skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> owning property in the Bay Area.

Ah, the American dream. So attainable.
Technology collaborations are limited to a very narrow subset of music. As an often acoustic/folk musician, I expect collaboration to be a same-space realtime thing. Classical, jazz, and most rock musicians have the same limitations. You need very high bandwidth communication - subtle visual cues as well as audio cues.
This is a great point, but we also know that institutional, internal information distribution systems, of the kind I mentioned, don't fall prey to that. (They may fall prey to other things -- agreeing with the boss, groupthink, etc.)

Anyway the reason why is because they have different incentives. The question is how to make incentives like that work for society, hopefully while keeping the critical independence of the media. We can't imagine that now, but we have new funding forms like Kickstarter, and Wikipedia is an existence proof for achieving consensus about what claims are well-sourced.

But I think we agree that it's not a great idea to run society on an information system that gets paid every time it stimulates our basest impulses for the lowest possible cost. The endgame of that is Buzzfeed.
College Smart – Starry Eyed (Official Audio)
So I prefer non-lyrical trip-hop. I wouldn't know I have that preference without discovering it through Spotify. You're telling me I should now start buying those albums on iTunes if I want to actually vector money toward those artists? But I can get most of them for almost free on Amazon Prime. So why not just send money to the artist directly?

I listen to Spotify and Pandora almost exclusively. Mainly Spotify. I probably listened to 300 tracks of Emancipator a month on Spotify. At 0.00786 per play, that works out to 2.85. For the last 2 years: 2.85 * 24. That's $56.59. I seriously doubt I would have spent that much on iTunes. In fact, from their site, I can only spend $46 on their music.

http://emancipator.shop.redstarmerch.com/Dept.aspx?cp=69283_...

In the long run, it seems to me that Emancipator is winning on Spotify, even if I overestimated by a factor of 3 and only listen to 100 tracks a month. Presumably, I will be listening to Emancipator for a long time.
We are a very social species, the culture we create is our natural environment.
It really shows the naivety of some of these marketplace users. This is how the "real" drug game works with people getting scammed and robbed everyday. Its not somehow different because its online.
I think there is a a general feeling of entitlement today as well.

Since you mentioned it, I wonder how much the percentage of graduates that actually had to take out loans has changed.
With barely 200 hours of flight under my belt, I think I haven't played the game enough, because I haven't reached that intuition yet to see this article's insight as obvious. What this means, of course, is that I need to go back playing more KSP :).

Seriously, it's amazing how this game can let you understand space travel and make you want to know the math behind it.
I find it interesting that someone who is making a news site would say that most of the news is "bullshit and a worthless time suck". Are you really saying that just 0.1% of the news on your site has value? Perhaps you should take Swartz's advice and stop fighting to improve something that has so little value to you.
More videos added to the company's YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0JDc9dooc1xATvMdG7MMLQ
Sendgrid.com unavailable, mail delays (EU traffic still routed via US)
Leap Buses Are Hitting San Francisco’s Streets This Week
Am I the only one here who is tired by artist complaining that we don't sufficiently support their preferred lifestyle? Also, the whole argument is straw-man, read what "pjc50" wrote.
That might be true as a rule of thumb for the general population. Although historically people who get large payouts (eg, lottery winners) tend to do very poorly with them. And for someone who is truly "good with money" to the extent of avoiding all lifestyle inflation and investing as much as possible, the periodic payouts are definitely better.

For the sake of argument, let's say that you have two positions which will pay the same total cash compensation. BigCorp's job will pay it out in equal amounts over 5 years, whereas NewCo's job will pay out 10% each year for 4 years, and then 60% in year 5.

BigCorp will almost certainly result in a lower overall tax bill because much of each year's income is taxed at lower rates. NewCo will result in a lower tax bill for 4 years due to the lower income, but year 5 will probably put a large amount of compensation in the top marginal tax bracket.

Also, the BigCorp job will afford more opportunities for outside investing (stock market, real estate, whatever) and possibly more free time to do it in. So with BigCo you'll have had four years of compounding investment growth before NewCo really gets started on it.
Can you ask them to reimburse you for the trip? Explain that you run a business on small margins so as to provide the best value for your customers.
Let's not overstate things. Apple is roughly twice as large as Microsoft as far as the numbers go, with 30K fewer employees. Jobs' decision to own the entire tech stack paid off for them handsomely.
You need to add the time dimension to your statement "Some classes of people will do well, and some will lose out". The timeframe is not a couple of years, which are needed to transfrom one class of labor into another class of labor. This transformation ( the class of losers becoming the class of winners) takes more than three generations. Imagine the social consequences of this.

