skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why are you upset that more men than women can change a tire?

First, because it mostly isn't true. I don't know any women of my generation who have waited helplessly for someone to stop and help them; that's an absurd thing to even imagine. I do know women who changed their first tire by following the owner's manual in the glove box -- women aren't helpless in the face of technology (except when they decide to be.)

Second, because when it is true, it's an abominable thing. Being able to change a tire, via instructions or otherwise, is an important skill for anybody who drives. Any woman who accepts this limitation for herself (or anyone who encourages it in a wife or daughter) shows a blatant disregard for her safety. It just isn't safe for a woman to hang out on the side of the road waiting for a man to notice her helplessness. Let's set aside the indignity of a woman needing to solicit help from a strange man for a job she could physically do herself, simply because a flat tire falls under mens' purview. Let's not consider the absurdity of a woman standing beside her car for an hour waiting for a tow truck driver to come do a job she could handle herself in ten minutes. Forget about all that. It just isn't safe not to be able to change a tire. What if the guy who stops to "help" her is attracted to her helplessness for the wrong reason? (It's always dangerous to act like a potential victim. A woman who can't change a tire screams, "I can't take care of myself; take advantage of me.") What if you get a flat tire on a busy highway where you can't pull very far off the road? (The faster you get the tire fixed, the less time you spend on the shoulder waiting for an inattentive driver to drift over and hit you.) What if you get a flat tire in a remote area? I don't object to women being different from men; I don't even object to them valuing the difference and actively cultivating their femininity. Sacrificing safety (not to mention independence) for the sake of gender roles is an entirely different thing.
Well since no-one else has posted their exploits with I Am T-Pain on here yet, here's my first song with it:

http://iamtpain.smule.com/mysongs/uid/44417/1654/?did=

And, no, I'm not familiar with the melody to I'm Sprung at all so I just made it up and I start adlibbing eventually, lol. Definitely worth the £1.79 for the entertainment factor. I wanna do some programming related hiphops next..
4 Reasons traveling is a waste of time
To me, that sounds like saying "and then some magic happens" which ultimately creates the end work. Who is to say that the intermediate steps could or could not be reproduced by a program?

By the way, I'm a painter, so I'm not saying that when I do create a work that it was crafted by a set of logical, binary steps that I always follow for each painting. But I can say that my work can be analyzed to see why I did every single step, and none of those are impossible to express to a computer. Aside from my anecdotal experience, this is something that is also easily observable within the visual arts, and the artists that are recognized for defining the field.
Try http://infochimps.org/
I'm confused. When he starts out, he seems to be saying the problem is that the news is printed, regardless of whether it's news or not. Yet at the end, his solution to 'web overload' is the daily news.
You mean any colour so long as it was the dingy standard grey, right?

http://www.floodgap.com/retrotech/machten/mosaic/osxmosaic.g...
I dunno, I mean, the government already tried to deal with AT&T, and it didn't seem to help.

If you're trying to make a snarky comment about how phones aren't important when compared to health care, I actually would find it quite refreshing if everyone stopped talking about health care, and started talking about how America's technological infrastructure is years behind.
I don't see why there would be much of a difference. I mean...you either know something or you aren't sure/don't know it. If I know something I'll talk without hedging...if I'm not sure then I'll hedge.

Women are going to know more about stereotypically female tasks and men are going to know more about male stereotyped tasks...otherwise those tasks wouldn't be stereotyped to begin with.

And it makes sense someone would hedge more when they are talking to the opposite gender about something they think that gender knows well. If I don't know something and I think someone else does, I'm not going to talk about it like I know it.
Regarding the Brouhaha Over the Version of Flash in Snow Leopard
I agree - as much as we all want to make it big, the desperation of trying to save your loved one is heartbreaking.
I watched someone type "youtube" into Google the other day during a company orientation session.
I believe that there is a serious incentive on prevention and efficiency. However, there is a much louder voice for curing and expansion. I can offer you two reasons why.

1) Lack of better knowledge in the past:
For a long time people thought smoking was fashionable. Today we know it causes lung cancer, but it is now too late to tell all those people that have been smoking their entire life. This can be said about nearly everything in every other field. I would not say that we have better knowledge about many things now. Science is still not sure if eggs are good or bad for you, neither why many people develop lactose intollerance after their childhood. Because of that, prevention is pretty much a luck guess by now. We look at those who have survived and try to figure out why. Then we tell people to do that and see if it works, but there are so many factors that 'I' feel that prevention is in many cases just a gambling game.

