skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is a similar Russian expression too, less poetic however.

I think "trust but verify" places more emphasis on the "trust" part whereas the other one emphasizes the personal responsibility. Both remind us to seek the balance between personal involvement and personal detachment in a particular project.
> Is there any other action people in the UK can take?

Yes, vote Lib Dem on the next election. Not only they have come out against this, but they also defended the drug expert that was fired.
My two-year-old son is adept at this technique. Unfortunately I am not sure he always listens to my responses. An example copied from one of my recent blog posts:

We have interesting conversations in the front hallway on weekday mornings when he tries to prevent me from going to work.

“No Daddy go!”

“Daddy has to go to work.”

“Why Daddy work?”

“Daddy has to work so that he can make money.”

“Why money?”

“Because we need money so that we can buy food.”

“Why?”

“Because we need to eat.”

“Why?”

Why indeed? I used to believe that when I had a child, I would always try to explain things to that child and never resort to the pat answers I’d hear from other parents (”just because”). My child is only two and he is already defeating this goal. Why DO we need to eat?

You can answer that question, sure, but ask enough “whys”, and you’ll find yourself trying to explain the nature and reasons for existence of the universe – to a two-year-old.
I'd add: wireless energy transfer.
I hate Java with passion, but symlinks (and hardlinks) are really atrocious hacks that should never have happened, and for good reasons were deprecated more than twenty years ago by the folks that created Unix in the first place.
I think it's wrong to think of introverted/extroverted as a black/white area. Just as there are those that are clearly one way or the other, there are others that I'm sure are borderline.

For Meyers-Briggs I've tested as an INTJ (taken at a previous job), and ISTJ in a personal test. Since I scored the personal one myself, I could see my scores in S/N and J/P were very close. In examining descriptions of the types I'd tend to classify myself more INTP/INTJ - clearly recognizing the traits of each in myself, but the only section I'm truly certain of is the I and the T.

I also tend to disagree that a person is one way online versus offline. I know I suffer from anxiety, but I have no problem standing in front of a crowd making a presentation for which I'm prepared and/or confident in my subject knowledge. That does not indicate I don't suffer from general anxiety though. I'd say it's the same with introversion. I could have a blog or tweet, but I think you'd notice a distinct difference in tone versus an introvert and extrovert, or how much personal information is shared versus professional. I'm sure there are introverted bloggers just as there are introverted journalists, actors, musicians, and other professions with a high public profile. The 'public' nature of what one does is not what defines their personality traits.
> most engineering is based on inviolable physical rules

Don't rules such as those of algorithmic complexity have the same status and position? They are as objectively certain -- more so, in fact, since they are purely logical. At its base, software is built on bits and operations, which are entirely determinate. The ramifications might not currently be fully understood or exploited (software is only about 50 years old!), but the potential is there.

As an example: with CPUs like the Z80 it was possible to count clock cycles of instructions, and determine upper/lower/average running times of code. That would be equivalent to determining resultant forces across a whole physical structure. Today, CPU makers have made things difficult, but that is completely contingent: it would in principle be possible to predict performance, in an engineering fashion, for many purposes.
The link is absolutely irrelevant.

I think this is the first time in many months that I modded someone down.
adding value to the conversation is how I always measure whether or not to make any comment or self-promotion at all. the discussion needs to relate in some way, technical or otherwise, to my product for me to try and do any self-promotion in a given discussion
Randy Pausch lecturing on time management
The Turing apology wasn't something anyone in power cared about. Granting petitions like that makes them look benevolent (and us feel empowered), but doesn't interfere with their plans.
The Location: header is a redirect to Google. That's not actually Google's server using Lighty.
I have always hated this phrase. It isn't "wisdom," it's just dumb saying that makes no sense if you think about it for more than two seconds. Either you trust someone, or you do not. People who go around spouting this line as an example of what a sage leader Reagan was annoy me to no end.
That's the clever thing about these laws - they don't apply to you they apply to the ISP.

So they disconnect you on government orders, that's a commercial case between you and the ISP. So you have to find a lawyer to take a civil case against a huge multinational.

