skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A few thoughts:

(1) You might want to stick to a more traditional landing page to help increase your conversion.

The way your page is designed right now doesn't scream out to me to sign up or anything.

There's a reason many landing pages look the same, and it's because they work, so people keep using the same conventions.

If you're trying to break conventions, then you need to have a very good reason why you're doing so and you probably should A/B test it.

(2) Add some social proof, like how many people signed up last week.

(3) What value are you trying to provide? It's not exactly clear. You're saying: "Healthcare needs a better way to find and recruit top talent..."

You're making me think too much.

Honestly, I didn't even bother to read the rest of that paragraph.

Get a nice, big h1 or h2 tag and put something like, "Get a job now in healthcare".

(4) I agree with Uptown in that you should get rid of the poll/question thing on the right hand side.

I know you're trying to make it interesting for the med student or whoever is coming to your site, but I'm not sure if it's serving any purpose.

Do people actually go to your FB page afterwards to discuss the medical case?

Is that questionnaire interfering with your sign up rate?

--

Anyway, those are some quick thoughts when I landed on your page.

As a future tip, you may want to have added a different landing page to your site so that people from HN don't mess up your analytics. eg. http://wellzly.com/hn

Hope that helps
There's a scientific meaning behind the word race - geographically isolated population groups, or more precisely groups that do not interbreed. Humans don't have those, and never have had those. I never said we were homogenous, any nitwit can see that most people in Asia have black hair, and there's no reason to think that only superficial physical characteristics sort geographically. Just that, there aren't distinct races. You know, a middle ground, as proposed by the guy who wrote that first article you linked to, at the end.
#FightThePower In memory of the oppressed.
1)Consider another font

2)It's too dense on information: separate it

3)Your modal is terrible(had no content and titled 'Imaged Viewer')

I'd consider taking a Bootstrap template and work on top of it

https://www.freshdesignweb.com/free-bootstrap-templates.html

http://startbootstrap.com/
Perhaps, but even a single database alone doesn't ensure atomicity.

For instance: suppose you're deactivating a user. You've got a user table, with an id column and a "deactivated" column. Then you've got an OAuth tokens table, with a foreign key column to userid.

If you had two microservices hitting the same database, then you make a DELETE to the user service, which now needs to send a DELETE to the OAuth service. Now, regardless of which transaction you logically have go first, you have a race: two services with separate transactions are modifying the same DB. Whichever transaction commits, the other could fail, leaving your external view inconsistent.

One way to solve this is to have the OAuth service check the user table to see if the user is disabled, and treat all of the tokens for that user as deactivated, but then your OAuth service is tightly coupled to your user service's schema, which means you can no longer modify the two services separately. My impression is that this isn't really what people mean when they say "microservices".

Another option is to have the OAuth service ask the user service if the user is still live, but now you have a circular dependency between services, and either one failing can effectively put the other out of commission.

Tradeoffs in all things.
If a knot is the only thing between you and a very long fall, "easier to release" might not be a feature.
Thank you, seriously. And good night.
You just rephrased the OP in a confrontational tone. It didn't say that SOA was bad, just overused in some places where it's not appropriate. It looks like the closest thing you have to a disagreement is that you can probably still get the some of the small code-base benefits while not getting into the distributed-systems stuff the article talked about (making sure your processes are all on the same machine or something, I don't know).
Materialistic rationalism is so outdated. Have these folks heard of Kant? Even Jewish thinkers (Hasidic and non Hasidic alike) viewed him with respect.
- avoid code sharing wherever possible. It creates an implicit dependency. (If you have a common library or util file, you've done it wrong. try again.)

Can you clarify on this a bit? Isn't part of the point of classes and libraries to encapsulate common functionality so that it doesn't need to be separately maintained in multiple places?

You listed an ORM as an example, what is a better solution to managing database interaction across an application?
It isn't new. That would be BCS Theory[1].

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCS_theory
Wellesley College might complain about the name.
Start with http://www.phptherightway.com/
A little surprised that this doesn't seem to be a demoscene production, because it has all the characteristics of one. I was even expecting greets in the endscroller.

If he could get the contents of this video down to a single 64k or 4k binary (including the music), it would make a great demo. Cityscapes are pretty common and definitely doable in 4k or 64k; here are two examples of winning demos containing similar scenes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UgbKQKD9I4 4k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaNYOzwlVC8 64k
I was on BOS around the same time patio showed up... It's amazing to see how "far" he has come. What he has mastered is marketing to developers, more than anything else. Of course it doesn't add up, because it's like all marketing: all sizzle, no steak.
I'm sorry, I was in a rush to write that comment and didn't make myself clear. I was bringing up a similar, related thing, and did not mean to conflate the two.

