skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Personality factors aren't like IQ, in that they don't try to be measures of extent, but rather tendency. Saying someone is "Thinking-primary" doesn't mean they always think, or never feel; it doesn't even mean they enjoy thinking more than they enjoy feeling. It means they fall back on thinking; or, more precisely, they think of themselves as being the kind of person who falls back on thinking rather than feeling. (Which usually amounts to the same thing; the box you slot yourself into circumscribes the habits you'll form, and then things that become habitual feel more "natural.")

Everyone on HN is pretty familiar with the introvert/extrovert distinction, and also how carefully it has to be explained lest it be confused with "outgoing" vs. "shy." The real distinction, as the 'common wisdom' goes, is about how you "recharge."

I personally think it's clearer to phrase it in terms of the contrapositive: introversion/extroversion is about what you reject when you're out of willpower. Whatever comes more naturally to you—whatever's more habitual—will "cost" less to keep on with.

And, I would say, other "personality factors" can best be described similarly. They're not how people are on average; they're what people tend toward when not awake/aware/energized enough to be engaging both complementary faculties at 100% as needed (as mindfulness meditation, or a zeroed-out sleep debt, can allow.)

And do note that most of the MBTI factors do occur separately in other personality-trait assessments, that were not created by mystics. :)
It is my understanding that GCC was actually pretty clean until the EGCS fork.
That is exactly what I have been using since early last year. No problems at all if you aren't interested in some of the more esoteric emacs features such as inline images. Give it a shot!
> And unlike high incarceration rates and tax loopholes, startups are on the whole good.

That's a highly debatable assertion. I really wish he would explain why he thinks startups are "good".
Platform Coops Can Beat Death Stars Like Uber to Create a Real Sharing Economy
It's a fair point, but the style guide is meant to be illustrative.

The former example is indented the way longer lines might very well be e.g. if your filter clause were a 2-part bool, you might not be able to fit it in a one-liner. The indentation also clarifies the difference between it and the imperative example above it.

The latter example is a rewrite of code written with 2 nested if statements, so the indentation serves to show that now the two nested statements were incorporated into the bool evaluation. If I made it a one-liner, someone might make the argument that the nested version is "more readable", but as written all you can say is that the single-if version is "less nested", which is the point I was trying to get across.
Seems like a good way to track lab supplies - is there a buy button when I run out of stuff or do I have to buy from somewhere else?
>we leave this version here commented-out,
because the code is very complex and likely to have subtle bugs. If
bugs _are_ found, it might be of interest to look at the old code and
see what did it do in the relevant situation.

Here are two better alternative solutions:

* comments (in natural language not code) that describe what the code should do
* test cases: to dictate what code should do and prove it does do it
I'd like to see the positions actually being advanced, then, because they've not been made very clear by anyone.

And I can find people who are advancing that sort of extremist position, though I can't say that I understand them very well. See, e.g. - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10831261
It's important to note that Google does give it's developers the freedom to choose their own tools. If a team isn't excited about Angular or Polymer, it's not forced on them.

If I was building a webapp that was going to have hundreds of millions of users, I'd think twice about grabbing an off the shelf JS library.
> 5. They aren't Incompetent. They are just good at what they do, for long time, which new comers might dispute as being lazy, not passionate about technology.

I'm fairly sure I would fall in OP's "incompetent" bucket, but this point of yours nailed it. I'm not among the oldest people around and I haven't been that long at the company I work at, but I definitely don't have the passion and drive of the single, early 20s guys in my team.

Give me a task and I'll do it well. But don't expect me to be 100% of the time on social media promoting the product, and don't expect to see me voluntarily working nights and weekends just because the product is really cool (which it really is, but it's still work). I have 1) a family and 2) multiple other interests outside of work.
The problem is that the Pi 0 doesn't expose the CSI pins and you'd need an USB hub to attach a USB camera.
Or don't use JSX and write pure JS.
Wealthy people talking about economic inequality - no matter how valid your points - is going to stir trouble.

Its like men talking to women about sexism in the workplace, or able-bodied people talking about the abundance of disabled access everywhere, white people talking about racism against black people etc.

You don't have to be wrong, or have flaws in your reasoning, to make a socially naive commentary that is easily perceived as insensitive (regardless as to meaningful content).
If you reduce "outsized returns" by 99.999999%, are they still "outsized"? What defines an outsized return? What's the proper amount of income inequality and what's a proper rate of return?

In a context like this, definitions are everything.
I think that's exactly what PG is saying.

"For example, instead of attacking economic inequality, we should attack poverty."

One major underlying cause of poverty is disparate quality of education.

