skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He was? That's news to me but you well may be right. I could have confused the details it's been a while. I remember there was a game in that match which was interrupted till the next day (they used to do it after I believe 40 moves) at the endgame stage and Bronstein made an elementary mistake the next day. Anything's possible but it's hard to believe that a player at this level would have made such mistake after having the whole day to analyze the position.
According to James Simons, "The average annual income of leading research mathematicians (those, say, with at least three articles in the Annals of Mathematics) is about 10,000,000 USD" ;]
The critical question here is "Is a call-forwarding service the same as a telephone provider?" Google has no cell phone towers or phone lines.

When you call someone with Google Voice this happens:
1. Google calls the number you're calling with the GV number they've assigned to you.
2. Google calls your actual phone number.
3. Google connects the two calls so you're talking to the person you wanted to call via your actual phone provider's network.
4. Your actual phone provider charges you money.

Whereas when you call with a normal phone provider:
1. You dial the number.
2. Your phone provider connects you to the person over their network.
3. Your phone provider charges you money.

The only significant difference I see between the two is that with Google Voice, you show up differently on the caller ID of the person you call.
You got mad at him for making an impersonal remark, and now you say to him

"Who are you? Why does it seem like you're angry all the time?"

Which is an angry, personal remark.

The word "fuck", not directed at anyone, is not important. Personal attacks are.

If you don't like unalone's style, ignore him, don't psychologize him. Personally I appreciate the fact that he wrote substantive on-topic comments.
Most people use swearing to indicate emotion. If you go against this convention, then you will often be misunderstood.
So, "Fuck that" doesn't have connotations. Not in the way that "That's shit" does, or even "Fuck you".

I disagree with that. Of course I could have said "Fuck that." However, just like you probably wouldn't want me just saying "Fuck that" in response to your viewpoint other people aren't going to appreciate a comment that says "Fuck that."

I will vote down any comment such as that, and I'm sure that many other members will as well.
The trend for Clojure is encouraging, however when comparing it with the trend for Common Lisp, one has to keep in mind that the latter is often called simply Lisp. A slight decline in the trend for Common Lisp may be related to an increase in such usage (if there is one, which I am not sure about).
I like the hidden comment scores. You can still see negative comments at a glance, and the comments are still ordered by the scores so you can read the high score comments first since they are on top.

If they are turned back on, I'd suggest making it an option, and possibly hidden by default.
Man! I even checked that and must have skipped right over it somehow. Thanks.
This is the most civil and reasoned discourse I've ever seen on global warming. Just incredible.
About energy and our future.
Google Voice doesn't offer phone functionality(with the exception of SMS). It offers bidirectional phone call forwarding functionality. The price isn't the real issue. The difference in functionality is.

Edit: I was less clear than I meant to be. The price to the customer is not the issue here.
William, I am not disagreeing that genetics may play a dominant role, but I do think it is a very weak argument to compare chess playing aptitude to running. From what I have read, we know a great deal about what physical traits (fast twitch muscles, bone length ratios, and so forth) make someone a fast runner. We know a fair bit about the role genes play in developing these traits.

With chess-playing aptitude we have indirect evidence of genetics gathered statistically. Can we measure a trait like seratonin to dopamine ratios? Can we measure a physical trait like the size of the brain or the pattern of the folds of the neocortex and statistically associate it with chess aptitude? Not to my knowledge.

So while there may be a statistical and indirect argument to make about chess aptitude and genetics, I think it should be made as such rather than making an argument comparing chess aptitude to something like running where (at this time) we know a lot more about the direct traits involved.
Upon review it looks like it might only be shifted 1 older or possibly the same, but it's unclear. Russian education apparently starts a year later than in the US and, until the 90s(?), ended/still ends(?) a year earlier and, as you noted, didn't/still doesn't(?) include a 4th grade. The presentation from 2000 on Russian math education I linked to also states that "number 4 is usually omitted" and that the system "has been in the state of permanent reorganization." Thus, it's not entirely clear to me how the grades match up, so sentence excised.
Most people here don't want to or have the time to read all comments on all threads and would appreciate help in finding "good" things.