2) Lack of knowledge of economy of scale.
When the industrial revolution started, steam was on its heydays, and all that, the idea of recycling and efficiency didn't exist AT ALL. People really thought that Earth could take everything that was thrown at it and its resources would last forever. Only now, with a population of many billions that we are seeing that Earth is panting, trying to catch up with our wasteful ways. The idea of 'reduce, reuse, recycle' to save resources is very new and there is a lot of social and economical mommentum it needs to overcome before it becomes mainstream.
A long time ago, I was at a client's site, and had to write code at a dumb terminal in the middle of the sales floor (I said this was a long time ago). One of the salesmen walked by and saw me typing up a storm. Impressed, he said, "Is there, like, a big chart that you have memorized?"

I said, "No, I just make it up as I'm typing it."

That explanation seemed to work well enough.
I dunno, I prefer

867-5309

over

phone://saw.your.name.and.number.of.the.wall.voice/jenny_jenny_who_can_i_turn_to
Snakes on the Web
The Myth of the Overscheduled Child
Agreed. I don't want anyone to be able to guess my cell number & spam call me, why would anyone want that?
Moreover, people who want to change how phone addressing works rarely consider the fact that the people who can email me are not the same people who I want to call me on voice. Or the fact that sometimes I change my number with the intent of denying that ability to people who knew the old number. Or the fact that the region-locality of numbers often yields useful information about the person on the other end.
I think that in the end it all boils down to motivation and free will, a computer has none, even the ones with random generators.

An intelligent being (artificial or 'natural' makes no difference here) has free will and I believe (but can not prove) that eventually that leads to intelligence.

The prevailing belief here (certainly judging by the moderation ;) ) seems to be that you can algorithmically describe everything. I'm not sure that that is possible, neither am I sure that it is not.

But to date, nobody has designed a machine that on its own decide to go and do anything at all. Even the act of deciding to make a painting vs going out for lunch or talking to someone for an hour or two requires free will and intelligence. No computer in existence today can do that, and if there is not going to be some fundamental change in how computers work I doubt that one will do so in the future.

If you haven't read it yet look at the top of this discussion, rms has posted a link that makes for some very interesting reading on all this.

& thanks for the exchange, it has been educational, especially about the 'method' that could be abstracted from art.
Of course, but I think most hackers nowadays are not amateurs.
The correct syntax is: sip:yourname@yourdomain.com

This is already a solved problem.

SIP and DNS SRV/NAPTR records are the relevant (IETF) standards. The "sip:" part above is actually optional. Using NAPTR records, I can simply request yourname@yourdomain.com, and your DNS will tell me how I can contact you (via email, via Jabber/XMPP, via SIP, /dev/null, etc.) in order of preference.
What is "positive thinking"?
Probably the most important idea I got out of GTD was simply writing everything down. Now, whenever someone tells me something, it's immediately going into my calendar - the actual thing itself and all its dependencies. For example, Oct 24th is Startup school, but I've written down on my calendar all the dates associated with that event: Sept 15 - submit application; Oct 1 - app deadline; Oct 8 - accept/reject notification - if accept, book airfare, arrange for lodging (at that point, that will trigger a separate set of items on my cal).

The point is, I'm not going to actively try to remember any of that, which frees my mind up to enjoy every day life. While I don't follow GTD to the letter, it's been a very helpful attitude change.
It's not just code complexity. I recall having to deal with older versions of pgp and gpg which made even some simple operations relatively complicated. I am positive that it would have been possible to talk people into doing stupid things by offering to 'help' them understand what they were to do to sign keys or something like that.
If you're asking me; sure, quote away.
It doesn't matter if $500k is a joke or even a real figure that they hope to achieve. By using $500k as an anchor, $100k doesn't seem like such a crazy prize yet.. it is for what's being offered. It's a common persuasion/sales technique. Make a reallllly crazy offer and then the merely "slightly crazy" offers can actually seem erroneously realistic. (No, this doesn't work for everything ;-))
I've said this often and I will say it again here: You want leaders, go military. Combat facing only.

Why?

Despite the (incorrect) Hollywood caricature of military leaders being shoot first ask questions later seim-psychotic blowhards, the military rewards everything you want in a leader and at the same time aggressively weeds out all but the strongest performers.

A good military resume will almost without exception create the following person:

1. Analytical observer - the fog of war keeps these people asking "what don't I know" even when it seems clear that they have all the information about a decision point.

2. Good Planner - Data gathering is important in order to make the right calls.

3. Decision Maker - These folk are always able to make calls - yes sometimes the wrong one - without knowing certain details.

3. Decisive Action Taking - Once the call has been made, these folk see that the Action is executed immediately, and attempt to gather information regarding the effectiveness of the action as soon as possible.

4. Results focused - These people appreciate and reward high quality results, which means they tend to breed people like them.

However, the most important quality is:

5. "In contact leadership" - Combat leaders tend to have a significant ability to think on their feet in reaction to the changing environment. In my experience, this never seems to be properly learned in a civilian in the same way. I suppose it has something to do with the magnitude of the choices being made, but even non-combat military folk seem to be better at this than the average manager.

