skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You don't see the inherently 'open' nature of HTML and common accessories to be a huge benefit? Sure, they can get messy, but are still bound to be more parseable and tow people along to the transformative idea of a giant shared graph with dev tools (inspection) support, compared to byte streams. Over time Flash, Java applets and other approaches have come along but been deprecated, which I'd considered to be emblematic of searching for a more transparent information commons outside one technical requirement (even if the logical conclusion of a 'semantic web' has been elusive so far). The fact that "view source" is available in all major browsers is to me incredibly meaningful and positive compared to alternative visions.

Or would your byte code blaster have similar properties?
There's been a bunch of research on Korean War orphans adopted to the West. Kids literally stunted from malnutrition, and traumatized by the direct experience of war as well as the death of their parents and families. As adults they test higher for intelligence than the native occidental populations they joined. Take that for what it's worth.
Case-sensitive? Spaces? Did you leave the "The" at the beginning?
CODE GENIUS – 5 Minute Physics by David DeSandro
The more I think about it, the more I think this is right.

Loaning many tens of thousands to 18 year olds is predatory, plain and simple. To pass laws making those debts non-dischargable makes it 10 times more predatory.

We all consider title pawns sleazy, but in the case of student loans, our government and our society is the predator, and our children are the prey.

What would it look like if our government wanted to be a protector instead of a predator in this case? A law limiting student loans to a small, managable amount.
I was attempting to aim my arguments at a wider audience than usual, but I forgot to dumb down the language. Sorry.
I'm pretty sure scrollaway's comment is sarcastic :D
I wasn't suggesting that you were unqualified to have an opinion.

We are all sitting on the sidelines of each others lives. I am no more a part of your life, than you are of mine. But what I was suggesting is that it’s easy for us to sit in judgment of the choices he articulated, as well as the outcomes of those choices, and say that he, “can’t make good choices”.

It doesn’t matter what you think your background was in comparison to his. You’re still projecting your reality and the outcomes of your reality, onto another complete stranger and coming to negative conclusions about his life. I call this judgment. Each of our lives is nuanced enough to affect outcomes even given very similar circumstances or “choices” as you call them.

Because Siegel’s outcomes ended in him defaulting on his student loans and articulating that, doesn’t mean he can’t make good choices.
To indulge in a bit of tinfoil-hatting re "some people just wanted to silence it": Tlon, Corp., the Red Hat to Urbit's Fedora, rejected Y-Combinator funding last year.
Efforts have been done, see:

https://github.com/uutils/coreutils

https://www.google.com/search?q=coreutils+rust
I don't know if there is a good answer to this question simply because I don't think we're looking at it the right way.

In my mind, a product/business/whathaveyou should be a collaboration between two or three individuals, who, should the project grow, become cofounders.

I don't think the process should be:

1) create idea
2) idea becomes business
3) "oh shit who will help me cofound this co.?"
4) find cofounder through means described in this thread
5) run successful business

...rather, the process should be:

1) with friends, create idea
2) develop idea
3) create profitable business, with the aforementioned friends as cofounders.

In my mind, the later described process works with a high success rate since you have essentially "vetted" your friends in step 1. However, I don't know if you really can vet your friends against the challenges described in step 3, but perhaps that is what dooms a large percentage of startups.

Who knows.
Cool anecdote, but you know what would be even better? If we had a choice.
Interesting overview of the recognition/imagination duality, but I dislike the tendency to play the game of "oh that's totally what [famous person] must have meant with his dense prose hundreds of years ago."
You could make the same argument against the real numbers. Almost all of them cannot even be written down or described, so it's hard to say how they map to the real-world. But the concept of real numbers is extremely useful for a large number of mathematical proofs.
I couldn't agree more with this. People will come to you once you have something that works.
What kind of person stereotypes an entire state of 40 million people based on their experiences in one small town?
Kozmo, Webvan, and all the online delivery startups from the first dot-com boom.

Arguably Loopt (Sam Altman's startup), which was doing a locality-based social network in 2005, before the iPhone. Subsequent attempts (Google Latitude, etc.) have also failed, but I suspect that's because the market still isn't ready.

General Magic. This Apple spin-off was doing a handheld computer in 1990, way before the technology or population was ready for it. Interestingly, basically all of the modern smartphone industry comes from General Magic alumni - Tony Fadell (father of the iPhone) and Andy Rubin (father of Android) both worked there.

