skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I've never seen anything wrong with more communication between stakeholders and adapting a solution to meet their ever-changing needs.

Surely there's a point where more communication starts being detrimental. Reducing it to the absurd: if you spend 100% of the time communicating then you have no time left to actually build the thing. So there's a trade-off, as usual.

It could also be argued that ease of communication to deal with "ever-changing needs" encourages more superficial requirements and less deep thinking about the actual problem, leading to wasted effort and lower quality results.

Maybe you are right, maybe the above paragraph is right. I don't know and neither do you. Replying "nonsense" is not really an argument.
It's main selling point is that it's fast and uses Markdown for writing posts. It's perfect for a developer blog.
Dunno why your comment is downvoted, this is a valuable testing strategy. Taking screenshots as an automated tool walks through your GUI is a great way to find regressions without writing tests for every last pixel. And you can run something like this on it's own or bolted onto existing test cases.
I had 'slide to unlock' phone a year before iphone... what a moron would go to court about such a triviality?
isn't it all because apple guys have tiny weenies and seek to compensate for it in the court so that someone would say they are cool and 'innovative'?
There's an obvious disconnect between describing your current role as 'critical' and the corresponding value the CEO recognizes in your compensation. The market is telling you that you're at least $50K subpar. That's some significant coin. Areas to explore-- A) how important is it to you to stay there? B) How much do they demonstrate they really want you. C) How much do you value your personal time? D) Would 8 weeks paid annual leave be worth a $50K trade-off?
I am very familiar with portage.

If 'installation time' is touted as improved, then zero compilation is implied. That means lost portability and binary packages, which is unacceptable to many.

As for repeatability, anything that touches the network is by definition unreliable. Portage offers package caching.

To make portage operations repeatable it is necessary to snapshot the system, kernel and portage tree, run emerge --fetchonly <package-spec> then provide the resulting /usr/portage/distfiles/ as part of the environment seeking to repeat the process. It's achievable, but non-trivial. Gentoo-family distribution developers do not optimize for this use case but it does work well.

Personally I have created an alternative to the other options in this space (thoughts at http://stani.sh/walter/pfcts) and am attempting full cross-platform support (any OS, any build system or deployment process).
Seems to be an oversight on LinkedIn's part.
I still can't buy movies in a DRM-free, open format at any price or convenience level. You might consider the status quo easy and cheap, but I'm still unimpressed.

Until MPAA-approved services offer a product that is superior (or at least equivalent) to the illicit services, this conflict will continue.
I think critical programmers from every generation back to Ada Lovelace have made this observation. When the solution has started costing more than the problem...stop.
If I have a paper company, and you're my only customer, should it be illegal for you to drop me as a supplier? I don't think it should.

I don't believe AdSense actually has contracts with any of their publishers but even that wouldn't make it illegal, just easier for the publisher to win a lawsuit.

You can sue for any reason including this but it's expensive and unlikely to succeed because Google can pretty much out-lawyer anyone. The case would probably get thrown out immediately.
Op is probably unaware of other things... Most script kids use rootkits that instal modified ps, ls, md5sum, etc... So you can't see the real evil files/Daemons
Neat trick: when wanting to see the full profile, just search LinkedIn for their name. If you come from search results, you can see the full profile (if their privacy settings allow it, which most do).
So the Economist's point is that a "research" project exploring an idea about the universe which has been known to be incorrect for centuries somehow proves the value of the humanities? Really?
I think your history with Google (and other large corps) being what it is makes you less of a good example here. I wouldn't be surprised if you're on a Google internal watch list.
Great! Congratulations on the web redesign as well!
We need to talk about poo (and how it could save your life)
This is so interesting. How differently people perceive and understand words and things. I'm not talking only about your comment, i'm talking about all HN comments here.

By saying anywhere we meant any location, that means any specific Dragdis folder (that creates organizing) or (soon to come) apps folder.

Thanks for your comment!
Excellent article! People should keep in mind when saying that HFT is siphoning money out of markets that their revenue is much, much smaller than hedge funds and investment banks.
It isn't fraud. The legal requirements for such are subtle and numerous, but basically require knowledge and intent which are difficult to prove and unlikely in most or all of these scenarios.

