skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I actually had to go and google the person in question. After about five or so newsgroup messages from him badmouthing other people I gave up.

Still no idea who he is.
I think this quote sums things up
"Writing is nature's way of telling us how lousy our thinking is" Leslie Lamport

Lamport is a renowned distributed systems researcher, inventor of Paxos, and creator of LaTeX.
The claim...:

"It says that in any sufficiently complex axiom system there will be statements that it can neither prove nor refute,..."

...is absolutely correct.

Your claim...:

"...take all true statements of the model of the integers under the second order system. That forms an axiomatic system in which all true statements are provable."

...is patently false. You are abusing the term 'truth' and confusing yourself. What 'truth' means in logic is not the same as what it means in the colloquial sense. In logic, we speak of truth only in terms of interpretation. Hence, axiomatic truth is an equivalent notion to provability.

In light of this, what you are saying is that if we take all the provable theorems in an axiomatic system, and add those theorems as axioms, we will have captured all possible truths - Godel's theorem actually proves that this is untrue for any sufficiently powerful axiomatic theorems (and 'powerful' here means capable of expressing number-theoretic statements.)
Writing is difficult for two reasons: (i) writing requires thought and thinking is difficult, and (ii) the physical act of putting thoughts into words is difficult. There’s not much you can do about (i), but there’s a straightforward solution to (ii) — namely, writing. The more you write, the easier the physical process becomes. I recommend that you start practicing with email. Instead of just dashing off an email, write it. Make sure that it expresses exactly what you mean to say, in a way that the reader will be sure to understand it.

http://www.budiu.info/blog/2007/05/03/an-interview-with-lesl...
While "writing is thinking" clearly overstates the case, there is no question that writing about a topic is a form of discipline that helps us to think more deeply about it.

Writing is a lot like exercise. It has salutary benefits over time for anyone who consistently undertakes it. Much of life is habit. If we sit about passively absorbing all that we think we know, we will suffer from a surfeit of derivative knowledge that perhaps deludes us into thinking we know more than we really do. In a way, we then "know" things but we really don't understand them. Writing - and particularly the habit of writing regularly - forces us to think about things and, as we think more deeply about a thing, we tend to make it our own - and thus our second-hand thoughts are replaced more and more by original thinking of our own. This original thinking may or may not be useful to those about us. This depends on the quality of what we have to say. But it will be our thinking and that is no small thing.

This assumes too that we strive for originality in expressing ourselves in writing. All too much of academic writing is passive-voice-ridden "it is asserted" and "it is believed" type of writing, stuffed with scholarly citations, and utterly unreadable and useless. In law school, I did a scholarly piece for law review that was like that. It actually got published. There was not an original thought in it. But even that was not a useless exercise. Once I saw the limitations of that sort of derivative writing, I was able to get beyond it and what a liberating feeling it is to just get to a point where you can express your own thoughts as you develop them instead of merely mimicking others. Writing well and often will help many people get to this point. I think this is the main point the author is making.

In this sense, this piece is highly encouraging to writers and should be taken in that spirit. The author says, in effect, it is hard work but by all means write and write often - the benefits are great and it is all there for anyone to learn if he only applies himself. I commend this spirit and wish I had those about me in my day to encourage me in this fashion.

That said, not everyone can be a good writer because there is an innate intelligence of some kind upon which good writing must be predicated and not all people have this. At the same time, as others have noted, all kinds of people can think who do not necessarily write, and it is a mistake to say or imply that the two are invariably correlated.
"I’m sorry, what the frack just happened? I turned over my friend list, photos and status updates to everyone in the world? Why on earth would anyone do that with their Facebook page?

The entire purpose of Facebook since inception has been to share your information with a small group of people in your private network."

I don't know, maybe it's just me: I've always assumed that anything that I put on the Internet will be known to anyone. I've never turned on any of these privacy settings, and I'm pretty okay with that.

I can see why others may want to. But I don't.

Maybe I've been on Twitter for too long.
Bonus quote from Lamport, and I will stop, I promise. (Although I can give several similar quotes from Dijkstra also.)

Math is nature's way of letting you know how sloppy your writing is; mathematical rigor has proved a solid foundation for other engineering disciplines — why not ours?
Hourly employees happier than salaried workers?
Wow! Bayesian analysis in the New York Times. Maybe there is hope for this world after all.
"Perhaps I’m being hyperbolic (who me?), or maybe they are a little of both, but the fact remains they screw up on important issues almost as if it’s a 'best practice' to do so."

That's how it is beginning to look to me, like Facebook has INSTINCTS that guide it to make the most sleazy or annoying changes it can.
I think it´s a substantial omission, not worth the value of being ´succinct´.

