skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The company in the article clearly has very serious problems. Based on the description they're in serious trouble no matter what.

But when there's a boom going on in an industry it can be so easy to make money and gain new clients that it can cover-up a lot of fundamental problems with the way that business is run.

Because money is pouring in the door (either by earning it or from VCs) the company can afford to give out a lot of perks and raises. It's easy to hire extra employees to pick up slack or for employees to get away with wasting large amounts of time or being semi-competent. If customers buy your service once and never come back who cares if there are beating a path to your door? There will always be more so you'll stay in the black. The atmosphere can be really relaxed and fun and casual. Lots of different ideas can be tried in a "throw spaghetti on the wall and see what sticks" manner. It doesn't really matter if you fail, things are going really well!

The problem is what happens when the market starts to cool down. The perks suddenly disappear in the raises stop happening. Manual processes that wasted a lot of employee time or cost extra people to have to be hired suddenly get cleaned up and people find themselves working overtime or without jobs. When the executive start seeing the money disappear the feeling inside the place changes completely. You better not make any mistakes or trying waste money with a new idea. Best to stick with what used to work; that must've been correct. Wasting money is the last thing you need.

But it doesn't really matter if the employees were doing their best job and weren't slacking off or wasting resources and all. Even if they are model employees the business model may have been unsustainable (like pets.com) and never would've succeeded even if everything had been run perfectly. $300/customer acquisition cost doesn't work well when the average customer ends buys $25/year in products.

If you knew all this was going on, employees could get out near the top or skip the ride altogether and work in a company that's solid building up their reputation there. Instead they might get laid off or have to leave under desperate circumstances and might have to find another job on the quick.

All because a change in the market revealed that there was a company that never should've been successful in the first place and may have only grown through an accident of luck.
Right, but how do you prove that?

That is the dilemma all these prospective piece of legislation in Vancouver, NYC are running up against? What would you do? How would you enforce it?

Water bills? Electricity? Which you could fake.

Phone presence?

A rebate program, which no one would vote for anyway.
Cool but when's the PowerShell module coming out?
I have a degree in CS. I also had 3 years experience as a professional programmer when I was laid off. Let me be clear: resume spamming does not work. I was on unemployment which requires documentation, so I know that for 9 months, I applied to a minimum of one job per week. In that time I got only 3 calls back and one interview. Fortunately I interview very well :)
Also, some high school players who do not want to go to college (for whatever reason-- academic, financial, etc.) go play overseas at age 18 for a few years, getting paid all the while, then get drafted along with their HS graduating class a few years later.
I'm definitely underpaid at the moment but that's the nature of a bootstrapped startup isn't it. They took a chance on me with no degree or job exp. Also money doesn't equal a better experience. I get to work on something really fucking cool and I love the people I work with. I'd probably kill myself at consultancy.

So regardless of whether or not make tons of money on this startup, I'll have 2+ years of job experience for the next job that I didn't have before.
I skimmed this article 3 times...Sorry, was there any actual substance to this link-baity headline, other than "Mainframes were big, now they're not and PCs were big, now they are not, ergo, Google is big, and someday they will not be"?

The OP provides little to no hypothesis on what will takeover Google...more "human" content, a la Buzzfeed? Seriously?? And then the OP goes on to dismiss all of Google's next-gen research (self-driving cars, Google Glass, etc) with a conclusion akin "Well Microsoft Research sucked so Google will to".

The OP is link-bait wankery at its worst. I'm sorry to even have spent 15 minutes trying to interpret it.
Practice Coding Interviews with Engineers from FB, Google
Native advertising is not in-app advertising. The term refers to what used to be known as advertorials. They used to be a minor feature of newspapers, but as newspapers have been mightily struggling financially, they have opened the floodgates and they are now happening much more frequently. That's not to mention all other non-news content sites that have commercial features as well.
The obvious question is - does it provide anything additional on top of `OpenJDK` that I can already install via `apt-get install openjdk` ? I suppose those builds are 100% open source too.

I skimmed through 451's analyst report if Azul is bringing any of their own improvements to Zulu but answer seems negative.
Backpack (YC S14) is hiring full stack engineers
Isn't OpenJDK already "free, 100% Open Source"?

What are the benefits of this "commercialization"?
(In case the title didn't tip you off, TFA contains coarse language.)
Well, don't just brag. Write a blog post, publish a GitHub repo. Share it somehow.
Huh, Google Glass is a failed product so far.
> Just because the code is available doesn't mean it does no damage. Only that you have the ability to find and fix the code.

