sylvinus

Well those $77k are helping run CAH! They are making a huge profit on this, and they deserve every penny of it :)

I don't think it has anything to do with the actual cost of digging. IMHO the primary reason is they don't want to keep digging for weeks. By baking in an artificial cost increase they make sure this will stop after a couple days maximum.

Hey!

We did start it a long time ago, but then someone aggressively took over the meetup page, so we're not in control anymore: http://www.meetup.com/parishackers/

We've since started "Paris Tech Talks" in the same spirit, which is now the largest generalist tech meetup in Paris: https://www.meetup.com/Paris-Tech-Talks/

What we've seen over time though is that the Paris tech scene already has a enormous number of high quality meetups, and people are increasingly tired of them. We are seeing the same general decline in interest that happened with hackathons a couple years ago.

I'd say that "Hacker News" is not really a strong enough unique proposition to build a new meetup on. Meetups linked to specific languages or technologies tend to do much better over time.

Feel free to reach out if you want to discuss more!

You should watch the TEDx talk of his daughter: https://www.ted.com/talks/sarah_kaminsky

What most people fail to understand (but was explained very well by Joel in some talks) is that SO is primarily optimized for Google & read-only users just looking for the answer to a common issue. By that metric they are extremely successful.

Many things people complain about are deliberate design choices that actually made SO popular in the first place.

Depends on your perspective! I think people working on the Ads Platform have much more interesting technical challenges than those working on G+, and that may be more appealing to many developers.

FYI, this is from 2015.

Are they claiming to have some new Clinton emails as well? https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/755501298687115264

Would you prefer her to work somewhere else for 3x that?

Completely false headline, please change it.

They mentioned multiple times that because the stage is empty, its center of gravity is much lower than what you'd expect.

Something like http://commonsearch.org ?

Oh no, one project at a time :)

We used http://www.discourse.org/, which I recommend.

Thanks!

We probably won't expose the underlying crawl data ourselves but being able to reference it just like [1] does is indeed important.

Hey, you're welcome! Hackday Paris 2011 brings back some nice memories ;)

One problem with what you'd like to do is the pagination. Because we have to send queries to all the shards and then re-rank them, it becomes increasingly hard (and useless for most users) to build pages with p > ~20 (which is why all search engines heavily limit their pagination). So our main infrastructure definitely won't be optimized for that :/

However sending the top ~500 pages with a keyword + a domain filter should be doable pretty easily!

Right, there is no specific roadmap for infrastructure yet or view of what servers are currently running. I will add those things on our Operations page, thanks! https://about.commonsearch.org/developer/operations

I definitely share your usage of "!g", which is why Common Search already supports it ;)

It is very early so we are not yet incorporated. The issues you mention will definitely be taken into account!

At scale, we'd probably have multiple legal entities in different countries anyway, like Wikimedia.

Thanks for the feedback! What would be your usecase for that API?

Well I actually share some of that anger so I'm sorry if I read too much into "destroy" and "sad". Common Search is forkable by design so it should hopefully stay on course one way or the other!

One thing to consider is that we can build the index on AWS and then only do replication with other datacenters at the Elasticsearch level, which is ~50x smaller than the raw data.

So much anger!

I left Jamendo 6 years ago so I have limited influence on what they do now, unfortunately.

Common Search is a nonprofit and 100% open source so it is fundamentally different.

The current average size of documents in the index is 2kB, so we'll need ~3.5TB of storage. For 1 replica this could mean 5 i2.xlarge instances if we go for SSDs on AWS.

Hi! I'm the founder of Common Search.

I don't think search result quality is on a linear scale so it's hard to define "better".

The results will definitely be less personalized, which will be a big plus for some people, and a blocker for others. There will be a few other dimensions where we can stand out, and some where we will have a hard time catching up (index size for instance).

In the end, given enough contributors, I'm pretty sure the results can get "good enough" for most people, and hopefully "better" for some ;)

Hi! Data is indeed as important as the algorithm. Common Crawl is a very good bootstrap but we will certainly need to go beyond once it proves to be the limiting factor. We also hope we can help them improve their data set in the short term by giving them a larger URL seed list.

Hah, sorry it was lost in translation :)

Since when is a 4.4 GHz computer required to view a static presentation website?

Well, that trick won't last long either. It's trivial to verify that an IP indeed belongs to Google:

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/80553?hl=en

I just feel the risk of major projects moving (increasingly likely) seems much higher than the complexity of adding the couple very small features, that probably don't go against anything they might be doing Enterprise-side.

I can't understand why GitHub isn't responding to the "Dear GitHub" people. They are not requesting huge political changes, it just boils down to a CONTRIBUTING.md and a basic voting system that many alternatives already have. It might take a couple weeks/months to spec and develop but they should at least send some kind of acknowledgement?

Do they actually want all those large open source projects to leave?