jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I remember an MIT (Sloan business school) professor giving a presentation and warning the attendees not to take money from those who were giving you just enough to fail. It sounds like you're in a hard place and, as such, the investor is going to get more than the money is probably worth. It also sounds like you've already come to the conclusion that this isn't a great deal.

It's a little hard to judge. Are you on to something big like Twitter or Groupon where you'll be a commonly-known-name or more on to something big like many startups that produce nice products, but aren't going to change the world. For example, Tarsnap is one of my favorite things, but it won't become a household name. Likewise, how close are you to having a product that you could show off, having users, etc? If you're closer to launching, you might be able to launch or private beta Gmail style and get better terms from potential investors who see a product.

The impression I get is that you've already put a lot of work into this and you're coming up just a tad short. You're negotiating from a place of necessity and that isn't a good place to be.

The investor doesn't sound like a friend-type, but rather someone looking to control. If you aren't ready now, will you be ready when that investors investment runs out? Maybe you're 75% there and will be 95% there when the investment runs out? Just in time for the investor to swoop in and take the company from you when you need more money? I'm not saying this will be the case, but if you're going to be giving up that much, you should be absolutely sure that you can launch within the time the investment will give you.
I'd tend to agree, but for myself I think what I enjoyed most about programming was the problem solving aspect. As I've matured as a programmer the problems become easier and thus less interesting and there seems to be less and less undiscovered country. I wonder how to get that feeling of exploration back and I think I should blame myself for not having the time or energy to explore harder problems.

I do think the author is misplacing his angst, it isn't programming itself, it's the business of programming that sucks. How to fix it though?
Anything that makes Facebook unpleasant is bad for business because it keeps users from logging in.

You don't see anything slimy with contacting your friends and family to embarrass you? They are threatening your reputation with friends, family, and employers.
Wait a second... You're telling me there's a senator thinking for himself and the good of the American people, instead of having lobbyists and special interest groups think for him? This is all wrong. Impeach the SOB!
Nice theory, I've never heard of anyone caring how students performed against a test bank.
Too bad its discussion threads are so hard to read.
This is interesting. I've come to love Solarized, and switch between the two depending on day and night.

http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized

In iTerm2 I mapped the lighter theme to CTRL-CMD-L and the dark theme to CTRL-CMD-D. I am sure there is a quick way to change the default theme as well, though I haven't really tried too hard.
A potential???

If you want less of something, or don't care if you get less of it, you tax it.

Totally ignoring the fairness issue (it's certainly a debatable point), starting from this status quo how can you possibly believe this change will not cause harm?

About the only way I see for the medium to long term is that VC firms restructure, which might end up with a neutral or even better situation (Fred Wilson is hoping for the latter, but I didn't find his case very convincing).

But in the short term it's hard to see how it's going to be anything other than a mess not to mention a distraction from the real job.
Can someone clarify for me:

1) Why do manufacturers do this? Is it for their own internal warranty control / tracking, or is there a broader federal mandate motivating this?

2) The dots are only useful in after-the-fact analysis, correct? If I print something and then there's reason to suspect me they can print something, compare, and verify, but there's no mechanism to find the initial document and find the printer, correct?
I mean that we are obliged to look for meaning just so that we consider the possibility that there indeed is meaning, so that we can act accordingly to avoid ending up in hell (or a similar place). And by that I don't mean the introspective, philosophical, non-falsifiable kind of meaning, but meaning somewhere encoded in the laws of physics, say, we are in a simulation and our creator will punish us if we destroy our planet.
I take you missed the "Cosmos, a time-space odyssey" series last year?
An early April fools and not an original one at that
How unoriginal. I was in Brooklyn long before the goat heads showed up, and I can tell you the whole "ritual sacrifice" thing has been kind of done for a while now. I hear all the real cutting edge indie mutilations are in Ridgewood, Queens anyways.
Google found this: http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/ldavis/df.pdf. But those high-order polynomial fits (see Figures 9 and 10) seem a little shady to me.
I'm saying that if you need to explain why one flyer is better than another then the design might not be as strong as you think.
We will have to see. It is a theory and I'm hoping to build some real world and computer model experiments.

A lot of my ideas of what would be good to do are based on Chris Alexander's idea of wholeness in which we actually have a better than 50/50 chance of telling what a 'good' transformation is. If it is less than 50/50 then very little will work.

I don't mean to insult. I need to do more study of what the austrian's really put forward. It is my least favorite of the schools and I haven't spent as much time learning about it as I should.
In Beijing, they also ration plates, so that isn't very effective either.