I am not a Luddite. The government policy is run by the super winners, whose interest is not so much about the losers, except by getting votes from the losers by throwing some breadcrumbs.
I think you guys make it sound a whole lot more glamorous than it really is. I played those city-building games back then (Caesar, Pharaoh and later Zeus). And do note, I absolutely loved them.

Caesar 3 basically had delivery "serfs" that would move stuff from one place to another. Each building had it's own unit to get supplies (materials to do it's thing), and it would simply retrieve it from the relevant store, so it had to path-find across a very simple road network to get to the destination, then back.

As for the other "agents", they were simply "roamers" that would randomly walk out of their "base" building, and go straight until they hit an intersection, and pick one at random.

There were no "dwellers" that would go to work. You simply had population, and buildings got magically filled with workers if they head dwellings nearby.

#Edit. Forgot to mention, you could have as many "agents" on the same road tile as needed. There were no collision checks, nor were sections of the road uni-directional.
It's not that expectations are high. It's that the games would be outstanding if EA hadn't crappified them. Many of these games have very player-hostile elements designed purely to suck more money out of people.

Maybe it's just me, but for all people like to point out how expansion packs back in the day used to be bad, I don't remember ANYTHING on the level we're seeing with how aggressively they try to milk their customers at the expensive of the experience.
This Screen May Be Terrible for You, and Now We Know Why
Cisco posts kit to empty houses to dodge NSA chop shops
probably about the same time that haskell agrees to leave the academia and discover the real world
I use the (I think still considered "beta" or something) Linux desktop version and it does not know when I turn the volume down.

When commercials come on, I quickly mute the machine, and I get a nice popup with the next song title to let me know commercials are done.

It's nice because I find radio commercials particularly obnoxious--far more than television--and spotify will sometimes play them back to back.

Speaking of which: their radio algorithm must be broken. I can select an entire genre--say classical music--and start getting repeats within a couple of hours.
The really funny part is that this garbage is written on a computer designed in the SV by a dirt bag using a phone and software designed there and published on a website that can be accessed only because of the SV.
I'm no physics major but I'm pretty sure this is a bunch of horse shit and the elliptical orbits are explained perfectly by General Relativity.
> Ironically, we can attribute the flourishing of trash articles like these to the new media landscape that has arrived due to the emergence of new technologies...

While I generally agree, it's up to us as a society to determine how new technologies are used. There's a difference between doing nuclear research and the research itself being the reason for nuclear weapons. People were responsible for the weapons / using technology in that way, but it is a fine line!
The first startup I worked for, after taxes, made me over 1m and I was employee 42.
Never mind that with Windows 8 they introduced (yet another) "app store". Between that and Office going service by way of Office 365, and they no longer need to sell Windows to bring in the money. May as well give it away and entice people to sign up for their services (Some Skydrive space for free, hotmail/live/outlook email, etc etc etc).

Thing is that MS has alwasy used the home market as leverage for their corporate sales. This via "total cost of ownership" claims. It boils down to the idea that home users are familiar with basic MS product use already, so the corporations don't have to spend as much time training employees if they buy MS software.
What types of positions offer large pre-IPO grants? How were you hired? (referral from friend already working there or were you headhunted or what?) Were you aware of the IPO plans before applying, and is this the sort of strategy that is repeatable?
The second video you link is 240p which is always going to have awful quality. You can't really use that for a comparison (unless I guess you force the first one to 240p too).
Thanks -- it started working, and I've updated the comment above.
Yup, I've also used it (the old version, I guess) to great effect to clean up a legacy code base which had defines for things like Amiga and VMS...
In an alternate universe, Sleepify and Spotify are Browserify plug-ins.
A vetting process seems like a useful filter, but it's not a sufficient one. Vetting doesn't necessarily affect stories that are factually accurate but irrelevant.

What is your definition of "important"? Or, more importantly, what definition of "important" does your community of "news junkies" apply? Because almost by definition, those "news junkies" have a different idea of what's important than other people do.
Much of the science points to blue light as the main problem in disrupting circadian rhythms. I started using a blue light filter app on my phone when using it close to the time I'm planning to sleep. Anyone else try one of those apps? Are they bullshit?
W3C Multimodal Interaction standards
Europe latency issues still unresolved (after 2 days) to blame probably the data center! https://support.sendgrid.com/hc/en-us/articles/204368438-16-...
Agreed. I especially agree that yellow journalism in particular is a useless distraction.

That being said, there is a certain beauty to experiencing things in the moment.
Getting started guide for OpenStack contributors
The LA Parking Violations Bureau Is Actually Run by Xerox
You would probably find http://www.retroreport.org/ interesting
It can probably also be put to less nefarious uses. Here's one that comes to mind for a web based chat client: You can use it to detect if a user is currently at his/her desktop or away. Unless the chat window is the current active window, I think this would be hard/impossible to do otherwise.
This is actually a somewhat controversial claim, academically. There's pretty strong evidence for a "critical period" for acquiring a native-sounding accent, and some evidence that certain adult learners still occasionally mess up minor grammatical details after decades of immersion. But other studies suggest that language-learning ability trails off gradually with age in much the same way that, say, physical ability does. A 35-year-old can still get in pretty good shape if they work at it.

