skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have worked on a similar server off and on, but it was mostly for GET/PUT-ing HTML files (and not JSON data). That way you could put the contents of `document.documentElement.outerHTML` right back to where the page was retrieved from. The developer tools of the browser, as well as `contenteditable` can be used to create a relatively convenient HTML/content editor.

Additionally the pages were retrieved/saved from a local bare git repository and when some file was PUT it would be saved in a new commit and the branch would be updated. It allowed more collaboration, since multiple people could work on the same page without overwriting each others work.

Anonymous editing isn't yet implemented, but the idea is to have anyone being able to make changes (with some restrictions) and offer it to the site's owner (kind of like a pull request). It would allow wiki-like functionality for websites in general.

Javascript was used for more specialized editing tools, like adding rows to certain tables and calculating totals (for example for [HTML5 invoices](http://www.jonathantneal.com/blog/the-html5-invoice/)). Remove DOM elements when you're done editing and PUT the page back.

Recently I felt a bit constricted with this model, since some parts of the pages needed to be reused across multiple pages (like 'master pages' or blogpost entries). I've implemented a simple 2-way templating engine. Static pages can be built from the templates and from the page you could extract the templates, without losing data. That way you could edit the page as-is, but the parts that are templated are saved in the template (and reused in other pages). It did make the server more complex than a simple GET/PUT server, but the GET/PUT functionality was still preserved.

I see a lot of potential in such a GET/PUT server. With the right permissions for PUT operations, this can also be quite a decent 'CMS'-like server.
Hah - when travelling in the passenger seat I often see my dad try and brake when I leave it a little later than he would.

He also grips on to the handle above the window.
Pretty sure while they may look flimsy, these care are anything but. I believe there are several micro-cars on sale now that have a very safe inner structures as well as advanced safety features despite looking "cute". Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_%28automobile%29#Safety
> I laughed very hard on this!

Really? It made me think he was a bit of an asshole.
Do you "ghost brake" when driving in the back of a limousine?

Yep. I'm frequently uncomfortable when someone else is driving. There's a handful of people in the world who don't make me uncomfortable when driving... my parents, a few friends who drive "safely"... Oh, and taxi drivers (where somehow my lizard brain appreciates that though I am not in control, the creature that IS in control has 100+ times more experience of driving than me, and is therefore unarguably a better driver). Though not all taxi drivers - some of the minicab (as opposed to licensed black cab) drivers make me nervous.

So for this technology to work for me and not make me nervous each time I step into it, I'll have to really get to trust it.

I'm not sure putting a cute face on the front of the car is gonna do that for me, but the effort is definitely worthwhile.
It looks conceptually similar to the Smart Fourtwo in size and design, and that car managed to score 4/5 on the ANCAP. So I don't see any reason why this car shouldn't manage the same.
Maybe because they didn't want to make it so obvious that the "other language" algorithm is much poorer than for English. A lot more people would pick-up on that fact, if they used Spanish, since a lot more people know Spanish.
An OS operates hardware, hardware needs drivers, drivers need testing, this is expensive and time consuming and not very possible for all hardware, even if the parts claim pin compatibility.

Hardware manufacturers compete with each other for market. If every handset is the same compatible hardware, that just leaves build quality and price as the variables and they are orthogonal.

That means hardware people also like to add features like GPS, compass, different cameras, expansion ports, heartrate monitor, fingerprint recognition, dual-sim, etc. etc. and we're back to drivers and testing.
Let's contrast with Android's take on a private API: private Content Providers.

> The problem is, there are more Content Providers in the system than are documented in that package, and while you can use them, you probably shouldn’t. They’re there because some of the Google-provided apps use them internally to access their own data resources. Because Android is an open-source project, it’s easy enough to find them just by running shell commands like find and grep over the source tree.

> [...]

> Back to Content Providers. For example, there’s one inside the built-in Messaging (A.K.A. texting or SMS) app that it uses to display and search your history. Just because it’s there doesn’t mean you should use it. The Android team isn’t promising that it’ll be the same in the next release or even that it’ll be there in the next release.

> So, go ahead and look at the undocumented Content Providers; the code is full of good ideas to learn from. But don’t use them. And if you do, when bad things happen you’re pretty well on your own.

http://android-developers.blogspot.de/2010/05/be-careful-wit...
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2010/05/06/Private-AP...

The main point here is that you are on the same level of Google: if you want you can use those private APIs, but be ready to do a lot of work to keep your application working fine.
An article like that should really cite it's sources.
I find this GoT quote to be fitting here—

Eddard Stark: Lord Baelish, perhaps I was wrong to distrust you.
Petyr Baelish: Distrusting me was the wisest thing you've done since you climbed off your horse.
It's interesting to look at these figures while keeping in mind Google's self-driving car project and their large investment in Uber. In 10 years Uber will be able to replace all those jobs they've created with self-driving cars.
Totally hate the format... what is this, Buzzfeed meets TechCrunch?

