fiaz

Can you somehow prove that Koichi made the solution SOOO obvious that even a teenager could have made the fix?

From what little I've read, it seems to me that this kid is pretty smart and has made a very generous contribution to the Ruby community.

You did perfectly fine - seriously.

Alternatively, you could have gone the comedic route by making the whole thing into a big joke, but it's not like things would have been better.

I find this list hard to believe. University of Illinois Chicago is in the list and University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign is nowhere to be found.

I think it is widely held that UIUC ranks higher than UIC.

The last two flights I took, there was something physically wrong with the plane. The first of which occurred after takeoff (the landing gear would not retract), forcing us to circle at low altitude for about 40 minutes before landing; and the second required us to be grounded for about 60 minutes (a component on the wing needed to be replaced in order to pump fuel into the plane).

It doesn't give me much confidence in the quality controls of flying, but the fear mindset is much more insidious - and more importantly - in my own personal control. Whenever that mindset kicks in, I joke to myself that life has been good to me, and usually that takes care of things...

There is an important parallel between the fear of flying and the fear of striking out on your own. There are so many things that are beyond your control, and taking-off (in either context) is the riskiest part.

I never cease to be amazed at the first moment when an airplane feels like a kite in the wind right after takeoff.

The preservation of one's own life is perhaps everybody's primary goal in life, and so there are many excellent reasons for somebody to avoid risks so that this goal is repeatedly achieved. But such a life (devoid of risk) is stagnant and hindered. I wonder if this is the difference between living and merely existing.

It looks like a highly sophisticated de-humidifier...a very cool product nonetheless.

One of the best moments in movie history is the swimming scene at the end [I should add, if you have not seen the movie and are doing a startup, do yourself a favor and watch the movie and do NOT click on the link!]:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWNRvRecE1Y

is adsense the only way to make money in advertising? why not sell your own ads the way TechMeme does?

King Warrior Magician Lover by Robert Moore and Douglas Gillette

http://www.amazon.com/King-Warrior-Magician-Lover-Rediscover...

All events given in the article are independent of each other and future outcomes. There's absolutely no reason to bet money on Chrome because of Ballmer.

Both. Microsoft has always stated they were interested in getting into the search business, so there is no surprise there. The fact that they've released something that is actually good may have spurred Google to make their announcement before having something to actually demonstrate.

I would imagine (as most have) that they are releasing some sort of Google-centric Linux distribution. This would make sense as it doesn't take long to roll your own if you know what you are doing (and I'm pretty sure Google knows how to do this).

Ok well stated. I think I got sidelined by the quote I threw up in the original posting (especially the browser war statement).

But the theoretical strategy that you state (the commoditization of the operating system) seems a bit "round about" for Google. In other words, I think it would be better for Google to really make their web browser into a new kind of web browser instead of creating an entirely new kind of operating system. Better yet, a web browser that enhances an existing operating system might be a better way to commoditize the OS.

It is possible that they have figured out a killer app for their new OS, but I suppose that's fuel for a separate discussion.

I have yet to see Google branded cell phones (based on Android). If this were to happen, then I would seriously question what Google's objective is from a business perspective. To shift directions and get into (old) businesses that are quickly heading towards commoditization is a step backwards.

Keep in mind, their core business is advertising and as mixmax has pointed out, they want to lower the barrier to access this advertising. Trying to convince users to switch operating systems seems to me a rather convoluted path to achieving this objective.

Ok this is interesting. I agree with you about the roadblock argument to a point. I think where it breaks down is that the browser itself is the choke point for any internet based strategy as it is the gateway to the web for 99.9% of the users out there.

To evolve the browser into something that is closer to the server would eliminate the roadblock of which you speak. I don't think you need to create an OS to do that. IE has a decided advantage for Microsoft as it comes pre-installed and is prominently showcased within the OS itself. The fact that you have to download and then install either Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or Opera presents a roadblock for users. Switching operating systems is an even bigger roadblock.

