skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you're doing accounting, sure you would want ACID compliant database. There you have a limited amount of kinds of data to store with strict and rarely changing constraints. You can keep it on one big expensive server (plus backup) and it's better to bring the system down to allow inconsistency.

However, for most web development SQL is seriously not good. You end up with hundreds of loosely coupled tables which constantly change their structure for new features. Half dozen of joins on every request. Hundreds of lines of SQL. Constant pain. And it's not like you cared so much for the consistency - if once a year three comments disappear from your web site, so what?

And it's painful to make SQL multi-master.

For (the most of) web development document databases are so much better. MongoDB is pretty nice because it makes hundreds of lines of SQL with ten files of code redundant - all per one complex document.
I've actually noticed Chegg doing the exact same thing experts exchange did.

For example, if I'm looking up homework help for second order differential equations, I'd see something like this[1] in the Google results. Does anyone know why is this not being penalized?

[1] – http://www.chegg.com/homework-help/questions-and-answers/1-f...
I don't know if you're being snarky or trolling or what but alcoholism comes in many forms. Please don't diminish the situation people are in just because they do their job well.
On the flip side of this is Google Consumer Surveys[0], which is actually quite useful. You set up a survey, specify your target demographics, and Google takes care of finding participants. How does it get participants? With the popups you mentioned.

[0] https://www.google.com/insights/consumersurveys/home
I'm not saying it's superior, rather it finds a significant place in the stack for many of the most cutting edge data focused companies. So it's here to stay. My argument is that those cutting edge data focused companies will be just about everyone to varying degrees in the years to come. There's room for many technologies in the enterprise abd it's naive to assume as the author does that Facebook and Google's challenges are unicorns.
How about looking at the number of people who must be removed in order to bring the bus factor down to 1? We can call it the "bus co-factor" :). With the bus factor we're picking the most critical people first, and removing the least number of them; with the bus co-factor we're picking the least critical people first, and removing the greatest number of them.

There's probably already some name and many theorems in graph theory for both of these ideas.
I was wondering if it would be possible for Facebook to fake their usage numbers. I mean, its valuation is closely tied to the number of users and not so long ago everyone thought Facebook was close to saturation, now suddenly they managed to increase the number of users. How can a stockholder know if the numbers they publish are real? It looks to me that it would be possible to increase revenue while the number of users stays flat, so that's not a useful measure.
That listing is blocked in France due to "legal restrictions". Is it a module designed for laptops, or something more general?
That link of yours is amazing. A lot of thought put to the problem of high school hierarchies in the US. I disagree about it not being about the age, though. School goes slower where I live so the 12-16 year period hits in secondary (youth) school instead of high school. The bullying basically stops as people go to high school. The pupils are still in the classroom. The situation doesn't change. Yet the bullying stops.
And it still goes on. China just celebrated Mao and Russians in Crimea were holding up signs praising Stalin a few weeks ago, madness.
"Forever more I'd be yet another guy discreetly carrying a white powder around at bars. I'd advise you do likewise."

I already do!
Ah, I stand corrected. With the additional news that they are scaling back G+, now I'm not sure what to think.
The police, the parties involved, hell, even the courts have seen this video. Could they ALL be lying, and he's a perfectly innocent man!?!?

Furthermore, it's not like it's particularly ambiguous: it's _117_ strikes over a half hour period.

This is like disbelieving Australia exists because you've never physically set foot on it.
> like salt. It's a great flavor enhancer

I wish there were a way to get my food unsalted.

> Now that they have the platform they need, they're pushing social integration into all of their features, literally pushing people who know how to do social into every nook and cranny of Google

And "literally" pushing users into adopting it, regardless. I prefer the TechCrunch interpretation (G+ is dead) because for one brief moment, I had hope -- but I suspect OP is more correct.
>> Social + Search = Knowing that when I search for a thing, I mean the one my friend likes, not the similarly named one he doesn't.

This is where Google have gone wrong. I don't want my search results to be affected by signals from my friends. They don't search for the same things as me.

I want my search results to be ranked with signals from other relevant people... and I don't know who these people are.

Google got it right first time around. PageRank captures the link juice from these relevant people. C# bloggers linking to open source projects. F1 fans linking to interesting articles. Apple bloggers linking to rumours.

Google+ puts the onus on me to decide who is relevant and I don't know. Using this as signal for searching is making me do Google's job.
I keep getting "no results found" =(
Russia Orders Bloggers To 'Register'; Outlaws Anonymous Blogging...
I did Ludum Dares 6,7,8,9,10,13,14,15,20,21,24 and 26.

That's a bunch of stuff that I've made that I wouldn't have without the Ludum Dare. It let me explore ideas and learn a lot. I haven't Won a Ludum Dare, nor do I expect to (I got 1st for graphics once) The standard is extremely high.

