skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Strictly speaking, if my wife and I worked 3 hour days, and were paid for 3 hour days, we could make a living. It wouldn't be a great one, but it would be possible at our current pay rate.

A surprising number of working professionals are at that level, but some factors prevent it:

1) It's simply more efficient to have one person working on a problem than 2 or 3...e.g. the mythical man month. The problems I work on don't get smaller just because I work less. I can either work on it 3 times as long, which puts my company at a competitive disadvantage over companies that have employees willing to work full-time. Or we can have 3 people working on it, which, for a variety of reasons turns out to also be less efficient than 1 person working on a task and is also a competitive disadvantage.

2) The standard of living at 3 hours a day is significantly less than the one I get to live working 8. Is it sufficient? sure, is it nice? No. Even if I took the cut and downsized, many of the hobbies I enjoy now, I wouldn't have the money or space for any longer. I'm also able to live well below my means and save up significant amount of money for eventual retirement. I can't stay in the labor force 3 times as long to save up the same amount.

You might argue that the owners of capital capture all the gains from technological advance, but it would be wrong. This model only works if there is only one entity operating in the economy that's advancing. In a competitive economy technological advances allow you to undercut your competitors either by offering the same item/service at a cheaper price, or by offering more at the same price. Doing this, you end up shaving into your profit regularly. In general, the profits at the most technologically advanced companies tend to be among the slimmest.

Profits are also eaten up as reinvestment in continuous technological advance. R&D is hideously expensive, and it fails most of the time. Economies that send all the profits home with the workers tend to also have stagnant technological advances and rely on espionage against economies that do innovate to maintain parity.
I love it when people contribute instead of just opening issues

I understand the sentiment, but please keep in mind that the set of people who use a piece of software and are able to file a useful issue does not always (or probably never does) overlap completely with the set of people who are able to contribute code to a project.

Well thought out issues can be valuable to an OSS project, and should IMO be thought of as a form of contributing. Same with documention.
> It's okay; generally, a project will eventually be picked up by someone else. All I ask of project maintainers is that they are willing to give the reins to someone else when it becomes clear that they no longer have the time for the project

I tend to agree, but this is actually the only thing I can think of that doesn't work as well as I wish it did. Or could be improved. There's quite a lot of abandoned projects, or ones that seem active but in fact lack this steering / leadership. You can submit a PR to one of those projects and never hear back, or bump into long delays that have nothing to do with the quality of your own code or its place within the project.

In those cases, renaming the project or just forking it doesn't really create a replacement. Nobody knows which fork is the one to follow from now on. Even if lots of people +1 a PR, it's still "hanging there". And this gets exponentially more tricky with many different PRs from different contributors for the same project.

This is more a cultural than a technological issue, but worth mentioning and thinking about. I wonder if there are some tools that can help the community as a whole have a stronger force. Perhaps some voting system, or a better weighting system to point to the "strongest" fork... just a couple of very rough ideas.

* Use the fork, luke.
> Also, am I the only one that is mildly disappointed that Coke's headquarters isn't shaped like a huge Coke can?

This is absolutely ridiculous. Do you expect Subway's headquarters to be shaped like a cold-cut sandwich?

In all seriousness, The Coca-Cola Company produces and distributes only their syrup concentrate to franchisees, whom bottle it for sale. Yes they have a subsidiary which oversees North American production and distribution of beverages, however that is the only one they own and operate.

And, with that in mind, their headquarters should resemble a large bag of goo instead of their trademark bottles.
I prefer the simple pleasures of Daffy Dook:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJdmmSTvw8
You are glad he said what? He rules out a Sony insider and says NK must be involved in some way unless someone did it for the Lulz.
In recent years (say, the past 4-6), imo inclusionists have actually more or less won on the "notability" question. Nowadays "verifiability" tends to trump it: if you can write a well-referenced article, this is taken as ipso facto proof of its notability also. I tend to write articles almost exclusively on obscure subjects, but with solid references, and my articles as a result don't get deleted. The trouble comes more when it's difficult to cite good sources. But if it's difficult to cite good sources, the whole Wikipedia model, which is dependent on citing good sources, breaks down: even if an article were allowed, there'd be nothing suitable to put in it. There are definitely articles I thought of writing but didn't, because I couldn't find good sources on the subject.

In some cases I think the real fix is outside Wikipedia: if "the literature" (books, magazines, newspapers, journals, other encyclopedias, etc.) have not yet covered a subject, the first order of business is to fix that gap. But I don't think Wikipedia is the right place to go about fixing it. IMO Wikipedia makes most sense with somewhat limited ambition: to summarize the existing literature, with references. That's already a pretty large endeavor, especially when you include summarizing the existing literature globally and multilingually. When the existing literature itself is lacking, I think that should also be fixed, but not by Wikipedia.