First generation of search engines. It's not just a matter of being smarter, PageRank wouldn't have worked early on in the web because the link graph wasn't dense enough to get useful signal out of it.

LiveJournal, Xanga, EZBoard, and the first generation of social networks. They had some traction with early adopters, but the problem was that their userbase was weird enough that it drove off mainstream adopters, rather than bringing them in like Facebook did 5 years later.
or just open source

There is still no "compile code, install app, and throw this process on a VPS" solution for pushes, from what I recall
It's not just an issue of rationality. IIRC, a recent survey concluded that most Americans didn't know who Edward Snowden is.
They are confined to Unix (or Unix-y) computers. It's as limited as anything else really.
It might not be common knowledge yet, but C#, F#, and .NET are fully open source and cross-platform. Development is done in public on GitHub (https://github.com/dotnet), and pull requests are accepted from the community. You can even get a support contract from Microsoft and call them up to troubleshoot your .NET project on Linux. No Windows required.
quite :)
I hadn't considered binary data. Thanks.
Are there any good examples of successful Freemium apps that sell additional functionality (rather than games or consumables like the article)? The only major examples that come to mind to me are photo apps that sell filter packs. Are there any apps that lock down their major functionality as demoware or upgrades? (like say, "add iCloud support for $2")
You are looking in the wrong direction for a solution.

The world doesn't need another * social app.
Very cool! Git really clicked for me when I realized it was just a set of programs for manipulating a directed graph.

Can't wait to see the pull requests:

Pull request 1: Direct route from my flat to work
Where I am, the supermarket cards provide a discount on (almost) everything you buy. Loyalty programs at cafes and airlines work as you describe.
You don't live in California, do you?

I lived in an area where even the cost of rent, exceeded what one could make at the low income, part-time jobs available in that area.
As far as we know, you cannot cut a fractal such as the Mandelbrot set out of anything physical, either. The details get infinitely fine, and that's not possible in physical objects (as far as we know)
It is a real, true, result, in a space that is based on different rules than our physical reality. A ball in R^3 is composed of a countably infinite number of zero-dimensional points. It's an abstract concept that doesn't really have much to do with a physical ball that consists of a finite number of atoms.

Fundamentally, math is something that describes a large collection of possible worlds. Our universe is just a small subset of all the things that could be, and when using math to understand reality we have to remember that.
I'm not sure freemium games with in-app purchases are a very good model for apps in general (I'm not saying you're suggesting anything other than that they make a lot of money, just pointing it out in the context of this discussion).

It's hard for me to see how they're anything but a form of unregulated (yet) gambling/exploitation of people vulnerable to gambling.

Who in their right minds think that tens, hundreds of dollars is a good price to pay for virtual gemstones?

At any rate, for others that where unfamiliar with Supercell, I'm assuming parent means the makers of:

https://thinkgaming.com/app-sales-data/1/clash-of-clans/

A somewhat related article:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2013/mar/26/...

(And there's of course been a number of articles on "predatory" game design, based around compulsive/addictive behaviour)
Wow! Where to start with this. Have you considered that some people with a head for business just might not grok programming? And vice-versa? Even if they do, have you considered that an amateurish prototype, that looks and acts like shit, might turn off some viable early-round potential partners?

The second point is even more ridiculous. If you not only develop, but have business connections and seed money, why court a CEO? At that point you simply need a couple of investment partners to fatten out your staff and you are all done!

Every person in a company does not need to be able to do everything in that company -- and shouldn't! That is why people have different responsibilities, strengths, and weaknesses.

It is a million times better to have a well-connected and capable CEO, and a talented CTO than to have both a CEO and CTO that both are ok at business and ok at development.
Maybe an abberration but Cyanogenmod's ClockworkMod comes to mind. They provide it for free but the auto updates are paywalled.
Those two articles you linked to were spot on, but I don't think you really took to heart what they were saying. I'll make it explicit (and know that this comes from a place of tough love): The reason it's hard to find a technical co-founder is that you don't bring much value, if any, to a startup.

You don't have a proven track record running technical companies, because if you did, you wouldn't have this problem.

You don't have a programming background, so you won't understand the implications of your decisions on the product (basic programming won't help you here, I'm afraid, though it's a good start, and I absolutely encourage you to continue).

You can't make hiring decisions for technical staff, because you can't evaluate their skills.

