skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel for the parents too. They were just digging deep into their bag of parenting tricks to try and get little Yamato to stop throwing stone at people and cars (though the presence of bears in the woods made their strategy a little ill-advised).

But mainly I feel sorry for them for the monster they may have created now. Yamato charted his own course. He didn't just sit there sobbing and chastened. Instead he hiked for miles, demonstrated incredible self-sufficiency, survived against the odds and became a national hero and treasure, while his parents have been vilified.

He will be the one putting his parents out of the car from now on. And he's only 7, so they have many years more to come. He's probably filling his pockets with stones right now.
I don't think so. 4 day work week would be a deal breaker for most companies. If Joe gets hired in and never works Fridays pretty soon everyone else will want Fridays off too. Salary is irrelevant, it's human nature.
Thanks for the suggestion. Will definitely see it.
>personally I wouldn't even bother interviewing at places where I know for certain the comp won't hit my expectations

Why would anyone do that?
It seems like it would be sufficient to say that not everyone has the ability to glimpse the future, envision a product given that, and initiate and direct the implementation of that product. Not everyone has that ability, but probably many do: however, in an established business with specific fiscal goals, how many people have the ability to do those things? Founders don't just bring some evidence of talent, they also have an authority and influence to make things happen that other people don't. Another way of thinking about it is that an established company typically does not have the ability to develop and empower that kind of person within the company. A founder precedes the company, and so is not constrained by the company in the same way.
Don't smear him without backing up your claims, Mr/Mrs. green-text-brand-new-burner-account.
This is a pretty clear cut case of negligence. Leaving your child unattended in the woods where brown bears are known to be located is negligence, plain and simple.

The fact that it is common in asian cultures to discipline children in horrible ways, like locking them in dark closets, or corporal punishment, doesn't excuse the parents from these horrible crimes.
As outlined elsewhere he's an "activist." He talks a lot but he's not a coder.
After what Snowden has shown us about the lengths the government is willing to go (on our payroll, that is), how can you really trust any technology? To me, the chilling effect is far stronger than we generally suspect.
This comment and others you've posted break the HN guidelines. Please (re-)read them, and post civilly and substantively (or not at all) from now on.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
Test how mobile-friendly your site is
Uhm... no. Him being from a wealthy family is not an example of hypocrisy. Nor is his family business being fed with government contracts. You've _badly_ misunderstood the issue if you think that's hypocrisy.

The question is... has he been a strong proponent of extra licensing requirements for government contractors. Licensing requirements that his family is able to easily handle, but will push out smaller competitors. That would be hypocrisy.

Has he supported legislation against subcontracting or legislation that artificially limits who the government (or private industry) can hire?

It's not hypocritical to offer services to the government. You're confusing neoliberals with anarchists.
Per point 2, Greenspan is kind of the worst person to make that call. There's a very good argument that he explicitly allowed that deregulation and coupled it with a series of bailouts, resulting in the "Greenspan Put". This moral hazard was then combined with very cheap credit, all at his insistence. I'd take anything Greenspan has to say about the economy with a few metric tonnes of salt - as would many people who served on the Fed Board with him. The documentary 'Money for Nothing' is a great laymen's view on this.

Similarly, the SEC isn't a super credible economic source for several reasons. One being if you are smart enough to work at Goldmans you don't work at the SEC. It's pretty self-serving for the agency in charge of regulation to argue that de-regulation was harmful. Do you know the specific economists making this argument? I'm very skeptical until I see names, and then my skepticism decreases while reading the actual paper.

I would argue that deregulation was not the central issue - which was a rise in activities which circumvented regulation, like off-balance bank trading. Greenspan shielded these new fields from regulation, and the resulting over-leverage killed banks. In addition, overly cheap credit made these activities and mortgage in general overly attractive.

There is a lot of evidence for this view, mostly in the multitude of institutions and industries which all had problems simultaneously. You can view this as a coincidence or you can view it as industries responding to incentives set by Greenspan.

TLDR Greenspan caused the housing bubble.
Testing Celery Task Retries
The theory i support is that avalanche that partially covered the tent triggered everything
If you live in a high crime area, you secure your house even if you have to put bars on your windows. Then you can campaign for a safer neighborhood.

It's not a requirement, or a demand, or blaming the victim, it's just sensible to protect the self first, then make the environment better.
Cordial » a zsh theme
Fleet APIs in CoreOS
What did it save you server-wise and how long did it take to identify and make the change? Also, did you discover this as part of a performance problem investigation or was it something you saw upfront and nipped in the bud before it became a problem. I agree it sounds like poor design. I instinctively simplify whatever info is going to be sent from the server.
Electric Bikes Won Over China. Is the U.S. Next?
Peapod, fresh direct, Google shopping express, max delivery, Amazon fresh, to name a few. We use peapod for almost all of our groceries, ordering about every other week

Even a lot of bodegas have their own little websites for ordering.
> Laws in the US default to women as caregivers.

