skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Uber runs services despite knowing that they are against local law and waits until courts stop them.

I think the comparison at least has some merits.
Because I find it really handy to quickly, and visually, check the sanity / logic of something.

In your example, it's really easy to run your eyes down a column and see that one of those values is radically different from the others.

As a trivial example:

int robert_age = 32;
int annalouise_age = 25;
int bob_age = 250;
int dorothy_age = 56;

I find easier to read as:

int robert_age = 32;
int annalouise_age = 25;
int bob_age = 250;
int dorothy_age = 56;

Coding styles are about readability and usability. The columns metaphor works well for some categories of data - that's why spreadsheets are so popular.
But this isn't title case, this is randomly capitalizing the "J" in "Jobs".
Getting Started with OpenGLES Graphics Programming
It's up to the copyright holder if content is removed. YouTube gives the holder the option to leave content up but take any ad revenue.
Ask HN: Do you know other firms like Valve or GitHub?
i.e. firms using collaborative/innovative/participatory methods of organizing?
Do you really think, if the accusations are true, fixing this problem wouldn't improve things?
This reminds me of the account of NGOs ( Non Governmental Organizations )- key functionaries in the dispensation of foreign aid - in Jim Rogers' book, Adventure Capitalist: The Ultimate Road Trip, something I read many many years ago:

"Even in countries with no roads to speak of, Mercedes service is available – often
to the exclusion of things like food – thanks to all the US foreign aid, the IMF,
and World Bank money being shipped in. It is no secret that this money is aimed at
nourishing only those corrupt enough to get their hands on it, while at the same
time fattening the bureaucrats on both sides of the transaction who diligently
work the trough. And none of them is driving a Chevy.

I knew much of this from my last trip. The upcoming trip, especially as it took
us through Africa, would be an eye-opening education into the workings of the
latest foreign aid scam: the nongovernmental organization, or NGO. As an American
taxpayer, I would be amazed to discover that a lot of the money we send to these
countries goes to support Mercedes and BMW dealers and various Swiss bankers."

"After cocoa, the commodity produced in greatest abundance in the Ivory Coast is to
be found in the commercial capital, Abidjan, one of the more cosmopolitan cities in
West Africa: NGO bureaucrats. They grow here in enormously high concentration, even
for Africa. They and their like have been directing Africa’s destiny for centuries.
One might wonder why so many national boundaries in these parts consist of straight
lines. In Germany in 1884, at what was called the Congress of Berlin, the European
powers came together and divided up Africa. They paid no attention to religious,
ethnic, linguistic, tribal, national, or historical differences – the Ivory Coast,
for example, is divided between a majority Muslim population in the north and those
who hold to indigenous beliefs and Christianity in the south, explaining why peace
in Africa may be far away. And why there will always be work for Western
bureaucrats." [1]

On the other hand, this is what Bill Gates has to say on corruption and why it should not be a deterrent to the continued giving of foreign aid:

There is a double standard at work here. I’ve heard people calling on the government
to shut down some aid program if one dollar of corruption is found. On the other
hand, four of the past seven governors of Illinois have gone to prison for
corruption, and to my knowledge no one has demanded that Illinois schools be shut down
or its highways closed. [2]

Even fully discounting the fact that the man is unimaginably wealthy and can afford the graft and misuse of funds, I am still not quite convinced by this line of reasoning. At this point I'm just hoping that I don't wake up some eight years from now to discover that even things like Kiva loans [3] had been all along a huge waste of effort, time and - yes - money.

[1] Adventure Capitalist: The Ultimate Road Trip

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812967267

[2] 3 MYTHS THAT BLOCK PROGRESS FOR THE POOR

http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/#section=myth-two

[3] Kiva Is Not Quite What It Seems

http://www.cgdev.org/blog/kiva-not-quite-what-it-seems
Nope! :^) In the boat question, when the bolts are in the boat they are displacing water equal to their weight. After they drop to the bottom, they are displacing water less than their weight. So less water is displaced, i.e. total water level drops.
Interesting strategy, you could be right.
https://www.reddit.com/r/fullmoviesonyoutube/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNd1l7LsxvU

This person covered the entire youtube screen in popups to his other stuff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDcrGq_fyoE&src_vid=hhHPnT_h...
Every language is a game programming language.
The US government has the resources necessary to fight any fight they want to.
15 great holiday gifts for the geek in your life
Right, I imagine it's completely different in a project a lot of people are contributing to and 1-2 people thing where I am familiar with the whole codebase and define the typedefs myself.
In my experience it's mostly due to convenience. When public transportation is available and more convenient, it's heavily used. It needs to be available everywhere and all/most of the time. Car pooling is similar, coordinating with other people, leaving home/work at the same time everyday is difficult, not convenient. If Lyft is widely used, it can solve this problem. No need to have advanced plans.
In fact, in Washington DC, I can see people offering these rides for free to a second person in the car and use the HOV lanes. This is already done from fixed locations without the help of an app. Lyft would make it so much easier.
If people aren't willing to a share car with a stranger for money then Uber wouldn't work. It really is that simple. The evidence suggests that they are. The 'will people share someone's private car?' question has been answered and it's an emphatic "yes". That isn't the whole story here though.