Yeah, I'm a veteran. But I spent five years working in uniform, and have spent about 15 out. Based on my observations, and excluding outliers, the difference is noticeable.
Michigan town to promise scholarships to all
All good points, but I don't see why any of this should mean that traveling is a waste of time. Most people, despite their best efforts, are going to settle into a routine in their daily lives. There is no substitute for breaking out of that routine and getting a different perspective on things. I guess you don't have to 'travel' for that but it's somewhat unavoidable that you get out of town and away from all those things you "just love and can't live without". She was miserable living on a French farm due to economic disparities? Sounds like a bigger issue than just a dislike of travel...
Coming soon to a precious storefront in a gentrifying neighborhood of Brooklyn: sustainable cupcakes made of flour ground from organic wheat raised in Prospect Park, served in wrappers recycled from old copies of the New York Review of Books.

Perhaps the author is a fan of http://www.latfh.com/
Clicked on omgpop.com just to see and it took 25 seconds before I was able to click something. So uh, flex does take forever to load. Twenty five seconds is your idea of "zippy"?
I am using mysql. Maybe I can figure something out and post it back here ...

Thanks for the hints.
Yes, I understand absolutely where you are coming from here. I simply am not sure whether there exists something inherently different that allows me to make decisions such as eating lunch vs. creating a painting, or whether it's just a matter of complexity within my own memory, (such as my past experience of painting at noon on a sunny sunday has rewarded me with a good painting, which to me is similar to expressing that idea to a program). But again, this is merely philosophical. I just don't want to throw that idea out simply because we haven't done it yet.

And it's been a pleasant exchange on my end as well :)
The advantages of the new media far outweighs the negatives, and this guy seems to be another case of focusing on the negatives rather than the positives. Is there a solution to his problem? Of course! We all know that. It seems he just has not reached the next level of thinking or searching to adapt to this new environment and make it work for him. I group him into the type of people who feel handicapped by their old habits. Nothing wrong with that. He will figure it out eventually.
Sorry, but I'd want to write code this way why? I mean no disrespect, but this code is completely meaningless to read. What is the motivation to use such a language for this application...esoterica?
If you're not home, does Mrs. Browl stand by the street outside your house, trying to flag down a male driver to open her jar? Division of labor is fine when it's convenient. Helplessness is not. Women living alone don't have to return a tightly sealed jar to the grocery store and get a refund. They just open the damn jar. It's a mystery how they do it, but I suspect it has something to do with not actually being as weak as they let on.
A lot of captcha uses always struck me as backward, like we want to prevent automation and make humans do work that programs could be doing.

For example why can't I have a script log in and print out my boarding pass for me? Or what if I want to make some elaborate program where one of the steps is to make a new email account (not for spam, just automating setting up an email account.)

Perhaps a big obstacle to the semantic web (where computerized agents schedule oil changes for you), are captchas and the general attitude that we only want humans using our websites.
Ask HN: Review my site (http://www.udoa.com)
The site called UDOA: Universal Debate and Opinion Aggregation is meant to aggregate news and bills and allow people to voice their opinion on what si going on around them. The idea being these opinions are not lost and are rolled up into topics and issues and can be extracted to understand trends.

It also offers a mashup between the news and bills in Congress so while reading an article you can read the bill it is referring to. (this is still in progress).

The site is a work in progress with some broken links and some placeholder text, but I would love feedback on the concept and if people would find if useful. Trying to take advantage of Gov 2.0.

http://www.udoa.com
I think this article was talking more about cultural aspects being killed, not physical things being killed.
Now I can see your point. Thanks for the reply. However, this treatment is not only about localized toxin. It has a two-fold approach of both blocking the blood path the tumor is feeding of and using a localized chemo treatment. Wouldn't this approach be more effective than the actual ways?
I have another question. Since you claim that localized toxin causes the recurrence to be much more difficult to treat because the 1% that survives is resistant to chemo, wouldn't an unlocalized toxin be much worse because not only it would also not kill these 1% that was resistance, but also it would kill less of those 99% susceptible and would also kill some healthy cells, making the body weaker and the recurrence to occur sooner?
> And history shows that in any game where computers can compete the humans have to play (almost) perfectly to even stand a chance (see: Chess / Checkers / Poker).

What about GO? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Go
You can play all sorts of games with health insurance. But insurance isn't care. This is a point the article makes:

On paper, poor patients have great government insurance; their only problem is that they can’t find a doctor.

My question, to proponents of "universal" health care is this: how will you make the physical provisions for additional health care to be delivered? I'm not asking about money, just resources (an hour of a doctor's time, a bed in a hospital).