Saying that ¨people who don’t write, are people who don’t think¨ is an insult to anybody who expresses their thought in music, social interaction, design, in-the-flow decision-making, etc. -- a very large number of people who have made major contributions to our world.
> The big difference is that when a bank loans money to a business, the business can bring in revenue from other parts of the economy to enable it to pay that loan back.

That's not a difference. When a biz spends borrowed money, it does so with the expectation that money will come back, just as the bank expects that its loan (of deposit money) will be repaid. In both cases, the bank/biz sent borrowed money out the door and only has an expectation that sufficient money will come back. (Yes, deposits are borrowed money.)

The Fed is different because it gets to print money. We're talking about ordinary banks here.

Yes, banks can get into trouble if its lenders call at an inconvenient time, but so can biz.
I'm in Portland. We're not exactly a thriving metropolis. However, I've been living without 3G simply due to the horrible reception, the astonishing number of dropped calls and - even worse - the calls that I just never get. Edge, it turns out, is way more reliable for those of us here.

I never had any of these problems on T-Mobile, nor do those I know who currently have jailbroken phones on that network.
Yeah, I agree with you. I didn't get into it in the article because I was trying to be succinct, but you're right.

It's a solid piece and it's important to be succinct, but I think in this case your succinctness might cause some readers to miss your main point. You might consider replacing "writing" with "the act of creation".
A word of caution: if you do find a plugin for jQuery that seems to do what you want, make sure to review the code before building upon it. I find that a lot of these plugins are poorly written and it almost always comes back to bite you.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying that all are bad, just some. It's always wise to review the code if you can.
Always a fun read- but I'd be interested in hearing if the situation is better in Psychology now, and/or if other fields have this problem today.
The dates are incorrect for China (said the Chinese major). Actually, most of the widely known writers from China are no more ancient than the widely known writers from Greece, so "even further back," which I suppose you typed relying on the source you kindly linked to, is incorrect. Confucius's dates of traditionally September 28, 551 B.C.E. to 479 B.C.E.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucius

are somewhat in dispute, but the dates of Thales, ca. 624 BC to ca. 546 BC,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thales

are actually earlier. The source you link to doesn't get transcription spelling of Chinese words correct, either, so you can be sure the author is not familiar with Chinese history.
We don't know what frequencies this is going to support, do we? For all we know, it could be an AT&T phone, or they could be be making two versions, or a single one that supports all frequencies.
Couldn't he just ignore the suit as long as he's willing to never go to Australia again?
agreed. most users assume Facebook content is (somewhat) private
Contrast ""And yet Morris sat on his data for years. If there were flaws in his theory, he was determined to find them before anyone else could. 'We set about destroying this observation,' he says. 'We brought in outside people with no blood in their veins, no interest, to destroy it.' But they couldn’t."

With "hide the decline" and "trick".
Baidu Baike and Baidu Zhidao is the similar content farm, but in Chinese:

http://baike.baidu.com/robots.txt

http://zhidao.baidu.com/robots.txt
I think people need to stop jumping to conclusions. Maybe the "problem with the network" is that "there are too many iPhones on the network." This deals with every actual piece of evidence that people are putting forward to try to refute the original article. Is it really so hard to believe that Apple could put out a piece of hardware that does not behave nicely to others?

I'm not saying that the nytimes article is right, but just that people who say it's wrong are wrong.

As an analogy, you can take the routers that were stupidly configured to use stratum 1 NTP servers. These misbehaving devices placed too much strain on the NTP "network" because they used it inappropriately. But it was only the NTP servers that a lot of these routers were configured for that were having problems. Yet no one would claim that it's the NTP network's fault for the issues.
We've now put a link to a tour of some of the features on the front page (http://friendbinder.com/tour)

I've also updated the links to include the recent "The Next Web", TechCrunch and Flickr Blog coverage we got last week.

Louis Gray is a blogger who is well respected for talking about social media and social media tools. If you are interested in that sort of thing his blog is at: http://blog.louisgray.com/
There were also good reasons for not having cars before Henry Ford mass-produced them. Along with not having lightbulbs before Thomas Edison made them practical.

Although to be fair, I'm pretty sure a case could be made that it's just too difficult to have in-depth analysis every day.
Arduino running on OpenSolaris
I went through the same process as Calacanis and most of my content had been automatically set to Friends Only. Maybe it's Calacanis who's unlucky... or clueless, or et cetera.
Wow! After reading these, and the replies, I definitely agree with John Resig about that newsgroup: don't read. Or risk losing your hope for humanity.
Yes. http://ha.ckers.org/xss.html
Hm, I don’t know anything about specific dishwasher models but I tried current digital cameras. I got Amazon, Wikipedia, various reputable review sites and one or two reputable price comparison sites. No spam.

When it comes to dishwashers the cause of the problem may be very simple: there are no reviews online (or anywhere). At least not when it comes to the dozens of same old and bland models dishwasher companies tend to spew out.

