skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sarcasm is a crude tool for communicating your point, it also causes me to have less empathy for you.

> It is rude to lie to people about the value of their options to hire them. ("Your options are 0.866% of the company"). But to try to defend that practice in public is just hilarious.

I never once stated that one should lie to employees about the value of their options. Those conversations are always highly specific to the situation, the negotiated contract with the person, and how fluid the actual current "valuation" is. It's very difficult to pin-point a true value for a set of options in a private company - sometimes you can come close, particularly once major funding events and milestones have been hit, but it is still difficult. I usually do my best to have a candid conversation with prospectives or currents about that value. A lot of founders do.

If all you care about is the financial upside in joining a startup, then I will always say that you should not join one. The risk is very high and it takes an enormous amount of cooperative collaboration from numerous people that are willing to be "in it together" - it also takes many years before you have something valuable enough to make those early options worth it. If you get in before the Series A and you really give it your all and it's a good product that people want and you're surrounded by peers who are the top of their game and you've got excellent leadership: Hang on because it will be a rocket ride. If not, then it might not be worth it.

The other reasons to join a small startup are numerous. In the early stages it's mostly intangible and the later stages are usually very tangible. The "option" for a financial upside is there and should factor into how much risk you're taking as an early employee, but unless that is all you care about then it should not be the only factor in your censure of an organization.

Figure out what's important to you and act accordingly.

> Heh, at least now we know what it does take to be a cofounder :)

Become one. You'll find out. I've been unable to accurately convey it to people it seems; most think it's glamorous. It is not. Most think they're entitled to it. They most likely are not. Most think founders have the upper-hand. Very few ever do (hint: the board and the investors control the strings more than most think).
They may be trying to make the point that there are alternatives that help to prevent unwanted entrants without being burdensome. While ESTA is overbearing in the context of travel from Britain to the US, it would be a welcome relief to visa applicants from India or China.
There is a finite pattern whenever one relies on volunteers. Most will come and go, but a few hang around and rise to the top. Lacking renumeration, they tend towards self-gratification. Some handle extra responsibility well, but others start building their own little castles from which to berate all below. This process is inevitable once you have multiple ranks of volunteers.

I've seen this with charities, open source projects, and it was a constant problem when I worked in film/tv (interns). Things always go south when you have volunteers bossing around other volunteers. Newcomers show up eager but depart quickly, normally after some dressing down by a more senior volunteer. Without pay in dispute, they rarely make complaint. They just stop showing up. And who can blame them?

The answer is to keep all volunteers equal. That's probably impossible for a project like wikipedia, but they could certainly do more to ensure new volunteers are not so bullied by the old guard.
You have much higher leverage on options, and you don't take a tax hit until you sell them. That's assuming the price goes up significantly. That's basically the tradeoff.
The foundation is just a bunch of suits, whose only function is to educate other suits (eg: law makers). No one controls Bitcoin.
Just curious, why are your edits auto-reversed? That's very discouraging to hear.
Somehow OpenStreetMaps has managed to remain democratic, welcoming to newcomers and yet remarkably accurate without much (any?) moderation, despite being almost as old as Wikipedia. I've always wondered how it manages that.
NASA and Future Explorers – What Does It Take to Become an Astronaut? (Updated)
> 80% of the effort of creating new content is following byzantine processes and procedures

You literally just press edit, make your changes, and then press save. There is zero bureaucracy in adding content. The bureaucracy comes into play with there is unresolved conflict and disagreement, when there is a controversy over how an article is written. In that case, there are definite, objective(ish) standards and rules by which those arguments can come to a resolution of some kind. I suppose in a more hierarchical structure there would be less bureaucracy when there are disagreements and the next person in charge would simply decide which view he thought was more correct. But the traditional structure of writing an encyclopedia is filled with gatekeepers who have the final, single decision without much of a need to reach consensus. Depending on your view this could be good or it could be bad.
Not many companies actually make ICs themselves anymore. A lot of the bigger IC companies you know are fabless: Nvidia, AMD, broadcom, qualcomm, etc.

It is simply way, waaay too expensive to operate a fab nowadays.
Yes, I'm well aware of that, but the article talks about some hypothetical future. It may be that the limits get increased. It may be that they won't care if you bring in cash far in excess of those limits as long as you declare it. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. The point is that there is no reason to believe Canada or Mexico will necessarily stop you from moving the cash even if the US doesn't want you to.
There are two inaccuracies in that statement. First, Free Basics will not be free, over the long term. Facebook has said that their long-term plan for Free Basics includes monetization of some sort. Presumably, it'll be a combination of advertising and collecting commissions for e-commerce transactions made via Facebook.