Here's a sampling of some of mine that play online.

Some Games came out a bit mad http://screamingduck.com/Lerc/LD13.html

Some were insanely hard http://screamingduck.com/Lerc/LD14.html

Some were pretty but otherwise fairly crappy http://fingswotidun.com/Ludum20

This one just about gave every web-browser a hernia http://www.fingswotidun.com/ld21/

And some were, well I don't know what the hell this is, but it was pretty neat. http://www.fingswotidun.com/ld24
100% agree. This is offensive and sexist. I'm a man and I'm offended, and can only imagine how women must find it.
TC is mostly right.

The usual motivation for making new products is to satisfy users' needs, to make their lives better. Google didn't make Google+ to give value to consumers. They made it because they feared Facebook.* Without Facebook, there would be no Google+. That's the fundamental problem – Google+ provides value only to a minority of Google users – why force it down everyone's throats?

As Steve Yegge said: "Google+ is a knee-jerk reaction, a study in short-term thinking, predicated on the incorrect notion that Facebook is successful because they built a great product. But that's not why they are successful."

Google still doesn't understand social and people. Facebook is successful because it feeds on (or exploits?) specific psychological needs. Technology and user interface are secondary factors.

* To be more specific, I think that the #1 reason they've built Google+ was to extract friend lists (social graph), because they've thought that this data can improve their other products. Their line of thinking was "If Facebook has social data and we don't, they'll be able to make a better search engine or an ad network." They've seen this as a big threat to their core business. But making a product just to exctract data is doomed to fail.
Seconded in full, save that I suspect in a lot of cases it's not just "interested in not seeing it" but rather silently cheering bullies on, on the same general theory as someone might, while finding the specific methods distasteful, approve in general of the idea of cross-gender rape as a corrective for homosexuality. (If that seems like an overly strong statement to you, consider that both "corrective rape" and bullying revolve around the use of violence to enforce a social norm. Granted, the former is much worse than the latter generally manages, but I'm increasingly convinced that the difference is more of degree than of kind.)

It's for reasons like this that, while pragmatically convinced it'll never actually happen, I am strongly in favor of the law treating adults who passively or actively enable bullying as it does anyone else who abets or conspires to a crime. Seeing the erstwhile principal of a school dragged off in irons, to be arraigned on suspicion of having been an accessory before and after the fact to assault and battery, seems to me just the thing to give every other responsible party, in every other school sharing the jurisdiction, powerfully to think. No, it'll never happen, but the once-bullied kid in me surely wishes it would.
Venture capitalists sell the founders capital and do pretty well. Same with lawyers selling them legal advice. And landlords selling them office space and housing.
When facebook was on the rise I had a situation when several students came at me for no reason. So many people behave like animals, hatred and bad jokes are like a source of energy to them. I failed to have a degree due to these people.

That was a reason I stopped using facebook too. I think the web should be used to drive people who have the same interests towards each other, but that's the opposite that happens: you end up confronting the people who know you and dislike you, and it's impossible to avoid them because you either work with them or you are in the same class.

What boggles my mind is when I read on the internet people saying "bullying is fine and it's part of life". Sounds like it's a game for them, and they don't realize that people just don't want to play with them.

If I could relive my teenage years, I would stab so many students. The scars bullying leaves on you are for ever.
And even worse - will most likely make money from it.
Celebrity SEO Fail – Kim Kardashian’s SEO Grade: F
The second time I saw him in Dublin, I remember walking out of the venue with this big goofy grin on my face and my ears ringing like never before. I walked down the street to a convenience store to grab a Coke, but when the cashier spoke to me it was quieter than a whisper. It took about 24 hours for the ringing to finally stop, but I would do that night over again without a second thought.

Watching Satch play live (and up close!) you see the passion in his face and his playing. This is a man that LOVES what he does - and he does it very well! If only we could all be that lucky.
WTF?

As an industry are we incapable of learning anything from our past fuckups?
Famo.us So Far: Field Guide for April 2014
> They just said that they no longer consider social to be a separate unit, but now will be potentially integrated to everything they do. How is that the same thing as giving up on social?

A product that is everybody's second priority is nobody's first priority.

You can see how this plays out in practice by looking at this other bit from the TC article:

"One big change for Google+ is that there will no longer be a policy of 'required' Google+ integrations for Google products, something that has become de rigueur for most product updates."

Assuming this is true, it tells you everything you need to know about G+'s current position in the Google portfolio: it's been demoted from something strategic, something fundamental, to an optional add-on.

You can argue whether that's a good move or not (I think it is), but you can't really argue that it's not a step down. Because going from "this is part of what it means to be a Google product" to "this is something useful we'll let individual units decide whether to use or not" is definitely a step down.
Maybe I didn't understand the case enough, apologies. Let me read again.
Yes, there really is nothing more productive to do. Worse, we're going to end up in a situation where unless we make big investments now with negative current ROI, society will be even poorer in the future once the current capital assets have depreciated and been written off.