Google has to do it's best to serve it's customers on both sides, those who display ads and those who pay for advertisers. Cheating exists, the mechanisms to mitigate that cheating aren't perfect, and each side loses some as a result. To claim that their imperfect anti-cheating mechanism is fraudulent is quite a stretch, and you'll be hard pressed to find a advertising facilitator which provides better customer service for such small sums of money.
Agreed. ML is the "Wolf Hunter", but in this case, he was hunting sheep. I am astonished by the press's reaction to this. I think a lot of it has to do with the relatively small and obscure HFT industry - it is not well understood, and it is easier to believe it is rigged than to understand what it is.

To even call it "high frequency trading" is not fair - this implied large volumes throughout the day by continuously providing quotes on both sides of a given security. Their PnL comes from the bid/ask spread and rebates for providing liquidity. They are primarily market makers. This is 99.99% of the HFT industry.

Instead, ML and IEX are talking about "speed trading" or, as the press has coined it, "latency arbitrage" - they take advantage of their speed to reach exchanges (2 milliseconds vs. 20 milliseconds) to front-run orders and react quicker to new information. These types of trades only happen at points during the day when signals are met, and they do not provide liquidity but rather cross existing orders (often times before the exchange receives the cancel message from the participant) and TAKE OUT liquidity. I would say less than 1% of HFT firms engage in this type of unethical activity.

An example: Imagine it's 9:29am and the Dept of Labor Statistics is going to release the monthly unemployment numbers. There is a positive expectation, and so before market open there are a lot of buy SPY (S&P 500 ETF) orders queued. The report comes out at 9:30am as the markets open, and the numbers are bad. Now, a rational investor would immediately attempt to cancel his order for SPX as the market is going to move downward. Imagine at the same EXACT time, a speed trader see's this investors buy order on the book and decided to cross him and sell. Due to his speed advantage, the exchange receives his message to cross before the investors message to cancel. The investor loses out, SPX invariably moves down, and the speed trader then buys everything he just sold for an essentially risk-less profit.

A final point is this: for any buy-side market participant (anything from a mutual fund to a "Average joe"), transaction costs are much lower due to the much higher liquidity and tightened spreads that high frequency trading has brought to the markets. HFT is making the markets more efficient. Cliff Asness (Founder, AQR Capital Mgmt) wrote a piece in WSJ talking about this: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230397830...
It's worth noting that someone replied with a pure python implementation that was a lot faster: 0.283s.
GitHost vs GitLab.com
I thought the same. What is the advantage of this platform over something equally simple like Jekyll or Octopress?
I think that's actually what happens in the US. The judge will give particularly detailed instructions (the original trial had a 109 page manual) and the verdict is actually a structured response (which is why they were able to give an inconsistent verdict). The system tries to do this properly but then the jurors are swayed by the emotional arguments and there's not much you can do about it. In this case maybe forcing them to deliberate on individual arguments would help. From the interviews they basically backtracked from "we think they're guilty" to "how do I fill out this damn form", negating the value of the structure that was in place.
Machine Learning as a service is not a new concept, but is incredibly hard to execute well.
-> "Very soon you’ll be seeing a fresh, slick Ghost(Pro) dashboard"

Is "(Pro)" indicating that the dashboard component will be available only for paying/hosted customers and will not be open-sourced?
The problem with labeling is that it implies it's relevant. How would you feel about adding a label to food that indicates the ethnicity of the person that packed it? Applying your logic, not putting it on there is just hiding information used to make an 'informed decision'.
Have you considered working directly with the most relevant advertisers for your niche market?
This absurdity is found all over the internet and it's the result of Google's crawling policy. You can do the same kind of thing with nytimes.com articles and other websites that want their context indexed by Google but at the same time restrict access to it. These absurdities are made and work because most people do not understand how to use the software they have.
There is just so much bot activity on Twitter that I wonder if these analytics can produce any meaningful insights.

If you think my statement is loaded, just try constructing a tweet with a story link and a ticker symbol for an actively traded stock (e.g. $AAPL). Just see how many clicks you get and if the link goes back to your site, you'll see that almost all of clients clicking don't run any JavaScript (strong indication of a bot).

The above example is from personal experience. There may be other topics away from finance that attract much less bot activity.
4OD is absolutely dreadful, and I've found that it doesn't work on Linux. Luckily, there's a 4OD YouTube channel where you can get the same content in a better (but still buggy, I assume Google wrote custom advertising code for them) player.