Second, and more importantly, even if Free Basics were completely free, it'd still be wrong. Microsoft bundled Internet Explorer for free with Windows. They did not do this as an altruistic gesture. They did it to crush Netscape, which was challenging their software monopoly on the desktop. Facebook is doing exactly the same thing with Free Basics. This is not an altruistic gesture by Facebook, regardless of what Mark Zuckerberg writes in his op-ed. This is a calculated move to establish a Facebook monopoly over user data in the largest untapped Internet market in the world. Facebook, with Free Basics, is ensuring that no other social network or messaging platform can challenge it in India.

The technology community rightly applauded the US Department of Justice when it initiated anti-trust actions against Microsoft. We should applaud the Indian technology community for standing up and forcing the government of India to take a hard look at the long term consequences of a Facebook monopoly.
You can do a lot more with crowdsourced models. Crowdsourcing content != wiki. My site (see bio) is a more structured way to build news and biography content that IMHO gives better presentation and less editor stress than the equivalent Wikipedia pages.
I'd thought it might be this mess, initially:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Belgium/@51.4409147,4.9327...

But it's somewhere else.
Concepts for Your Cognitive Toolkit
Didn't you already post this?
Jon Galloway presents a 1hr Intro to ASP.NET 5
Freddie Gray?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Freddie_Gray
This is a fantastic article that I highly suggest everyone read! It contains a quick run down of a lot of cognitive tropes which can add a new perspective.
I skeptical of benefits of declarative routing. My project got much simpler after I got rid of react-router.
Technically yes, but I was on their blog today and it showed they had updated it. So I wanted to share the updated version.

Since Ycombinator doesn't show notifications, I figured it would be best to post the updated version.
I have already read this in particular and is one of my favorites too.
RE your favourite story, I'm just waiting for someone with experience in this topic to point out here that vacuum pockets are actually a real thing under some conditions, and even maybe that those "safety nazis" were actually justified. Hanging out on HN I've seen many cases where something derided by people turns out to actually be true. :).
Elaborating on early exercise. Employee can choose to pre-exercise ISOs soon after starting job (before vesting) and file 83b. In this case, the difference between strike price and FMV is $0 and hence tax realized is also $0. This also starts ticker for capital gains sooner and if the company gets sold/IPO after 1 year from date of exercise and 2 year from date of grant then long term capital gains will apply and not short-term capital gains which is taxed as ordinary income.

This obviously depends on the strike price on joining the company and how much money employee is okay to lose in case company goes bust. If not all, some ISOs can be early exercised.

In my case, I early exercised around 25% of ISOs soon after joining. In hind-sight I should have early exercised more as the company did go IPO around 2 years after I started...
oh okay. That makes sense. i remember reading it the first time it was posted. good article.
The article calls for an explanation not why some ML method works, but for an explanation of a particular ML result, like why a car drives this way or why a patient got a cancer. While I hopeful for the former, I just do not see the basis for the latter.

If some regulations shall require such explanation, the end result will be fake stories like parents tell to the children that Moon do not fall because it is nailed to the sky.
The intelligence community was doing its job. They were monitoring the actions of foreign agents trying to secretly influence Government policy. The intel community is supposed to be doing that. That's basic counterintelligence - it's how you catch spies.
Language specific package managers seem to actually work in real life and are cross platform, e.g. npm. But I'm not aware of anything for e.g. C++ which would offer the features of npm (mainly installing dependencies with a single command and supporting GNU/Linux, OS X and Windows).

Is there a single non-language specific package manager which is cross platform, and supports a large percentage of packages for a given programming language?

Note that I'm not saying npm is excellent, but I'm not aware of a single successful language-independent package manager. If there are none, why?
I read their blog posts a lot. One of the only sites I see posts from on at the minimum a weekly basis. Sometimes they post 3-4 a week. So I like their site.

This was probably one of my favorites of theirs.
Bitcoin processes transactions via the mining process. Miners gather up all the transactions that Bitcoin users broadcast and package them into blocks which they do their mining work on. Every ~10 minutes a block of transactions is mined.

There is currently a 1 MB limit on the size of a block. A typical individual Bitcoin transaction is around 500 bytes in size. So if a block is produced every 10 minutes and the size of a block is limited to 1 MB that limits the transaction throughput of the Bitcoin network. When the rate of transactions being broadcast by users outstrips the available space in the blocks being mined then there is a backlog and not all the transactions will be mined in a timely fashion.

Which transactions get in a block are determined by the miners so the net effect of there not being enough room is that miners pick the transactions with the highest fees to include first. Over time as the Bitcoin network gets very large this will artificially drive up transaction fees to very high levels. The fact that the block size limit is 1MB was a quick hack in the early days to prevent spam and was always meant to be lifted once Bitcoin gained popularity.