Also your shenanigans become visible. You'd have to code extremely carefully to break the fake with plausible deniability, and even then your name as a developer would forever be mud.
Very few people would be happy studying lambda calculus in their basement, most humans like being around other humans. Socialization is why colleges matter, not useless humanities degrees.
Selection bias is useful for allowing all sorts of fascinating arguments to be made.
Perhaps, in a world where direct response advertising is growing ever more relevant and useful, brand advertising can wither and die, taking the Wanamaker problem with it. Do we need to hear stories that try to make us have emotional relationships with floor waxes?
Block the advertisers on your firewall?
I bought my HP11C in 1987 for $89.00. It's still useful. That was the engineer run HP of the cold war. Not today's MBA run company that bamboozles it's way to profit via overpriced ink.
Something like domain blocking? https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/disconnect-mobile-privacy/id...

Full disclosure: I work for Disconnect.
why do you think data was the only or largest driver?
>What specific problems does this create that prevents you from shipping with a degraded experience?

It's not just a degraded experience as in 'turn off this feature', the bug in question affects the entire infrastructure of how the app works, since it is part of the message passing and serialization mechanism used. It's legal, standard, JS, that just happens to run slow.

In this case, a workaround is available, and it is already fixed, but not shipped, because we froze commits some time ago for launch.

> That's either a lie or incredibly naive. You wouldn't have shipped without iOS. Full-stop.

You mean like we didn't ship support for Android tablets? You would have thought with the big Android Lollipop and Nexus 9 launch, we would have made sure this worked there, right?

Maybe you should think about Hanlon's Razor as an explanation.
Nit-pickey feedback: "a lot" is 2 words.
Carlin is really good. To the non-Americans out there, push past his movie trailer voice, it doesn't mean it's tosh, he is actually rather good.
Exactly right about how U.S. education seems to put more emphasis on WWII than WWI. And then even within WWII you don't get the whole story. Carlin's "Ghosts of the Ostfront" series gave me an entirely new perspective on the side of the war the U.S. didn't fight. In many ways - certainly in terms of lives lost - it's an even more tragic story.
Email is probably the main method of text communication with about half of my friends and relatives. Plus I have a few subscriptions, notifications etc.
But with a well-controlled compact microwave emitter, you can build a compact, fast-reacting heater for shower. Finally.
Hidden deep in this is an incredible treasure: how to do it yourself:

http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/gcnc/
Same - the help page says it's not available at all for Google Apps accounts, only for personal Gmail accounts.

https://support.google.com/a/answer/6082718?rd=2

Since I only use my @gmail.com account for spam and have my own domain for personal emails, guess this is a no go for me. I was considering switching back to a personally hosted mailserver for privacy reasons anyway, would have liked to try this though.
House hunting? Having a hard time keeping track of houses you saw?
If your stuff is really that critical, wouldn't you rather they tell you that you have a fake, rather than just brick it mysteriously and leave you to figure out the reason on your own?
In Australia at least it's not actually a problem. While we have an incredibly low population density, it turns out that almost all (92 to 95% or something) of the population actually live in fairly highly populated cities and towns. The vast majority of the country is mostly uninhabited apart from a thin strip around parts of the coast and then a few inland cities.

This is why the previous Australian Government set out to build a wholesale-only fibre network that the private carriers could competitively deliver services over, to reach 93% of the population (the remaining 7% is a combination of satellite and fixed wireless). This was to fix a problem that had been created by a past Government when the old Government-owned monopoly carrier had been privatised into a single huge anti-competitive company who doesn't do any upgrades unless somebody else does - such as when another company put in an HFC network, the monopoly (Telstra) overbuilt almost the exact same areas with a competing network, not touching anywhere else...

Unfortunatley the new Government is dismantling the new plan, and replacing it with a token FTTN effort to "save money" because of a fallacious "budget emergency", even though financial modeling shows that the FTTP plan actually had a better chance of making a profit (which was to be re-invested in expanding the fibre footprint and upgrading the network). Strangely enough, it's the party who created the Telstra problem last time they were in power...
Honest question: are you participating in this thread as a greenbean because you want to hide your identity from harassment from those who disagree with your unpopular opinion, or because you want to hide the fact that you are affiliated with FTDI?
According to the thread the VID is RO?
Google is both dominating smart phones and search at the moment. The examples given were of particular products that superseded other products. Is there a product that going to supersede Google Search or Android? If not, I don't see Google at its peak. In fact, with their efforts to take over the last google free screen in your living room, it might be that they're due to break into an even bigger advertising market.
I've certainly been caught out in that regard before.

But a 'advanced options' ability with a stern warning would be useful to many.
That's not the right chart. The rest of the country probably looks somewhat similar.

If you were to take historical data, California home prices were 27 percent higher than the U.S. median in 1960, then 35 percent higher in 1970. But by 1980, they were 79 percent higher, and then by 1990, they were 147 percent higher. (Fischel, 1995) http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674753884

In the early 1960s, California accounted for one-fifth of the housing permits issued in the entire United States. But this pro-development orientation shifted once the available flatlands in the Los Angeles Basin and the rest of the Bay Area got built out to the hills. It transformed the politics of all the suburbs toward growth control, as residents started fearing that multi-unit dwellings would start encroaching on their single-family homes and bringing poorer people (read: minorities).