Mostly, they don't.

> Women get maternity, men don't

Well, by definition, its only "maternity" when the mother gets it, but the federal requirement for unpaid, job-protected family leave in FMLA applies equally to parents of both genders, as does (for one example) the California state requirements for job-protected unpaid family (CFRA) and paid family leave (PFL)

> Women get default custody of child in divorce, men don't

There is no legally-specified default custody in divorce; women get custody in divorce more often because they are more likely to request it. Men get custody more often when it is contested between the parties.

> Women get to adopt easier than men

AFAIK, that's true for single women vs. single men in practice, but not an example of a default in the law, since its a result of the practices of private adoption agencies, not a result of a difference in legal requirements.

> Domestic violence on men is ignored/laughed upon, presumably because men are not caregivers but violators by default

Again, to the extent that's true, that's not an example of the law treating them differently; as a matter of law, domestic violence is equally prohibited when a male is the victim.

> Women don't have mandatory military conscription, men do

Well, no, since the draft ended and the all-volunteer force was established, no one has had mandatory military conscription in the US. Men are required to register in preparation for any potential change in that policy, though, so while overstated, this seems to be the single valid example of a legal preference in the direction you suggest on your list.
Well that's a derivative work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work
Yes, it was a war. There were plenty of earlier social networks, like Friendster and Myspace, who probably looked down at upstarts like Facebook, shortly before getting killed by them. Facebook was in a good position, but it certainly wasn't invincible.

And Google isn't just any competitor. This was back in the days when Google could do no wrong. They conquered the world in search. They conquered the world in email. They were starting to conquer the world in mobile. They had some of the best engineering talent in the world. And they were now pointing all their guns at Facebook. I can certainly imagine why Zuck was shitting bricks. Kudos to him for pulling out a win.
True! Web must stay open, services that are limited to smartphone owners are just classist.
I'll recommend the You Don't Know JS series: https://github.com/getify/You-Dont-Know-JS

It's free to read and a good primer for how things have changed in JS-land in the last few years.
The solution to this is easy: don't bother with that uncooperative recruiter. Remember, we're talking about trying to jump from one high paying job to a higher paying job here, so why bother with uncooperative recruiters? They need you much worse than you need them.
The video is informative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lql2yFXzKUs&feature=player_e...
You can make data tell any story you want with enough creativity.

They use ridiculous attribution modeling to justify all sorts of ROI that doesnt really exist. They aren't actually truly measuring impact, they are justifying an expense where there are no ramifications if their modeling doesn't reflect reality.

I worked for a company that lived and died by paid media. If something really didn't work, people lost their jobs. Without that level of accountability...it is just a bunch of BS people sell themselves to justify their decisions and/or make themselves look good.

You and I both know that ad tech spin data in all sorts of ways to make them look good.

I mean, do you really think a below the fold, unseen ad impression that was delivered to someone who bought 3 weeks later should get any credit for that sale?

Do the exchanges report on view through conversions? Of course they do...

Even, an above the fold impression, that was seen by a human being, is still 90% of the time ignored by ad blindness, but if that guy buys 29 days later, they'll still call it ROI.

Let's not pretend there is true accountability in digital media today. We both know thats just not true.

Edit: I thought I was replying to someone else and said "your exchange and corrected it to the exchanges."
That awkward moment when Google fails its own website testing tool
CamingoCode – a free manually hinted typeface for coding
He's pursuing a PH.d.

Think this is simply him dedicating more of his time to schooling.
Google has been recording your voice
I hate how "regulations" and "deregulation" has been reduced to a word that you are either "for" or "against" based on your political affiliation. As if regulations are all either entirely good, or entirely bad. I mean c'mon, do you really believe there has never been a bad regulation?

Free markets tend to produce the most wealth. Some regulations are necessary to prevent market failures like monopolies, information asymmetry, etc. But otherwise they are just getting in the way and causing more damage than good.

Regulations are not going to create a middle class or create economic equality. They can only prevent certain abuses from happening, but you can't regulate "equality".

The reality is some portion of the population doesn't have very much economic value. It's crazy and inefficient to try to artificially increase their value by protecting their jobs from competition. Instead we should tax the wealth that capitalism creates, and redistribute it more fairly.
If a PE shop buys your competitor, you should rejoice. PE firms primarily generate returns through (1) debt repayment from free cash flow, (2) multiple expansion, and (3) operating improvements.