There is a possibility that people wouldn't want to give up the convenience of commuting - having your car at the office so you can go somewhere on your lunch break, leaving the office without having to wait for your carpool ride, carrying large items to the office, and so on - are benefits that you would lose by switching to Lyft. People will have to weigh those benefits against the cost and stress of driving to work. So the question here is really "Do enough people want to give up driving themselves in favour of a cheaper, easier, but mildy inconvenient alternative in the form of Lyft?". The answer to that question is not an obvious "no". There could well be a big enough market to sustain a profitable business.

The fact that people haven't carpooled much before is not evidence that they don't want to or that they can't be persuaded to now; it is simply evidence that the pain of commuting was lower than the pain of organising a carpool. If you can lower the effort people have to put in enough so that it's sufficiently easy to carpool then it is possible change people's minds. Lyft will succeed if they can do that.
Moondust and Duct Tape (2008)
It is unfortunate that prosecutors have so much discretion that they can enforce selective prosecution. On one side they bully people like Aaron Schwartz for victimless misdemeanors by threatening them with decades in prison and on the other side they can let go murders like Darren Wilson with no charges.
It's entirely possible that I'm being biased as an American, but I've never really felt this way. I love public transportation whenever I'm in cities like Chicago or New York City. My issue is that my state (and sometimes my commute) is bigger than most European countries. I've never felt a deep cultural barrier between public transportation and me, it's personally just incredibly inconvenient. I would very much love to see more public transportation options in America, though. But your argument is quite interesting, so thanks!
Yes, I do. In fact, it won't change a damn thing in the daily lives of anyone you know. You have to deal with YOUR problems, not wait for someone (e.g. government) to correct someone else's behaviour (the big boys) so you can feel better. Downvote and whine all you want - your poverty is your problem. There is nothing wrong with the world.
If I recall correctly, it was written by Linus Torvalds a long time ago. I haven't found yet when it originally appeared, but it was probably the pre-Bitkeeper days; I found a discussion about it dated from the last century.

There were many edits to it, by several people; its more recent story can be seen on the kernel git repository. Of course, if Linus disagreed with an edit, it wouldn't go in, so in a way it's still his document.
Actually I'm sure that elites feel a sense of moral duty, for example to their family members and friends. That's a problem we all have: Extending our ethical intuitions to everyone. It's much easier to act ethically with respect to the person right next to you, harder to act ethically to the person on the other side of the planet. But consider also that an egalitarian ethics is a much easier sell to working people, whereas an ethics of nobility is a more natural fit for the ruling class. There's a lot of power to that old idea that economic conditions determine systems of beliefs. Anyway, my point is that it’s not that elites don’t have morals, they just have different ones.
Might you be one of those who reels in horror that Google electronically sniffs your email to serve you ads?
The Pre-Crime Database - or rather the Don't Make Us Use Something We Have Against You Database.

Related: http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/...
Please read what I said a bit more carefully. I don't think people had a problem with Napster because it was the logical extension of copying your friends' tapes. But I think some people have moral qualms about copying tapes and then selling them for more than cost.
Hipster Linux
> it's item (c): "when you use sparse to literally create a
> _new_ type for type-checking."

The problem is that this is presented as an exception that must be (strongly) justified. I think that using typedefs for integer types should be acceptable by default, and there should be specific rules for when to avoid them. The burden of proof is being put on the wrong side.

Even for structs, the argument for typedefs is stronger than the argument against. Even across a purely internal API, the caller often doesn't need to know whether something is an integer, a pointer to a struct, a pointer to a union, a pointer to another pointer, or whatever. Therefore they shouldn't need to know in order to write a declaration, which will become stale and need to be changed if the API ever changes. This is basic information hiding, as known since the 60s. Exposing too much reduces modularity and future flexibility. I've been working on kernels for longer than Linus, and the principle still applies there.

