skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is one place where I'm wondering how Cap'n Proto[1] would help. Since the structures are already made for in memory usage I think it might work pretty well. And given that it's all versioned/tagged structure wise it should be easy to do the schema migration.

[1] http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/
One of the Go developers is part of the GCC project, maybe that helps?
You could argue it's instead like a built-in GPS that doesn't display your exact latitude and longitude - precise information about your location that is interesting, but usually not useful, since you have to take roads/links to actually get from point A to point B.
Thanks for coming in and taking the time to talk with us. I hope you guys do continue on building and I wish you the best of luck doing so.
Ok well it makes sense that she chose to start at the highest level and work her way down. And yes I was speaking about culture.

She was absolutely brilliant, probably somewhere up there in the top thinkers in history. But building a functional society is obviously exceptionally difficult, and the highest level arguments seem to me more of a thought game for academics then a practical solution to a pressing and absolutely real societal problem. I guess the reason I wrote the article is because at times misenterpretation of complex ideas can be dangerous. Maybe similar to how Germany's propaganda misinterpreted the teachings of Nietzsche.

And thanks for your input, it's helpful
Talentless girl lol
The way I would interpret the phrase 'apes with shiny toys' (although it was not me who used that phrase in this thread) -- is that we are slightly-evolved apes who have become infatuated with our technology. Thoreau said: "Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end."

It's just that technology is far from a panacea, and it creates as many problems as it solves. Worse, the problems it creates can be of greater magnitude than its solutions. For example, arguably technology on its whole became a net loss once we invented nuclear weapons -- until that point, we never were a push-button away from extinction.

The tragedy of the commons is far from solved; one example is that the environment is a commons that industrialized nations abuse (and whether it will have a devastating effect on our future is yet to be decided). It is great that we have made moral progress as a species, and that we do have charity; yet how far has our morality progressed when we have food enough to feed the world yet starvation continues?

No, I'm not claiming that I've entirely overcome the bias of my brain, only that I'm aware that human brains were evolved to suit cave-man conditions, not the modern world that we've invented around us; cultural and technological evolution have outpaced natural evolution in our lineage.

Finally, I entirely disagree with your assertion that we devalue lives in other countries because we don't have the ability to affect their lives; of course we can affect the lives of people in other countries -- through charity as you yourself point out, and in the way that our politics affect other countries.

For example, to most Americans, American civilian lives are worth much more than civilians in say Iraq or Afghanistan; not because Americans cannot affect Iraqi or Afghani lives -- we have and continue to do so (e.g. the civilian casualities in Afghanistan dwarf the losses of Americans in 9/11)[1].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_War_...
We were interviewed by the same group (Jessica, Paul B., Trever, Michael), and the experience was very similar.

“Here we’ll show you a demo,” Shao offered. “No, we want you to tell us what you’re building,” Paul fired back with a very skeptical look.

We, too, tried to show our demo and Paul gave us a skeptical look and said something along the lines of "I'm distracted by pictures."

The interviewing team is very skilled in the art of extracting the essence of your startup and the possible shortcomings. I was impressed in how each of their questions had an obvious and very precise purpose.

Additionally of interest, I can't remember Jessica asking a single question. I think she was observing the relational chemistry of our team during the interview.
On any contentious topic (eg: climate change, criminal cases, religion, politics, economics...) it is a HUGE improvement to not just read the main article but also skim the associated "talk" page to see what points of view are being actively suppressed by whatever cabal currently controls that issue. If you do that, wikipedia's not too bad an information source.

The primary problem is that - like google - wikipedia has been too successful. What can happen now is that when a new issue becomes newsworthy:

(1) one side grabs control of the most relevant wikipedia page and slants it in their direction by the simple expedient of giving their side "the last word" in every argument and being ever-so-slightly more strict about sourcing for claims made by the other side than claims made for theirs.

(2) Lazy journalists skim wikipedia to see what they should think about the issue and write news stories that reflect the slant wikipedia intially had.

(3) Active editors use the articles written in step (2) to reference their own slanted claims and make the article even MORE one-sided.

And so on. I don't really see an answer to this circular dynamic other than perhaps: train journalists to look at the Talk page too?
It's funny that I have 6 open tabs right now and all them are https: so it its shown. After reading your comment I thought they had reverted that stupid decision, but they didn't :)
Caviar (YC S11) is Hiring Full-Stack Engineers
What gives you the right to prevent other people from going about their business in a public place?

It annoys me when people use cliches, for example, but I don't interpret that as giving me the right to cut out their tongues.
(This has now been removed, according to an update by the author.)

The fundamental idea isn't all that bad. But look, even in the 300px image you still have room to show more:

http://i1.wp.com/garybacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Sc...

le.