Example: sustainable power generation.
In what context are you referring to the "compute in advance offline" part? Sometimes it's costly to compute things in advance and store them, when you might not need them. If storage space becomes a concern, then Google would have to write some fancy algorithms based on data access patterns that determines what to compute in advance, and what to compute JIT. Which complicates things because now they have to write and regularly run programs that tell them what to compute, which simplistically means that they are at least running 3 different tasks, instead of 1 on-the-fly computation.
War, famine, disease, losing your liver -- all this pales compared to cyber bullying!

I was bullied as a kid, it was awful, but I was being hit with fists, and when I didn't have any money to steal, they'd hit me again. They also carried knives. I lived in a ghetto.

If this is the worse thing that happened to her in her life, she must have had a pretty good and happy life. I am certain that cyber bullying is real and can create a huge emotional torment, but what I read here is pretty lame. Colleagues post mean comments and it affects you emotionally? Seriously? Maybe it was much worse than the author can express, in which case she is just a bad writer, but her twitter reaction[1] made me think this is not the case, and it made me lose all sympathy for her.

If this stuff affects you, it's bad parenting. If you live in Disneyland and are this isolated from real life, it's only the fault of your parents who didn't teach you anything about the real life, where people are hateful, mean, and generally want to fuck you up in some way.

Because I am extremely arrogant and because I am always right, people hate me a lot, especially people on the Internet. This doesn't affect me negatively, this amuses me. Seven years back (wow, already 7 years!) some guy hated me so much, that he hired thugs to beat me up. Real thugs. With sticks. Sticks that hit me in the eye. I couldn't see for two weeks with my left eye. I still have floaters and flashes in my both eyes.

Did this depress me? No! I am now stronger, I learned a thing or two about self-defense and I got my revenge, except without violence.

[1] https://twitter.com/anna_debenham/status/459673982149877760

/edit: this was downvoted less than two seconds since when I posted it. Two seconds! HN readers muts read pretty fast, since I assume everyone here actually reads before downvoting. Surely that's true! As I said, amusing.
Ask HN, what do you think about this teaser page?
Hello HN,

My team and me are working on a new project, and we created a teaser page for it that can be found at: http://teaser.waevio.com/

I am affraid I can't tell you too much about it at this point, but in this case that might be the point too.

The question would be - Can you please comment here, what do you think it's about? Also, is there enough to make you leave your email address in the box bellow? What is your general opinion about the page and what can we do to improve it so it could get better response?

Thanks for checking out this post and looking forward to your responses! :)

We are still trying to figure out the best way to promote our website and all help will be appreceated!
I'd used Go (continuous delivery) at University before I'd heard about Go(lang). Yes, whilst in the perfect world everything would be named a short, memorable, unqiue (,descriptive?) name - that's not the case. The two items in question are distinct enough that searching for golang vs go cd will produce relevant results.
Google is ahead of Facebook?

Ha ha ha ha...
How a poker player with no experience snagged a job interview with Mike Moritz
Which is another way of saying that this technology, like any other, is morally neutral, and only the actions of the people who use it have any moral weight.
That's a bit hyperbolic since being a software engineer is skill with very high demand globally, and people in SV tend to be paid higher than anywhere else. Sure you have your ramen bootstrappers, and equity dreamers, but even when you fail in those scenarios you usually come out with invaluable experience.
Interesting, that isn't transaction, it is just a workaround, and I don't think you can design your app like that which treat document as a transaction log. And then using view to generate the real information.
Unregulated market usually doesn't work (i.e. it degrades into monopoly which is the opposite of the free market) when competition is way below a healthy level.

Can you give me an example of a market which has no specific regulations, where the State only enforces basic stuff (personal safety, property and contracts)?

I think you'll be hard pressed to find one. Regulation is pervasive. When people claim that a certain market is unregulated, it usually means it lacks the regulations they find important, not that it's actually unregulated.
Would it make more sense to have a government agency handle the litigation for class action lawsuits? I'm thinking of something like anti-trust lawsuits, which I believe can be initiated by both state attorneys and private law firms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law#Rem...

I'm not necessarily advocating for this, because I suspect there are a lot of implications I haven't thought through... however, I'm leaning toward it as an idea.

The big problem I see here is that the real victory for a law firm in a very compelling class action is mainly in gaining the right to represent the class.

At this point, the risks become asymmetrical, because the payout for the lawyers on a settlement is so high that it makes no sense to engage in even mildly risky behavior, even if the expected return is far higher with litigation. If you and 10 other lawyers are going to get to split 300 million, would you press for litigation that had an 80% chance of returning a billion, and a 20% chance of returning nothing?