FTA: Google won the browser war, with the help of Mozilla. The important point here is that Google doesn't care what browser you use. They don't make money on browsers, they make money on online offerings and apps so all they care about is that your browser is fast and supports the newest technologies.

1) Chrome's market share is minute

2) Google makes over 95% of their money on advertising

I'm not entirely certain how much thought went into this article, but I'm certain that the Google OS hype machine has gone into overdrive as I'm seeing too many articles like this that make absolutely no sense.

The article is spot on in asking a critical question about exactly how capable Google's offering is in reality as an OPERATING SYSTEM. To say that Google's OS is to provide a distributed storage mechanism is to bypass the concept of what an OS actually is - the gateway to the underlying hardware so that you can perform the functionality required to complete a specific task.

If Google's goal is to provide us with a distributed storage mechanism, then a better strategy would be to provide a better interface to their web offerings on existing operating systems.

No matter how much we desire a web-centric user experience, there will always be a need for software that takes advantage of all the computing power available in as small a foot print that is right in front of you. The question is will Google's OS provide this ability equally as well as Windows or Mac OSX can in order to be considered a "complete" operating system that has additional advantages.

I really can't take such articles seriously anymore because they very simplistically confuse companies with tribes and competition with war...

Microsoft, Google, and Apple have figured out ways to make money in different ways. Whatever Google has to offer, it is going to help Apple and Microsoft further delineate what they do best. I hardly see this as "going to war".

Yeah, him and Zed Shaw. But their personalities seem to be on opposite poles.

I was hacking my Apple IIe with "Thriller" playing in the background. I would like to think that counts for something. Perhaps that doesn't warrant the top link on HN at all - after all his death has no impact on the computer world. At the same time, his cultural contribution to my generation is just as much important to me as was the contribution of Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Steve Jobs, and Steve Wozniak.

As a compliment to this book, I submit "Fooled By Randomness" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. An excellent book that describes very well how human beings make deliberate attempts to rationalize random events.

Absolutely correct - please consult with your doctor before you take any advice off of the internet. Messing around with your neural circuitry may cause more harm than good.

Godin was probably drawing an allusion to Guy#3 being the "tipping point" of people to join.

As far as detractors...somebody could have just as easily poked fun at Guy#1 (mock dancing, throw a soft object at him, etc.), thus invalidating his own self-absorbed ecstasy, and probably making it more difficult for the observers to be converted into participants (not to mention detracting from the overall mood of the purpose of the festival).

I think a more reasonable explanation for how participation precipitated would be to look at it from the perspective of influence and the time for that influence to propagate throughout the crowd. Guy#1 takes a few minutes to influence Guy#2 to join. The two dancing together takes less time to influence Guy#3, and then the three of them take VERY little time to attract a small group, and then the whole festival jumps in...

I think that there is some value in calculating the time it takes for the group to go from one participant to many participants to see if there is an exponential growth rate taking place.

That might take the effort out of squinting too hard.

;)

The question really boils down to whether or not I want to ditch QS for QSB...any thoughts on which one might be better?

One thing I've found frustrating with QS is that some of the functionality that worked in Tiger is no longer functional in Leopard.

and there you have it...the redditization of HN...

edit: I should add that yes, this article does make me feel less secure about the quality of articles making it to the top of HN (hence the very last statement in the original comment).

Beautiful article...please more like this. I had no idea that Perl was used for something so important and on such a large scale.

I really don't understand the purpose of this article. Sure, Wolfram has a super huge (and possibly fragile) ego...does that in some way make the author feel less secure such that he has to invest time in trying to convince the world that Wolfram "ain't all that"?

I really feel compelled to point this out because as of now, this headline is #2.

What this article says to me is:

1) there exists multiple frameworks that are independently excellent

2) some of the best minds in both worlds have nothing better to do other than to take sides in meaningless discussions

AWESOME! In the meantime I'm still waiting to get invited to the beta...

(please invite me on your own time, not because I posted this to HN)

Is there any way to run background processes in the Java version of GAE?