3,065 karma · joined March 12, 2007
http://www.underengineering.com
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/ntoshev; my proof: https://keybase.io/ntoshev/sigs/-piodh_N3Iz_KHRDy9q8DwzUm8hyzhfGYMQHzguhJhI ]
http://blog.freebase.com/2010/04/29/a-freebase-implementatio...
The Facebook docs:
http://developers.facebook.com/docs/api
But even the cleanest API is of no use if the API calls don't actually work...
I see this statement a lot and I never understand it. If you're Zynga, should you build Farmville for OpenSocial and as an independent site too? The cost of doing this seems prohibitive.
Most businesses built on Facebook can be taken elsewhere if the cost of the Facebook platform starts to outweigh the benefits. Even Farmville can be ran independently, but consider how many users they'd lose in the transition and afterwards.
Open Graph API seems very clean and it also seems like it doesn't need much documentation... if the API calls actually worked. I haven't used it and I don't plan to start using it given these reports (in the old API there were also quite a few things that break occasionally and take forever to be repaired).
You're right it can be easier once you are familiar with it, but there's nothing to suggest how/if "up" works if you are not.
All re-ranking you can do is very limited with these services because they are black boxes: you don't see what factors went into ranking a page the way it happened, you can't tweak the weight of different factors, you can't add new factors. All you can have is hardcoded rules like "if there is a wikipedia page in the first 20 results, bring it on top" that don't really add much value, because if that wikipedia page is any good it would be on top already. With spam results it's similar: you can provide impressive customer service blacklisting spam on user requests, but major search engines are already pretty good in low-ranking spam so much that you don't see it if there are any other meaningful results.
Your marketing here on HN has been brilliant, you have some very interesting UI decisions and possibilities that Google doesn't have, but your added value is definitely not in improved ranking of results.
Such articles are meaningless.
I think your son doesn't need answers to the questions you ask here. He wants a simpler explanation allowing him to understand the concept and relate it to things he sees in his daily life. Start with something counter-intuitive to hold his attention, e.g. with the fact that things with different mass fall with equal speed. Then talk about the Earth and the moon, tides, what an orbit is.
This is where both Kurzweil and you are wrong. A very complex compression/decompression scheme can achieve much better compression. Intuitively, you can encode some of the information in the decompressor itself, even if it is in a very abstract form. This is the reason why compression competitions include size of the decompressor code, e.g. http://prize.hutter1.net/
Try bringing some schizophrenia to the site: show the "classic" version to the "classic" crowd by default for some time and see if the two versions will diverge more.
Subjectively I feel programming articles are getting rarer on HN.
I have used Rails, but my web framework of choice is Tornado; I really like their design choices.
cat /dev/urandom > /dev/dsp
There is a free iPhone app too.
Maybe a separate PM would see the forest better as he is not looking at specific trees, but there are a lot of people who can do both well.
E. Dijkstra
No intellectual curiosity was satisfied by the article.