(And since I don’t know anything about dishwashers this statement was most certainly a gross oversimplification for which I apologize to all the busy dishwasher engineers out there.)
Ask HN: Why doesn't the "threads" link on HN include submitted stories too
Why doesn't the "threads" link on HN include submitted stories too
There is another reason to label something wontfix: If it falls too low on the priorities. If you know that you do not have sufficient time to do everything, and that you have issues that are far more important, you might as well just mark the punted issues wontfix.
Jackson Computer Repair Services
Are you searching the right upgradation for some critical parts to your computer or Laptop ?Seaching for the appropriate remedy from a good computer repair service .
I'm not sure this Microsoft answer on at least one of those bugs doesn't fit any of those categories:

"At this time we do not plan on fixing this issue. We appreciate the report, but unfortunately we are at a stage where need to choose what we work on to maximize the value for customers and web developers."
Don't be fooled by the title: This essay isn't really about women in science. It's about careers in science and how much they suck.

To the extent that there's a theory of gender in here, it boils down to "it doesn't take much of a social barrier to keep people out of a profession that sucks." [1] I'm not strongly convinced by this hypothesis, but your observation -- that there are other miserable professions that appeal more strongly to women than men -- does not invalidate it.

Incidentally, I'm not sure that "science" in general is missing women: There are plenty of women in biology, and of course medical school applicants (who study more science than most) are 50% women:

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-...

Paging a sociologist!

---

[1] Well, there's one other theory: That lots of physical science grad students are young, unattached emigrants from foreign countries, a class of people that has historically skewed male in many if not most of the world's cultures. This is an interesting hypothesis and I'd love to see some anthropologists, or perhaps sociologists, weigh in on it. But it, too, is not the primary focus of this essay.
Yo should make a post about it. Make sure to mention how it relates to similar Microsoft's own efforts.
No it doesn't. I make a lot of money from it right now!
Beat Eczema With A Powerful Guide
When I was growing up it was a known phenomenon in my family that hot water pipes would freeze before cold pipes in winter. And that using hot water to de-ice your car would cause it to freeze up again more than cold water.

It's something I've always been meaning to test out properly to see if it was real.
We can answer this pretty easily by looking at AT&T Blackberries. If 3G Blackberries also have issues, then it's the network. If not, it's Apple's problem.

Anybody out there with a BB care to comment?
'cuz it doesn't.
In that case, only the transaction mattered, not the exchange of goods. The buyer and seller were the same person. Or they were two parties who'd agreed to return the payment.

In this case, the exchange of goods is crucial (for their fixed value equal to payment). And there's no prearrangement between buyer and seller.

Different means to the same end.
Thanks for the link. Definitely no offense taken at your comments...

I forgot to mention that the guard at one point said, "You have no rights here", which I found oddly unnerving. I realized at the time that I had no idea what rights (if any) I had on Canadian soil at the Canadian entrance checkpoint.

I agree with you about the best strategy, and that the guards are not likely to be cordial, etc. The experience taught me (for the first time) what it feels like to be someone who isn't automatically given the benefit of the doubt by law enforcement officers, and nudged me firmly in the direction of libertarianism (small L).

I think the most worrisome aspect is when the law empowers guards, police, etc., to use too many whims. There was also no method for oversight... in retrospect I should have asked them to send a supervisor over, but in the stress of the moment I didn't think to ask for one (though my subsequent phone call suggests that the supervisor wouldn't have been sympathetic)...
I don't think so, from his abstract: "Here, we show that commercially available paper can be made highly conductive with a sheet resistance as low as 1 ohm per square (Ω/sq) by using simple solution processes to achieve conformal coating of single-walled carbon nanotube (CNT) and silver nanowire films. Compared with plastics, paper substrates can dramatically improve film adhesion, greatly simplify the coating process, and significantly lower the cost."
- http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/12/04/0908858106

From what I understand, he is using the fact that the nano-tube (ink) layer is conductive and the fact that paper acts as a good insulator to assume that he can use this to craft a better capacitor.

Unless that "1 ohm per square" (something) is an incredibly low resistance, then I fail to see what is so incredibly novel.
The content that they're talking about (articles on ehow.com and friends) are generated by Mechanical Turk or some similar arrangement, not by Markov chainers! But I'm sure they'll jump on autogeneration as soon as they possibly can.
Try searching for "dishwasher reviews" - it's all spam. And by spam I mean, if you go to the actual links, there aren't any actual reviews.

Part of the problem is that people don't tend to review appliances online, so there is nothing for google to find even if it was perfect.

And the appliance makers make it deliberately hard - the same model has a different model number depending on where it's sold (which is done to prevent people from price matching).
Hell, even most of my peers in college always type the www. first.
If we don’t behave well then we are going to get
regulated by clueless politicians and policy makers.