EDIT: Actually, they've gone and removed all that. Wonderful. I wish companies would license the BBC iPlayer technology.
I've heard that some contingency-fee outside recruiters want resumes in an editable MS Word document: They want to shop the resume around, sans the candidate's name, to potential employers. Don't know how true that is.
No, I'm pretty sure it's a purposeful strategy to acquire paying users.
What's the goal there? v8, at least, will give the name in a stack trace even if the function is declared like `var a = function(){}`.
doesn't look like solid project right now. One screenshot, few word about the idea. Nothing more. There is prediction.io which looks like much solid implementation, but I still don't like it. I don't like ML software that feels like blackbox. If I can't see learning stats/graphs - I don't trust results. There is also bigml.com, but I haven't played with this yet.
Apple is one of the biggest patent trolls in the world (by any of several metrics, the most meaningful in my personal opinion being the total amount of damages sought from infringement of patents not in use in any product). Just google 'bockstar'.

I think there is some conflation of 'patent troll' vs 'non-practicing entity'. The latter is a subspecies of the former. After multinational conglomerates got good at exploiting the (busted) US patent system, more specialized parasites -- of course! -- evolved to exploit it even more efficiently (by not producing anything, nor having any assets vulnerable to counterattack).

But just because you make products doesn't mean you aren't a patent troll. Honeywell and Apple are perhaps marginally better then Myhrvold's Intellectual Ventures... but only because they are patent trolls who also produce things of value (to some people).

Patent-trolling-wise[1], they are the same.

[1]: Hyphenating only the last pair of words in an ad-hoc-compound adjective is not as bad as patent trolling, but still bad, IMO.
"So near the physical boundary of the system there is a layer that requires fiddling. It is useless to try to write tests first (or tests at all) for this layer. The only way to get it right is to use human interaction; and once it's right there's no point in writing a test."

This seems dead wrong. There is probably no way to write tests first in this environment, but with so many different browsers interpreting your CSS (to run with preceding example) you need to be aware of when changes in your code cause changes in rendering that might need to be revalidated and further fiddled! I do agree that it doesn't fit well with TDD, but it absolutely can work with automated testing.
As a general rule of thumb can we all just agree that 90% of all human organizations -- at the very least -- are mediocre? A good resume should be part of escaping these types of places and living a more successful happy life! :-)
In a 30 KLOC rails project I find those numbers acceptable. Also you are unlikely to run the full suite after every editor save. Even Jim Weirich runs a single test file and not the full suite.
Heh. My reason from screen is the exact opposite. It's easier to be available on all servers i ever connect to... which is why i won't care for those features anytime soon.
I think it's great. I'll be using it.
> except this one is hip and popular

And sometimes that's all it takes.
Linkedin has always baffled me with this stuff.

It's the guy at the party who's so nervous to over-control the social situation, right down to the T in Gil's name.
Not true as of 0.10.24, which is what I have installed.
What I assume is the background video bluescreened my windows 7 machine. Yikes! All I saw was video artifacts begin to form on the page and then POOF!
their value strategy is allow recruiters to find the linkedin profile via google and than up sell the recruiter.
Automatic container creation for Docker
The scraper bots are exactly why they're making the full information available to non-logged in users, so it shows up in Google's index. I believe it's considered a no-no to show the bot a different page from a non-logged-in human viewer, so they don't really have a choice.

Hiding it from users with login/session cookies, however, is just being annoying and depending on the fact that most people won't know enough to switch to an incognito window.
I suggest to come up with your own buyable products (tutorials, how-to's, etc..) and show half of it (teaser) to everyone and allow to see the rest to paid members.

Then you may charge per download, or full access based on recurring membership fee.

You may also offer free membership to capture emails and then market to interested visitors further.

Whoring your traffic to other people's platforms or products leaves no residual value to you and makes you vulnerable to other people TOS'es, moods and playrules.

The point is to use Google what it's good for - to send you prospects.

Your task is to capture prospect's contacts and establish relationships with them.

Begging for Adsense peanuts is unsustainable strategy as many people are finding out the hard way.

(PS: I worked on bulding membership site software that allows you to do just that with a few clicks)
UK end user here. Is this case really a sensible way to divide up the market share for middle to high end smart phones? I mean what would be gained by the ordinary customer if Samsung lost and decided not to make phones any more as it wasn't worth the hassle?

Am I being naive?

I presume Apple does not want to compete in the low margin part of the market (which I imagine will see the largest growth as the higher end saturates).
Stanford Business School opens a course at Polytechnique, France
I would be extremely happy to take over, would you please email me some stats of the website/revenue so we can discuss. contact at iphonophile.fr
thanks
"Measuring implementations of the same algorithm is how you benchmark" that one algorithm.