So while I know I want to enter a new URL or search about 20x as often as I want to edit or copy the current URL, and, therefore, I am fine with needing to click somewhere else to "view or edit" the URL (default being that the search becomes blanked) - on the other hand, no reason I shouldn't glance a the full URL by default.

So I suggest that you show the URL in light grey and clicking makes the field clear, but berhaps the domain name could be darker, and clicking that part will meke the whole field editable/copyable etc.

It's a subtle difference but it could work.

I'm certainly glad they reverted.
So this free website that serves billions of people makes money off the data you knowingly give it to target advertisements. That's what is considered evil nowadays?

Does it escape people that this is the only way we're going to get free social media or search engines? Here are the options the currently existing websites have:

1. Free and sells data to advertisers
2. Not free
3. Nonexistent

If none of those options please you, then it's not some concern about malpractice, it's just being unrealistic.
Should we expect more from social science?

Has psychology ever been able to yield the same practical findings as fields such as Electromagnetics or has it merely reflected fluid social trends.

The real story here is to avoid taking the social sciences seriously.
I would trust bird reflexes more than those of a random drone operator, birds aren't made of metal, and, without regulations, drones could weigh whatever the customer wants to pay for. News crews might replace their helicopters by drones weighing a thousand pounds.

Regulations do not necessarily mean that you can't fly any drone without a permit.
Have you seen the kind of damage large birds do to aircraft?

This wouldn't be an issue if we were only talking about upgraded small RC aircraft being used as drones, but some companies are selling much larger drones that are way outside of existing "bird strike" parameters.

You can't have dozens of unregulated news drones the size of a small car flying through the same airspace as rescue choppers.
Interesting. Presumably there will still be just piston rings in the normal place, although I would like to see more on how they are going to lubricate it. You don't want the gas spring chamber to fill up with oil. My guess for how they are going to get it started is by driving the permanent magnets with the coils. Also, why is it 2 stroke? I'd always assumed that 2 strokes were smaller and cheaper, but had less power. Possibly because there is no momentum to do 2 of the 4 strokes. Toyota definitely has the technology to make it a modern EFI 4 stroke, though. For the fuel intake and compression strokes, the coils could be disconnected from the load and driven so that the strokes complete.
yea this smells of BS, the first line had me skeptical.

> "I have communications. I have documents, I have files, I have lists, and I have names. I have all of it. Like I said from the beginning, I have carefully waited and carefully planned everything out."
Ubuntu practiced configuration removal and I dropped them.

One of the 3 reasons why I dropped Ubuntu for Mac OSX was that Ubuntu... didn't allow me to configure my mouse speed. They "merged" the speed and acceleration control of the mouse (which is quite unclever) and also prevented it fom going <1, while I'm usually comfortable at 0.25. It made my tracking devices unusable, thus it made Ubuntu unusable.
Google code search uses an mmapped index of trigrams, in Go:

https://code.google.com/p/codesearch/source/browse/index/mma...

http://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp4.html
https://github.com/skulpt/skulpt

Skulpt is a Javascript implementation of the Python programming language.
http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Please don't sign comments, especially with your url. They're already signed with your username. If other users want to learn more about you, they can click on it to see your profile.
I'm also conflicted. I grew up with my mom and my neighbor sunbathing topless in our backyard. I don't think they'd have appreciated any drones snapping pictures and uploading them. Then again, maybe in this brave new privacy free world no one will care?
Very good points you make, and I relate. I own a drone that I use for photography purposes, strictly as a hobbyist and hacker/tinkerer. It makes people uncomfortable. Once I learned proper control I went into a few areas where there were a few people, and I could definitely see a few "uncomfortable" looks. I couldn't even imagine what would happen when more people start using drones in crowded downtown areas.
For a while I've wanted a nice C library for an mmapped heap with allocation and common data structures (and maybe locks?) - all the usual stuff you'd expect in a standard library, but with support for relative offsets instead of pointers, crash robustness, introspection, and other features required to work well with a persistent file. I do not know any library of this type that currently exists.
Oh what a surprise an article only makes it to Hacker News when it's actually published without restrictions on, you know, the internet...

Quora is an annoying walled garden that's just a mildly classier version of expertsexchange.
SQL for Marketers  Udemy Course
kdb is mmapping db files - it's also a high-perf time series db, with exactly the same advantages and disadvantages what you mention.
The providers apparently assume that you're already paying for "unlimited" internet.

Also, these access points pair with your device and don't provide bandwidth to other random devices, so at least you're not providing free backhaul for random passersby.
A distraction from the main point, being: state graphs rock! And deserve a high level way of talking about them in any language of choice, which most languages don't include in the stdlib. So one may have to roll their own/find a library. And that the article confused code that's "difficult to understand" with state graphs being bad.