I know plenty of people whose language-learning strategy is basically, "Put myself in situations where I need to use the language and I can puzzle things out. If I get curious, maybe look something up once in a while." It's not quite like childhood acquisition, but neither is it a completely different process.
copy? unless you want to play on two machines at the same time, you don't need it, it's steam after all
No matter what the cost, it'd be a cost be damned situation.
In fairness, CNN was only started in 1980. In its beginning, it may very well have been much more intelligent and mature. Now that the TV news business model (and cable for that matter) is much more mature, it's a race to the bottom.
9 Years Old Boy Demonstrated How to Hack Android Smartphone
I wonder what the average is? Because that per stream rate obviously changes depending on how many streams you listen to. 350 sounds rather small. I listen at work, in the car, sometimes I listen to comedy. I might double that number in which case the difference becomes more and more negligible until I get to the point where I'm paying less per stream then what spotify currently pays. I can see this getting extremely complex.
Semi-correct but terribly argued.

First, Silicon Valley sucks but it's not the fault of "technology". The Valley has been successfully conquered by the mainstream business elite. They've won, we've lost. It's not our territory anymore.

The corporate elite has been wiping out jobs for generations and, to be fair, that's not always a bad thing to be doing. The crime isn't that jobs end. It's that these corporations won't pay to train people up into the new jobs that are created, dodge their taxes and therefore emasculate the government, and lobby for an economic status quo that is harmful to most people.

Second, "technology" (as a force) generates wealth but doesn't distribute it well. There are a number of reasons for that, but one is that engineers don't care enough to change the distribution of newly-created wealth from what it is. If the engineers who build technology are at fault, it's through inaction rather than malice. We'd rather be curing cancer than helping businessmen unemploy people, but when you look at the current socio-political structure of society, it's only set up to go one way on that.
> A subsidy of popular music by indie fans

That's an interesting problem — this is only true if indie fans listen to less music than pop fans.

Imagine there are 10 users, 9 of whom only listen to pop, one only listens to indy, all of whom pay 10$. Now consider two scenarios: A. everybody listens to 100 tracks per month, or B. pop listeners stream 110 tracks per month, and the indy listener streams 10 track per month

Scenario A:

9 pop * 100 tracks = 900 tracks streamed
1 indy * 100 tracks = 100 tracks streamed
total 1000 tracks streamed

total to pop artists = 900/1000 * 100$ = 90$
total to indy artists = 100/1000 * 100$ = 10$

Scenario B:

9 pop * 110 tracks = 990 tracks streamed
1 indy * 10 tracks = 10 tracks streamed
total 1000 tracks streamed

total to pop artists = 990/1000 * 100$ = 99$
total to indy artists = 10/1000 * 100$ = 1$

The argument remains that you'd expect your money to go to the artists you listen to, but the payment arrangements don't necessarily benefit mainstream artists over indies, unless indie fans listen to less music than mainstream music fans.

EDIT: Now that I think of it, it probably benefits pop music over metal and progressive rock (or, worse still, classical music), because pop tends towards short songs, so more tracks played over the same period of time.
As I suspected before I clicked on the link. Not a reference at all, just a number of related links. Its not even especially complete - there is front end, but no back end. Github but no Bitbucket.
Once they know it's defective, sure. There's not enough evidence to say they are, in this specific case.
I'm a bit confused by the reasoning here. It's clear that light users are subsidizing heavy users, but why are we assuming that light users prefer indie bands and heavy users prefer pop music?
This is not my research area. However, I can't help but the results seem to radical to me. The dip in male diversity seems far too synchronized among so many different regions / cultures. Are there examples in recorded history of sudden reductions in male diversity that lasted for multiple generations?
It was a good post, I wasn't trying to criticize it, just wanted to add to it based on my own experience :)

Looking forward to a part 2!
The concern is about what happens to people who are no longer employable if we cannot create new jobs for them? Will everyone be happy when a majority of the population depends entirely on charity and hand outs?
Right. This is not a new theory. It's well known that evolution tends to favor polygamy where females are more selective and males are more promiscuous.

What's interesting is that this apparently started after agriculture rather than before. I had previously thought that maybe hunter gatherers practiced polygamy but it faded away as we become more agricultural.

Also 17 females to 1 male is pretty absurd. Even if you look at cultures that practiced polygamy in recent history it wasn't to that extent. And even when it was practiced, it wasn't necessarily common except in the very upper class, so the average female to male ratio would have been more reasonable.

