Thanks! I can parse any applications really since it reads the data from the display buffer. Web browsers was just an example, it is application agnostic at the core.
> If you could parse out other applications I could see it being a hit.
I had a suggestion: This feature gives you stories 'above' a certain threshold. I think it would help a lot if there was an option for stories 'below' certain threshold.
Rationale behind it is that lots of folks here (like me) don't check the New Submissions section regularly and lots of good stuff never gets much love. If there was an option for generating a front page for stories below certain points, a user can review them and upvote worthy ones, which eventually can feature on normal front page. Any opinions?
The prime difference is that the proposed feature would rate the stories according to HN algorithm (taking threshold into account) not chronological order as 'new' does. It'd give a filtered-out 'new' section. As in, a story that is upvoted by 2-3 people and has made to second/third page of HN but never makes it to front page. Few good stories deserve wider audiences IMO.
Every time I read something from aforementioned blog, I finished with a feeling of disappointment. No insights, no deep thought process, just plain apple-fanboyism.
Let me guess—you don't read aforementioned blog at all, do you?
I don't see much apple fanboyism if any, but plenty of antiappleism and antigrubersim, which most often is based on zero research and analysis, just parroting some latest anti-Apple fad.
I think bhavin is saying that Gruber's blog posts are Apple fanboyism. I'm not sure how you could deny that they are at least generally favorable toward Apple.
If a patent examiner cited the swinging patent in an application involving actual technology, I would guess the examiner might have intended the citation as a red flag, a signal to future judges and juries that the examiner regarded the application as bogus but couldn't prove it.
I went through both Samsung and MSFT patents that 'refer' to this patents.
This patent, in both cases, is cited by the examiner. So, my idea behind that is the examiner either didn't like his job or had a good sense of humor about whole patent process!
You're free to classify me as foolish for this, but before clicking the link I honestly expected this to be one of thought provoking articles (as there are often ones here on a sunday), with an intentionally absurd headline.
Not to beat a dead horse, but could we be any nearer to reddit? I wish I could hear from people who upvoted this one.
Not to beat a dead horse, but could we be any nearer to reddit? I wish I could hear from people who upvoted this one.
I'm not sure who is ultimately responsible, however I think your response would definitely make the list of 0th world problems, as defined in the linked article.
It would help if fellow HNers read through the content a bit before upvoting something quickly. Here is a project which was last updated more than 2 years ago (no changes in source/tutorial/wiki in 2 years). There's no working implementation to support the claim. Any sane programmer would highly doubt existence of a (faster_than_C && safer_than_java) claim. Why are we as a community are becoming more and more obsessed with sensational link-baits?
Agreed: http://code.google.com/p/anic/source/list there has been no updates since 2010. I was honestly surprised to see this on HN and actually had to double check that I wasn't seeing an old HN submission for some reason.
I was briefly involved in this project, I wrote some code for instruction selection, was active on the mailing list and had a few lengthy discussions about dataflow programming with Adrian/Ulitmus. Last I heard, in early 2011, he was still working on it, but in private, and he had changed focus somewhat to something even more ambitious. I voiced my concern over raising the bar before the first simpler version was released and feature creep, but I guess his mind was made up. I haven't heard anything since, despite trying to reach him a couple of times :-(
So, from this, I would say that ANI can safely be assumed dead unless a working compiler is surprise-released.
Same here, I had some discussion with the creator but it looked rather doomed from the start. He was worrying about parser optimization, logo design, and interactive shells, when there wasn't even any (hand-)compiled program or proof of concept of the semantics...
You said you found the writing style immature, but have you considered the job ads of the companies OP might have applied to? "Xbox's PS3 Nerf guns Starcraft/Rock band competitions !!!".. How mature is that?
I am not talking about the 20% interviews where it didn't workout, but the other 80% where there was no reply, I am sure many of those job ads won't classify as "Mature" in your view. Some of the best programmers i know can't write even proper English sentences, since its not their first language. Do you think they are any less able to do the job? And does it disqualify from expecting even a reply to their application?
I completely agree with all your arguments except for one , writing proper English is really a skill that a developer need to have.
On this post http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CollegeAdvice.html
the first advice that Joe gives to the college student is Learn to Communicate and he has some good arguments for it.
I too am not a native English speaker by the way.
umm, what I meant when I said there have been attempts is - those seem to be not full hearted with no outside support. E.g. there's no open-source social network project I know of which plans to run through people's contribution (financial and technical).
> If you could parse out other applications I could see it being a hit.
Could you elaborate?