It's true that PG is experimenting with the system, but it's a value judgment to say the old way is more flawed than the new way. In other words, your last two sentences beg the question.
This is the book to read if you want to understand sustainable energy issues. The only part where it's weak is discussing the economics; I would have liked more material on the costs and how to make sure they're manageable.

And yes, it's refreshing to see a book on this subject written by someone who can do enough math not to fall for nonsense.
Perhaps "like" is too strong a word, but it's rather bracing to get an idea of how long high-energy civilization can last; barring some miracle like practical, cheap fusion power appearing in the next decade.

If I were to make a comparison to a work of fiction, it wouldn't be to Mad Max or The Day After Tomorrow; but to The Cold Equations, by Tom Godwin.
Do many people use messages on facebook? Most of the activity I see is wall status updates, or wall->wall.
I can't tell you how much I've got out of volunteering for trail maintenance on the weekends. A few hours wielding a pick-ax somewhere beautiful is the perfect mind-cleaner after 6 days sitting in front of a computer hacking.
Five minutes multiplied by several people is a long time in a day.

You obviously participate in HN a lot. Don't fault the rest of us for only wanting to do it part time.
I think you presented the list very well.

Several points have been touched on already, I will mention one: DSL. I agree that the perception of it as a barrier to entry in a project may exist. I think it is as incorrect as tying Lisp to AI, albeit for a very different reason. Indeed, a new member of a team has to learn DSL if one is used in the project. However, new members always have to learn the conventions and patterns used in the project they are joining. DSL makes some of them explicit and more understandable.
Keeping a wiki full of links to medical resource free of spam sounds like a nightmare to me.
"10 points by ivankirigin" is actually quite misleading. It looks like "ivankirign" gave the comment 10 points.

I don't believe I've seen a site where any user can give more than one vote, so I don't think this is misleading. But I've not thought about it before, and I do like "by ivinkirigin, points: 10" better.

Kudos on putting so much thought into your UI. Definitely bodes well for GraffitiGeo.
In response to In response to cash is faster than debit, it never happens that way here in New England. I watch as the register total increments. Every $20 I pull another $20 out of my wallet so when I'm done I just hand the wad of cash to the cashier.

Compare that to someone with a debit card who always has to wait for the cashier to do something (I dunno what it is) then tell the customer to swipe their card and enter their PIN, except the swipe often needs to be repeated, and then there's the wait for approval.

Not only is the cash-pay mean time lower than the debit-pay method, by my observation, the debit-pay time has a huge variance depending on equipment reliability, account status, the occasional desire for extra cash and other technical issues I've encountered only once:

Many years ago I tried a debit transaction but was denied, so I paid cash with my "emergency" $100 bill. Later that month the store charge showed up on my statement, but of course by then I had no evidence I had already paid the bill in cash. Of course this would never happen to anybody else, and it sure as hell isn't happening to me again.
I only did that with comments that went below 1 when I felt it was valid. Is that not expected behavior? (Although one can still do this because text color indicates it's gone negative.)
>Like price, comment score is the best indicator of context, class, and quality.

You mean in the same way a book's price is an indicator of its quality? ;)

The nice thing about comments is that they are short and quick to read. Unlike books or films there's no need for reviewers or critics to help you find the better ones. Just read and decide for yourself.
I do agree wholeheartedly. I guess the lesson is never downvote or upvote something unless you have a solid reason for doing so.

