as well. I routinely see modeling and design slammed on this site. Time-to-market trumps everything. Experience is systematically devalued. Discipline is something that 'interrupts flow' (JS semicolon debacle).

The sky is not falling, but for a site that presumably has a high contingent of skilled devs, it's a bit concerning. It's not the new-ness of the tech, it's the cavalier attitude of not learning from the past.
Sure but if you have the environment prepared for that... Hey! this is already compiled, tested etc with lots of additions and ready for hacking!
Wayland exists because it was proposed with concrete reasons why X was rubbish and needed replaced.

So everyone said "yes, true, valid, you speak honestly here" and they proceeded to develop Wayland and everyone was on board with transitioning to it when it was ready.

Mir has never produced any arguments for its adoption and has only spread false information claiming why it has merits over Wayland.

Free software will usually jump on any software that can clearly state "this replaces X, for reasons Y, because X is insufficient for purpose in these domains Z and can't be fixed". You get situations where projects like pulse and systemd come under fire over disagreements over what Z domains X is appropriate for, not because there are arguments against Y being lacking functionality.
So that's not really solving any specific problem and it's kind of hand waving to say RDF solves data integration problems for data on the web.

Let's break it down a bit.

We learned early on that people put information on the web in different ways. Sometimes it's encapsulated within the UI, sometimes people come up with there own formats for things like contact info and comments.

So how do we make a system where everyone can understand everyone else's data across the web?

Instead of rigidly defined relational models... Where you would need a schema for every type of data... We will attempt to create a universal model consisting of subjects predicates and objects (triples) as the 'schema' for all data. This is essentially RDF.

Like most stuff coming from the w3c, they took a pretty good idea and made it needlessly complex with a terrible initial XML syntax and confusing specs. The first implementations were horribly slow for storage and querying. SQL people were laughing at this joke. There is no reason why this entire concept and a simple implementation can't fit on the same sized sheet of paper as the brilliant JSON spec.
That's going to come in useful, bookmarked, thanks!
So every voter in Turkey essentially knows what Erdogan is doing. So nobody who understands democracy should vote for Erdogan.

If however not enough people understand democracy ...
I once had the pleasure of asking Marvin Minsky if he thought we'd ever use something other than text to create computer programs. Without missing a beat he said, "If it's good enough for Plato and Aristotle, it's good enough for me."
Jason Eckhart's Inner Wealth Secrets
Microsoft buys AR headset patents for $100-150M – report
I just don't understand why a company would want a Facebook page; consequently all this angst and drama leaves me befuddled. They have a website. They can show people who care pictures of food and whatever else they want. Why would they seek to dilute their web presence and message by helping another company profit from their content?
The article only compares Windows hosting numbers. It does not include Linux. I think for Amazon the number of Windows hosts is relatively small compared to the total hostings...

A typical vendor-sponsered research result :-)
Totally right, it's a front-end theme toolkit, but relies on many dependencies to be compiled (check the gemspec file).
Same question goes for the `twitter-bootstrap-rails` gem and a few others.
Saves a lot of time and hassle to add it as a gem and forget about it!
I asked myself the same question and don't have an answer yet.
I have to ask, did you even read the first sentence of the email from James Jones of NVIDIA? It says, "This direction seems to conflict with our plans to continue running our
DDX driver under XWayland." The rest of the email isn't exactly positive, as well.

"Progressing so quickly" just isn't the first thing I think of when hearing about difficulties like those described in that email.
I know all of those things. But it is still the case that the initial serialization format was XML and most of the initial tools were Java.
Bullshit. Otherwise 1024 would've taken off. Not 2048.

See how easy it is to shoot down someone's opinion and state your own?
namecoin would fix this: https://www.namecoin.org/