Once the problem is fixed in "the literature", it's then much easier to fix it in Wikipedia. For example I sometimes look at the MIT Press new-books list, or the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy new-articles list, and write at least short new Wikipedia articles on subjects that they cover which Wikipedia doesn't yet cover. For me at least, that "source-first" subject selection tends to be the most relaxing way to write on Wikipedia: instead of picking a subject you want to cover and then finding sources, find good sources and ask, "what do these cover that Wikipedia doesn't?". That way of working has a good impedance match to Wikipedia's goal of being a sources-cited summary of the existing literature.

I wrote something more long-winded on that subject a bit ago: http://www.kmjn.org/notes/wikipedia_notability_verifiability...
In Japan, they eat KFC:

http://www.fastcompany.com/3040263/its-not-christmas-in-japa...
Dude your story is hilarious. Totally enjoyed it. Keep writing.
Quite an interesting read, but it's just stating the obvious repeatedly. Time equals money. And of course, with slower economics coupled with ever-increasing competition of the global market money becomes more valuable. But why do we feel so? It seems, there are some socio-cultural drivers for this need of the resources.

People tend to want same things their neighbours have, or more. Today you feel your neighbour is not just someone living across the fence, but also someone you've just chatted on Skype (across the continents). Our sense of what Normal is is based on the cultural environment we're living in. And with technological progress, modern communications and mass media this sense skews towards images propagated by those who are involved in producing more of this kind of information i.e. western world.

This flip side of this process is what might have looked like a decent living now seems less so. When you live in the area with life expectancy about 60 years and suddenly you realize your friends live somewhere where average is 74, you become more stressed to maximize your efforts. So my idea is that most people who work extra hours do so not to get rich, but trying to avoid ending up worse than average.

So what is the way we can free our time so we could sit on the "park benches with pretty girls" more often?

The only obvious answer I see is to improve the overall life quality of the poorest. This sounds frighteningly lefty, but this notion is based on the realization of one of humanity's ultimate goals: providing personal freedom for everybody to do what person feels preferable for him. The non-destructive way of achieving it is taking off the stress and fears of less income-maximizing life style. When you're certain you still will be well fed and able to afford medical assistance even without extra-hours at work you'll be more inclined to do what fulfils you as a person.

At this point it's natural to discuss the old issues of exploiting social care and parasitic lifestyle in market economy, which might be possible in societies with high social guarantees. This is an axiological issue and answers depend on personal senses of equity and sympathy, and it's a hot topic on its own. However, scientific and technological progress is what I think the only plausible potential way of improving the overall life conditions thus leaving more time for leisure.

*Some context on happiness vs inequality:
Paul Alois. Income Inequality and Happiness: Is There a Relationship?
www.lisdatacenter.org/wps/liswps/614.pdf

Shigehiro Oishi, Selin Kesebir and Ed Diener. Income Inequality and Happiness.
http://www.factorhappiness.at/downloads/quellen/S13_Oishi.pd...
I sincerely doubt the mainstream media will give Schneier any air time, as his view point isn't sensationalist enough to sell well.

But I also think his skepticism is spot on. This "explanation" is too conveniently tidy for me to find it all that believable.
Nice copypaste of my article :)
I don't think anyone is trying to partition projects into disjunct sets. It's more of a continuum. I think the idea of "app-iness" just captures the interactivity and statefullness of an experience. Incidentally, that additional complexity is exactly what the Web technologies were initially ill-suited for and what frameworks were built to help manage.
>"Great, that means we can double production, which will earn me rewards because it will impress my superiors!"

That would be a Marxist-Leninist system (or rather a Marxist-Stalinist one).

Marxism doesn't say anything other than the society en masse and through democratic means has a say on what the level of production is for each sector. They could have just said "that's enough" if they prioritized leisure.

Of course USSR had two problems: it was underdeveloped, and it faced huge dangers from outside ("capitalistic") powers, so it had to ramp-up its production pronto (else, it would have been squashed by Germany in WWII, for example, something which the industrialization prevented). A single country (or even a small alliance) cannot adapt that well to doing what it wants (e.g. emphasize leisure) without falling prey to other powers around it. That was the whole hoopla with the notion of "socialism in one country" btw ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_One_Country ).
Get you, I think that relying on a framework to teach you that is a problem. Once you've used or researched one or more frameworks in an area you learn the successful patterns (right down to file/folder/test/method naming). At that point the whole enforced structure can be a disadvantage.
Oh yes, I forgot about the pop-up ads whenever you're stopped. :)

Waze's routing just did not satisfy me. It tended to prefer highly complex routes, sometimes just for the sake of avoiding a tiny little stretch of road where it thought there was heavy traffic. Half the time, it was wrong about the more complex route being faster. When it was right, though, the added labor of following that route wasn't really worth it, because it would only save me a negligible amount of time.