Because of #1, PE firms like annuity-like businesses with predictable cash flow. A ventured-backed startup doesn't need to worry about #1, and therefore can focus all their internal efforts on #3. (If multiples expand, then that's even better.)

Here's an analogy. Venture-backed companies are busy building rockets, and rockets either take off or blow up. When PE takes over, your competitor has decided..."F this, let's go build a train instead."
I played hockey for hours and hours at -13f every day as a kid without even a winter coat. We'd still play at -40f, but it would be too cold for a helmet at that point and we'd have to wear toques.
What I don't get is how they didn't find him sooner. Apparently they did a sweep of the base and missed him. Was he asleep? Signs of someone being there should have been obvious..
More likely this story.

https://twitter.com/ioerror/status/638735997396774912
That is exactly what I'm saying. They are in a position of weakness. Their BATNA is losing everything they have. You don't need to be desperate, but you can't be as cut-throat.
Well to be honest I'm in Windows 10 on Ubuntu Studio. My work platform is OS X and a lot of tmuxing.

I actually don't have a primary OS anymore because with c9 I can have a sane env over https.
We are witnessing the death of the hypervisor (global banking), not the virtual machine (nation-state agreements) or the underlying operating system (cultural norms) or the underlying hardware. (nature)
This is rather silly. You've altered the definition of "free market" to the scope of things on the market, rather than the regulation of the market itself.

Although some free marketers (and many others) argue that things like prostitution should be "liberated" from prohibition, that's generally tangential to the arguments.

Usually, legal arguments about what can be bought or sold are settled in social/political terms, economics isn't really all that relevant.
Because they don't want to waste their time on someone their client won't agree to hire. It's a numbers game, and from a time perspective, meeting you for coffee and shopping your resume around isn't completely free.

Years of experience in the client's stack are a pretty good proxy for whether the employer will want to talk to you.
Rare 'Baby Dragons' Recorded Hatching in Ancient Slovenian Cave
The Trivia section is funny and shows you why we have so many Devils Lakes in the US (oh, spirit, must be the Devil!!)

I do love the name Kholat Syakhl (Dead Mountain). That must mean EVIL!!! (asks native) Oh, yeah, nothing to hunt on that mountain, try that one over there called Lunt-Husap-Sjahyl (Mountain of Goose Nests).
You get what I'm trying to say. :) Thanks for trying to clear it up.
What would the world look like if the Nazis had won World War II? Or if Russia had nuked the world in the 1980s? Or Henry VIII had had a surviving male heir early in his reign? Or if Yeltsin hadn't have been an easily manipulated alcoholic?

I could go on - at length. And this only scratches the surface of alternative world history, which is just one of a crazy number of reasons to simulate something that involves a previous history's peoples.

Hah, I wonder what geologists would get up to?
I wish HN had less snark.

Who cares what language communities obsess over what?

Snark ruins otherwise informative posts.
GDS have done a fantastic job of what you might call "government UX", by getting people with the right technical ethos in charge. HN would approve of their minimalist, functional, responsive approach.

Letting govt agencies who don't know what they're doing go out and tender for private sector building of internet services would be a disaster; they'd be oversold six ways from Sunday. Treble the cost to build the same thing three times for the three mobile platforms? Sure. Given that 99% of the stuff is simple secure form-filling, it doesn't need to be more than a web page.

I can file my taxes or renew my driving license online. The system works.
I agree. Following that recipe, you decide on ending the phone call with a nice, but uncooperative about blurting out a number recruiter who claims they can be competitive.

Now the question is this: if you are willing to blow off the whole process anyway on that call, why not at least try giving them a number and give them a chance and see if they would beat it?
If her intuition is "this guy is flirting with me and I don't like it" my advice was to clearly state that. Being rude is one way to do that, yes.

"Don't blame the other person for your failure to communicate." is my advice taken as a sound byte. Not just to women, but to everyone. Never blame someone else because you suck at communicating something.

ps. I love how you took two words out of my entire reply and ran with those - ignoring the rest. For example, the first sentence telling them to be honest and communicate their disinterest (mentioning nothing about tone). Their weak signalling obviously isn't being communicated to or read properly by the other party. And yes, there are people who are bad with social cues or even "stronger signalling" and need actual words to be said to them.
You can turn it around on them a little bit by replying "this sounds like it may be a good fit for me, but I'll need a salary range from you in order to move forward" and then the whole conversation is short circuited.
It is a strong word, and I use it deliberately. These sentences were clearly copied from King. If your reader would be better served by a direct quote, then you are not "relating" a part of a book.
North Korea manufacturing MakerBot clones
I agree with you. I see this advice constantly parroted about, but I just cringe at the amount of work these people go through to avoid naming a number. If you want to deflect the first time the question is asked, fine. But if you have to deflect more than once, you won't come off like a professional. A professional knows their value. If you follow all of the rest of the advice, like doing your research, you'll know what you are worth and it shouldn't be a problem naming a fair price.

