skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hopes this succeeds...my impression of the news business is that journalists have vastly underestimated the importance of delivery system. Newspapers had success in the pre-Internet days, not just because of good journalism, but of good delivery systems. There's a reason why afternoon newspapers died as television became popular (back in 1948, there were 1,453 afternoon papers versus 328 newspapers: http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2008/02/rip-pm-newspapers.html)...it's not that people are just attracted to stellar journalism, but the newspaper is expected to provide a useful, reliable service (such as classifieds). Too many journalists thought that people paid to subscribe because they, deep inside, cared about the First Amendment and freedom of the press. Yes, some subscribers do. I pay for the New York Times and the New Yorker because I want to support them, but there's not enough people like me around.

And truth be told, the New Yorker's digital service is a pain in the ass. For awhile, their user-management system was horrible (find your print magazine, enter your name in exactly as it appears on the label) and the web-viewer is trash, and to read it on iPad meant downloading hundreds of megabytes per issue. I only use the digital service because it comes free with the print subscription and would never subscribe to digital alone. Reducing friction has been a huge factor to online subscription services in general and the news industry has been far behind on it...hopefully the Netherlands project makes up for that.

But even with a good subscription service, I wonder if it's too little too late? People are now way in the habit of not paying for news. And unlike Netflix movies or Spotify tracks, the average person doesn't get addicted to morning news clips. Reading news is more work than pleasure, and that's always why newspapers, back in the old days, were very careful about how they did comics, sports, and other non-news sections.
Isn't this the point of the article though? that most people thought just like you, that the interaction would be miserable and a waste of their time, yet they were enriched by it?
This game exists for the Parrot AR drones. http://singularityhub.com/2010/06/17/parrots-ar-drone-gets-c...
Could use more examples :)
The Tower of David – Venezuela’s “vertical slum”
Note to OP: what follows is speculation for entertainment. Get advice from a lawyer before even considering basing any actions on this.

Note to everyone: OP said his agreements have been made "verbally". I'm going to assume he meant "orally", because 99% of the time that is what people actually mean when they talk about verbal legal agreements.

It almost certainly is true. The only ways it would not be his code are if it were a "work made for hire" or if he has transferred the copyright to someone else.

There are two ways for something to be a work made for hire.

1. It is produced by an employee within the scope of his employment, or

2. It is specially ordered or commissioned and falls into one of several categories AND the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work is to be considered a work made for hire.

If all they have are oral agreements, then #2 is out. For #1, "employee" does not necessarily mean an actual employee under whatever definition your state uses for that term. It can include relationships where the person creating the work acts like an employee. A big factor in that is how the work is supervised, and who provides the equipment and facilities used in creating the work.

From the OP's description, he did the work on his own. It's hard to see how he could be seen to be an employee for purposes of copyright law, and so #1 is also out.

The other way he could no longer own the copyright would be if he transferred it to someone else. Copyright transfer requires a signed, written instrument. If all they have are oral agreements, then there could not have been a transfer.

There's one more possibility to consider. Even thought the OP almost certainly owns the copyright on the code he has written so far, it is possible that he has licensed it to his partner. For instance, if they intended to make their code open source, and the OP included a notice stating that the code was under GPL, and gave a copy of the code and license to the partner, the partner might argue that he can continue to use that code and continue to develop it without the OP's further permission, as long as he follows the GPL.
Since an import cannot reference a specific tag or commit, even with forking you're exposed to the situation where a team member may update the fork and break the project. Keeping dependency information external to the project is a bad idea.

So with forking, you still have to reference a "vendor" path, as described in the linked article. You could use Git submodules or Git subtrees, or something homegrown, all of which add complexity and are not ideal.
This has happened a few times recently.

It seems to be a new thing, that the front page is being editorialised.

An example of dang whitelisting something to get what he feels should be on the front page on there (and past the various things that would block it): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7634603

And the criticism of Sam Altman's Barack Obama fundraiser at YC was silently removed the moment it became apparent that nearly all comments were negative.

What we've seen in the last month is:

1) Things can be whitelisted and their place on the front page assured (skip filters and checks)

2) Things can be killed in a way that excludes them from the front page without leaving the item as [dead] (penalise in the placement algorithm)

3) Things can be silently removed (soft delete)

And all of those things are happening.

As a community we used to be able to rely on the fact that pg basically didn't get involved. And so we could trust that the front page reflected the community intent.

That trust is being broken.
Ah ok thanks, so yes, CrossOver would be what I'm looking for. LightRoom is mentioned as "known not to run" so that's a bummer, but Vegas 11 has a Gold medal for Linux, which is a good start!!
I think you could, check out GNUnet, seriously. Those guys have been laboring away for a long time to produce a platform for anonymous and encrypted communication.