> Classes are a way to encapsulate state, you don't have to use them together with oo.

Lexical closures are another way to encapsulate state, modules are another, then there are monads! People have thought of lots of cool ways to encapsulate state.

> How else would you describe the example in python without using object oriented constructs? Global variables or passing around a dictionary with all the things set up in init?

I would build the example on state graph terminology, instead of on top of Python's class directly. Though, as userbinator pointed out, someone has described an OOP pattern for talking about state graphs [1].

Unfortunately there is no built in way for talking about state graphs in Python. To build that, Python has lots of fun features I can leverage! I wouldn't artificially limit myself. But first I would definitely research if someone has written a good library.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_pattern
There's already a usability problem with the address bar: Many people use it to search google instead of entering urls.
There are other ones which are just a simple amplifier, not a whole base station. There's one antennae on the outside, another smaller one on the inside, and whatever signal it picks up one one antennae, it retransmits on the other with more power. Obviously the antennaes are directional so you don't get feedback, and there might be some more complicated filtering too.
Google Debuts Dedicated Productivity Apps For iOS
Would be great to see a proposal for some next generation, semantic URLs that are more userfriendly (e.g. less machine friendly). With new TLDs, hashtags and search terms in ads the traditions are already being broken down. Why can't an URL be like a search string, just with some formal language behind it to make it standard?
You can't use most STL containers by default, but Boost Interprocess solves most of that: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_55_0/doc/html/interprocess/a...
> and a well-tucked-away "Advanced" button that, having given the proper warnings, allows the user to poke around on the inside.

I simply don't understand that this point, which is bloody obvious, is completely lost on the so many UI (re)designers. I don't mind you simplify (and most of the time thats all we need) but what is the point behind cutting-off all access for good for those who wish to tinker?

For example in the recent Firefox 29 release, the add-on bar has been taken out. They might argue most of the people don't care about it and even though I disagree (I spent 20 minutes trying to put FoxyClocks (to display world time) everywhere else and it simply didn't fit), its ok as long as you put an option in the Preferences to turn it back on (I ended up doing that via installing an extension/add-on). I don't even mind if you turn the option off by default. It is incredibly frustrating to see the designers think that their way is the only way and their use case is the sole case.

Sorry to hijack your point but I suppose you made it well enough to elicit a rant.
I feel the comparison of "Nokia" or "Motorola" to "iPhone" is odd. It's brand versus product. I don't think there is surprise in lack of translation for the "Lumia" (a Nokia product) or the "Moto X" (a Motorola product).
> It may seem strange to divorce airwave rights from property rights but it's not that different from water rights or mineral rights or airspace rights

It seems very much different to me, because all of those things have very obvious externalities for your neighbors. My example, where you build a faraday cage and test a signal jammer inside that cage, has no externalities (assuming a hypothetical perfect faraday cage). There would be no measurable signal an inch outside the faraday cage, and certainly none at your neighbor's property.
Thanks for the good wishes.

Going over to ask for investment and mentorship was a no-brainer. I'll try again with YC if I do another startup in the future.
hope safari, firefox won't go this road
Nothing will happen.

Aaron, Snowden and the techie subclass (readers of this site) he represents are a threat to the established politics.

Sure, we'll get a movie, see some angry people, but that is it.
I would be upset to have to go through a search engine like Google's to get to sites. I will use a browser that makes it easy to get to the URL; Chrome is currently my favorite, but I would consider switching to FF or Opera if the links went away, simply because I use them for so many things.

I wouldn't mind if all links were the kind that you see in shortening services, though.
I agree, but for the time being you can still click on the actual button, which will let you view/edit the entire URL.
How much of this would feel addressed if a button was added to copy the URL to clipboard? Obviously, it would not fix things like being able to manipulate the URL in the field (/page2 to /page3) or get rid of utm_source cruft, so it would still be a net loss.

But would you consider that a tolerable loss, or still too much? (I think I'd say it's still too much, but I am also a web dev and thus a power user.)
I don't think it's quite at the point of being stable enough to provide an ISO yet.

Also, while it is possible to run on bare mettle, it would not be most productive to do so in most cases. One of the strengths of CoreOS is the ability to quickly add new machines to a cluster and manage applications not on the individual server level, but as collections of services running via Docker. This means, unless you have quite a few computers ready to scale, it would work best on something like AWS or Google Cloud Platform.
TFA says "By mmap'ing a region and then accessing into it, the overhead of creating multitudes of small interlinked items can be reduced hugely."