Today, California is this: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/24/us/a-california-dream-not-...

It's more extreme in SF because we have water on all three sides, and are largely built out. There are only maybe 37,000 market-rate housing units too. The city has created 70,000 new jobs since Jan. 2010 and added roughly 10K residents per year since then. So, yeah, that's why we have the most expensive median market-rate rents in the nation.

Btw, the comparison to NYC isn't really accurate because you're comparing SF against all of NYC. Manhattan alone is probably more of an apples-to-apples comparison.
There is no apology sufficient for maliciously and intentionally damaging the private property of your customers.

Refusing to work with counterfeit hardware is entirely appropriate, destroying it in a way that most consumers cannot recover from is in no way acceptable or defensible.

You may as well have come into my home and destroyed my cookware because I bought a stove from you and the pots I had weren't your brand. It's uncalled for, inappropriate, unethical, and immoral and I'm not certain that it's not illegal. Your employer has no leg to stand on.
"The problem for Google is [...] they’re an ad company, but the key to native advertising on the Internet is the capability of producing immersive content within which to place the ad [...] Google has nothing in this regard (with the notable exception of YouTube"

Google has plenty of other assets here to build immersive advertising experiences on top of if they chose to leverage them, not the least of which is the most popular mobile OS in the world.

"Moreover, all of the things that make Google great [...] translate to the more touchy-feely qualities that make a social service or content site compelling."

Google has the best asset of all here - an empowered sales force that has direct relationships exactly the agencies, creatives and buyers that would be the first to jump on an innovative immersive ad format.
The basic assumption behind this seems to be that marketing spam in email will keep increasing and instead of fighting against it, organising content around it is better approach.

Most people (who nowadays carry lot of personal/group communication around facebook/whatsapp) still get a lot of mails on product deals, newsletters etc. Email is also the tool for login, password recovery and for other utilities like that. Beyond that its the primary tool to do the most important thing : send a official mail to whoever concerned. May be to the president of country or to the school principal.
Reducing the noise into this core tool should be of importance. Facebook/Whatsapp has take out a big chunk of casual and group communication, which is good. Something that could keep out the product marketing out of email could be of next good change.

I think the movement should be towards reducing the unwanted content in emails, than organising the unwanted.
The IBM Centennial Film [1] is a nice watch for anyone interested in the history of IBM.

[1] http://youtu.be/39jtNUGgmd4
Google is just as well poised for getting brand advertising dollars. Specifically consider this point from the article itself: "To date this type of brand advertising has strongly favored television; targeting is certainly nice, but channels like Lifetime (Dove) or ESPN (Axe) are specific enough..."

The majority of brand advertising dollars are currently in TV. What's the next generation of TV? We don't know yet, but these are some contenders:

1) Apple - Apple TV / iTunes
2) Amazon - Streaming Prime Content
3) Netflix
4) Google - Android TV & Youtube

Out of all these players only Google is taking advertising model for video content; the rest of the players are monetizing through content itself. Thus, it's very possible that Google will be taking the lion's share of brand advertising dollars as consumers cut cable.

I wouldn't count Google out of the brand advertising game. Youtube has over 1 billion monthly actives who consume 6 hours a month in a format very friendly to native ads.
Could someone explain what is happening on those photos with the blood bags?
Kindle Voyage Touch Screen E-Reader with Light
Redpanda Concierge
Lets try to make it go viral, it is a great website i discovered last night! www.redpandaconcierge.com
I disagree with a lot of this post.

This analysis breaks down because the transition from IBM->Microsoft->Smartphone companies was because of newer and better technology. Native ads hardly fit this category.

In fact, if you think about it, search ads are native ads! Just like sponsored Buzzfeed articles, search ads on Google pretend to be content. In some ways, it's like they're the ultimate native ad because they're close to what you expected to see when you typed in that query. They aren't annoying, they're very relevant and they're easy to buy.

> IBM didn’t capitalize on PCs because their skills lay on the hardware side, not software. Microsoft didn’t capitalize on mobile because they emphasized compatibility, not the user experience. And now Google is dominant when it comes to the algorithm, but lacks the human touch needed for social or viral content.

Google has expanded way beyond search ads and everything in the internet is their batting zone. They own:

- DoubleClick, the biggest ad server on the Internet

- Youtube, the biggest platform for videos

- Display Network, the largest contextual network of display ads on the internet

Google isn't going away any time soon.
If the athletes truly brought the value and it wasn't the schools and league itself, then the NBA's D-League would be raking in the billions and they could all play there.

It turns out that people want to watch their school beat another school, and they aren't particular about the athletes. You can say the individuals bring value, but they destroy an equal amount of value at some other school when they succeed.