If the system is being underused (i.e., doctors going out of business due to lack of patients, empty ERs, etc), that should be easy: just direct the unused capacity to new people.

But if the system is currently at capacity or being overused, where will the additional physical capacity to treat 50-100 million new patients come from?
I don't think this would work, for the following reasons:

1. Money. While 14-20k isn't that much, it does provide enough money not to have to think about bills for months. Perhaps even more importantly, taking someone else's money (esp. when that someone else is PG) is a pretty strong incentive to actually produce something.

2. Environment. When you physically move somewhere with the sole purpose of working on your startup, it's a lot more difficult to screw around. Not to mention the fact that you're constantly around your co-founder(s), and other startup founders, and the natural thing to do at that point is "work".

3. Distinction. Because YC is well known, people around you will recognize it. You will have some real level of clout, more so than being a part of a newborn virtual combinator clone. Albeit this one can probably improve with time..

Decent idea though. I personally wish there were more YC type people here in LA.
And very rarely they result in cure. Sometimes, they give you some years till recurrence kicks in. Mostly, they make your last years very miserable.
Unfortunately, they arrived one month too late.
Young Workers in Free Fall: 1/3 Under 35 Live with Parents
From Google's Design Patent to the Virtual Machines of Modular Innovation
Probably something really sinister, like the ability to route your phone calls to you, or something.
the account in nl was already in $CAN

Aha, that solves that problem. I didn't realize that you could get CAD bank accounts and credit cards outside of Canada.
What about the frozen yogurt with sprinkles bubble? I'm still waiting for that one to pop.
How I upgraded to Snow Leopard
Maybe you would like phone://j.mp/jenae better.
Outrageous stance to attract attention; little value added.
I'd like to see how they apply this 'basic science' rule for the Peace Prize.
sounds like the perfect use for http://botornot.com

Sadly, it's already registered
These are my 5 favorites (#s 3,11,34,40 & 46), simply because they have all been killed just because current web companies for some reason seem to not be able to get the model right when it comes to distributing online music. Napster was the last company to really stick it to the major lables, and as Pandora has just been proven to, they were hit with the infamous FCC regulations. We can fix these issues with a different model and the distribution of power.

3) Listening to an album all the way through
The single is one of the unlikely beneficiaries of the internet – a development which can be looked at in two ways. There's no longer any need to endure eight tracks of filler for a couple of decent tunes, but will "album albums" like Radiohead's Amnesiac get the widespread hearing they deserve?

11) Music stores
In a world where people don't want to pay anything for music, charging them £16.99 for 12 songs in a flimsy plastic case is no business model.

34) Mainstream media
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Rocky Mountain News in the US have already folded, and the UK's Observer may follow. Free news and the migration of advertising to the web threaten the basic business models of almost all media organisations.

40) Undiscovered artists
Posting paintings to deviantART and Flickr – or poems to writebuzz – could not be easier. So now the garret-dwellers have no excuses.

46) Staggered product/film releases
Companies are becoming increasingly draconian in their anti-piracy measure, but are finally beginning to appreciate that forcing British consumers to wait six months to hand over their money is not a smart business plan.
Not to draw it out much further, but I don't think a majority of domain experts in a field would (or have in the past) completely discounted the possibility of an invention or achievement. It's usually journalists, pseudo-intellectuals, or self-proclaimed experts who make these types of claims. Are you saying that leading physicists and engineers in the mid-20th century didn't think space flight and satellites were achievable?
The "cross-browser" compatibility is greatly exaggerated by adobe and "widget" programmers who don't have to do heavy application programming. I have been working with a large team for two years on a website with heavy flex integration and we have had far more browser incompatibility problems with the Flex than the HTML/Javascript portions. Rendering is very consistent across browsers but the network stack is largely handed off to the browser which introduces all kinds of problems. Also, things like transparency and background mode can massively degrade in the wrong browser/OS pair which means testing all of your supported platforms for performance and turning off features accordingly. The network stack is very hard to get right on all browsers. Big surprises like Internet Explorer can't parse an XML file over HTTPS if caching is disabled for the resource. Thats right. Now considering that virtually all XML API calls out there disable caching, this is really annoying. So basically we had to detect when a Flex client was calling our services and remove the no-caching headers. And of course, since you don't want to cache you have to add in a nonce on the url or it will never be called again. Also, Flex can't by default handle anything other than HTTP 200 so better recode all of you server processes to basically be Flex specific, returning Flex friendly HTTP codes and headers. The Flex network stack is simply pathetic. Our QA team tests the Flex application on all supported browsers. They do not even bother anymore with the HTML portion because errors have become so comparatively rare.
Any one have links to the evidence mentioned for the effect of positive thinking on performance?
http://www.udoa.com
The number one request in our user feedback forums is to get rid of Flex/Flash.