And parking, damn, parking sucks. Two cars? That would suck twice as much.
Obama should have declared the entire fiasco a National Emergency and repossessed the entire operation, repossessed all the engineering information and subcontracted out the fix to Exxon under the command of the Army Corps of Engineers or better, DARPA. If BP is the first and only operator drilling at 5k feet and royally screwed the pooch than how worse of a job could Exxon do?

When the President of the United States thinks that BP is the best we can do, we are all well and truly boned. Not because that is obviously not true, but because the President has more or less abdicated his power.
Who I am worried about are not the superstar scientists, but the masses of people who become addicted to mass media to the detriment of other parts of their lives.

>> If electronic media were hazardous to intelligence, the quality of science would be plummeting.

Scientists today did not grow up on technology, so I don't think this is a valid point, until the next generation at least. Also, measuring the "quality of science" by "discoveries" is poor -- only a few very dedicated (very anomalous) people make major discoveries.
This is an interesting article. But I think he's being too mysterious about this notion of "cheating".

Consider a far smaller set: {1, 2, 3}. Bob wants to prove that there are at most 3 elements in this set. (Yes, I know this is trivial.) His strategy: name 3 elements in the set (1, 2, 3), and no matter what Alice picks from the set, he will name her choice. Obviously, this strategy works.

Now suppose that Bob wants to prove that there is only 1 element in the set {1, 2, 3}. His strategy is similar: name 1 element in the set (2, say), and -- he hopes -- no matter what Alice picks from the set, he will name her choice. Of course, this doesn't work. However, in order to be sure that Bob does not name her choice: Alice must know his strategy. Does that mean she is "cheating"? Hardly.

The above "cheating" issue is the same as that in the article. So we're not talking about some mysterious property of infinite sets.
The web developers who put this into place should be the ones lynched.

All that "Goatse Security" did was put together a quick and dirty Luhn algorithm and start generating serial numbers to grab data from a publicly-accessible part of AT&T's website. Shady? Sure. Malicious? Perhaps. Illegal? I really don't think so. I'd kind of liken it to creating a script to check generated lists of phone numbers against one of those "people search" sites to scrape data.
And why is that? Because they didn't want 1-2-3 to be "the" reason to own a DOS computer, leaving them constrained to support 1-2-3 at the expense of their own loftier ambitions. Such as dominating the office automation market. Your objection is merely a smaller part of the whole picture.

If somebody else owned Office, Microsoft would have to dance to their tune.

One could argue that this is hardly a bad thing in the abstract; what company has total independence? I think some of what you're seeing here is the way that the attitude of the leadership filters down the chain and affects the company profoundly. "An abstract company" may be happy to carve out a niche somewhere and be part of a large ecosystem, but Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Larry Ellison need to be the winners in control.
If you're willing to sift through the noise you'll find something worthwhile and people that will respect you for the work you do. Craigslist isn't my first choice, but it is reliable; lots of people use it everyday.
"proud to be Mac" because their fully cross-platform offerings include Mac OS and iOS? Really? And of course they're looking forward to a major update to one of those platforms which will let them do more with it. The article even makes it clear - "and it's similar to what some Android users can already do."

This is trying so hard to tailor a story to a particular audience it's actually somewhat painful to read.
Not just some guy:
"Reiss, a professor of psychology at Ohio State University"
Are there any pics of this giant open space? I'm inclined to agree with you, but I'd like to at least see it before passing judgement.
it is awesome to see how fast react native is gaining third party plugins :)
the npm route surely will be a boom for them (though some packages wont work)
Yeah, but defense in depth requires that each layer make the security strictly better, or, at least, not introduce a huge vulnerability.

If a non-cop picks up a tagged gun, that seems like it makes them more easily confused as as a good guy, and thus a lot more dangerous. And if you were already able to reliably distinguish plainclothes-cop from plainclothes, then what does the tagged gun add?

What am I missing here?
You can simply keep those messages in an encrypted backup. Who knows how valuable they will be in 20+ years. And maybe you will be able to apply (local) AI to them and find out interesting things about yourself.
Cell phone tracking, eyewitnesses, confessions. Most of these people aren't going to be arrested or prosecuted, and the more egregious ones are going to brag about it.
Yes data is shared and kept. Now you know.
See I see this and it's $349 for the hardware plus $99/year.

At that point, I might as well just go with a paid ProtonMail or similar solution.

My expectations for self hosted isn't to have annual or monthly fees.
Re: correct language/abstraction

At the highest level you want a purely functional DSL with no side effects. Preferably one that catches dependency cycles so it halts provably.

On the lowest level, however, all your primitives are unix commands that are all about side effects. Yet, you want them to be reproducible, or at least idempotent so you can wrap them in the high level DSL.

So you really need to separate those two worlds, and create some sort of "runtime" for the low level 'actions' to curb the side effects.

