mkyc

http://stats.grok.se/en/201009/Soul_food

All else aside, calling the person who turned the phone over to Gizmodo a thief might amount to slander, so Craig should be careful. This would be something for a court to decide: e.g. http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/6/45-6-302.htm . Note "permanently".

You should track at what times the people click next.

Your like button is too far away from the next button, and neither has keyboard shortcuts.

It seems to have gotten us h264. The variant that isn't patented is clearly inferior - look at the screenshots.

Good move, you now have one more user to not-track. I'll be trying DuckDuckGo out as my default search. I'll give you feedback if it doesn't work out. I hope others will give you a try by setting you as the default, too - you can always switch back. (Those that do, change http to https.)

A lot of people make the mistake of thinking that Godel's result suggests a superiority of human over machine, or something of the sort. There is, however, no reason to believe humans aren't themselves subject to Godel's theorem. Formalizing knowledge into a simple elegant system is very difficult, but this isn't a matter for Godel.

Yes, and a short, unsearchable domain name that I can't type either.

Allows invalid characters: http://séó.com/!]

The students and parents are also presumably fully aware. If on the other hand they were unaware, the student's mistake of opening a webcam program would not reduce culpability.

I get the feeling that you have no idea how science works, or what he's saying.

He's not saying that the 3rd law is faith, he's saying that you take it on faith. A statement of faith is one that rests on no proof or evidence. Someone who has either wouldn't be giving a dickish answer like "um, 3rd law" or "GTFO", they'd be busy explaining.

The most important part of science is questioning and attempting to falsify current theories. He has a legitimate question, answer it or be quiet.

Nice soundbite, but that's nonsense.

They're not trying to compete with Apple. It's just a demo they had lying around (probably from back when everyone was going crazy about chrome os), which they released because everyone's going crazy over tablets.

It's timely, and it's worth watching. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq3EeZz-W3A has some similar interactions.

Yes, it feels like "vinyl" - like I'm listening to vinyl except I'm in a little storage closet and I just tipped a box of records all over my face and my face is bleeding.

You broke your site. This is a visualization with an interface crowded into it. Revert and offer this - let's calm down and be honest - basic slideshow as a new visualization.

Imagine that instead of a pretty picture of the band, there was just a white background. Now look at the interface. It's a nightmare. The song that I'm listening to is controlled at the top right, except for hearts/comments, which are on the left side (except when I try to give a heart, the button slides away from me). The song-forward and back buttons are on opposite sides of the screen, well away from play/pause/volume. None of this would be a problem if the controls were visually/conceptually linked in some non-spatial way, but they are not.

I'd like to know the user testing process you used, and whether you ran this by whoever did your already-great former UI layout. I just hope your guiding light wasn't a small group of hardcore users and passers-by shouting "awesome, intimate, inspired, daring, and elaborate". It sure as hell wasn't your community.

The US government is allowed to exempt itself from intellectual property restrictions, especially in the interests of "national security".

Surprisingly, the South Butt is not selling butts, so tarnishment is not a serious claim. (Unless, of course, butts are "unsavory" in the jurisdiction - had a sufficiently rude word been used, tarnishment would be likely). In fact, they are selling clothing. So the standard interpretation of trademark blurring is also not quite applicable. Using a parody of a famous brand as your own brand even for commercial purposes is... apparently ok, in many cases.

I think they have a great case for infringement, though. From a reasonable distance (a few feet), I can't tell the difference. Oh, right - the south butt logo is on the left. Except, of course, when the item in question (say, a bag) is lying on the floor. Or maybe I don't care that much to remember details, relying more on crass pattern-recognition.

If you think that the text of a logo has all that much to do with the logo, then you're missing the point of having a logo. A "South Butt" logo could have been made that infringed on pepsi, or on mcdonalds. But we'll see how this goes.

You can't summarize that paper. The responses to the various objections are vital; they are part of the central argument, not tangential to it. The positive argument is also much richer than you portray it, and therefore much more convincing.

Save your summaries for techcrunch. They are not for refereed writing on subject X (i.e. 'existential risk') by the foremost authority on subject X. If you're not reading the whole thing (perhaps 2 or 3 times), you may as well not read it.

I like the clean interface. Your gear image looks ugly. Remove the period after "...wage right now".

Set up a comet-based common chat that everyone sees, and sit in it. This will let you help users learn to use your system, and will give you valuable feedback which you can use to improve it. You need to make "sitting around waiting for work" interesting. One way to do this is to piggyback the rest of the site on an irc-like technical chat.

You absolutely need a reputation system for this.

Why limit yourself to tutoring and to minimum wage? What if I'd like someone to give me a code review for $3?

$300 is accessible to "hobbyist" researchers (hackers) - this is the main point of this story - and hackers will crack DRM.

Great, I'm finding it readable, and pretty well-selected. I look forward to seeing the next issue.

Why waste 20 minutes of a professional developer's time, multiplied by the average number of reviewers, with a bonus for bad advice due to inexperience?