"Measuring implementations of [different] algorithms is how you benchmark algorithms"
> it can simply mean patent aggressor who uses patents for anticompetitive purposes

Then the term is meaningless. Patents exist solely for anticompetitive purposes. That's what they're supposed to do. Patents are supposed to provide protection from competition to promote innovation.

We can argue about what the patent system should look like (or if it should exist) some other time, but to call a patent troll anybody that "uses patents for anticompetitive purposes" is an entirely meaningless statement that completely misses the point of patents in the first place.
Got ya! Thanks!
I'm one of the publishers whose account got nixxed (just a few months ago), and also within a few days of payment. It wasn't a big account; I only made maybe $100-200/month on it, but it was a nice bit of extra change. (I'd also had the account for a long time... since the early days of Adsense.)

I think the biggest frustration is having the account pulled with no explanation as to why. I assume it was click fraud, but it wasn't my doing - I generally just ignored the site. Was I clickbombed? Don't know. But it feels like Google punished me for something beyond my control.

One curious thing - I noticed in my analytics account that the site had gotten about 2x the usual traffic for the day before, so when I emailed my appeal I said maybe that had something to do with it. But a few days later (after the appeal was denied) I looked at analytics again and that traffic spike no longer existed. I wish I'd taken a screen shot the first time. (Or saved some server logs.) Didn't do either though, so oh well.

Still don't know what happened, but the experience definitely makes me bitter towards Google.
For most people the easiest way to see what using an API looks like is to use it. And the emergent design that results can often be better than what you would have designed if you tried to design by thinking about it without writing code. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WhatIsAnAdvancer
Spain. I have a colombiano friend and I've heard zancudo often, but not mosco. Never mind, I'm going to use mosco exclusively from now on to annoy fellow spaniards, it's catchy :-)
That double-naming thing is going out of fashion, since modern browsers + node.js all know how to figure out function names without it.
so, I realize this might be seen as spam, but I am always trying out adsense alternatives and regularly maintain a list of the ones I'm trying out. http://www.dotcult.com/best-adsense-alternatives/

TLDR: casale, Lijit, technorati are working best for me.
I didn't notice any start-time issues, but I only have Firefox 29 currently installed on a higher-end laptop so that might be part of it. I'll be interested to see how this fairs when I put 29 on a netbook that I have (Intel Atom, single core).

I had the same gripe you did, if you grab 'classic toolbar buttons', it'll give you the smaller layout with the 'enable small buttons' option on.
This is the tension that is LinkedIn.

While they were growing, they allowed great amount of sharing. Now it seems they are transitioning from a growth based company to growing their revenue--I've personally been finding more and more examples of this increased friction.

So far that tension seems to still be 'ok', they still give away, for free, most of the value is in their huge user database. Their monetization strategy has been to tighten things up so it's still valuable for most people, with the exception of sales and recruiters. If you are one of them, then to get the value of the database you need to pay.

Given the network effects of their user database, I suspect over time what they give away will be less and less and we'll see more examples of this.
I can't believe people still use LinkedIn.

And when I say that, I am talking about the HN crowd. It's one thing to say "I can't believe people use IE6", but this is tech-savvy people using a joke of a social media.

Guys, if you want to look professional, buy your own domain name. Something professional, like yourname.me, or clever like "yourna.me". Build your own web page with your own damn profile and don't leave control over a company on how you look on the web. Be in control of the first point of entry to your identity.

For god sake guys. LinkedIn has had so many security issues, so much scummy behaviour regarding spam, user retention etc... yet you are still blessing them with your presence. (Obviously this doesn't apply to those that don't)

PS: Use gandi.net as a registrar for your name. They offer a free ssl cert along with the domain (and support almost every tld) for added "professional-looking" value to your site. I am not affiliated with them, I just love Gandi.

Edit: I'm being called out for "living in my own bubble" it seems. Yet LinkedIn is the very definition of a bubble. I used to have a LinkedIn profile and from it all I got were the most awful recruiting experiences, and all of them through cold calls. Your own site with CV + portfolio + Github + contact details is a LOT better.

PS2: Downvote or not I don't care, but please reply if you disagree; I'd love to disagree even harder!

Edit 2: I'm starting to think there is correlation between finding LinkedIn useful and not having a Github profile. A lot of the points people are bringing up here are solved in a very similar way by Github (which is in many ways a social network). This does bring me back to my original point though, why use LinkedIn when you can use a company that isn't scummy and actually have your real work experience on there and a link back to your personal website with more portfolio etc?