The other point I have is that the first number isn't all that important. Yes, it might anchor the starting point, but you'll be in a stronger negotiating position when the written offer is actually made.

I just went through this recently. Yes, their hiring manager asked me what my requirement was for a salary and I gave them a number without any fuss. In their first formal offer, they gave me the number I wanted; however, by that point in the hiring process, it was clear that I was a top candidate, and with other competing offers, I was able to get them to come up another 30%.

In the end, I don't think the best approach is to force the company to make the first offer. They aren't going to give their best offer if you force them to make the first move. The only time that strategy might make sense is if your best number is much lower than their worst number; in that case, you did a lousy job in the research phase and need to take a step back.
Please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News.

The parent comment was fine because it went into detail about specific experiences. But a reply like this is just kindling for flamewars, and we don't want those on HN.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11830868 and marked it off-topic.
Actually, never trade in your existing car at the dealer where you make your new purchase (unless you are a skilled negotiator). Typically, whatever discounts you ask for on the new car, they will quietly subtract from their "evaluation" of your old car's value.
I think you're talking about Spring the ecosystem. Truly a burning hell, with your path dimly illuminated by ten trillion outdated stackoverflow and coderanch posts, and where at every junction you can choose either the XML or the annotations path.
For a very loose definition of "all the code"
Absolutely.

The banks further profited by investing their own money - something we then prohibited them from doing, as it made them far too risky. Essentially the banks had abnormally high returns, which is almost always a sign of high risk. The entire purpose of regulation is to force the banks to be boring, low-risk low-return options so they have a very low chance of failing. People seeking high-returns can then go to the stock market or hedge funds, which are much less likely to be 'too big to fail'.

The public is also unaware that nearly every substantial banking regulation was created as the result of a bubble, recession, or depression. We need strong bank regulations in order to prevent financial crises which can cause global depressions.

Throwing away regulations when everything is going well is much like throwing out all that error-handling code your application has built up over a decade. Sure, you get better performance initially...
> How do I signal to a client, "I'm expensive -- and worth it!" without saying, "Hey, can you afford me? Because otherwise let's not even talk."

You're missing a step in your sales process, which is the qualification part. Before letting a conversation go into much details or letting it turn into an interview call, take control and state that you'd like to to spend 10-15 minutes asking questions to make sure they're a good fit so you can make best use of each others' time. Then ask:

- "So tell me, why are we talking here today? What is it exactly that brought us into this conversation?" [Let them throw up their problems on the table, but only in broad strokes.] (~5-10min)

- What their decision process is and how they'll fit in [in passing] (~1-2min)

- How urgent it is for them to fix the problem [if it's not clearly urgent] (~1-2min)

- What their ballpark budget is [~2-3min]

Most prospects resist giving a figure at this stage. A trick to get them to give a ballpark is to announce a scary-sounding range. As in "hold, the type of contracts I work on start at $5k and go as high as $500k. I don't necessarily need your specific number, but can you at least let me know where you more or less fit in that range so I can know how much I can help you?"

Sometimes, there's an obvious and intuitive mismatch between what their problem is and the budget they're willing to allocate towards fixing it. If you suspect they've deeper pockets than what they said, you can occasionally hold their hands and walk them through their own numbers. e.g. "Hold, let me try to see if I get it right. You just told me your team of 6 engineers was on this for 4 months and failed to make this work. Depending on how you pay them that likely makes it a $150-250k type of problem. Are you sure your $20-30k budget range will allow you to solve it?" [Then see how high they could actually go, without negotiating or promising anything on your end.]

That way you won't waste time going over prospect problems for hours on end without the slightest clue of whether it'll be worth your time or not. If they're clearly under your number, say it up front upon [dis-]qualifying them. Either politely stop the conversation there, or spend the rest of your meeting giving them a few good pointers. [Then ask for a few referrals.]
This doesn't worry me so much on it's own. You have to contrast it with new unemployment rates.
Out of curiosity....since ad injection is bad, what is the most common revenue model behind very popular extensions? Donations never make much money, and only ad blockers with enormous install bases can use the extortion model. Does anyone know how extensions make money if they aren't injecting ads?
"always be able to walk away" to me includes never allowing yourself to be in a position where you cant walk away. I think of that as an actual survival trait not just a business skill.

I would also say never pretend, actually be willing to walk away. Someone good at psychology or picking up subtle clues will see right through pretending.

Anyway you slice it being desperate is never good, don't be desperate.