Back to Blockstream. Blockstream is developing a technology generally referred to as "sidechains". It would allow users to perform transactions on private blockchains that are pegged to the Bitcoin blockchain. A sidechain can be thought of as a alt-coin backed by Bitcoin (similar to how paper money might be backed by gold, or the full faith and credit of a powerful government). Transactions on a sidechain wouldn't need to be processed by Bitcoin proper so the sidechain wouldn't be limited by any block size limit in Bitcoin.

There is nothing inherently wrong with sidechains and the idea is even kind of cool. The problem is that Blockstream and those acting on it's behalf oppose any increase in blocksize. This will have the net effect of driving up Bitcoin transaction costs to artificially high levels making it unattractive to use for every day transactions and would relegate Bitcoin to a settlement layer where high value transactions between major financial players take place and nothing else. Blockstream is hoping this would drive people who still wanted to use Bitcoin to sidechains where there wouldn't be a back log. These sidechains could in turn be controlled by a company or bank for their specific purpose. ie: you can transact on the Visa sidechain powered by Blockstream.

Raising the block size doesn't preclude Blockstream from implementing sidechains but keeping the block size small as Bitcoin grows very large will make Blockstream's sidechain scheme absolutely necessary. If the block size were allowed to grow it isn't clear if the value proposition of sidechains would be as strong.
Each package should strip tests and documentation from the package. Of course, many don't..
Why You May Have ‘46 Years of Friendships’ on Facebook
I'm curious to hear about what gains you saw from dropping it and how you handled rendering
You shouldn't comment asking for people to read. It makes it look like you're gaining something from it.

Though, I will say it's a very in depth article. It's a good share.
I've seen many cases of old documents not being handled with gloves. Apparently it is accepted by some as a myth that it protects the documents:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/booked/2012/03/21/the-white-glov...
Oh c'mon. Do you understand the issue of privacy at all? The whole problem is that when you want for any cost to spy, you'll step on your shoes with privacy infringements. And then the higher order goal - the one you do the spying for - gets compromised.
Funny enough, I just made my first commit[0] to what I hope will be only the first successful game project next year.

I have a ton of half-finished projects I need to either finish or abandon. I even have a Hacker News clone that will probably never see the light of day. But mostly I want to play around with games.

[0]https://bitbucket.org/kennethrapp/berzerk
It wouldn't and you're correct. I don't know why I wrote that. Sorry!
I used to contribute a lot when I was younger and had more free time but I might have kept that up if not for the change that happened in the late 00s when the higher ups decided that wikipedia has too much content and started streamlining by simply deleting whole sections. I am not talking about when citations became a stricter requirement and the quality in general became more of a focus - that came later. I think it's more sane nowadays but I'm too disillusioned now. I hate its approach of "if it's not intelligible to or of interest to a layman then it needs to be streamlined".
"The 'S' [in 'Harry S Truman'] did not stand for anything, a common practice among the Scots-Irish ..."

Neither of my parents (who were born in central Europe) had a middle name at all. The fact that middle names are optional (can be zero characters long) does seem to be recognized by people who create forms asking for full names. I never provide mine, and nobody complains.
Very in depth. Good read.
Almost everything we know on the topic came from those dogs and the people who suffered accidents. It's the really unpleasant side of industrial and extreme environment danger: intuition just isn't enough to make big decisions on. The alternative is learning through trial and error, and industrial accidents teach us that is enormously bloody, expensive, and reactionary.

If it helps, every major write-up on the topic talks about what the dogs went through. A high price was paid, but they aren't forgotten nor did they suffer in vain - and most made a full recovery in fairly short order. You can be sure countless lives across space exploration will be saved because we'll know who can be saved and what's needed to bring them back.
There's another enclave inside Flanders that causes Belgian politicians a lot more headaches, hehe.
Google products are malware, as every user of little snitch has learned.

Back in june they pulled the offending code from chromium referenced in this bug: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=786909

But it may still be in chrome.

In short, yes they're probably listening all the time. And once per hour they make a mysterious "software update" call that you can't block (it uses a different address/port each time -- and if you find a way to block that it'll fall back to curl, wget, whatever until it gets through).

TL;DR -- google search IS getting that creepy and it is NOT just coincidence?
>Most think founders have the upper-hand. Very few ever do

Upper hand, n: having better knowledge, information, or otherwise situation than the rest.
Compared to the employees founders most definitely do. Eg: how many startups will give you the answers to the listed questions easily? Founders have them.

I am not saying founders are above all, but they definitely have the upper hand when compared to those pesky employees who want to know the value of monopoly money they are claimed to be paid with.
Could you offer more details? Why are you skeptical? What did you observe to come to this conclusion, &c?
I believe Microsoft worked to get Node.js supported on Windows.
Don't UNC paths solve this problem already (30000+ char limit)?
Just woke up this morning to this and I'm still reeling from the news. It's almost too hard to accept.