As if TechCrunch's main stream of news wasn't "mainstream" enough already...
> you still own your phone. Don't be silly. Jailbreak and builds apps to your hearts content.

In the U.S., only as long as the Librarian of Congress keeps granting temporary exemptions to the DMCA, that otherwise probably makes jailbreaking your phone illegal. (And they have not exempted jailbreaking on tablets).

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/jailbreaking-now-...
>I think it's a very valid criticism if your best people (not talking about "most" people, who don't start companies and create new stuff) can easily move to another country (or other state inside the US) and earn WAY more for the same job or skill set.

I think, what a lot Americans overlook, is that most people in the rest of developed world want more from life than a high salary. Moving from somewhere with the highest standards of living in the world, such as Toronto, to somewhere that doesn't even make the list of top 5/10 in North America alone such as NYC, might come with a salary increase but it's a significant trade off in terms of other factors.
This reminds me of how Microsoft added specific code to Windows 95 to ensure SimCity would run.

This is from Joel Spolsky's Strategy Letter II: Chicken and Egg Problems
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000054.html

So Windows 3.x on Intel 80386s was the first version that could run multiple DOS programs respectably. (Technically, Windows 386 could too, but 80386s were rare and expensive until about the time that Windows 3.0 came out.) Windows 3.0 was the first version that could actually do a reasonable job running all your old software.

Windows 95? No problem. Nice new 32 bit API, but it still ran old 16 bit software perfectly. Microsoft obsessed about this, spending a big chunk of change testing every old program they could find with Windows 95. Jon Ross, who wrote the original version of SimCity for Windows 3.x, told me that he accidentally left a bug in SimCity where he read memory that he had just freed. Yep. It worked fine on Windows 3.x, because the memory never went anywhere. Here's the amazing part: On beta versions of Windows 95, SimCity wasn't working in testing. Microsoft tracked down the bug and added specific code to Windows 95 that looks for SimCity. If it finds SimCity running, it runs the memory allocator in a special mode that doesn't free memory right away. That's the kind of obsession with backward compatibility that made people willing to upgrade to Windows 95.
Just a temporary hold over until we have proper automated delivery machinery. And we did just get that self driving car article.
Absolutely correct, which is why it looks like an infographic, not a research paper.

But those of us here can parse the language quite closely and get some actual information out of it, as well as noting the use of shadows to hide and reveal.
I'm one of the founders of plaintextoffenders.com and just came in to point that out myself. So happy you beat me to it ;)
Junior role? The things I'd do for $100-120k...
The video suggests these cars are probably being built in Tesla's factory - the white-painted walls and red-painted machinery are pretty unique to Tesla. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqSDWoAhvLU#t=58

(Also note that "Rotary Lift", the brand seen at that point in the video, is the exclusive supplier of vehicle lifts to Tesla - http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/tesla-motors-chooses...)
As my old AI lecturer put it "If a person driving a car runs over a person that driver is at fault, if an AI driving a car runs over a person that AI will probably never be used again in any car.", so it's interesting to see the 'cute' approach they are taking to, as the article says "minimize the fear".
As a low-speed vehicle capped at 25mph, the car is exempt from most federal regulation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-speed_vehicle#United_State...
I'm curious how the author knows that it "does nothing". It seems that the argument ends with "because they can" we can "rest assured" that it "is exactly what they’ll be doing". In other words, if you already have a certainty that Google is pure evil then you can extrapolate from that that they will do the most evil possible thing in every circumstance, including this one. That's not terribly profound. The entire rest of the post is a litany of ways by which Google can see your cookies, which has little to do with what they DO with that information, which is what the user account setting purports to affect.

(to be clear, I have no evidence either whether they continue to track and store web history or not, but it doesn't seem like the author does either, and it's disappointing to see such a baseless trashy post from someone who I have in rather high esteem in general).
Ooni – tracking Internet censorship in the world
what do you consider interesting nowadays?
Digging deeper in to the DOM with the Chrome devtools
Yes in general in computer science, I've found people don't tend to include/reference the source code they write - which is quite a pity.
The worst response to a great idea
Uber is a great service - head and shoulders above the entrenched taxi industry. Customers like them better, the drivers like them better; but they are lucky that Goldman Sachs had never created a medallion investment vehicle. If upper middle class doctors and lawyers had seen a drop in investment return you know Uber's "stealing" from the medallion holders would have been stopped.

"In Seattle the number of arrests for DUI to decrease by more than 10 percent." They better be careful here. If they start cutting significantly into state regulators revenue stream they will be stopped.