GNUnet can be used to build a darknet of any sort: P2P chat, a social networking application, email, you name it. Brilliant people are plugging away at it to build a platform for people with less knowledge of cryptography (like me) to build this sort of stuff on top of.
This is the Internet, not everyone speaks English. ;)
At some entrepreneurial meetup I met a german scientist, who was working on applying their image and information system's detection algorithms for exactly that.
Could be useful to make an "uncheatable" driver's log.

Didn't hear if it actually made it to market.
It still would be quite niche, as the only "improvement" would be that the user wouldn't have to enter the current mileage by hand and can just snap a picture.

However I have a strong feeling that other tools, such as "automatic.com" or other systems that plug into the Can BUS of the car are of more use, if you have to manage a small fleet of cars with varying drivers.
I find the comparison of software development and surgery/flying an air plane very lacking. It restricts the term "Software" in the post title to very critical systems (OpenSSL admittedly being one of them).

The author proposes automated tests/Software "checklists" as the solution to all problems. The problem with automated tests is that they can only catch "expected" bugs. The author describes an idea for an automated test that _might_ have caught the Heartbleed bug. Big deal, now that we know all about the bug. A next unforeseen type of vulnerability will come, and no automated test will catch it.

I think the article greatly exaggerates the applicability and capabilities of automated tests (or "check lists"). I'm a big fan of all things TDD and consider myself a very rigorous programmer (surely often to the detriment of speed/pragmaticism). But I don't need a check list of the complexity of a flight check to describe the rules I use in my work.
Submitter here. You know what's weird? I could've sworn I put the title of the HN submission as the title of this article (I just Ctrl-V, Ctrl-P'd the title... Is it possible that others can edit the submission's title?)
Something really interesting (and relevant) is that in cases where a redesign makes an interface markedly easier, it can still perform less favorably simply because people liked knowing how to do something that most people couldn't (i.e. using said interface). Take Ideo's redesign of the Bloomberg example, for example.

http://www.ideo.com/work/bloomberg-terminal-concept
Right on. Right now, there is no company. The OP owns the software and the implementation not the concept is the only thing that has concrete value.

The business person's obligation is to execute on the business side, and that obligation hasn't been fulfilled. Moreover, the business person has stated that they are not going to execute their role until they feel like it.

Let the other fellow lawyer up.
Ditch the smartphone to optimise your bandwidth
Lyft taught me that many lyft drivers choose fairly terrible routes, and I'm better off using UberBlack.

AirBNB taught me that many AirBNB hosts, even those with good reviews, are dishonest about their locations, the details of the facilities that are available, and their own identities. But they use social pressure to avoid bad reviews. As such, I learned that I'm much happier using a traditional hotel.
The most common feature I've found in successful tech products is ease of use. For this, a product should be intuitive. My definition of "intuitive product":

- Simple, but useful: it must possess not too many parts or features, just the most useful ones.

- Familiar, but innovative: the features it possess must look like other features from other well-known products, but have recognizable improvements also.

HTH ;)
While facebook validation is possibly helpful in some cases, I'd imagine it's relatively trivial to create a fake facebook account. Lyft's success so far probably hasn't had much to do with the pre-verification (which is flimsy at best). Their success is probably driven by the fact that they've found a small subset of the US population who is comfortable with "ride sharing". Their branding; with pink mustaches, fist bumps, riding in the front seat and a sense of "community" (presumably going through that ritual with another makes you part of an exclusive community), has self-selected a group of people who is comfortable with giving up some level of trust, in return for the ability to participate in their transportation marketplace.

That said, I think we see taxis in most cities actively avoid areas that could cause trouble. From anecdotal reports, the same isn't true of Lyft. The implied trust (facebook verification and sense of community) likely puts those drivers in more dangerous situations more often (although it's a group who is either comfortable with that, or hasn't thought it through).

There's also an open question as to whether or not their trust system can scale. While initial marketing can help you pitch to a select group to start with, can that effectively reach a larger audience? Fun and quirky might be antithetical to the safety and reliability concerns most of the general public probably has for their preferred transportation system.
Had many terabytes of footage shot of events that couldn't be recreated with cameras that turned out to have broken firmware. When reading out the sensor the ADC would get out of sync with the shift register, resulting in adjacent pixels merging into each other or being skipped in a different pattern on each frame. Resulted in appalling pictures. I figured out how to re-bayer the image, then using some frequency-domain magic on a picture interpolated from the green photosites only, determined the shifting pattern in various areas of the chip. We could then automatically gain individual pixels up and down and remove the effect, resulting in a perfect image. Went and saw the fnished film at the biggest cinema I could find and didn't spot a single pixel wrong. Dread to think what might have happened if I'd tried to fix it in a more traditional "just paint it out" manner...
I love this redesign. It is definitely more readable and far more enjoyable; removing the clutter of navigation links and bringing focus to the article are massive improvements.