We can only speculate to what degree this might have shaped our (recent) evolution. That's a huge selective pressure on males to have traits that would lead to them being the local king or whatever they were. And everyone alive today would be descended from those people.
I've followed him enough, can't stand his music because it sounds like noisy, barely competent shit to me and I know he makes his money just like Timbaland makes his money - getting paid on the back-end for production work. I can safely assume that most everybody has NOT read that article based on the ridiculous notion that somehow the music industry has changed its principles and methods since my family got started in the business in the late 1960s.

Why would I take seriously a person who says "Sound recordings are not cheap to make" and goes on to state "Artists still have to pay for that highly skilled labor" when frankly neither of these are true? Maybe it is for musicians who live in a 1960-1995 dynamic, but I have more computing and music making power and ability in my home studio than I know what to do with. Recording studios are dying by the dozens. For all the talk of disruption, that's one legacy industry that is taking it on the chin. Lowery is part of the problem, not the solution. Plus he tosses out anecdotes like "For a very long period of time record labels provided a decent living to thousands of lucky artists" and cites...nothing...

So the most ground breaking conclusion he has is Free+Streaming+Digital Sales? WOW. It's my business model for the past 10 years! Boy did I learn something from this guy! Oh, wait, no I didn't. That link is one of the most rambling and thinly veiled self-serving "discussions" of music in the new digital environment. I'll eventually study it more, simply to use it as cannon fodder for rebuttals. Thanks for sharing, I can always use more proof I know what I'm doing is right.
Powerful 4 SEO Growth Hacks for Startups
Wow

"Its obsession with the criminal and the deviant makes us less trusting people. Its obsession with the hurry of the day-to-day makes us less reflective thinkers. Its obsession with surfaces makes us shallow."
Facebook Sued Alleging Sex Discrimination, Harassment, Other Charges
Yes, but your perspective does nothing for CNN's party line that capitalism is good and everyone needs to have a J.O.B. Those that are capable of getting off their ass and finding niches into which to apply their skills are largely irrelevant to their propaganda - which is mostly to fuel the fear and uncertainty in life and feed the witch hunt against anyone that stands in the way of their message.

In my mind, the thing that makes humans greater than machines is our talent to think, design, create and reason our ways to greater things; to do things that require a human touch - like caring for people. If machines are taking care of all the BS jobs that don't make use of our cognitive abilities, that leaves us to do what we do best - think, design, create and be human... and that is what everybody's J.O.B. should be, anything less than that is a complete failure of technology as far as I'm concerned.
> Integrity also means different things to Warren Buffett than it does to other people. Ripping someone's face off in a business transaction is a desirable quality to Warren Buffett.

From the letter Gates was talking about (I've read about the 1st 1/3 of it over the last couple of days), integrity would be why Warren Buffett bought a major insurance company on a handshake and a one page document. No pre-audit. No financial review.

He trusted the guy.

In my opinion, that's the same definition of integrity everyone else uses.
They're probably choosing not to cover it, yet, because they do not believe, at this time, the product is actually defective.

Their resources are a red herring here.
If you don't know what it is after "Like Dropbox, but behind your firewall. File Sync and Share for the enterprise", you aren't their target market anyway.
Suddenly, Plenty of Options for Cord Cutters
Reflections on a year in DevOps
Communication Patterns in Cloud Haskell
5 Tools for Turning Meetings into Design Work Sessions
> Also, I find organizations putting Integrity as part of their motto distasteful.

If you have to officially state that integrity is something you value, you've already lost.

That it was part of a scummy company's "values statement," after they "merged" with my great company -- selling the deal to shareholders on a CEO deal they broke after a year, and then breaking up the company and selling it all off to float their drowning businesses -- was PARTICULARLY galling.
Diablo 3 was fixed in the expansion when they got rid of the real money AH... its actually enjoyable now.
> global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion are realities. this is not overblown rhetoric. we are removing millions of years of fossilized plant-collected sunlight, previously sequestered deep in the crust of the Earth, and burning it at a rate so fast that the biosphere of the planet cannot keep up with the changes in the climate. there are other fossil fuels as well that contribute to this besides just the petroleum burned by cars, but petroleum burned by cars is a huge factor here.

These are not problems with cars, though. These are problems with internal combustion engines. Over the next half a decade, electric cars are going to take off in a big way, as EVs with low prices, long ranges and good performance characteristics become common (so far we know about the Model 3 and the Chevy Bolt, both coming in two years, and a significant range bump on the Leaf is likely by then too).
But you don't want users to think they're normal and should be ignored. They're an exceptional case and should be understood.
See generally: http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html

(My favorite pg essay, mostly because the bit about measurement and leverage is wildly instrumentally useful even if you agree with no other conclusion of the essay.)