Witness the last NBA lockout when the players had some all-star games and couldn't fill the seats. A mature competitive league is responsible for far more of the revenue than it gets credit for.
When you compile C99 apps using _Decimal{32,64,128} types, and you enable a flag on IBM's compiler to use the DFP instructions and tell it you're compiling for at least a POWER6 (e.g., -qarch=pwr6 -qtune=pwr7) it will emit the optimized code. The same types are available in C++ apps as well. (I'm not sure if GCC/LLVM also support emitting the instructions -- haven't checked.)

If higher level languages implemented in C/C++ implement their decimal support using the built-in C/C++ types, they'll get the speed boost.
>, if the market for cookies grew it at 6% every year, and thus the number of searches for cookies grew at 6% per year,

The author may have used poor examples to flesh out his thesis but I think his point is the contexts & triggers for advertisements can drastically change. When that happens, it can make newer companies become dominant.

For example, if Facebook-Apple comes out with an Oculus-or-wrist-wearable-augmented-reality-gadget, a user could be standing on a street corner and see a car pass by that he doesn't recognize. He then sends a voice command to his wearable to ask what the model is and it creates ads of dealers that sell it. The "search engine" behind the scenes could be Bing or whatever Facebook-Apple licenses.

The ads are still there. Searches (of some type) are still there. But the contextual triggers have changed. There are no business guarantees that google.com will remain in the pipeline of future (lucrative) ad triggers.

My example above may also be convoluted but I'm sure others could imagine a future where the majority of searches come from another mechanism besides typing words into a little box on a webpage. Ad rates from google would nosedive because advertisers would pay a premium for Oculus ads instead of google.com ads. I think those are the scenarios that would "eclipse" google.com.

This has happened before with newspapers. The car industry grew but newspapers ad rates for cars and car dealers have declined. A lot of those ad dollars shifted to television and google. Newspapers declined even though they still run ads for cars today.
New Zealand, Australia, and to a lesser extent Sweden all have vast areas with very low, near zero population densities. Could that be impacting the deliverability?
Then any parasitism is restricted to trademarks rather than trade secrets, patents, etc. Who cares about trademarks?
If anyone wants some haunting footage:

Berlin, Pre-War: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-m9A8mY-U0
It's bizarre that Berlin once looked like this. It's OT, but here's how Berlin turned into what it is today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=592ZXOuG7yE

German side of the war: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CErUTpuDbd8&src_vid=B-m9A8mY...

More German: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPb_hJcno3g&src_vid=CErUTpuD...

German, with poison gas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8EJc7RAXDk&src_vid=CErUTpuD...

Multiside: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uP_0DkpFOKs
This article is a huge non-sequitur. Yes, every big company will eventually be eclipsed. That says nothing about "native advertising".

There was already something like "native advertising" for search: it was GoTo.com. You could pay to appear in the search results. It's not hard to imagine that, as a result, the search result quality was inferior to Google's, and users chose to go elsewhere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo!_Search_Marketing#Origins...
Macintosh Garden – Celebrating macintosh abandonware
I'd much rather our devices be bricked than risk someone getting hurt.

The idea that these are mutually exclusive options is almost comically naive, particularly coming from somebody who claims to have designed critical systems.
Working for Google today is a lot like working for the Microsoft of ~15 years ago.

Employees are well paid, benefits are good, it's comfortable. The quality of the hires are still pretty good, but definitely not what they were 5 years ago. The engineering culture is still strong and permeates the entire organization, but the company is so large that less and less flexibility is allowed in each team's process. Thus, engineers (especially those at the lowest levels, like right out of school) aren't exposed to as much interesting work; many will find in 2-3 years that they have career opportunities at Google and companies of similar size but few opportunities at more interesting companies that are looking for someone with a few years experience with newer technologies. Technologies that Google doesn't use. Processes that Googlers don't know because they work in the confines of a huge corporation.

Still not a bad place to be 'cause Google pays well and they're comfortable. But then the best and brightest stop coming to Google. And then the company slowly dies a painful death toward irrelevancy that takes decades.

I think the comparison to Microsoft is spot on. The exact timeframe remains to be seen.
The label printed on the outside of the plastic package of the chip is the only thing that's illegal, since it's depicting FTDI's trademark. Scrape that off and you've got a 100% legal compatible clone. Whoever decided to use the clones in any given device may be be in breach of a contract if the use of genuine FTDI chips was specified, but that may easily not be the case. (The clones also violate USB specs by using someone else's VID, but that only prevents them from labeling the product with the trademarked USB logo.)

Also, possession of the fake chip as an end user is no more illegal than owning fake Louis Vuitton stuff. It's the sale under false pretenses that gets you in trouble.
Google Glass isn't a product yet, so it's unclear how it could be a failed product.