I like the Introversion one better because it builds the city organically out of roads, personally.
Its sounds good, but people like you end up over-engineering the solution. AKA making it generic, extendable, etc.. It's pre-mature optimization, i see it from a mile away.
>> Colonialism probably damaged India in ways which can't even be repaired now.

When you say things like that, you are implying that things were better before colonialism. Is that right?

It is important to get your context right before you can look for a solution. Before Colonialism there was no such thing as "India" and what was there was absolutely steeped in "linguistic, regional and religious" systems.

How do you change anything while this context is well preserved?
Why are we on first-name basis with LeBron?
Here's another video of Cheetah jumping during a run
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C65a0RFhdd8
Because they were documented at all, at least in my experience.
The thing that stuck out to me the most when I was reading this was the notion of 'anti-fragility' -- the business structures resulting from the leveraged buy out apparently could not handle the shocks of 2008.

The question is, does the architects of LBOs and mergers and business like this have any duty to build more buffer and ability to withstand unpredictable futures? Of course, when faced with a $550m -> $100m decline in their Atlantic City revenues, that is a huge shift in the industry. But still, even as Las Vegas recovers, so too has Caesers hasn't! Too much legacy baggage.

So back to my central thesis, what kind of responsibility do corporate masters have to build anti-fragile and reliable companies? One interesting thing here is the lack of stakeholder lawsuits quotes in the article (although apparently there were some, as a different commenter noted).

In the end, the legal arena is where these matters of 'morality' (in-so-far as it exists in a legal sense for this area) play out and are decided. The only downside is it takes a long time, and costs a lot of money. Not sure if there is any advantages to moving this kind of adjudication farther into regulatory or government divisions. I guess the Nevada Gaming Commission get it's say for the ethics of running the operation.
Market share is misleading as high speed trains have been deployed on only a few corridors. These are expensive systems that need high volumes - in which case they work. Checking train share of market by corridor gives a better view.
Regarding info from Cato or Reason, I'd take it with caution. They used to produce good research but unfortunately they seem to be driven by ideological choices more than facts. Still a good read but needs fact-checking.
Last - about environmentalists: the overall impact of high speed train depends on how many people ride it. California should be a no brainer as traffic potential is huge. I wouldn't say the same of Spain (where lines are under used).
Overall: don't trust the definitive arguments. Most people have hidden agendas on the high speed rail topic.
From a realistic analysis of facts, you may conclude that California hsr should easily be a commercial success, therefore environmentally good, and has a good chance to be profitable if properly managed/built.
Texas hsr is the same. North east has a great potential but the costs are so high that just a small deviation ends up in huge sums of money in overspent. Guaranteed commercial success but risky from a construction/financial standpoint.
Other projects can be more questionable. I've participated to a review of all them for a potential investor and this is what I remember of it. Don't take it as truth, check the facts.
How auto-racing champ Mario Andretti fueled his second career
Greg Bear's "The City At The End of Time" It has its flaws, but there are more cool SF ideas in this book than practically anything I've ever read.
I would suggest you get a PHP server going right away. Install WordPress or another PHP framework. Make the server do something useful. Use PHP to receive POSTed CURL messages.

Use PHP... and you will become familiar with PHP.
I would like to read that article, comment whatever about git and graphs
How do you deal with business logic getting updated correctly across all modules that write to the database without some shared file or library?
Docker volumes are persistent. Docker never removes anything unless you ask it to, specifically to allow you to decide what is persistent and what isn't. It certainly has never removed volumes when containers stop using them.

However Docker lacks a good volume management UI, so that fact is not always clear.

To answer your question, the reason volumes are useful is that they allow you to be explicit about which part of the container's filesystem should have a lifecycle of its own, across container upgrades.
I am shocked you can't get remote work with 7 years exp. Rails.
Modern PHP is a sane language. A lot has changed in 8 years. I second Cholmon with his recommendation for phptherightway. I also highly recommend using a modern and developer friendly framework like Laravel. You can learn about it quickly by watching some tutorials at LaraCasts.com. Check out the Laravel 5 Fundamentals series which is free.

https://laracasts.com/series/laravel-5-fundamentals
This story is such a tragic indictment of our justice system. RIP Kalief. I can only hope something good comes out of the horror you lived through.
I'm curious as to how this (which I know as a "French Prussik") could possibly be jammed. IME, and that of the guides who recommended it to me, this is far less likely to cause jamming problems than a traditional single or double prussik.