Perhaps you have some great idea. But great ideas are a dime a dozen. The moment you gain any momentum, a dozen clones will pop up. Execution is what matters, and that's up to the CTO to deliver, for the most part.

A CTO could just hire you as a strategy consultant, salesperson and/or market analyst, just for a salary. You need to be able to say why you merit equity and decision-making authority if you want to be CEO. Could you answer that question if you were being totally honest with them? If you can't, perhaps you should look for work outside of the C-suite for now.
Two words, case sensitive, no punctuation, film title, 1956.

Alternative, three words, case sensitive, no punctuation, film title, 1940:

522218c9dac88e6efb7330d06fcb1211
>The DNA samples allowed the scientists to factor out the influence of genetic heritage

That's a pretty impressive achievement
Shunning "others" is very common behaviour. Shunning the child of "others" is very common.
Then his article just leaves me more confused than before. I was already familiar with the traditional resolution of BT as "well, that's just an artifact if the weirdness when you have uncountably many points".

But now the author insists that "oh no, you get the same paradox with finite pieces". And yet on every probe of that point, it comes back to an issue of infinities. So what's wrong with the traditional explanation? And how does this article justify a "finite version" of the partition.
Ask HN: A less-expensive (or free?) alternative to codementor.io?
I can code, but only in the sense that I can cobble things together until it basically works. I took an intro course sequence, but am almost entirely self taught beyond that point. I know from watching other, more professional programmers working, that my process is inefficient and often results in less-than-optimal solution. I make a lot of mistakes. It takes me a long time to figure a problem out, while it seems to take other people way less time to solve similar problems. I think I am probably that dreaded "bad programmer" everyone talks about.

I really want to be better.

But, I think I have hit the wall with self-teaching, and what would really help me improve at this point (going back to school is not an option) is some regular hours every week for a few months doing pair programming. I heard about codementor and thought this sounded like a great idea until I realized how much you have to pay for these sessions.

I also know that there are a lot of people out there that would probably be willing to help out someone who is genuinely interested in improving their skillset, either on a volunteer basis, or for less than $40/hour (the apparently minimum rate on codementor...)

I know about the Recurse Center too, which actually sounds perfect. But, I am not in a position in my life to drop everything for 3 months and do that. So, I guess I am looking for some kind of hybrid between codementor and the Recurse Center. Does such an animal exist?

Thanks in advance.
This "upcasting" and "downcasting" also work with mathematics itself. For example, we can consider adding infinitesimals to the real numbers, allowing us to do calculus without taking limits. Then we can downcast back to the real numbers.
SiCortex

It might not be the kind of startup that you were thinking of, since it was hardware-focused, but I was actually there so I think I can tell the story in some detail. What we made was large computers, though we tried not to call them supercomputers. Up to 972 nodes, each a six-core MIPS CPU with direct access (no second support chip) to a very fast RDMA-capable communication fabric. Looking at the boards, you'd see little other than those chips and a lot of memory. I got there in 2006, but the company had already existed a few years before that.

The "bad timing" aspect was two-fold. First, the market just wasn't ready for that kind of low-power/high-density play. It's a lot closer, but still took too long even for Calxeda and SeaMicro which came later. Then there was the funding. Our first generation had done well enough to start a second - likely to be on the order of six times as fast. Since we were building everything from chips on up, we needed a fair bit more than the first gen was bringing in, but we needed it in 2008. Not a good time to be seeking funds. Even pursuing unconventional avenues, we just couldn't scrape together enough funds structured the right way to make a round, and literally ran out of money. All that amazing knowledge now molders in escrow somewhere, except for that which former employees are now applying in subsequent jobs.

If that same talent and effort could be collected in one place now, or even better around two years ago, I still think it could lead to a new computing paradigm. Instead of a few "fat" nodes with more CPU power than the rest of the system can keep up with, we'd have seas of smaller nodes better balanced between compute, memory and communications, and software designed to take advantage of it. In the end, far more useful work done per kilowatt, per BTU, per cubic foot, or per dollar (that was almost exactly one of SiCortex's slogans).

But it was not to be, because the principals saw too far ahead. It's a sad commentary on how deluded (or misled) the rest of the computing industry can be.
If NYT knows the Third Department and whatever private contractors they have are trying to breach USG computer systems then I guess NSA knows that as well. Not even touching on defensive needs, why isn't NSA blanket surveilling Third Department, et al. and making that intelligence known to potentially affected agencies?
So you could use this to implement fork without sharing signal handlers and files? Given that the latter two seem like the biggest issue with fork why is - to my knowledge - nobody using this?
So kanban and scrum are fairly similar, but the difference is that with kanban, you don't have to estimate a point value to it, as time isn't the priority.