Waze claims to learn your favorite routes. It never seemed to learn anything at all about my favorite routes. As far as I could tell, this feature didn't exist.

The ride sharing update not only made it much more frustrating to share the ride -- before you had a great link you could just paste or share anywhere, now it's some sort of Waze-specific notification which goes away and gets lost after you click on it -- but it also made the ride sharing maps nearly non-functional. Whenever my girlfriend or I would use it, it would almost never actually update the other person's position on the map. We tried this several times over the course of more than a month and the failure rate was very high.

In my opinion, if there were bugs causing it to crash before (which I never experienced), they should have just fixed those bugs. The interface "improvement" was a huge step back for me.

Maybe all this is fixed now. I hope so. But it wasn't that long ago that I switched away from it -- about a month or two after the ride sharing update.
"America" isn't, strictly speaking, "The United States of America" - but when people use the term, we all know of which is spoken. Likewise "England".

Can't resist...

Guildenstern: I don't believe in it anyway.

Rosencrantz: What?

Guildenstern: England.

Rosencrantz: Just a conspiracy of cartographers, then?
When you to try and make someone look bad it does matter. "I didn't see bob on instant messenger, and I called him several times and I left him a voice mail. I'm not able to get my task done because I still have not heard back from Bob."
Ask HN: What non-profits might the HN crowd be interested in?
Christmas is a great time to re-up on generosity and giving. What non-profits are there that are particularly of interest to the HN crowd? e.g. YC non-profits, or program to help low-income students learn through code
This really, really deserved more upvotes. I'm really glad I caught it. This effect bugs the hell out of me on newer TVs. I can't help but be completely distracted by how obvious it is that the set is a set and the actors are just people pretending. This explains the phenomenon better than anything else I've read.
He didn't rule out a Sony insider.

> It's possible, but that employee or ex-employee would have also had to possess the requisite hacking skills, which seems unlikely.

Considering the number of laid off techies, I think it is somewhat "more than unlikely".

I don't know where you got the second part.
You might enjoy this headquarters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Longaberger_Company#mediavi...
FUZIX and UZIX runs on an Z80
It would be interesting to note both sides engage in some underhanded tricks to win their case. This is not a one sided argument - even though this article would make you believe otherwise.

All you have to do is look at the John Gotti cases or the OJ Simpson case to see some pretty questionable defense tactics.
What/where is your article?
>Particularly with the advent of the internet, there isn't that much stuff that we NEED to be away from work to do. We can easily organize our personal finances, research and schedule various appointments, order groceries, etc. all the while coordinating with one's spouse.

Nice theory, but fails down at all those pour sobs working overtime and not allowed to even piss outside of company schedulle -- from factories to call centers etc...
BTW, clickjacking was fixed few weeks ago and http://homakov.github.io/nocaptcha.html isn't working anymore.
That article only mentions Pittsburgh once, to say that that's where Duolingo is based.

I searched and couldn't find articles about Duolingo moving out of Pittsburgh, although they did recently move to a bigger office in Pittsburgh: http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/blog/innovation/2013/0...
Distributed Algorithms in NoSQL Databases (2012)
Christmas gift for GitHub users: instant search on users/repos
[2009] Corrected [2011]
This one http://homakov.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-no-captcha-problem.h... they also link my PoC in the end. Instead of linking "the source"?
The problem with 'questioning the existence of licenses' is that Uber always plays the same tune, world wide - even if those licenses work very different in different locales.

Not every taxi system works as bad as San Francisco's and in some areas (eg in Germany), when counting by the numbers Uber is the bully: tons of money and international reach vs. regional taxi companies with a handful of cars.

People tend to be quite opposed to 'rent-seeking schemes' on hn. Except when it comes to Uber, which is _the_ example of a rent seeking, as the 20% parasite between customers and drivers while trying to tear down the advantages of the existing system that get in their way (safety regulations, accessibility guarantees).
I agree. You write well. Make this into a series.
http://homakov.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-no-captcha-problem.h...
for some unexpicable reasons, in italy we get 80's movies (Trading Places (1983) is the top) and asterix cartoons.
I used to wait eagerly for those, to be frank.
http://homakov.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/the-no-captcha-problem...

It's not exactly a copy-paste though.
I agree with the other replies but when you talk about learning from Rails, I agree. I also don't think using Rails is a bad idea. However I find the idea that if you don't use a framework to literally force you down a path you're on your own, that chaos will be dogging the project, that you end up with massive re-invention, to be incorrect.

Rails is also a bit of a special case I think, it was a massive ecosystem that dominated the community it was in. That isn't true of any JS client-side framework right now so choosing one isn't necessarily a sensible investment when you look 3+ so years out.
Drivers already keep 80% of their fares through Uber.
> "React isn't a framework, it's a library!" There I said it!