For ascending, I believe their recommendation was to use a traditional single prussik for the harness, and this for the leg loop. This is certainly easier to move up an untensioned rope than a traditional prussik, but may also slip slightly more readily, I think.

Personally, I've used it mainly as a backup when abseiling; I can't understand why it's not universally used there (attached to leg-loop and below the abseil device) - you just keep your hand on it and it will allow descent, let go or allow it to move up and you are stopped.
When -isms start getting thrown around people stop making decisions based on their own beliefs and start doing so out of fear. That isn't the free market of ideas at work.
If the goal is to exec another process, you might want to consider moving to posix_spawn.
The reason I've heard for this ordering (or why BX is out of alphabetic order) is that in 16-bit x86, it's the only "splittable" (into BH and BL) register that can be used to access memory, so it was grouped together with the last 4 (which can also be used to access memory) in order to simplify the logic.
Influential User Identification in Online Social Networks
UNIX emerged in an era of more structured systems, though. Many OSes of the time did not have files in a naive sense -- they had record-based formats. "Everything is a file" was a revolutionary idea, and made UNIX simple and lightweight and portable.

It is interesting that the author doesn't highlight "everything is a file" which I have always understood to be the fundamental UNIX philosophy. ("Do one thing well" applies to so much more than UNIX.)

Our understanding of how to use types and how to structure data on disk and for streaming has greatly matured; but that doesn't mean we can ever afford to pay more to get nothing. Say for a moment that `ls` provided data in tab-separated value format (a format which is, unlike CSV, line filterable). Wouldn't that go a long way toward allowing for the HOFs the author mentions? And it wouldn't involve a shell type system (or "Shell Object Model").
One interesting thing is that even if they did tell people they were Atheist, but continued observing Judaism with action, nothing much would happen.

They would not be shunned or anything.

Judaism is much more concerned with actions than thought, it's also more concerned with this world than with heaven.

There is a saying from the Talmud that "a person who acts without belief will eventually come to believe". Meaning that's it's perfectly fine to do the action without the intent, even for years, even for their whole life. Not just OK, but actually encouraged.

(They saying applies also to smaller things than belief, for example someone who gives charity not to help someone, but because they like being praised is still lauded for their action. Eventually they will come to give charity to help someone, rather than for what they get from it.)
> The gist is to frequently re-render a complete and lightweight representation of the DOM, then apply a difference filter to detect the minimum changes that need to be made to the DOM. A similar technique has existed in game development long before React: re-render the game screen in every game loop, but only update the minimum portion of the screen which changed compared to the previously rendered screen.

Practically every desktop UI works that way (Windows API, X Windows, Java UI libs). It's funny to see how web programming in 2015 slowly reinvents the wheels known since 1970s.
> ...but the majority of your clients will be small and mid-sized companies. They will try to nickle-and-dime you for everything because they want to save money.

In case anyone reading this is considering going into consulting: There are good clients out there. You don't hear about them because people don't complain about good clients, they only complain about the bad ones.

I've been consulting for two years and never had these problems. It helps to be on a monthly rate (vs hourly) and choose your clients wisely.
I assume you are trying to convince people to use what you built?

tl;dr _The easiest way to do that is by explaining what's in it for your user, up front, and in the clearest terms possible._

For years I used to make the mistake of thinking that I should describe the features of my projects and let the the user decide if it solved their problem.

Let me show you an example. A friend of mine runs gitwatcher.com

Three major areas of prime real estate used to describe features, a little similar to your landing page.

The reason that features don’t make for good geek marketing is 2-fold:

1) People are lazy. Especially geeks. Almost nobody reads anything but the headers from your website.

2) If someone needs to decide whether or not they are interested in a feature, they need to think about all problems they are facing right now and see if the feature would apply to any one of them (e.g. do I really need to categorize by tagging and watch and compare right now?).

It’s a mental for-each loop. O(N). Most people are lazy. So they won’t.

Instead, talk about the problems that your side projects solve. Make it exceedingly easy for people to know what’s in it for them.

For example, if you look at shareasimage.com you will see their headline isn’t utilitarian like “we create images with text in them for you.”

It’s a solution-oriented pitch about the direct value you get for using your their product: "The fastest way to
double your social engagement."

Notice also the clear call-to-action. There is only ONE place that it is clear you should click.