Always sucks to lose a pioneer.
For the security people at ad networks: The URL was

whatsapops.com,

the mobile device was Android latest, the region was The Netherlands. It's not a virus on the device itself:

- No app installs since setting up the device a year ago.

- A lot of internet forum chatter with people using clean factory resets and getting the same problem.

Next to mining for phone numbers, they try to sucker you into installing a 12 Euro a week app. Very similar to the porn-redirects ads from DoubleClick that were plaguing mobile devices and tablets around 2012. This page also abuses the vibrate API and was successful in disabling the back key by working with a redirect-chain.

Related: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/adsense/KV1nv...
US fiscal policy, depending on how you define that, is mostly executed by the Federal Reserve, which is a quasi governmental entity not directly managed by congress.
Yes and it would be good thing. I don't agree that there is anything moral coercing people to part with 50% of their hard earned wealth so government could fund losing wars, foodstamps for bums and lobster fight clubs.
> unless that [money] is all you care about

It is. If i wanted to change the world, I'd join the red cross. Attempting to make someone feel bad for only caring about pay, as a way to get them to work for worthless options only works on some people. :)
I'd go for a second place after the google index itself
https://github.com/about
10 most poular python libraries started in 2015
I'm sure that "options are for suckers" has a powerful effect in your recruiting materials but I don't think it adds any value to this discussion. Options have real advantages, you don't have to exercise them "out of your own money", and you ignore that a ton of feathers weighs the same as a ton of bricks. (eg, you're not giving me more money just because you're giving me a promissory note).

There's no doubt that you've created a generous plan for your team. The description of your plan was certainly helpful and illuminating. But this thread seems like an odd place for a recruiting ad.
Mostly true but sometimes you can sell on a secondary market or through a tender offer.
Understanding Compiler Optimization – Opening Keynote Meeting C++ 2015
I don't think that anyone soon this would bury paper. If you want to hoard value, gold, silver and copper are far more effective.
Haven't seen any benchmarks but I'm guessing the baseline working set of a .Net Native UWP app is still megabytes bigger than a C++ UWP app.

*edit: ~16 MB for .Net Native, ~10 MB for C++ using latest VS2015 targeting x86.

Not going to matter for most apps, but for system UI that has to run on multi-user servers it does ;)
Unless the company goes out of business, or you decide all of a sudden you aren't okay with the new "cloud-enhanced food profile" your refrigerator builds about you with the newest cloud-pushed update that records everything you eat and sells it to advertisers. Or until the market is flooded with the cheaper, ad-supported fridges that play out loud ads for sponsored products whenever you run out of something.

There's something, I don't know, honest about building something that works, and works well, and just selling it to people who then own it.
> That is, actually, the real problem.

So all wikipedia editors have Asperger's and OCD ? That seems astronomically unlikely, don't you ?
Direct primary care is a good thing, and I greatly appreciate you contributing your experience to this discussion.

On the other hand, having grown up with a public health system (in Ireland, whose model is almost identical with the UK's NHS), I'm strongly of the opinion that the necessarily higher rates of income tax are well worth it. Why? Because when you get sick you just go the doctor, and if the doctor's clinical opinion is that you need additional care, you go to the hospital. There is no financial decision-making involved, there's no additional paperwork to be filled out (not by you anyway), and you don't have to have conversations about who's in or out of your provider network in the normal course of events. The only focus is on your clinical care and recovery needs. Is it perfect, of course not - but when you develop a medical problem, you get to focus on that rather than having to split your attention between medical, financial, and administrative worries. My experience of the American healthcare system is that while there are many sincere and selfless people working in it, the system itself is badly corrupted and wildly inefficient.

One objection I've heard from opponents of single payer healthcare is that if going to the doctor is free or almost so, doctor's offices will be filled with hypochondriacs and genuinely needy patients will be crowded out. I have never seen any evidence for this claim, and it doesn't match my experience. Most people don't like going to the doctor because it makes them nervous, it's icky, and they dislike being around other sick people in the waiting room - same as everywhere. Of course there are some hypochondriacs out there, and doctors quickly become skilled at spotting them and running them off. It may be a bit harder in these days of WebMd, but I am disinclined to believe that a tiny number of hypochondriacs are the major obstacle to restructuring and industry comprising 10-15% of our economy.
I appreciate the concern about evidence, but please stop fuelling this controversy.
I wanted to join and contribute to some niches I have considerable value to add.

Was onerous enough that I quickly found other things to do with my time.
OpenStreetMaps' content is virtually 100% objective (with only political borders and names being potentially contentious).