React is a framework though, for the most part it calls you(r components), you don't call it outside of the original binding. It's not a huge one, but it's still one.

> I'm sure sometime in the future browser's DOM tree estimation and computation would be so efficient that you wouldn't need a Virtual DOM anymore.

Browsers already batch changes and defer recomputations as much as they can. They can't significantly improve the model because it requires a different abstraction which is not available under the existing DOM.

Also, you can use a VDOM without using React and its component, several VDOM-only pure=js libraries have sprouted up e.g. https://github.com/Matt-Esch/virtual-dom (the basis for elm-html, and the Mercury react-like framework)
3 Often-Ignored Aspects of Content Marketing
But they have a trademark on the bottle design.
Privacy analyst: ‘Santa is the ultimate role model for the NSA’
Not all of these things can be solved by a control system alone, at least not without a ton of investment in RFID and other auto-id infrastructure. Some human is still going to have to administrate your system, and he or she needs to be educated and trained, and they need to value security.

In the article's case, for example, they made it sound like the "hacker" basically conned someone into giving him access to the remote management interface. The only way you can fix a problem like that in software is to make the interface totally inaccessible.
I see his argument about being primarily about the future, that as the standards fill in the gaps investing in libraries will become less of an attraction.

Don't forget he was part of the REST/ROA group who were belittled when they said that Web standards were an alternative to the ridiculous number of Web Service standards and he was quite right in that case.
For me the issue is that if you're going to pick a model, you're kind of stuck with something like Marxism-Leninism or Maoism if you want to be able to do any serious hypothesizing.

Vanilla Marxism is the abstract base class of political ideologies. You can't actually instantiate it, because Marx left too much unsaid when it came to the nuts and bolts of how he thought a society should function on a day-to-day basis.
This is seriously the level of discourse here? Just flagrant outright lying?
Is voice mail recording device at home still popular in US? Often seen in US movies but such device has never caught on in Singapore/Malaysia.
Doesn't async/wait solves the same problem in a more elegant way?
In many countries exerting influence in the democratic process is heavily tied to the monetary resources of the person doing the influencing. Given that mechanism it might be easier to remove the wealth inequality than to dismantle the inequality in the democratic process directly.
Isn't (2) a relative issue? In other words, if everyone else also worked three hours a day instead of eight, then the prices of goods would change to reflect that. People with a higher hourly wage would still enjoy a much better standard of living, but the effect of "I'm working less than half as much as everybody else" would be normalized.

The problem is that this just isn't an equilibrium point. If everybody worked three hour days, you could double your income by just working six hour days. The extra money would probably be too tempting, and before long everybody would be back up to eight, at which point the marginal benefit of adding on more hours seems to hit a threshold of sorts.

It's similar to the issue of dual income households. How was it that in the 50s and earlier very few families needed two incomes to afford a nice middle class lifestyle? The answer, partially, is that society had found this pseudo-equilibrium point where no families had two incomes, and so the market prices reflected that at the time.

This was sustained only by social pressure against certain demographics working, mainly women, and when those pressures were finally broken down dual income households started becoming more common. This was a huge increase in prosperity for the initial wave of dual earners, but as it became widespread housing prices came to reflect the doubled earning capacity, and now most middle class folks find they struggle to afford a home with two incomes.
Sony will release the Interview on YouTube
If you were playing poker at a casino, would you be content if the dealer took 20% of every pot?
We are just now picking ours:

Apache or IIS webserver

Javascript includes Server Side Includes or SSI for templating system - write once, use everywhere

doT.js is a possible contender at http://olado.github.io/doT/

Etherpad server for content creation ( think Wiki or shared Google Docs where those invited can write, update and edit documents for later placement ).

Javascript JQuery library ( demos here http://jquerydemo.com )

Javascript html5shiv - Makes previous IE9 browsers know some HTML5 https://github.com/aFarkas/html5shiv

Bootstrap framework - http://getbootstrap.com

Brackets.io by Adobe or text editor of your choice - http://brackets.io

BBEdit - text editor ( commercial product ) - http://www.barebones.com/products/bbedit/

Photoshop - images ( commercial product ) -

databases - ?

Nodejs - Node is a javascript framework https://www.npmjs.com and http://nodejs.org/download/

Any tips welcome.
Pretty-printing Emacs Lisp code
You seem to have intentionally misrepresented options 1 and 3. The society originally described includes in option 1 supporting the fax repair man while he dives into founding a startup, starting a homely little cliffside cafe, busking on the streets or whatever else. It does not mandate that the recipient of the support continue to pursue a dead end against all evidence and logic.
You are presupposing that toys make girls be girls. All evidence is to the contrary and suggests girls toys are made and sold because girls want them. Even in infancy, before any "social" effects can be a cause, sex based toy preferences exist. In fact, they even exist in other primates who clearly are not part of our society.