To use the gitwatcher.com example, instead of selling features like “Categorizing by tagging,” you might try more solution-oriented sentences like:

“The easiest way to keep up with the coolest new open-source projects?”

“Want to get a free weekly email digest with the GitHub projects you should be keeping an eye on?”

Skip the for-each loops and let your readers do a O(1) mental operation. If you tell them the problems you solve, they can instantly know YES or NO. No mental processing necessary
Not true. It is called the autoblock for a reason. You tie it by wrapping it around your rope. To descend, you simply apply a slight amount of downward pressure to the top of the knot. This is the easy to release part. If you remove that pressure, by just moving your hand off the knot, it instantly grabs and stops all downward movement. A Prussik will retain most or all of it's tension, making it difficult to use in ascending or descending. I only use a Prussik in a situation where I want no movement at all for the duration, such as a backup to an anchor.
Also see "Caught in the pulpit", about preachers turned atheists yet unable to quit. One of the authors of the book is Daniel Dennett, one of the most inspiring rationalist contemporary philosphers.

http://www.amazon.com/Caught-The-Pulpit-Leaving-Belief/dp/06...
OAuth is better considered a microservice that grew a little too big. Strong consistency in identity management is a well studied problem. This is why people pay money for Active Directory consultants.

edit: The trick to your particular dilemma is to design your operations more carefully. Don't allow sensitive operations for any service via long lasting authentication tokens.
PHP is totally fine, it gets a bad rep it doesn't deserve. It's not as elegant as Python or Ruby but it's acceptable and it'll be more familiar than you think. If you're looking for the Railsy-est thing in PHP it's Laravel. If you can move them to Laravel (if it would be a good MVC fit) you'll be happy you did. Otherwise, don't stress about it too much.
Attention à la marche en descendant du train!
Unfairly? I think you're both ignoring the same behavior in other political factions.

I certainly see certain groups trying to decide who can make decisions about a woman's body, who people can marry or adopt children, and other individual freedoms.
"Free market of ideas" seems like one of those things that means whatever the person who invokes it wants it to mean.
If you look into composer and start writing code using and contributing packages, you may be surprised at how similar modern PHP development is to other popular languages. Also look at the PSR standards, especially for auto loading at http://www.php-fig.org/psr/
PHP is a decent language and ecosystem these days. Perhaps one of the minority of ecosystems that are actually on the rise rather than on the decline. It still has lots of warts, but whatever. Forget the idea that PHP is "taking what you can" or not a sane language -- you're in it now so might as well get up to speed with best practices and use it the best you can. I promise you can build compelling software in PHP.

http://www.phptherightway.com/ is a great resource for most things you'll need to know when working with modern PHP. Definitely start here.

Familiarize yourself with the ecosystem by poking at the most popular frameworks, at least skimming the docs to understand the types of things they provide and how they're structured: Zend, Symfony and Symfony Components, Laravel, Slim, Silex. Study WordPress, the "stereotypically bad" piece of software, for anti-patterns, but there's also a lot of good stuff in there and some improvements on the roadmap.

Composer is the npm of PHP. Check out packagist (horrible UI though) or browse github's PHP repos to find some of PHP's commonly used packages, like Monolog and phpunit. You can build a simple app in minutes in Laravel, and even put together a small product MVP using 90% boilerplate code within a matter of days on Laravel. Since there's a growing ecosystem for these tools now, it's getting easier and easier to write quality software in PHP, and it's actually a relatively pleasant experience.

Plus shipping and managing PHP in production is a breeze -- it's the most widely supported web platform, after all. We've got support on great CI systems like circleci and scrutinizer-ci.

Anyways, start there and good luck!
Sailors have known and used "jamming" hitches like this for centuries. It's the basic principle behind a sheep shank for example. Marseilles is of course a port city, so I wonder if he found some inspiration along the waterfront.
Quick rundown (in no particular order):

* The language has comes leaps and bounds since you last used it

* Install composer and learn how to use it (PHP package manager)

* Read up on Laravel, IMHO it's the best PHP Framework out there right now. They guy behind it is a genius and has great vision for it.

* You'll want to use nginx + php5-fpm (No more apache and php_mod)

* Check our PHPStorm, if you are going to use an IDE you can't bear intelij IMHO and PHPStorm has support for a myriad of things

* ORM's have greatly improved, even if you aren't going to use Laravel read up on it's ORM to see what is possible

* Much more OO now especially when it comes to interacting with the DB (no more mysql_connect/mysql_query nonsense)
Apple was famous for building multiple prototype versions of a product internally and then scrapping all but one pre launch.