Uber's best bet is a "negotiated settlement" with local and state authorities to kick-back some of the cash they are diverting.
Ubisoft Consults Kaspersky Lab To Authenticate Watch Dogs Script
I have no experience with video transcoding. But I do run a single founder online business. So hopefully I can help.

We (technical single founders) have a bad habit of spending time developing code while we should be spending time understanding the market and the customer. Running an online business in my experience is 20% coding and 80% customer support and marketing.

My advice is to follow the below steps for 2 weeks.

1. Stop all development work on transcode.io.
2. Remove the message that this is not production ready. If there are some restrictions (e.g. output fixed to 360p), mention them.
3. Setup a Google Adwords account. Run some ads for keywords that potential customers would use.
4. Setup an online chat widget on your site. (e.g. zopim.com). This should not take more than 5 minutes. Be logged into the online chat all day.
5. As potential customers arrive, you can start an online chat with them. Speak to them about how they use transcoding in their business, find their pain points and find out what they are currently using. Try and get people to use your site by handholding them.
6. Email your existing users (40+) or people who have shown interest. Find out the same info from them.
7. If enough customers have the same pain point and you can fix it by adding a feature, add this to your list. Do not start development on this yet.

This will help validate whether transcode.io solves a pain problem for the customers. At the end of two weeks, you will have a better idea about
1. Is transcode.io solving a real pain point. If not, can it?
2. What are my costs of customer acquisition?
3. What is the market size?
4. Is this a sustainable business?

This will help you decide whether to continue working on transcode.io or whether to sell it. Also try and go for some tech/startup events in Calcutta. Who knows - You could meet your business cofounder there.

All the best!
Mocking helps with feature isolation. If a test failed you can be sure it was because of the use case of the test.

Mocking helps when you are calling into code that you can't control. E.g, when calling into an API that is broken and sometimes returns incorrect results.

I don't write very many tests anymore. I haven't mocked an object in years. I also have a lot of bugs in my code.
That's a pretty weak argument considering that syslog is entirely UDP and is bound to drop log data, sometimes en masse, most likely even silently. Not a good idea.

Why not use something like multilog or svlogd and wire up a tiny processor for it to kick logging data over someplace using something like rsync?

To boot, syslog is annoying to tune, depending on your particular implementation. rsyslog has a default buffer limit of 2k, whereas other syslog implementations (IIRC, syslog-ng and Solaris syslog at the very least) have default buffer limits of 1k, and this might not be obvious until you're running up against that and make the shocking discovery that you're losing data.

On an nginx server that services 2TB/mo worth of transit (which is distinctly possible since I've got infrastructure in production that does this), there's a good chance that you'll be stretching some of these limits a bit.
> The comments here are rather disappointing.

Most of them remind me of Clifford Stoll's famous rant:

http://www.newsweek.com/clifford-stoll-why-web-wont-be-nirva...

"This new thing isn't like the old thing, so it could never work."
I don't know why they chose it, but off the top of my head :

1) possibly less production cost. an individual laser module is likely more costly than the mechanism to rotate a single one.

2) fewer channels of data often means less processing overhead.
> young people already opt to not own cars.

Really? Any study on this matter?
Not only that I believe Google contacted most of the popular SMS devs when they made huge changes to the SMS content providers in Kit Kat (which are private). They didn't really need to but did to let them know of the changes.
I'm talking Voodoo 1 here. ;-)

Voodoo2 I think was 800x600, but you could push it up to 1024 if you had two chained up with SLI.

Of course, when I first got a Voodoo card, it was plugged into a 15" cheapo CRT which couldn't even handle anything north of 800x600. So it wasn't an enormous problem.
My understanding is that Raymond Chen ( http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/ ) was a huge part of ensuring that everything was backwards compatible. If you like that kind of thing, he's got a book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Old-New-Thing-Development/dp/03214...
Also allows you to correlate them with backend services, Web App Firewalls etc to see if there is an current attacks or threats.
It is (indirectly) to me. I often visit the US, and I'm always amazed that I can't seem to go anywhere walking. The distances to go anywhere are huge. It seems to be that way because cities in the US where designed / build with cars in mind.

In Europe cities were obviously not build with cars in mind, and as a result I enjoy here a much higher density of amenities (and suffer much worse driving conditions / parking time).

Having all this space available for cars is not transparent to pedestrians.
Not to the mention the fact that the FFT is an algorithm to compute the DFT. So calling the Fourier transform an FFT is even more of a misnomer.
A future with no taxis! No Lyft or Uber either.

Less and less humans tied up doing work that can be done by a "bash script"[0]. I look forward to this!

[0] Or highly advanced AI for that matter. Same final impact.
Planetes: a hard science manga with space debris as a core story element.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes
StumpWM window manager, the successor to Ratpoison. Both are awesome (obvious disclaimer: I use both).