You do not need to call mmap directly, because malloc() will do it if your allocation exceeds MMAP_THRESHOLD (usually on the order of a megabyte). So you get this optimization "for free"--the only important part is that you do not call malloc() for each tiny object.
Dear Google, why does it take 11.84s to load a page on Google Groups?
The yandex (chrome) browser has been doing this for some time now. I switched back to chrome because of this feature. /sadface
Ghostman
Yes, I'm sure there is. Look at Google clicks by hour or similar metrics, there is a significant curve during the day, peak can be 4-5x the low.
I'd love to have a pretty simple law: Wingspan below 2m, total weight below 6Kg, flys with out restriction under 500m (aside from normal property damage laws and exclusion zones). Those numbers are based on the Bald Eagle, one of the bigger but still relatively common birds around America.
I've never understood the claim that the omnibar was a usability problem. It's really only a problem if you have an ideological issue with preferring to search Google... which isn't a usability issue.
Most URLs are human-readable enough that I think street addresses make a better analogy.

Latitude/longitude would be more like IP addresses and HTTP headers. They require some technical knowledge to use and understand, but they're still quite human-readable unlike raw GPS signals or ethernet frames.

(As an aside, most GPS units also display the altitude. I live in a mountainous region, so I often make use of this figure.)
Who's Hiring? On npmjs.org
This feels like a Reddit 'I've found a safe post' that we'll never get the second installment. I do wonder if it is someone just trying to create attention for the sake of it. What doesn't add up for me;

Why would Google do this? Sure they can avoid paying a payout one time and then they have permanently lost that sites traffic. The is no benefit to doing what he says other than the extremely short term. And it's hard to believe anyone but a single rogue employee could think like that.

It it was true it's a hell of a story but I won't vote up this post until I see some evidence that it's more than a well written troll post.
Back in the day (I haven't been in a while, unfortunately, so I don't know the current status), at nicer theatres and at the opera, they had a service available for emergency personnel (doctors, et cetera) where they'd take your pager, put a tag with your seat number on it (and also typically you'd be seated on an aisle), and they come fetch you if your pager went off. Worked great with minimal disruption to patrons... though the definition of "emergency" was fairly narrow, and this likely wouldn't work if patrons were insisting on it for family phone calls and so on.
I am not sure of the tip to associate labels with every form input.

In many cases placeholders and surrounding text by itself is sufficient.

Most launch pages doesn't have a email address label associated with each including the avocode example posted on HN today.
For the same reason that you would link to another website on the web.
I used Paypal to pay for something in-store recently and they identified me by matching the selfie that I took in the app (that showed up on their iPad screen tied to my name) to the same one shown on the app on my phone that I held up for them. Pretty neat/clever and would work just as well here.
Unnecessary powerplay from Paul. And leaking information which is outright insulting to the 6(?) involved. This is a bad reaction for a developer relations guy.
Low cost country sourcing
Low Cost Country Suppliers is an online sourcing tool for manufacturers to receive or send RFQ based on technical drawings,specifications,NDA etc.
This blog confounds popularity and quality.

If we were to judge news websites using the same metrics as he's using (users in the marketplace) Yahoo! News, HuffingtonPost, and CNN are the epitome of news reporting, which we should all aspire to and emulate.

The lesson from this article is that good design will not make you popular on its own (if that is what you want), in fact it is mostly orthogonal to popularity, just as quality content will not make you popular (on its own), and is not really related to popularity, in fact in some cases quality content will make it very, very hard to be popular (e.g. news). Of course these things are valuable in their own right, and you might want to carve out a niche as a quality provider of content for people who know all about x, at which point you might even become popular in spite of your quality content and quality design.

Facebook is a terrible website in almost every way - the content is bad, the design is worse (though improving) and yet it is very popular. Does that mean we should step back and respect its design (awful), and content (worse) and attempt to emulate them? Does that mean we should not strive for quality content or quality design?

Of course design should be about producing solutions which work for your customers, rather than producing things which appeal to other designers, and UI is not the only thing involved - in that sense some of his criticisms are well aimed. Paper is interesting because it may be beautifully designed, but it has been designed for the wrong sort of content - it would work far better as the app for say medium than an app for FB content. But I think its unfair to judge it entirely by monetary success or numbers of downloads - if that is your sole criteria for success, then you may as well give up on good design, good content, because the majority of people don't want quality, they want quantity, they want pictures (doesn't matter how bad), they want regular stimulation, and sensational stories (true or false, doesn't really matter).

Number of downloads/views is not a good metric for quality or success (unless you mean purely monetary success). By this metric the best things in the world are FB, Angry Birds, and Yahoo News. For many people, success is not measurable purely in downloads or money raised, success is making a good product, not a popular product.