Of course, there will be challenges implementing this, including the lack of images that can serve as article covers (or, for that matter, user avatars). These problems can be solved if the community wanted this design; however the community does NOT want it.

A much more moderate redesign was recently whittled down until it was just an imperceptible font change; there's now a discussion about rolling that back as well.

Your time and considerable talent is probably better spent on some other projects; Wikipedia has a community that is extremely hostile to new people and ideas.
Which means that every time you change an interface you have to compile everything (given that you don't explicitly call out the Awesome interface anywhere, so you don't know whether any particular source file will require the Awesome interface without compiling it).
Atari 'E.T' game cartridges unearthed in New Mexico desert
The way you describe it ends up being more awkward, because you have to change code to reference the new path, both in your own code, and potentially in the library you've forked and other dependencies that use it. Vendoring by just maintaining a GOPATH for your dependencies that you control is the preferred way.
Anonymity is definitely a big problem, but there's something to be said for a network that doesn't have a central authority. I don't think the problem with Silk Road was the anonymity, it was more the fact that it was a central authority - once that was taken down, the whole system stopped. As the article says, it's very difficult for the feds to take down a network like this if there's a ton of people using it.
Here's a longer version of his talk that answers your question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI9esN3BqbI
The arbiter system is broken. The bitcoin are effective timely controlled by who controls the arbiter.
Wikitrotter – The Wikipedia reader
Jürgen Schmidhuber's Theory of Creativity
He isn't confusing the terms, he's just using the correct one.

Functional programming is about programming with functions - "Purely functional" is redundant. It should be obvious that Functional means functions, and "function" has fairly precise meaning which predates computation, and certainly didn't include anything about side-effects. Languages which don't use functions are not functional - they would be best described as psuedo-functional, nearly-functional, or mostly-functional, as he uses in the article title.

The only reason we've had to invent new terms like "purely functional" is because the original term has been abused to mean what it never meant - it was used to describe psuedo-functional languages, so we needed a new term to distinguish the two.
His name is "Will Dayble" and he appears in many videos on youtube. I think he is just below average in height. But honestly I don't know.

On topic though, interesting video.
I wonder if it could be indecipherable because it was written in a known language by someone with a brain injury?

>untreated head trauma

probably somewhat common for the time

>education

uncommon, but then again, it's not like you find these things everyday.
Your friend came up with an idea, 1% inspiration. You have done the 99% perspiration. You have more of the cards than he does. Work the 'nothing signed' to your advantage.

What does money bring to the table and how will it convert your MVP into a viable business entity?

Personally I believe you need customers before you get yourself beholden to some outside investors.

Get the customers, go live with your MVP in a soft roll-out way, do what you have to do to get to ~100 customers/clients/users. If they like your product then they will do some 'organic' growth for you. If that happens then you will have traction. You will be able to get money for growing into a proper company from many other sources than your friend's network.

So, head for success. When your friend who would not give you a formal 50/50 wants to know why he is not needed just tell him that his idea was just an idea and that 99% is perspiration. From how you tell the story he has brought nothing else to the table other than an idea, ideas on their own are worthless.

Much like winning the lottery there is this dream of having the right idea, getting an MVP and then being bought by FB/Google/Yahoo to then not have to work ever again. However why not go for the customers, get revenue from them and grow the business fairly and squarely?

If you are charging customers, selling ads or getting revenue sent by any way that needs code, make sure your bank details go in the back end. Simple as. Setup the hosting in your name, make sure you have the DNS situation under control too. Keep your partner along for the ride just in case he does bring something useful to the table but don't tell him that he isn't really needed until you are absolutely certain of that.
Who actually uses them?

I still can't wrap my head around why people are willing to rate products on pages like amazon or leave restaurant ratings on yelp and write detailed reports on tripadvisor or holidaycheck, but are not willing to do the same for their workplace and schools attended.

The obstacle seems to high for most of the users to write honestly. Only a fraction of the potential people that could be rating (all of the students for example) actually do it.

Facebook would have had the chance in the early days. But I guess that card is drawn...
I think you would ask yourself : can I compute this at compile time? (And is it useful to do so?) I don't really see how you could use that for a database driver, but for example you could create a library that uses macros to generate custom serialization/deserialization code to/from json (or whatever format) for your data structures.