Not on Github per se, but still awesome.
1.3MP (or 1.4 if you're marketing...) - pretty good for the late 80s, but unfortunately it's not colour!
My favorite example of using a lens for a FT is creating a dark field image. You just put a small beam block in the center of a pupil plane and block all of the low frequency components. You end up with bright lines only at the edges of things which are the high frequency components of the image.

Also "google images" isn't an image source, and just because you found something on the internet doesn't mean it is free to use.
This doesn't surprise me at all. I was sure I was going to be horrible at parenting. I was scared right up to the second I held my son for the first time, when everything just clicked. I don't know how else to describe it. I went from terrified to "I was born to do this" in about one second.
Boston: Sports and Tech [Slideshow]
>We are expecting to get the same chance of ranking as normal pages.

Then you should probably adjust this expectation. You say in your article:

>While having this sort of HTML fallback was technically possible, it added a lot of extra work to public-facing single page apps, to the point where many developers dropped the idea...

A JS-driven site with an HTML fallback is a normal page. Then you don't need any tricks or force Google to run your application and hopefully make pages out of them. Start with the fall-back and enhance.

This is a serious mistake with consequences. Tor bundle and Firefox shipped with JavaScript support, because disabling JS broke too much of the current web. It causes accessibility issues (remember when Twitter changed to hash-bang URL's?), if not for Googlebot, then for regular users (From the Webmaster Guidelines):

>Following these guidelines will help Google find, index, and rank your site.

>Use a text browser such as Lynx to examine your site, because most search engine spiders see your site much as Lynx would. If fancy features such as JavaScript, cookies, session IDs, frames, DHTML, or Flash keep you from seeing all of your site in a text browser, then search engine spiders may have trouble crawling your site.

>Make pages primarily for users, not for search engines.

I am still going on the assumption that you created a one-page application without a time-consuming fallback, and you rely on Google to make rankable pages from them. Then you leave some users standing in the cold, so why deserve to rank equal to a user-friendly accessible web page?

> ... single page apps might rank differently or worse than normal pages ...

From the original article, the most current source on this:

> Sometimes things don't go perfectly during rendering, which may negatively impact search results for your site.

> It's always a good idea to have your site degrade gracefully. This will help users enjoy your content even if their browser doesn't have compatible JavaScript implementations. It will also help visitors with JavaScript disabled or off, as well as search engines that can't execute JavaScript yet.

> Sometimes the JavaScript may be too complex or arcane for us to execute, in which case we can’t render the page fully and accurately.

> Some JavaScript removes content from the page rather than adding, which prevents us from indexing the content.

In the SEO community Googlebot's improvements were noted for a while now. See for example: http://ipullrank.com/googlebot-is-chrome/

Single page websites or application-as-content-website's are not popular among SEO's. One reason for this is that it doesn't allow for fine-grained control on keyword targeting, and keeping the site canonical, and it can waste domain authority when you have less targeted pages in the index than you can rank for. Experiment and find out for yourself.
s/Cute/Ugly/;
You could use this little bookmarklet as well:

http://lee-phillips.org/norefBookmarklet/
I don't like fixed headers at all and I dislike even more fixed headers that hide on scroll... it's too distracting and useless.

A couple of years ago, when fixed headers became "cool", I'd write scripts for Greasemonkey just to get rid of them. Today I'm too lazy for that :D.

But nice project.
>equating access to private APIs in a private store with morality

Well, I think there is a lot more to it than this. I think people are just using this as one example. Personally I don't think it's a very good example, but you won't see a thread on HN about Apple purposely breaking X so Y is more difficult (for example the android imessage fiasco), or the fact that many 'innovations' by Apple, like thunderbolt or retina, are really just 'one-upping' the competition and attempting to lock the consumer in to something that's no more than a gimmick.

Sure thunderbolt is fast, but it's not something that any tech company couldn't design, it's just something to break compatibility between systems. Microsoft and many other tech companies are guilty of the same thing. Maybe google could make lighteningBolt on their chromebooks that goes just a little faster then thunderbolt, and then MS can make FTLBOLT on the surface that goes just a little faster than lighteningBolt, and then we can have no universal standards.

Next every company can come up with their own formats for their devices to make cross-compatibility impossible!

Like I said, Apple isn't the only company that's guilty of this, but they certainly seem to be the worst offender, especially when it comes to the consumer. If you're an investor it's great though, because they do everything they can to hook the consumer and make sure they can't go back.

Personally I'm not a fan of the Apple ecosystem. I had a lot of issues with sound going in and out on my MBP and bad multi-monitor support and I kind of felt mislead my the Apple community because I foolishly believed that OS X would have no issues out of the box.

I think the fanbase needs to be more open and accepting to criticism of the brand, because acting like Apple is some kind of flawless tech company does more harm than good.
I really don’t think that kind of risk mitigation is of much utility.