Or the ISP could take the government to court to test the law. Then the multinational has to prove to it's shareholders that taking the government to court is good for the business!
And yet you paint yourself with the broad brush of a 'Myers-Brigg-identified extrovert'? It's hard to tell but I'm guessing you're being ironic?
I suppose you could wrap everything in a WebKitView (or whatever it is called) and just submit that to the AppStore, but as some have pointed out before, you will probably get a "Mature" rating because all data is loaded from the web...
Maybe in 2010 GHC will start working on Snow Leopard. Fingers crossed.
I think a lot of tools can really cripple programmers. One needs discipline to only use such tools as a convenience, once you already know what's going on under the surface - hence why I generally avoid IDE's, etc...
Any respectable "enterprise" Linux distribution has these two advantages.
Way too long of an article, though it covers the challenge that Google faces in declaring scraper sites spam or value-add.
I can't imagine the trick of the none lie would work more than once or twice (at least, before the students consider it an option that should be explored further) but I don't see how having the students trying to find the lies should stop working, assuming the professor doesn't have a problem with students who question him.
I assumed they were being facetious.
Sounds like a great teacher. I had a prof who was a bit more sadistic/incompetent about this. He would incorporate a falsehood into his lectures, not always and not always just one. When challenged he would admit it but if no one caught the mistake he would let us live on in ignorance. This was a fluid dynamics course so you could frequently find the "lie" by carefully going over the algebra in his derivations. I'm pretty sure this was just a clever ploy to conceal the fact that once in a while he did, in fact, make mistakes.
He claims to have learned that

> "Experts" can be wrong

While I agree with this, and enjoyed the story, the story does not make this particular point well. In the story, the lecturer is basically perfect.

The expert lecturer remained fully in control of the situation at all times, had the students doing what he wanted, and was never wrong by accident.

In general, imperfect experts can be wrong by accident, can lose control of situations, etc... It's common, but the linked story isn't an example of an expert going wrong.
Why is the sibling to this (my) comment dead? I don't see anything horribly wrong with it!
This comment is spot on. To add, this story is from the perspective of the student, so he gives his professor (his self-admitted favorite) a bit of a shine.

Nothing wrong with that at all, but a salient point to remember.

That aside, I wish I had more professors that engaged the students and not just the content of the lectures. Sounds like this professor loved to teach, which, IMO, is more valuable to the students than expert knowledge, at least at the undergraduate level.
This is a fantastic article. We've had a decent amount of success so far with our startup following this same mantra. Release early with a core set of features, and then follow up with rapid releases (preferably one per feature).

This has the following advantages:

1. Unnecessary features are the #1 source of waste in software. If you launch with a very limited feature set, it's much easier to avoid feature bloat.

2. Having customers immediately helps to fund future development, gives you a large group of real-world test cases, and a huge source of information about what the market wants in your product.

3. Rapid releases let you create constant buzz about your product. If you have six months between releases, it's much more difficult to create constant conversation about what you're up to. Your users will be happier, also, because they continue to feel they're getting more for their money, and they get excited about what comes next. (Also, if you implement their suggestions, they can feel more like they're participating in the product development, which builds a good customer relationship.)

4. Continual releases are a very powerful motivator. We've tried it both ways, and having a release every week (or every other week) for smaller feature sets is much more motivating than spacing them out over a couple months.

(Note: this naturally assumes you've got a SaaS model like us. However, I think you could pull off something similar with desktop software, within reason.)
What a great strategy to help students focus -- and wow for the most difficult part.
I couldn't disagree more. iPhone devs who write native apps are trying to get the best usability out of their products - have you played with an iPhone webapp recently? They approximate the native experience, poorly. The UI doesn't flow, it's not fast, it's not responsive - it's a pale shadow compared to a native app, even for mundane tasks like menus and buttons.

There's "good enough" and "excellent" - these are not the same thing. It seems like the webapp apologists are in the "good enough" camp, and they're certainly right: Apple's webapp facilities are good enough.

But they're not great, and great UI is the defining feature of the iPhone. If you lose it all you have is a piece of plastic that has fewer features than the competition. IMHO also, the constant settling for "good enough" UI is a hallmark of programmer-driven UI, which rarely results in usable apps by regular people.
"were deprecated more than twenty years ago by the folks that created Unix in the first place" [citation needed]

Also, could you explain some more. Why do you think that they're "atrocious hacks"? They solve some problems in a quite nice way (simple versioning for example)
Interesting but does 5 times work for everything or just some specific problems? I would agree that constantly asking why is a good thing but I'm just not sure about this 5 thing
These changes will make a concrete improvement to my daily productivity as a Java developer. Definitely removes some of the pain points relative to other languages.

If they can also do something about closures, I'll be much happier as a Java developer when this comes out than I am today.
The author presents a strawman version of UCD and then tears it down but there is one important point in the article: UCD really hasn't fully come to grips with the new era of web applications.

Everything taught in schools about UCD leads up to the final prototyping stage but there's very little discussion about how UCD applies after a product is launched. A large part of this has to do with much of UCD research and literature being driven by academia.

There's a whole host of amazing UCD stuff you can do with a live web app: A/B testing, polling, behavior tracking, logging etc. However, academics typically don't have access to applications being used by real users & companies are focused more on being effective than documenting their practices so there's a disconnect.