Fix education and you are fixing one major determinate of future economic inequality.
I claim that economic inequality at the scale we are seeing today, with Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Donald Trump, the Koch Brothers, the Walton family, et al. as plutocrats, and with Paul Graham and various other bourgeois pseudointellectuals as their kiss-up apologists, is per se bad. It erodes the broad social/economic power balance in our society, atrophies our civic institutions or coöpts them into quasi-fascist tools of the elite, breaks our journalistic institutions and cheapens our political discourse, diverts our resources into building wasteful things, and prevents us from tackling the serious challenges we face, while leaving millions of people struggling for basic survival.

I don’t see Paul Graham out there fighting in any concrete way for improvements to any of the “bad things that cause inequality” he hand-waves away. Where’s his work to improve labor rights, end police brutality, guarantee a functioning healthcare system, track down and close tax loopholes, expose and regulate industrial polluters, or figure out how to save the lives of all the people economically displaced by his startup “disruptor” buddies? Where’s his respect or help for teachers, social workers, doctors, policemen, civil rights activists, local politicians, garbage collectors, journalists, mail carriers, or any of the other people who keep our civil society functioning in return for regular wages. All I see is contempt for those “losers” (quoting from a recent tweet, https://twitter.com/paulg/status/672112234521231361) who don’t want to become rich capitalists.

How does Paul Graham’s imagined perfect society work? If everyone is a startup founder, who is left to be the employees at all these startups, much less do any of the other work we all need for things to keep running.
The concentration of wealth has some observable effects that we probably don't want - for example, real estate prices.

Not that expensive real estate is bad in itself, but people who work in areas where they can't afford to live - for instance, a hypothetical cop in NY / LA / SF - have three obvious choices:

1> commute, sometimes for hours one-way. One could argue that policing outside of one's neighborhood is bad policing, but for the most part, long commutes are just a drag. And probably will last only as long as it takes for a job closer to home to open up. So now it's a turnover problem.

2> rent control or other "low-income" concession. Waiting lists are long, developers resist creating more supply, and always have to consider the risk of arbitrage.

3> extra jobs / graft - competition for outside security work is pretty tight, and I'm sure we can all agree another cop on the take is something the world doesn't need.

We could try a variant of option 2 and provide housing subsidies for certain professions, something I think the FBI does for agents in certain areas, but then we run the risk of creating castes. I doubt anyone would entertain subsidizing a barista's rent just so they wouldn't have to commute 3 hours to a Starbucks in Beverly Hills. But it might happen for a cop (probably not.)

The degenerate case is all the cops leave and the rich have the opportunity to fend for themselves.
The article you cited is about a decade out of date. Some points are still relevant but most are not. Deploying IPv6 in modern times is not difficult or expensive.
Nonsensical, but still accessible
Why do we fear technological advancement?
Tools and technology are neither good or bad, it is what we humans do with these tools that create our reality.

There's your answer. We fear what other humans will do with these tools.
Are you getting subsidized or do you make $85k+? Why only catastrophic?
(Guide) – Free A/B Testing Tool: Google Analytics
Well-formedness doesn't appear to have a definition in C11. In the C++11 standard, the wording rather implies to me that it is a static property, suggesting that a well-formed program could therefore still induce undefined behaviour at runtime.

The C11 standard is however quite clear on what undefined behaviour is: "behaviour...for which this International Standard imposes no requirements". That sounds like a far cry from illegality to me! It sounds more like it is merely... yes... undefined.

This means that gcc (et al) are allowed to do what they do. It doesn't mean it's not crap.
Actually the authors dutifully note this case, explaining that "we show that cold boot attacks are more generic and allow to retrieve sensitive information, such as contact lists, visited web sites, and photos, directly from RAM, even though the bootloader is locked."
US stock markets open with worst performance since 2008
Why not extend the language with an "rmem" keyword or function that you use like this: rmem(pointer) and you're guaranteed to produce a memory read, rather than reusing a value in register. Then say that the compiler is free to assume two pointers/arrays etc. never overlap. Then, introduce linters which can detect most cases of these-two-pointers-might-overlap. Maybe runtime ones like valgrind.

I want to write C as high level assembly. If I put values in registers and reuse them, then I'm opening myself for the same kind of problems as if I'm writing C and not doing explicit memory reads.
Just use Let's Encrypt. :)

Signed,
The guy who marked that bug report invalid.
Self reinforcing startup feedback loop is my guess. Also I suppose with the rise of social media being more accessible through search there's less importance on having your own domain to create authority.