Don't just go along with the pack.
Balance along what spectrum? Rationality vs. Demagogy?
FWIW, that's how it is called in Italy (informatica).
My guess is that soccer received more support than chess in the Soviet Union, but the results weren't impressive at all.
Checked it out after reading this post, and I'm damn impressed. It seems to have everything I can think of, and the quality's sweet. One question, though: I'm located in Canadian, and lots of streaming services including Pandora and others I was interested in using either didn't offer service outside of the states or stopped offering it once they hit a certain size. Is that going to be the case with your service as well? If not, I'm probably hooked.

Thanks.

PS: If you'd be willing to toss a shirt up north of the border, I'm a medium.
Ask HN: What do you think of the University of Waterloo?
I'm starting to look into universities in Ontario, and was wondering what everyone thought of UW's Computer Science program?
Karpov spent a year (I think) studying math as a freshman... "He couldn't make it" as the story goes.
Gallery of default anonymity
??? An algorithm that executes in O(n) time executes in O(n) whether the computer is silicon, DNA, mechanical, vacuum tubes, or whatever else you build a Turing machine in. I think "computer", to most people almost always refers to the physical implementation of a computer.
Yes.

Using numbers taken out of context to push own agenda.
I have done so, but not in a long time. Then again, I haven't even used tree in a long time. Maybe I don't really use it any longer.

Hmm. . . .
In my experience mathematicians become quite good at chess - if they take it seriously. That's why I gave up playing long time ago.
In some cases that might be true, but I'm observing a lot of communication among people my age (mid/late twenties) that used to happen over email is moving to Facebook. I'm Facebook friends with a number of people that I spend time with regularly, but I don't have their email addresses.

Here's why: it's harder to give someone your email address than to become Facebook friends with them. For email, you have to write down a long string, keep track of it until you get home, and correctly type it into a computer. For Facebook, you just say, "Are you on Facebook? Are you friends with Jon? Just look me up on his friends list."
OSWALD Hand-held Computer (designed by students)
Honestly, what did you expect? The link was called "Traits in PHP." The article described the initial constraint as being "stuck in PHP." This wasn't an article arguing that it's a good idea to do it, but more of an exercise.

So your questions, does PHP really need all the added complexity of this?

That doesn't matter. If you don't need it, don't use it.

Does it really help solve the problem, or did you just add a new maintenance nightmare?

This question is a false dichotomy. First, it wasn't trying to solve any other problem then getting traits to work. So yeah, it solved that problem. Second, new code always adds new maintenance concerns. Whether or not it's a nightmare depends on the quality of code, which seems to be above par in this case.

As Nycto pointed out in this thread, there is a "Traits" patch which seems preferable to this code. It's likely that OP didn't realize it existed and did reinvent the wheel. But still, in terms of an exercise in PHP, I found it quite cool.
Hmm. Yeah, that could be problematic.
Device That Grows Meat in Your Kitchen Wins Design Prize
Tell PG: Disadvantages of no score against the comments experiment
I am posting this as a separate thread because that thread is gone out of control IMHO. I am starting with a few reasons why I think its not for me and other people who are in the same boat can add onto it.

1) I already spend a lot of time on HN. If I have to read through all the comments to find merit, I am screwed

2) The comments are threaded and the ranking is based on the original comment and not subsequent comments. A lot of times replies to comments deep inside are more resourceful than the original comment itself. Removing the scoring will remove that.

3) When I first joined HN, I used to analyze all the comments and their scores to learn what kind of behavior is expected from HNers. HN is going to grow and there will be no way for newbies to learn that.

Edit: The reason for the new thread was to just accumulate pros of "keeping scores for comments visible", not to start a new thread for discussion.
It's a really good idea, but it kinda feels awkward.
Yes, I agree it was out of balance.

No offense taken.
I moved in the opposite direction, from VSW (which I used heavily for a while) to Vimperator.
And they said K5 was dead...
that's because Simons defines "leading" mathematicians as ones working for RenTech
Just as a datapoint, my wife once received a comprehensive account history including balance, full social security and PIN. Very scary to have all that information in one document, imagine if it had been my wife's information instead of some random Korean national whose address bore no similarity to hers!