Some of the most interesting research coming out of UCD right now comes from PhD students in HCI doing summer internships at places like facebook, Google & Yahoo. They have access to interesting sources of data yet are concerned more for scientific validity than effectiveness so they're asking different questions about it.
Global warming rigged? Here's the email I'd need to see
NASA Scientist Creates First Tricorder
It seems like it would only work for subjects where students have the capacity to figure out errors on their own. It would be disastrous in a foreign language class if you were told the word for "mother" was "banana".

As I've mentioned in another discussion, I once had a math professor who would sneak in impossible problems into the homework (e.g. prove the continuum hypothesis). It worked very well to get us to spend countless hours just trying things out, and eventually to spur us to prove decidability of the problems, all of which made us much better. But I imagine it would get old fast if every class I took did something similar.
"I think the proper response here is: mee-yow!"

No, the proper journalistic response is to investigate the facts and find out what is really going on.
Already in the process of getting this done :) btw - it seems like you're an edu entrepreneur yourself! would love to chat with you if you're interested - just ping me at steli at supercoolschool dot com
To me, it sounds as if he is using it in a different way to how you and I understand it.

I read his post as meaning trust the person, but verify that your message has been correctly received and understood - after all everybody makes mistakes.

As for the more popular meaning, you are right - it is a more socially acceptable way to say "I don't trust you" that put the onerous on the distrusted person.
I'm told by an (admittedly pretty crappy-looking) online test (http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jTypes2.asp) that I'm an INTJ, with strong NT, but only weak I and J components. I don't know anything about the Meyers-Briggs scale beyond what's stated about it in the wikipedia entry, but the result isn't surprising to me at all, as I can definitely sympathize with your propensity for missing "obvious" features in your surroundings.

This must be a common trait among engineers, too: one day I went to my engineering classes with exactly half of my face shaved, the other half having grown out for 2 weeks. About three people in my class noticed eventually and started laughing at me. Even with them laughing, the rest of my classmates didn't notice, and couldn't figure out what the laughing was about.
I think the whole point of the government petition website is to gauge public opinion. I think it'll do more than 'nothing'. I'd agree though, write letters as well.
and when you're reading log files, you often only care about the last handful of lines anyhow:

tail errors.log

or if you want, say, 50 lines of output (instead of 10):

tail errors.log -n 50
Thank you Spokey.

I am using Google Doc Viewer and they currently do not support pptx.

Good idea on the password, and support for .doc and .docx.

I tried to register doxdox, and dox.ly but they were already taken so I settled for Doxela.

Thank you very much for the feedback. Maybe I will repost another Ask HN by the end of the week, since only a few people actually voted/visited, so maybe they missed it.
I spent some time worrying about this just before I had kids, running scenarios like this through my head. My daughter's first question for this destroyed any value such rehearsals might have had by saying "How do you know?"
I don't see the irony - the Myers-Brigg test pegged me as an extrovert, I did not insinuate that this has any relevance to anything whatsoever - quite the opposite.

The point is that most of HN identifies themselves - on the Myers-Briggs scale anyway - as introverts. The test labels me an extrovert, yet I do not see these artificial, and frankly invented, differences between all of us.

I also mentioned that this sort of broad labeling is divisive - and I certainly feel this way. I've been labeled as a Myers-Brigg extrovert, and now I have the rest of HN to thank for assuming that I'm a brash, shoot-first-ask-questions-later sort of guy.
Exactly the reason I stopped reading the Consumerist. It's frustrating to see things that are usually careless mistakes misconstrued as big EvilCorp's plot to screw {all consumers, all taxpayers, the world}.
Simple things like this seem to be the most effective. This is particularly interesting, because it forces students to check what they (as a class) find most difficult, in order to find what they missed.

From my experience, there seem to be two classes of professors, those that interact with the class, and those that don't. It is relatively easy for a professor to interact with and engage the class when the class is small, in the 20-30 student range. Personally, I don't care much for these classes because when the professor interacts with the class, all of the interaction becomes dominated by one or two students. Then there are the really good professors who teach a lecture-sized class, but still engage the students in the learning process. They have 50-100 students (or more), but still manage to get the students involved with learning. I have only had one professor do this particularly well, and I enjoyed his class far more than any of my others at the time. The interaction dynamic is very different in a class this sized. One or two students can't dominate the professor's attention, it just isn't possible.
Thanks for the feedback! One of the reasons why opened up to the public (before that we only offered our solution to the enterprise market) was to learn who will use our product in what way and then focus on that group (customer dev basically)...that's why its so vague at this point.
When one city has the smallest possible benefit to entrepreneurs that it's worth moving there, it will gain huge benefits over time (cumulative advantage). New York was smaller than Philadelphia, Boston, Charleston, and Baltimore when the colonies were primarily trading with England, but when internal trade grew, New York's larger, deeper harbor and the fact that its river connected it to its hinterland made it the logical depot and it quickly outgrew the other cities. People were making cars lots of places for decades before Detroit gained the production, materials, suppliers to become the place to build cars. Phoenix, Boston, Texas, New Jersey and SV all had transistor and electronics technology, but Fred Terman and William Shockley were enough to turn one of those into a global power.