At least medium has got past the problem of nearly everything on it being garbage int he last year. Before the last few months I would actively avoid reading anything there but now it appears more like a platform and 30% or so of what I've seen has been at least close to worth reading.
Here's an entire article on it. Basically, they get more reach on medium then self hosted

https://m.signalvnoise.com/signal-v-noise-moves-to-medium-c8...
My current plan has an has an HSA component but the company that administrates the account, BenefitWallet, has some fine print in the account agreement that they charge an account fee for balances less than several thousand dollars. Realistically I only spend several hundred dollars per year on healthcare stuff so I don't think it is to my advantage to lock up that much money in a non-interest bearing account or pay the bank 120 bucks per year.
If you want a short one: It's not too hard to get flex to switch from generating compiling code to non-compiling code by removing a comment. The secret is in if the comment is "interpreted" by flex or the compiler, even thought they should both be the same.
Seriously, who cares about this? It's not like they blocked access to their services, you could still access Facebook via their website, it's just harmless A/B testing.
Highlights from the all-new periodic table of elements
Because they aren't C. I think it's not just that "undefined behavior can be optimized" in some abstract sense but that in particular C has the problem that its undefined behavior is where a lot of optimizations live. This is due to a combination of the language being very old now, and the hardware world having moved on a lot since it was (half-)specified.

I really don't consider this a criticism of C per se or its designers. It is unreasonable to expect that a language specified in the 1970s would be tuned for either modern processors or have the benefit of an additional 40 years of collective experience. But it is, nevertheless, true.

(It's part of why my position is very much that this entire approach just won't work. C is pretty much what it is; it can not be changed. It is literally easier to use another language than to try to specify a "friendly C" in 2016. And I don't say that because I don't know how large a task it is to start writing code in another language; I say that because people are really underestimating how much work Friendly C will take. I suggest that everyone observe that all who have now seriously tried to sketch what this would look like have immediately given up and totally surrendered. This means something.)
I ended up in Linux -- mostly for my preference couple years ago. But looking at the landscape today, simply there aren't any alternatives anymore.

I share the author's sentiment about Google, but for the other reason -- it's the fact their service often works better than their competitors, not only they have Chrome available for Linux, Google's Music, and movie service works better than many competitors out there. (I guess they have incentive to make it work on Linux, as Chromebooks are pretty much Linux-based -- which may not necessarily the QA objective other companies would look into.)

I really hope Linux will be able to break the 10% mark, if not becoming hugely popular. If 1/10 of people are not being access to certain content, it becomes harder for content providers to ignore Linux users.
Man Has 1,497 Credit Cards and Near-Perfect Credit Score
List of Cheapest Domain Name Renewals
What if income inequality is a cause of educational inequality? It's not hard to think of reasons why that would be the case: schools suffer because the most capable families in their districts deploy capital to remove their children to private schools (or: because the most capable families pay test prep and consultants to advantage their kids in college admission), &c?

Zooming back out a bit: what are the demographics of successful startup founders? My intuition is that they're not a mirror image of the demographics of the country as a whole. There are a lot more well-off startup founders who went to CMU or Berkeley than there are startup founders from East St. Louis.

It's not a problem if a person picked at random from the population makes 50 million dollars with a photo sharing startup. But it starts looking a lot more like a problem when we're not picking people at random, but instead picking them mostly from the ranks of the most privileged people.

And still! I don't give a shit! I really don't think startups have much to teach us about income inequality and I don't generally believe they're a big Part Of The Problem. I'm much more troubled by the mere idea that startups might be a good lens through which to examine inequality and public policy.
> When someone who is a diversity hire

What are you trying to imply here?
_Assigned_ doctor?

Did he get put in an HMO? If he got a PPO plan, there shouldn't be a doctor assignment, right?

It could be that the only doctor he was able to find that could take his PPO plan is 2 hours away.
Someone needs to program Watson to get itself hired via this system.

AI will have arrived when AI systems can get hired for remote jobs, competing directly with humans.
But you mum doesn't want to be a client either.

The question is not whether your mum wants to be a server, but whether she would like to use services that are only possible or are easier/cheaper to implement technically using a "server" on her machine/network.

People also don't "want a natural gas burner". People want that their home is warm and they prefer not having to shovel coal and they prefer the general lower costs of natural gas heating vs. electrical heating. So they end up buying natural gas heating systems. Not because they somehow like natural gas burners, but because that happens to be the technology that provides the comfort they like at a price they like.

And if you don't want your TV being a server, you most likely don't want it connected to the internet at all. It's not that it not being a server somehow prevents it spying on you or from being vulnerable to outside attackers.
After Executing Regime Critic, Saudi Arabia Fires Up American PR Machine
We know, we have a problem generating links that work both with our new online documentation system and github (syntax incompatibility). For now you have to use http://spacemacs.org/doc/DOCUMENTATION.html :-)
Dogfooding and Prototyping
Why would it not be more affordable? You're not getting anything.
> But economic inequality per se is not bad.

Both essays feel like they are built on a strawman argument. Nobody serious said inequality was bad or good, not even Piketty. The discussion is about degrees, and PG adds nothing to it by arguing categorically.