We took the document to the bank of course, they promised to "fix" her address, entirely unconcerned at the fact that they had just mailed out random personal information to a different customer. We're no longer with that bank.
You don't need to be that technical.

1. Open gtalk.

2. Hit menu.

3. Select "Add friend"

4. Type "im@twitterspy.org"

Now you can just start tracking topics or login for friend watching or whatever.
This was around '89? I think they were switching from a 10 to 11 year program and whoever was in school already at that time skipped a grade.
I like it. Ideally the title would be optional, and if left blank would replaced by a snippet of the message.
The RSS real-time technology is called RSSCloud: http://rsscloud.org/
In the abstract of that paper, it says "the significant negative correlation could be observed only in groups with above average mental abilities and not in a random sample from a general population." Are there other papers that say there's a general negative correlation?
Since this is an opinion poll, it should have the "It doesn't matter" option. That's the one I'd go for.
That's why I try to be careful how I swear. I thought that "fuck that" was casual enough to come across as being neutrally dismissive. Guess not; apologies to all!
People usually queue so that the queues of the same length in meters when I arrive --- so I go for the queue that has the least amount of stuff in it.
The ironic thing about bodily hygiene is that room temperature water is as good at killing bacteria as warm or hot water, incidentally its effect is negligible. Soap works better in warmer water, however as more and more people use liquid soaps and hand washes its meaningless as the added surfactants enable it to work just as well at lower temperatures. In fact many liquid soaps are better at removing grease and dirt at lower temperatures than standard soap is at better temperatures.

Then there's the whole problem that frequently washing your hands in warm water without a good liquid soap (which typically contain antibacterial agents too) can actually increase the bacteria on your hands due to the added moisture and temperature.

Dropping the temperature of your shower to room temperature will not only save you significant amounts of energy but will wash you just as well. In fact plumbing a cold water storage tank into your shower line and keeping it in a well insulated area of your house, you can spend virtually nothing on heating your shower water. Even adding a cold water storage tank to your shower line will likely cut the energy usage of your shower in half even if you take a hot shower. Most showers either run off a hot water tank (majorly inefficient) or an on-demand hot water system (either one that replaces the hot water tank, or a stand alone shower unit connected to your cold water line) and both ways end up heating ground temperature water: water lines stay at ~55F, room temp is between 68F-77F and a hot shower is 85F.

So even if you like a hot shower, simply adding a holding tank to the cold water intake of your shower can reduce the amount of energy you use phenomenally (potentially a 2/3 reduction). If you're in and out of a shower in 5 minutes, you likely only need a 25 gal tank, but for an average household I'd recommend perhaps a 100 gal tank, just in case.
Glad to hear you like the idea. My method for reading through HN and others is to scan through items with a certain threshold. Once I get below the "fold" of the page, I start to lower the level so I can compensate for the "decay factor" you mention.

There's tons of good gems at the bottom of the page, and they need to compete at the same level as those at the top.

You could tweek the "weighting equation" and try linear, quadratic, or exponential type formulas.

You could also apply this technique to articles, so those at the top don't get overly hyped and those at the bottom have a fair chance to making some movement to the top.

Also, one thought in terms of the scoring value is to have it with a few digits of decimal precision. So you could still see how competing articles are doing at the very top and see your vote make a difference (be it very small).

Example two competing top articles:

Article Exhibit A: (score 47.25)
Article Exhibit B: (score 46.33)

Now when I click to bump exhibit "B" it moves to say 46.38 a boost of "0.05"
Incidentally, David Mackay's group came up with the Dasher eye-tracking user interface and a bunch of cool machine-learning stuff; and for further HN cred, one of his ex-postdocs is CTO of Songkick.

http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/
To squarely address the concern about transparency: I think the model is highly transparent and has previously been well communicated.