* Even in the case of bazel, you have separate .bzl and BUILD files.
* In the case of nix, you have nix files and you have the final derivation (a giant S expression)
* In the case of CI systems and github actions, you have the "actions" and the "gui".

Re: CI vs build system, I guess the difference is that build systems focus on artifacts, while CI systems also focus on side effects. That said, there are bazel packages to push docker images, so it's certainly a very blurry line.
It’s hard to know what users want if those wants are assumed, which serves to reinforce bias.
I've got the same problem. Using a Hetzner VPS and can't find my IP on any blacklists but it's all sent straight to spam...
> Its one way FAANG weeds out lower performing engineers.

I believe you.

And without any judgement on her specific case, I can also believe it is a way for "The Company" to discourage "confronting" the structure
Answers you got from
astuyvenberg and eugenekolo are incorrect. That's not how it works.

The way it actually works is that when you join, you get a starting grant that vests over next 4 years, and then every year, you get a so-called refreshers, each of which is roughly a quarter of your original grant, which also vest over 4 years. This means that in year 4 of your employment, you get a (last) quarter of your original grant, along with a quarter of each of the 3 refreshers you received in the next 3 years. Then, in year 5, your original grant is gone, and you only get a quarter of each of the 4 refreshers you got in past 4 years.

Depending on the size of your original grant, and the size of refreshers, this can result in some pay cut in year 5. This pay cut can be bigger or smaller, depending on the size of your original grant, size of refreshers (which are driven by your performance rating/promotions), stock price in year 5 etc. However, other than some special circumstances where you get some additional discretionary stock grant, after year 5 you kinda reach a steady state, and your the value of your stock compensation can go down pretty much only if the stock price goes down (assuming constant performance over time).
There are better stories that deserve this headline, stories where people land their dream job only to be disappointed by the role, or the company, not just one individual.

Still, the position she was in sucks. You can never have a good working relationship with the harasser again, and the only outcome that would resolve the situation is the harasser getting fired, but that won't happen with only hearsay of inappropriate comments; it would need to be something egregious with witnesses. The only move is switching teams and telling HR so it (hopefully) doesn't happen again.
> No competitive servers can be built with it.

Not all servers need to be high end. There’s a big market for small websites.
Rather, the connotations of the word "nerd" have lessened significantly. In the 60s and 70s, it was like what being called an "incel" is today. It was meant to mark you as unlikeable, unpleasant, unattractive, and pretty much outside of the realm of normal human consideration.
> Users 18-49 were 73% of the user base and produced 72% of tweets, but only 27% of political tweets.

> Users 50+ were only 26% of the user base and produced only 28% of tweets, but 73% of political tweets.

By these numbers, users 15-17 are <1% of the user base and produce 0% of political tweets. (And even more dramatically, despite being more than 0% of users, they also produce 0% of tweets.) Even after allowing for rounding, this can't possibly be correct.
Cool, so what are you going to do with all the hundreds of millions of pet animals that already exist?

> Similar reasoning, the idea is to cut down the downstream demand so we're able to cut down the upstream one

That's an inaccurate, backwards analogy. The accurate analogy would be "my pet eats only mango cores, so I'm going to buy the mango even though its from another continent". Which is patently untrue. Pet food demand doesn't drive human meat demand - human meat demand makes pet food cheap and plentiful. Cutting human meat demand would drive up the price of pet food (because there are fewer castoff materials available) and lead to people re-evaluating how many pets they can/should have. Alternatively, it may also lead to investments in healthy animal-free pet foods, similar to fake meat for humans.

Since you're so concerned about the environmental impact of pets, consider also that for many people, their pets are surrogate children. Presumably if they couldn't have pets they might have actual children, which is far more destructive to the environment.
> Pets are doing us a favor by eating all these things that would otherwise simply be thrown away, with a great deal of pollution involved

Seriously, just the fact of making their food, the food containers/packages (aluminium, plastics or whatever, not talking about the further recycling environmental costs), end-to-end delivery/transport, all of this has a massive impact, e.g. pets industry in US is $75b/year [1], those pet products and services are generating "a great deal of pollution"

Saying pets are environmental-friendly is dangerously wrong, above all in our current state

Pets are like a virtual human extra-population (1 billion in order of magnitude), given they are not wild animals participating in the ecosystem (when they are feral, they disrupt it [2]), nor farm animals. Their footprint is probably somewhere between 3% and 10% of the average person, that's still significant

You're definitely right about human having to reduce their meat consumption, their consumerism in general, pets included. That's the key to environment problems

[1]: https://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp

[2]: pets/'feral' pets impact on ecosystem https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/the-dog-is...
Yup, this seems about average. I get awesome reviews in person as well, but it doesn't show up in the results.