(Edit: after a quick check this use case seems to be already covered by #[deriving(Encodable, Decodable)] in rust.)
It was a problem personal project I did a few years ago. I was writing an editor for ship hulls that would allow a non-technical user to model a ship hull out of 3 sets of bezier curves - one for the side profile, one for top-down, and one for front-back. Pics at bottom.

The hard part was taking those 3 sets of bezier curves and turning it into a 3d mesh. There's no pleasant mathematical way to do this directly, and there's no way to convert the 3 sets of curves into a 2d bezier surface.

The eventual solution involved several steps - first the top-down curve was rasterized into points at intervals of N on the X axis (from front of hull towards back). The maximum distance between any two sets of symmetric points was used to "scale" the front-back view so that the endpoints of each copy of the front-back view would match each set of symmetric points on the top-down view. At this point, each set of symmetric top-down points has a matching front-back curve that connects the two points. Now each front-back curve is rasterized at intervals of I on the Y axis (from port to starboard).

At this point I have all the points I need and could actually rasterize them into a mesh, but with one problem - the side-view curve still isn't accounted for. If I were to rasterize it at this point, the ship would probably look like a bullet cut in half.

So to take the side profile curves into consideration, the side view was rasterized like the top-down curves were, into points at intervals of N on the X axis. These points are converted into proportions (from 0 to 1) of how far they are from the top deck relative to the deepest point on the side-profile curve. Finally, each proportion was multiplied with the Z components of each point on the point-rasterized front-back curves. In this way, the side-profile just acts like a "scale" to how deep the front-back curves are allowed to go.

I was pretty happy with the results - however the mesh had densities in bad places that I later smoothed out using bicubic interpolation. I don't have any pics of final product, but here's some of it before the interpolation phase:

http://i.imgur.com/PqX1aWL.png

http://i.imgur.com/se9YdoO.png

http://i.imgur.com/oK4taXA.png
I can't reconcile the two quotes, but I've never encountered someone with more attention to detail.
How is a common change (updating a function signature) easily causing cryptic bugs rather than a visible compile-time or run-time error an issue?

Bugs are bad?
I think Blendle is doing a great job regarding reducing friction. I signed up and read my first article through the service yesterday within one minute after somebody in my Twitter feed shared it. The per-article fee is subtracted from my account as I read, but I can ask money back if I didn't like the article.
The hustle isn’t anything new; anyone who’s lived in what’s termed the inner-city knows about people selling bootleg CDs and DVDs on the street and people offering rides for money--they’re called 'gypsy cabs' in Boston. Most of the people who participate in this underground economy are desperate to keep a roof over their heads and to know they’ll have a next meal.

The author is pointing out that companies like AirBnB ($776.40 million in funding: http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/airbnb) and Lyft ($332.50 million in funding: http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/lyft) are monetizing this desperation and asking: are we as a society okay with this?

When you take this point of view, you can kind of see why they (the companies and investors) use the warm and fuzzy term ‘the sharing economy’, which puts a nice spin on it. Sharing is good, right?

It’s a slippery slope issue too: what else will get monetized in the name of the sharing economy? People often share prescription drugs with each other now; you could totally see an app that lets you see everyone around you who’s willing to share their Prozac or whatever.
"Pixel Bar" or a brick and mortar photo/print studio for a new generation.

Working in the photo industry, things have changed so fast but I still think there's value in physical, printed products. I haven't worked out the perfect setup but something like:

- a small retail location in a high-traffic, high tourism area (think union square in SF or 3rd St in Santa Monica)

- "print stations" where people can drop in, connect their phone and get great prints on demand. It looks like an apple store not a crappy kiosk as Walgreens

- photo booths or "selfie stations" where friends/family can snap some shots together and get prints

- a staffed area like the apple Genius Bar where people can get a quick professional portrait taken and printed or order higher price-point printed products (think books or framed prints)

- sell photo related smartphone accessories

- have an app to order prints for pickup and do deals with other local attractions, hotels, conferences and Uber. For example, a hotel in the embarcadero encourages you to take a photo using the app or a specific hashtag. Those photos are automatically sent to the store and you can pickup prints any time.
What an unfortunate name. Not only does it share a name with a cyber crime forum taken down a few years back but it invokes the thought of trade in illicit goods. There was a thread on reddit a few days back talking about how they should have called it "FreeMarket" because it would be harder for politicians and media pundits to dismiss out of hand since it would sound like they were against one of the tenants of capitalism ie: the free market.