The issue he raises, i.e. that the investors in Seedcamp are the ones choosing the winners on the final day of Seedcamp week, seems a fair arrangement: these investors have invested money in Seedcamp to provide capital for the winning startups. Hence they should have an input on where their money goes.

Note that investors do not pay to have exclusive access to Seedcamp companies on the final day. Seedcamp does not sell its services as a "gatekeeper". Instead, the investors have put equity into Seedcamp and Seedcamp invests in the winning startups. The amounts invested in Seedcamp are about 50K for individuals and 200K for institutions. Everyone is free to invest in Seedcamp (he should talk to them!).

Saul's point that the final day is closed except for the investors and invited mentors/advisers makes sense to me. It's a special day where the winners of Seedcamp are chosen, i.e. Seedcamp makes its investment decision. This needs to be a small session and behind closed doors.

Finally, any mentor or investor is absolutely free to invest in any company accepted to Seedcamp week or part of the final 6 - or indeed those that have been rejected by Seedcamp. You can invest before, during or after Seedcamp week. Everyone is totally free to choose where to put their money. The one exception is that as part of the selection process, Seedcamp does not want companies in Seedcamp week that already know they don't want investment from Seedcamp. Seems sensible.

So I guess this whole thing was just somehow handled badly or he was invited on another day and it wasn't really clear when that was. I am sure no one meant to "kick him out of Seedcamp". Part of the reason Seedcamp thrives is that there is this awesome network of mentors and advisers who aren't investors in Seedcamp and see the non-financial benefit of donating their time - for the ecosystem, for karma, for encouraging entrepreneurs, for improving startups. This is a completely voluntary process and mentors do it because it's fun. I think startups can benefit immensely from the advice, but I also find it hard to believe that any individual advice from a mentor can be measured in a potential equity return to Seedcamp and the Seedcamp investors down the road. The companies that deal best with mentors' advice are the ones that would probably have been successful anyway.

Disclaimer: I unfortunately wasn't at Seedcamp this year, so I also wasn't in the room when this happened. My employer, Atlas Venture, is an investor at Seedcamp. Usual disclaimer on personal opinion and the like.
It's not a matter of doing it "part-time". The original example given was that if somebody said "this way is better" and they had lots of upvotes, then it would be worth looking into. Thing is, that's a rare case in a conversation. Most talks here are opinionated, and opinions don't require research. In the off-chance that there is a comment that has, say, five responses suggesting alternative methods, then that's obviously a subject that warrants research on the part of the original commenter, if he cares at all about the subject.
I suggest to wait at least two weeks before starting new threads about this topic. Give it a chance.
I know this guy and he's pretty approachable. He was always keen to improve the content of the book so get in touch if you've got comments.
The point of messages is that you can't see them, unless they're to/from you.
I couldnt agree more ...

"Web 3.0 will be all about RESTful webservices"
Sure it steals google and bings search capabilities, but it is a great way to compare results.
I'm skeptical of that. There is one web site (besides the above comment) that has this quote. It links to the Wikipedia article about James Simons as its source. The Wikipedia article does not seem to mention the quote. Even if James Simons did say that, I'd like to see his source.

Edit: it just occurred to me that, since we are talking about "average" and not "median", this may as well be true, if a handful of mathematicians make a gazillion dollars a year. Very senior faculty members in the top research universities in the US are likely to make only $200-500k per year.
Heck, you can do liquid rescale in Javascript now. http://labs.pimsworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/demo-co... (requires a browser with fast javascript - not IE)
Good points, but this didn't need a new thread. The only purpose is to magnify your viewpoint.
Then why can't Google's mere "bidirectional phone call forwarding" include the disputed rural endpoints?

I assure you the dollar costs of complying with the regulation (paying the rural phone services), and thus the prices at which competing services can be profitable, are the only "real issue" here. Neither Google nor AT&T are charities. Everything they do -- even when writing whiny letters to the FCC (which both are guilty of) -- is motivated by profits.