I view this as an advantage for two reasons:

- 1. Most non-technical clients view point estimates as absolute expectations. They can't comprehend an estimation in any other way. So if I can do 5 points a day, and I give a story 13 points, it's expected to be accomplished in ~2.5 days. If I exceed that amount of time, I've missed their expectations, and now I have a client who considers that work behind schedule.

- 2. Large complex problems can be solved without the pressure of accomplishing it within a finite deadline. I think this leads to more robust implementations, and helps prevent large amounts of technical debt. To compare, I have never seen a scrum project that didn't have a runaway amount of technical debt that lead to some insane scope creep in stories later on.

It has a downside of potentially hiding some problems, but I think it helps with individual responsibility when it comes to tasks. Every time I've used kanban, it's usually been for pretty short periods, but those periods were extremely productive and way less stressful.

I mean, this is just all my opinion, so take it with a grain of salt, but this is what my agile experience has been so far.
I'm pretty sure you mean "uncountably infinite" instead of "countably infinite".
Damn, that was cool. Really liked the in-source 3d models and map.
But that's the thing. You have to understand your business in order to lead it. It's like some people want to be CEO of a car company even though they don't have a driver's license.
The field of computational cognitive neuroscience studies the mind as a machine learning algorithm.

http://grey.colorado.edu/CompCogNeuro
If you're interested to know how and why you've been conditioned to think that way, look up Edward Bernays and his involvement with getting fluoride into the water supply of a number of countries.

In short, he's known as the father of Public Relations. Fluoride can only legally be disposed of in expensive toxic waste dumps, and Mr. Bernays came up with a plan to dispose of it for free by passing it through the human body. His public relations skills were so amazing that he even succeeded in making people (like you) want to ingest it.
I don't understand what you think the "traditional resolution" might be. In the Banach-Tarski theorem you are partitioning a 3-dimensional solid ball into finitely many pieces. Because the ball has uncountably many points, those pieces will have uncountably many points.[0]

Does that help?

[0] Actually that only shows that at least one of the pieces must have uncountably many points, but in the theorem we find that at least four pieces must have uncountably many points.
You just don't "search and find" for a co-founder. I think it's rather that you already know him but you don't know he will be your co-founder sometime soon.

Engage in a lot of side-projects, it doesn't matter if you are in high school, college or a full-time job. You'll know what people you like working with, but most importantly, like as a person.

Now, the question is: Once you have a group of talented and smart people which you have a background working with and who you like their personality, how do you choose just 1 or 2 of them? That's a hard question. The good thing is that you're scratching your head not because you have a potential co-founder deficit, but rather a surplus.
Nothing is wrong with whiteboards. I;d evem say they're better. No inhaling chalk dust, dusty erasers, looks clearer, more erasible by common materials, the list goes on.
Ditto for me, although not with quite the same effects. It ties into so many things in the real world; for us, e.g. "Worse is Better" (https://www.dreamsongs.com/WorseIsBetter.html) because it has survival value.
RiotJS also looks very compelling
10 Facebook Page Tips for Better Business
Are you saying, poor people would by default inherit subpar IQ? I don't think you are saying this. You are just missing the intention of the article by a long shot.

Also I thought "tabula rasa" means the opposite, that IQ is pretty much a factor of environment.
When Is a Software Bug Not a Software Bug
> I don't know anyone who wants to get a free pass on bad behaviour just because they have a severe and enduring mental illness.

How many of them want to be shamed, bullied, and ostracized for it?
Trying my hand at this blogging thing stating with an annoying bug I've been wrestling with recently.

The layout of the page is still being worked on hence the horrible links at the bottom and the lack of post title
Ok that could work then. Do you mind trying Lombok + AutoRefactor please?
I believe Apple does do this - it's $99/year to become an Apple Developer, and I think you need to be an Apple Developer to have an app in the app store.
How to perfect UX with design affordances
What about it sounds semi-technical? I've helped two people (a doctor and a restaurant chef) who I was the first person they've ever talked to who knew programming and I helped push them through these steps and they got pretty far. But they were people who were in the top 0.1% of something else and were thus, willing and able to be helped.