Again, it comes down to defaults and burden of proof. The rule should be to forego struct typedefs only if every user provably needs to know that it's a struct and what's in it (which is often a sign of a bad API). Even then, adding a typedef hardly hurts; anyone who needs to know that a "foo_t" is a "struct foo" and can't figure it out in seconds shouldn't be programming in the kernel or anywhere else.
I keep thinking these two things are related: 1) reliable identity 2) good security.

If you had a reliable identity - well implemented private key crypto or signatures, or perhaps just a fixed IP address - Communications protocols could be created that don't allow anonymous communication. You don't provide identity and they won't accept messages. The thing is, this would also allow private communications which neither corporations or governments want to happen.

So the internet will remain insecure so long as companies want to read your stuff for "ad targeting" and governments want to read your stuff to "stop crime". Got that last part?
If LSP defines this why do people keep modeling things this way? More importantly, why do all the type systems let me create models this way. They have one job: to help me with correctness. Looks like that failed. So you see my point.
You're not understanding their idea behind typedef. IMO, their lines for usage are extremely good when adhered too.

The note about integers is worth complaining a bit about, I agree there is merit to typedef'ing integers in some situations, but the Kernel standard agrees with that in those instances (And the example is bad, there are instances of 'flag' typedefs in the kernel). In general the note about integers is just to discourage spamming typedef's everywhere.

More importantly then integers though, their note about making opaque objects with a typedef is extremely good practice, as it makes it easy to distinguish when it is or isn't expected that you'll be accessing the members directly.

The point of those rules are to allow typedef to actually be useful and communicate some information. If you just allow typedef'ing everything in every situation, then whether or not something is typedef'd becomes useless information to the reader.
when a prosecutor oversteps their authority like this, they should be punished in some way.
Uber Jobs Analysis: Becoming a Political Company
If it's government funded they should provide you a PhD grant. If not, you should be careful before going into that PhD.
Obligatory:

http://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentence...

Most importantly: when you are charged with many counts of the same crime, the DOJ likes to write press releases suggesting your sentence is the product of the maximum sentence of each count. But that is not how sentencing works in reality. Reality works more like this: the judge uses sentencing guidelines to figure out a sentence for the "worst" single count you're charged with, and that's how much time you serve.
It sounds like the actions went something like this: Modern Settings places a large order for 100k oz platinum from BASF. BASF buys mined platinum stock at price Y and takes 1 month to produce the refined platinum order. BASF doesn't want to be exposed to price movements with platinum that swing +/-20%. (if the price of platinum drops, BASF doesn't want to make thinner margins on a product they've already produced)

Therefore, BASF calls up their friendly bankers, Goldman and HSBC, to reduce BASF's exposure to platinum price swings through derivatives. BASF hears both banks' proposals over respective dinners. The conversations between the teams range from difficulties with the business, the client that BASF is dealing with, and what could be done to make everyone's job a little easier.

The relationships get cozy over time and BASF starts an open flow of information about who's purchasing what metals so Goldman and HSBC can 'just handle' the derivatives BASF should buy. Unscrupulously, the banks start trading on the information on when large orders will be placed on which metals markets and get discovered insider trading.
I suggest we prepare a giant banquet for the poor. (you will read this in my voice.)
Mega was really just a heavy-handed sales funnel [1] forcing people to pay to pirate and paying people to upload popular content.

Dropbox doesn't deserve the comparison, dropbox restrict sharing to make themselves unattractive for piracy. The similarities stop with "storing heaps of files".

[1] e.g. on the streaming video side megavideo they had a 72 minute per day limit on watching videos. On the download site you were throttled and made to jump through a bunch of hoops to download one file at a time for free. These were not nice sites.
People waste a lot of time in making things pleasant to look at.
Higher Speeds Will Not Provide Us with Better Broadband
Promptly? No, it took several years to shut Napster down.
Boolean Blindness (2011)
Corruption, and the sense of entitlement it gives powerful people when they can get away with it, certainly does (in the long term) make a difference to every person on the planet when it is kept under control.
"Get a decent editor and don't leave whitespace at the end of lines."

Trailing whitespace always raises a huge red flag for me whenever I look at someone's code. It's not just sloppy, it often makes diff output so noisy you can't detect real changes to the code.
It's a buoyancy/displacement question. Similar to the one that follows. ;-)
That's just rationalization. It's basically saying that some typedefs are OK because Linus is used to them, but he doesn't want to take the few seconds to figure out any new ones. The cases for typedefs shouldn't be treated as exceptions. The cases against them should.
Take every single penny back and 10 times more. Put everyone involved in prison.
I agree with you. I think structs help readability specially we using function pointers within structures.
Would it be out of line to suggest a new naming convention for struct typedefs and pointer typedefs i.e _t for typedegs and _tp for typedeg pointers
While I agree that the amount of discretion is too high, Darren Wilson was not "let go" by the prosecution; the grand jury decided that there was not enough evidence to indict him.
I've been thinking for a while about something: Americans really need to live through a Communist/Stasi era that brings them to their knees and to live in fear of their neighbors or anyone working in the government for at least 2 decades or so.