You know those clients who think programming is easy? Writing and reviewing copy is hard. So is pretending that you're an unbiased fresh-minded user, in a group of novice reviewers.

https://www.mturk.com/

1) Tell me what you think the site is for. 2) Is this site attractive? 3) Try to perform task X, cancel before it asks for credit card info, and tell me what the most annoying thing was. 4) etc.

Send them several sites to review, including yours and your competitors'. Save $200 or heaps of everyone's time. Or pay a professional.

http://ieng9.ucsd.edu/~mfedder/zombies.html (story link, without spoiler)

Also read: http://www.xs4all.nl/~pot/scifi/byhisbootstraps.html

Awesome, some real information, rather than pointless and obvious speculation as to what happened. He links a news story:

http://www.thetimesherald.com/article/20091211/NEWS01/912110...

That argument's hardly better than the "he helps cats therefore he's innocent" quip at the bottom of the link. Quit thinking of there being two sides: there's no "other story", there's just "insufficient information". All we know is that he got pepper sprayed and charged, and that he needs money. Donate to his defense fund and leave the speculation to science fiction writers.

(I'll let someone else comment on "if you don't obey, you're asking for it".)

This isn't a webapp, it's a wizard for naive prediction of the date of the singularity (you seem to mix AI with a very narrow form of IA). You're not quite "modeling" a future world. Java sucks for this - why use it, given the current state of javascript and canvas?

This would make an interesting blog post if you distributed the various "viewpoints" on the various questions into a bunch of images.

I agree, but yes it is: 1) you can't unscramble variable names, and 2) you have to prettyprint all js, even well-written js, or create a 'compression detection' algorithm.

No, the example given was voice clips. Your idea of a "trial run" is interesting, but I doubt that they're doing this to get some extra logistics practice. Unlike gmail or wave, mass mailing is a well-explored domain.

They're doing it to put the gmail logo on your fireplace mantle. Which is just fine, because you might not otherwise have sent a cheerful card. Plus their snowflake pun is hilarious.

Cheating is now easier. That's good, for two reasons:

1. The steps are small and have clear documentation. Copying a wall of numbers does nothing. Copying delimited steps while being told exactly what they are helps. Actually, it's a lot like typical classroom instruction!

2. Cheating from someone "smarter" allows rationalization. The class is hard, you suck at math, they're smart. But here a dumb process spits out answers. The typical response to this sort of narrow AI is "well, it's not that difficult after all". This suggests that you don't need an abundance of ingenuity to do rote math of this sort. And that's motivating, if you're feeling daft.

The mediocre borrow and the great steal; if a novice learns from brute copying then we shouldn't give a damn.

Have a look at the source:

    <div class="utterance"><div class="name">Iwata</div> 
    <div class="message">In this interview, we're going...

http://nymag.com/news/features/27840/ (2007) has the best account of this effect that I've seen.

one page version: http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&...

For those, like me, wondering why this sounds eerily familiar:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=124386

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/02/my-favorite-lia.html

It's great to see it posted again - though I do prefer that original overcoming bias version. I can only speculate as to why it received only 30 points two years ago. The key differences seem to be a) the linkbait title, b) the bolding of random sections within the post itself (which I found made it uglier to read) and c) the picture at the top of the post. Of course there's also d) we had fewer people.

I don't know what it is, and maybe I'm mistaken, but it seems posts like this tend to attract a lot of low-signal comments. Perhaps this can be used to our advantage: every few weeks, pg could let a few really linkbaity and low-grade posts past the filters. Pictures of cats, or something equally fun but inane. Something from the top of Digg. Everyone who upvoted such a post would have their voting rights suspended. Would this help or harm the quality of posts here?

Because it is possible with a Turing machine.

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

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:CgFC04CcivAJ:folk.uio.n...

The idea (iirc, and poorly translated into more familiar vocabulary) is that when we're running a quantum Turing machine on a regular machine, the data on the tape can be "quantum encoded". There is a specific series of steps for "decoding" it, but it's a destructive operation: decoding the data screws up the data. Decoding it a second time gives you broken data, and you know that it's broken.

(You might wonder, why don't we just write a Turing machine that can decode the data without destroying it? Well, you're free to do so, but then it's no longer a quantum Turing machine running on a Turing machine - it's no longer the same as the physics, can't be implemented directly in quantum physics, and therefore would be both slow and potentially have a tape with more slots than atoms in our universe.)

Whoa, no, don't do this.

dsc-450.jpg > user/acbdddc1ab1b73536fabbd3f4ffeea4e dsc-450.jpgsalt > f043ce111eb398cd280b67c80c6c8ca6 usersaltdsc-450.jpg > 272ed08a85fc1e47b97462fb053a7c29

You'd need at least a secret site salt, as well as a per-user salt. If you have only a site salt, I can figure out what file names would be by uploading my own. If you had only a per-user salt, I calculate it myself. The problem of your site salt getting out remains.

At the very least, you should randomly generate identifiers. This makes it less obvious which targets are worth looking at. What you really need, though, is something like per-folder access control.