Now, the connections, ideas, investors, and labor pool mean that SV has a much bigger advantage than any other place when it comes to web tech. You can either do it where you are, where your personal connections matter, or you can move to SV. Few people that don't go to school there even move to Boston to start companies. No other city (anyone from Austin, Seattle, or Boulder want to correct me?) has people move there to start a company. Maybe they move there for a job and start a company later, but if you want to move to help you start a tech company, there's only one place to move to.
The point of this article seems to be that prior to release debuggers shouldn't be used in order force developers to output to logs that can be used in production.

I would say that developers should be logging anyway, and reading the logs in addition to using their debuggers.
In many years there will be big companies that are small today.

How has "the game" changed that now you need certain features and you didn't back then, whenever then was?

Why would everyone need all those features that is on "that huge feature list"? Not everyone needs the same things.
Maybe that's what's behind the high self-employed number for WPB - lots of real estate agents and investors.
Here's a workaround to get the latest Haskell Platform working on 10.6: http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Mac_OS_X
Great input - will do! :)
perhaps since nginx is available in the German language, among other European translations including Russian, Polish, French.
You can always assume that it's the most restrictive type that you want. How many times did you really need Map<Object, Object>, when you initialised the map with {"abc":1, "def":2, "ghi":3} ?

Since you can always make it specific what you want, you can assume that the most common case is the "default". That's what c#'s `var` does anyways - if you have a `var a=1;`, 'a' an int, not an object. If you use `var a=new []{1,2,3};`, it's int[], not object[].
I think he deserves a good degree of praise for having an amenable opinion.
Shades of "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." But would anyone really have predicted the success of Twitter in July 2006?
I doubt it - Consumerist is very good at manufacturing outrage, even for minor, accidental transgressions. They're also very good at playing the oppressed consumer card.
Facebook Co-Founder D. Moskovitz Raises $9 million For New Collaboration Startup
Offline Gmail Attachments
I am not sure how to measure and compare complexity of buildings and software. But I wouldn't immediately dismiss buildings as being all simpler than all software.

> if there are n software modules, there are n! possible communication paths.

We deliberately build software so it does not join every part to every other. That is fairly evident from top to bottom, and really it couldn't have a distinct coherent function if that wasn't the case. So I think a stronger argument is needed . . . which I would be quite willing to accept if good . . .
I'd always heard it put as the "seven whys", but yes, it does work.

The number is probably irrelevant, but the idea is to keep pushing for the deeper meaning (or root cause, in this case). If you can keep your reasoning from being circular ("the sky is blue because it isn't any other color"), you either get the answer, or learn that you don't know enough to get the answer.
You can't just say something like that unqualified. My life is made better daily by the presence of symlinks.
Seems like you managed to piss off Java as well as Unix guys in a single sentence. But a fair question is what you would use instead of links. I suppose you are talking about plan 9.
Where is the strawman? The wikipedia version? Or the way I say it's applied?

The very thing that you point out as being relevant is my point exactly. That UCD should test on customers not users in a real environment.

I am not against any of the mentioned A/B testing, polling, behavior tracking, logging etc. those are the very things I would wish more would do.

The problem is that I am of course stepping on a lot of peoples toes that do exactly what I am after. And there are more than you would think. That is least what my 14 years of working with hundreds of clients have shown me.
You have to be a bit careful with this approach. If there's one thing that annoys me, it's managers constantly asking me for "status emails", making me go to "status meetings", and asking me to do other things with "status" in them.

I find that the best managers are the ones who can get the information they need and create a minimal level of disruption in the developer's workflow (not that it's always possible, I understand that disruptions have to happen at times).
It's just a rule of thumb, like the "rule of 7" when it comes to cognitive load. The point is to continue past the surface issue until you find the real problem. Fixing a lower-level problem (like not having automated testing) has much more value than fixing a higher-level problem (like fixing regressions when they occur in your software).
The comments on the TC article are really worth reading
Deprecated?! When?
I've seen this happen to users before. Looking at tomjen2's history, all comments from the last 11 days have been killed with 1 point. I take this to mean that they were killed quickly and automatically before anyone voted on them.

Of course, if you aren't +showdead, you would never know.