I feel like it's a numbers game. Technical interviews are a mess all over the board. It's sort of the joke where someone knows something is done wrong, so they do things differently, which is just as bad.

You'll probably have to keep trying your luck, hoping you find a company whose star developer just died or started a startup and they're desperate to fill the spot. Or someone who has this perfect vision of an engineer which fits you exactly.

I tried to optimize my job search the same way, and what worked for me were the things I hadn't optimized for. Like I've fine tuned my script for YC's job listing when I was actively searching, and yet two of them offered an interview when I wasn't searching. Maybe people who fine tune their resumes and cover letters feel 'off' somehow. It seems to work a bit like dating - the more stats you collect, the weirder you seem.
And capitalism?
Some people may want to tinker with the generator, write some plugins (if supported) or just see how it is built.
Wait, does this mean you have 7 which ghosted you after the technical? That is unusual. I would follow up with those. I have always gotten a response, in both directions, after a technical.

Also these numbers look very reasonable to me. 9 technicals out of 50 is a good rate, esp for coming from an overseas company as you said you did.

Finally, are you using the modern tools like Hired, etc? Do you have LinkedIn gold? Are you actively networking and getting internal referrals? Are you going to meetups, esp those run by companies of interest?

Getting a job is not just about sending resumes into the void and waiting.
Also, being bored makes us more creative: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8915371

From those results we could make one of three conclusions:

* Any sufficiently strong emotional response inspires creativity

* Different people respond to different emotional queues and the studies had samples of people biased in different directions

* It is all a load of bunkum.
Proof that science denialism is just as much a problem on the left as it is on the right.
Cassini was launched by the IV-B variant of the Titan. Given that only one IV-B launch had taken place prior to Cassini, I'm guessing they applied a pretty big risk factor to the launch vehicle.
I think it's cool to come out and say this. I have also had extremely positive experiences with drugs as a geek.
It was worth doing (at least once).
You should see some of my project names. I think I had to change a few of them before I started interviewing for a new job.
I regretted it.
Have you tried reading SICP without a math primer? What's your current math background?
I have tried it.
The SICP, from the chapters I've read, does not rely on mathematical sophistication the way, say, Knuth does. There's a little bit of calculus, but not much. If you've had a semester of calculus, you're probably more than well prepared. If you haven't you can probably focus instead on the data structures and algorithms.

Your best bet is just to grab a Scheme interpreter and dive in.
I have not tried it.
I personally like the Haier's appearance more than the Hisense's. I dig the whole carbon-fiber aesthetic.
it's obvious Time magazine has been pressured to choose someone less controversial

I feel that a far more gloomy and more likely scenario is that companies like Time, Mastercard, etc etc have not been pressured significantly or at all by government

The older you get, the more responsibilities and (financial) risk you have, the harder it becomes to think outside the box and swim upstream. I think it is perfectly plausible that people in their position decided on there own that supporting Assange was a step to far into a brave new world :-)
Due process was invented for a reason, and that reason is that innocent people like us do not like being unjustly punished. Any entity powerful enough to deliver an unjust punishment qualifies for the reason that due process was invented.
In this case, it's not possible to have a control group. You should interpret this data as a case study rather than a randomized trial.
> Note that this only affects you (potentially) if you offer services or goods at certain tiers,

This affects everyone who has sponsor tiers as effectively all sponsor tiers come down to a trade: You sponsor me (e.g. pay me) and I give you something in return (e.g. mention somewhere, a sticker, support, etc.). It also affects GitHub because they will very unlikely be able to argue that they are just payment processors with the current way it's implemented.

Additionally it's even worse than what the tweet suggests, because VAT rules are different for digital services and physical goods in most countries in the world. So if you give someone something physical in return (e.g. stickers, coffee mug, some merch, etc.) for a sponsorship then you must distinguish your VAT collection for sponsors who only get a digital service in return and those who get a physical good in return.

It's a real bloody mess and VAT is the worst bureaucratic nightmare to digital businesses. Nonetheless, no excuse for a huge corporation like Microsoft to blatantly violate tax laws which they are very well aware of.

> Honestly, VAT is one of the most puzzling aspects of trying to do any trade with people/entities in Europe, and unless you use some service that handles the accounting for you, it's impossibly hard to figure it out all on your own.

True, but it's beyond Europe. VAT applies in the country where the customer lives which means you also have to deal with VAT rules for South African customers and many others and not just EU or UK.
This site is super fun. I knew of bitcoin when it launched and am certain I generated a coin for fun. Didn’t think much of it back then. Occasionally I come across backups and go looking for wallet files with no luck.

I also knew of Amazon and didn’t invest there either so, womp womp.