That we are talking degrees of inequality is also the reason why economists argue with statistics and do not differentiate much between specific causes or mechanisms on the micro level. Sorry to burst that bubble but PG is not a "creator of inequality" on the level that is interesting. Shifting a few hundred people around means nothing given that we are talking about income and wealth distributions over millions of households in the US alone (and increasing inequality is a global phenomenon). Clearly, tax policy, financial (de)regulation, labor market policies, even the fall of the Soviet Union, etc. are more relevant than petty arguments over whether this startup or that high freq trader made a few mega- or even gigabucks in a nice or not so nice way.

On a sidenote, the relative impacts of the trader vs the startupper on aggregate welfare is not as clearcut as intimated by PG at all, once you take second- and higher-order effects into account. Furthermore, creating wealth for some individuals may also decrease overall inequality; it depends on the starting and end positions of said individuals in the wealth distribution and the other ongoing processes in the economy.

Lastly, economic systems have a lot of feedback mechanisms, both positive (ie destabilizing) and negative (stabilizing). We should at least consider the possibility that past a certain degree of inequality, wealth becomes self-perpetuating. This is especially pertinent for US Americans, given the degenerate nature of their "democracy".
Obama to Expand Gun Background Checks and Tighten Enforcement
Ask HN: What hypervisor are you using?
We are looking at bringing our apps back in-house and running them in some type of hypervisor on bare metal so I was curious as to what others are using? I know awhile back KVM was the way to go because it was in the mainline kernel but I believe that has changed and now XEN is pretty painless to get up and going. Docker is not an option sadly.

We are not looking to build a "cloud" or anything as most of our applications do not need architecture like that. Basically just a physical cluster we can deploy VMs to.
We do use consul for service discovery so we essentially just need some type of solution that allows us to hit an API (or run a command locally) that will fire up a pre-defined virtual machine on one of our various servers. Performance of the virtual machines is our top priority with ease of management being a close second.

Currently we use salt which appears to have good support for working with KVM which is a major bonus but not something that ties us to KVM 100%

Anyone out there using barebones hypervisors in production who can share their experiences? Right now it honestly seems like a toss up from what I've been reading.
In Australia the penalty is 1% of your income (or more) https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Medicare-levy/Medicare-le...

This makes it a no-brainer for anyone earning over ~$90k to get health insurance (as it's cheaper than not having it).

Yet it doesn't force low income earners into having private health insurance: they fall through to the safety net of the public healthcare system.

It's not a perfect solution; but it's perhaps slightly better than what the USA has at the moment?
What differentiates a "product engineer" from an entrepreneur†? Lack of ambition?

Insofar as I fit all the criteria you're listing, those traits are all things that push me to want to work on a small, independent product where I can dictate the vision for it. If I'm willing to "learn programming somewhere along the way as a necessity" to express that vision, there's no reason I won't also decide to learn how to start and run a business "along the way, as a necessity."

To put it another way: in the games industry, the "product engineers" there are called "game designers." Game designers don't generally work as freelance consultants, or put themselves on the market as employees for companies like EA or Sony to snatch up. Instead, if you have the actual vision required to come up with a decent game, you'll make it—and sell it—yourself, either as a one-man show, or by starting your own small games company.

The only game designers working for the big games companies are the ones that grew into that role from whatever they got hired to do (usually either programming or art)—and, even then, only embraced their roles once the company decided to start letting them come up with products "from scratch" that they could basically run as their own little ventures, rather than just stewarding along some existing product of the company's.

---

† I say "entrepreneur", but not in the typical HN meaning of the term. Most "startup founders" I ever hear about seem to be either pure-engineering types who just think about cool tech all day, or pure-business types who think about what'll be profitable all day and follow trends. Entrepreneurialism seems to actually be much more common outside Silicon Valley in regular-old small businesses, where someone with a "product vision" like "feeding people really weird pizza" will get a loan and set up a pizza place to fulfill that vision.)
> Startups are good for a variety of reasons, and they also happen to cause income inequality,

(emphasis mine)

One of the points of the original essay is that startups don't just happen to cause inequality. On the contrary pg claims that getting rich is precisely what fuels and motivates people to build startups.

> therefore taking steps to reduce income inequality that happen to reduce the income inequality resulting from startups does not actually mean that it's "harm[ing] the good".

The essay explicitly claims otherwise:

"You can't end economic inequality without preventing people from getting rich, and you can't do that without preventing them from starting startups."

I think I side with pg. Never met a person who chose the effort, uncertainty and sleepless nights that come with building a startup without the promise of a financial reward at the end. Every time such a reward is won, we inch a tiny bit towards greater inequality.
The Story of a Trump Supporter