Maybe after that ends with a revolution to be remembered, such nonsense would stop being proposed at least for another century or two.

Many Americans seem to quick to agree with mass surveillance and absolute power of the state if it they promise (without even proof of it) that such power will stop some common crime - without taking a second to recognize that if the state is so powerful so many more crimes will be done by that government against the population.

It seems many Americans have lost forgotten why their rights are important. That's why I think maybe they need to go through a really oppressive time, to remember.
How to manage accidental complexity in software projects
A couple of these have been Mythbusters edutainment TV show topics. I am almost certain both the pigeons and the balloon have been on the show. I'm not sure how they'd use explosives to test the pigeon one, but I'm sure it would be interesting to watch. (edited to add, I just figured it out, they'll put frozen chicken parts from the supermarket in a really big box on top of some explosive, and put the works on a scale...)

The iron bars is more fun when analogized to the famous barometer building height challenge where the goal isn't someones abstract idea of simplest but to come up with the most unusual way to determine the answer (for the barometer I like the idea of tossing it off the roof and timing the impact, or bribing the building superintendent with a really nice barometer). For the iron bars I think a funny way to solve the problem is to heat one bar above the curie point and after it anneals back to room temp, if the bars don't stick to each other I guess the heat treated bar WAS a magnet. Another fun trick if you don't trust your string suspension to not bias the hanging position WRT north pole, simply spin each bar in each axis and one bar will have a funkier deceleration curves for various axes.
That "initial commit" was the import of the whole kernel tree into git, ignoring any previous history; that commit having been made by Linus does not mean any particular file was written by Linus.

You should instead look into historical repositories like https://archive.org/details/git-history-of-linux, which go further back; however, before Bitkeeper the authorship of each change was not tracked in detail (that historical repository IIRC does not have the detailed Bitkeeper history, but there is another repository somewhere which has it).
And how do you differentiate 'IS' with 'is'?
And Scribd, and YouTube etc, etc.
Review of the new Firefox browser built for developers
Still no, you cannot lose a move in the opening. There is no "pass" move in chess. In fact any initial move no matter how wasteful you try to make it, will very soon alter the game. Even rook pawn a3 or h3 will soon have an influence in the game and cannot be ignored. It's very hard to craft the equivalent of a lost move in the early game - say, use an extra move with the bishop or something like that - and it's virtually impossible without the collaboration of the opponent.

Try it yourself vs a few instances of your favourite chess software or just here http://www.chess.com/play/computer (requires Java). Open a few instances and see how can you chuck away a move.
> I don't expect that marginalization of entire groups of people will be in vogue again any time soon.

While we've definitely made progress towards racial, gender and sexual equality, this still happens every day, and may not be a fixable problem. Democrats routinely marginalize Republicans, and vice versa. Even those who benefit from the recent shifts in favor of gay marriage equality routinely marginalize bigamists, or polygamists. There's always a group of people not in vogue, and the way in which we deal with these things is somewhat absurdist.

The current de rigueur is for society to realize that our unjust treatment of a special group is unfair. In the 60s, it was our unfair treatment of blacks. In the 90s, it was our unfair treatment of gays. Then we work to get them declared as a protected class, and then we fight for their rights using that protected status as leverage.

Instead, we should do a better job of understanding what rights entitle us to, and then simply afford those rights to all people, whether or not they belong to a majority class, a protected class, or an unpopular minority.

Tribe mentality will always cause us to identify more with people we can more easily identify, and it will always cause us to mentally place others as being outside our tribes. Creating special rules for the disenfranchised du jour just reinforces that there will always be groups of people fighting for some form of equality.
Flic lets you create a button for anything [Product]
Bunch of them in there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_organization
Germany to Legislate 30 Percent Quota for Women on Company Boards
First of all insider trading is largely legal in the commodities market, and secondly this case doesn't appear to be about insider trading, but about front running which is something different.
What Facebook Can Teach You
Attlasian
I used it for testing Spare Matrix kernels I wrote for my Uni thesis.

However, god knows why this site is considered news worthy. I mean it's the same as it was yesterday, and the day before...