Wise words indeed. And when it happens, entrepreneurs everywhere will be crying.
From what I've read, the new updates default to share with "everyone" only if you have NOT modified your privacy settings in the past.

If you have, which probably anyone concerned with privacy has, they default to "not everyone" choice.

The rest of the point stands - people use facebook to keep in touch with their friends. They're not interested in content propogation to strangers.
I'm a student, graduating this spring. Here are my thoughts:

For one, I might not have heard of your company. It's not a personal bias against small companies (and you haven't heard of me either :) But how do you make sure students are aware of your existence? A popular blog is one way. A job posting on a campus job board is another. You can also contact a secretary in the CS or EE department, and ask to have your job posting sent to the mailing list.

Also, don't ignore the colleges that aren't the usual suspects for a source of good CS students. I'm sure students at MIT or Waterloo see more job postings than students at my school. This just makes you lost in the noise. (and makes me personally wonder if I made a huge mistake when turning down that Waterloo offer of admission :)
I think ConsumerSearch, as a made-for-AdSense, made-for-referral-revenue site, is part of the problem Kedrosky is highlighting.

Also I wouldn't try any of your generic/naked term searches if buying a major appliance. The results don't really help discriminate among choices on major axes.

I would instead mix the categories with descriptors ("best", "reviews", "compact", "most reliable") or brand names. But unfortunately, that nowadays results in a maze of repetitive e-commerce pablum sites, many running AdSense ads. It's possible to pick out some useful information with effort -- but it's hidden in a lot of muck of Google's own making.
Drug money saved banks in global crisis
And they wonder why people laugh at initiatives like Azure.

Seriously, folks, making a standards-compliant browser is a critical path item to not losing the 21st century to Google. Hop on it, Redmond.
This reminds me of the advertising DSL-based ISPs used to run claiming that 'data hogs' on cable ISPs destroyed the experience for everyone else. Even if the iPhone was inefficient, that's something you compensate for with more aggressive network upgrades. If a communications network consistently provides poor service, that's not bad technology - it's poor management.
In orthodox economics, rationality became a straitjacket. Platonified economists ignored the fact that people might prefer to do something other than maximize their economic interests. This led to mathematical techniques such as "maximization," or "optimization," on which Paul Samuelson built much of his work. Optimization consists in finding the
mathematically optimal policy that an economic agent could pursue. For instance, what is the "optimal" quantity you should allocate to stocks? It involves complicated mathematics and thus raises a barrier to entry by non-mathematically trained scholars. I would not be the first to say that this optimization set back social science by reducing it from the intellectual and reflective discipline that it was becoming to an attempt at an "exact
science." By "exact science," I mean a second-rate engineering problem for those who want to pretend that they are in the physics department — so-called physics envy. In other words, an intellectual fraud.

Nassim Taleb, The Black Swan
I'll start by saying that I'm not trolling.

Using conditional probability, or bayes theorem to calculate a conditional probabilitiy, does not make something bayesian analysis.

I haven't read the original report (it's on my list) but what is presented in this article isn't really anything except probability. It would be bayesian if they put a distribution on the proportion of people that have a "certain cancer."
> As an analogy, you can take the routers that were stupidly configured to use stratum 1 NTP servers. These misbehaving devices placed too much strain on the NTP "network" because they used it inappropriately. But it was only the NTP servers that a lot of these routers were configured for that were having problems. Yet no one would claim that it's the NTP network's fault for the issues.

A poor analogy:

- AT&T sells the iPhone.

- AT&T sells the service.

ergo,

- AT&T is responsible for providing quality service to the iPhone.
If this change stands, the majority of Facebook users affected by it haven't signed up yet, so your first point doesn't have a lot of bearing on whether the move is ethical or not.
Most, but not all. When I went through, there was only one option up at the top that was not set to "Friends Only". No big deal, right? Just one thing out of 10 or so?

Except that one thing included all my status updates, links, and pictures. I switched it off because I'd heard all the hoopla and knew to read carefully.

Calacanis is totally correct. Many (most?) people will just see that it's "only one thing" and assume that Facebook picked sensible defaults. I would have, if I hadn't been warned ahead of time.
Social network searches could be a hacker's dream
Here is another possible explanation for the correlation between reputation and CV upload:

Higher reputation --> more time on the web to answer questions --> likely unemployed --> more desire to upload CV.
GNU, Gnome, and the FSF
Men who pursue science Ph.Ds can also still do law school, or B-school. And a physics Ph.D who also has a J.D in intellectual property or an MBA in finance is incredibly valuable.
You mean like MX? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MX_(newspaper) ) inspired by ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_International ) and then crossed with the economist.
The first part (comics, light reading) has been done. the second is harder.
Good Enough is the New Great
I have an LG phone with at&t, and a droid with verizon. Verizon gets where at&t can't, even if you just compare non-3g.
It's sad that one person can destroy an entire community. But one can.