That lottery would probably be the basis for extracting a good settlement, but it makes sense that lawyers would be extremely reluctant to take that risk, because the outcomes for them are tons of money for sure and probably tons of money but maybe no money. The order of magnitude gets lost in the gain, so only the risk remains as a consideration.

Would state prosecutors, who stand to build a career on this but will be paid "the same" regardless of the outcome, do a far worse job?
Oh dear. Not again.
Any word on whether Notch is participating this time around?
Funny, I'm dutch too.

Yes, as long as we stay humble. :)
He tried to suffocate his girlfriend and hit her 117 times in a half hour.

Plainly, what the FUCK is wrong with you?
OT but I think that there is a place for a new programming language designed around making testing and TDD easy. Maybe the test code can be written in a higher level DSL or dialect of the same language.
Fighting for share of the pie in the Android market would have created far more sales than fighting for crumbs of a virtually non-existent pie in the Windows market.

Having said that, I agree with your final point. If you view the whole thing as a setup to extract maximum value via an acquisition, it might make sense. They may have been worth more as a MS acquisition target selling Windows phones than they would have been had they gone down the Android path.

It's entirely possible that neither path would have led to sustainability as a standalone entity.
These points are not in contradiction. You can publish anonymized salary information which gives other professionals accurate information about their market value while at the same time protecting employees against abuses of power where individual HR data becomes available to third parties.

For example, Tekna, the Norwegian Technical and scientific professionals' society, publishes annual (anonymized) salary surveys which are categorized by percentile, length of work experience and public vs. private sector. A software developers' "union" could easily provide similar statistics, perhaps organized by specialty. What you need to publish for transparency is enough information to ensure that new employees don't get a raw deal, not individualized information.
Crying right now.
"Weighs 165 lbs, out drinks the 275 lbers"
I haven't heard joking about G+ any more than I have about FB.

FB is where you go to have your grandma and aunt write weird messages. G+ is where you go to share photography and travel logs. Sure, people do each of those things on both platforms, but g+ is in no way 'dead' or even close to it just because you don't personally use it.
PhoneBlox-style fancy modular smartphones are an interesting prospect, but I really wish there was a simple replaceable-parts phone design based on ordinary development-board-style PCBs. Make it about 25mm thick and then it would be somewhat viable to carry around as a nerdy but genuinely usable phone, while still having enough internal space to be based on replaceable PCBs without too much pressure to miniaturise. Such a standard would have lots of utility: as a testbed for commercial phone development, as a place to experiment with new hardware or software for phones, as a phone (or just a gadget) incorporating niche (or "niche-of-one") hardware or software you can't get in a commercial device, as the equivalent of a self-build PC for enthusiasts.
You call motorbikes, buses, and bicycles trucks?
This is the definition of (s)exploitation.

Apologies for reacting without reading clearly.
It looks like it's pretty painful to add stuff to OpenSSL: https://plus.google.com/+ElieBursztein/posts/c99W3fGsuKx
I'm "accusing" them only of doing exactly what they indisputably did.

It is sensitive and I applaud them for talking about it and taking control. But when you post something to twitter as a public post, it is a public post and you simply don't have control over the discussion.

As someone who grew up with the internet, as they say, they surely understand this.

People might be mean. People might point out that "bullies are people too". People might post stupid jokes or asinine comments or talk about it being one side of the story.

Avert thy gaze. Geez, when I post technical articles and they get linked here or on Reddit, I don't even read the comments to that because I'm overly sensitive to disagreement. But that disagreement and the normal course of discourse is important, and I understand that I can't suppress it, nor should I.

Which is why I noted that when someone says something that the author said, the submission should be removed, as seems to be their desire regardless. The invisible hand of coercion is corrupting. Alternately HN should abide by some sort of robots.txt agreement or something.

And just to be clear, instead of simply making the post private or researching how to block sites, they instead called out HN specifically, to exactly the expected results: Lots of navel gazing and people talking about how mean HN is, so we really better keep it civil for them. They withdraw the threat. How can anyone argue that isn't explicit, obvious coercion?

To put it another way, the comments on HN are for the service and edification of the members of HN. They are not to serve the interests of the linked content or the people involved. This is a point that so often is missed in these "woe be us" discussions.
Comments would be the feature. Social is just an adjective.
I'm honestly not sure what to think. I post pictures that got a lot of great feedback on other places to Google+. Google+ reports that these pictures get hundreds of views, but almost no one +1s, shares, or comments.
yep, it would be nice at least if you could decide which circles contain relevant people to your interests (including ∅)
From what I've read ADH is something yeast has evolved with. It's not added to yeast.
And then he reaches into his bag, and excitedly holds it in his palm: The Placebo Effect!