skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Let's push the thought experiment a bit. Let's suppose you have the option to opt-out from vaccination.

If the premise is that you are responsible for your own body, then shouldn't you also be responsible for any consequences that occur as a result of your choice to opt-out?

As a non-vaccinated person, carrying a disease that would normally be vaccinated against, can you be held responsible in the event that the disease you carry infects, for instance, a child that is not yet old enough to be vaccinated against that particular disease, or infects someone who was unable to be vaccinated due to other medical reasons? Should you be fined or prosecuted in the event that your choice to opt-out can be directly linked to a significant health event?

It's hard to talk about disease on an individual basis. A person's choices with respect to their own health has an impact on the individuals around them, and I do think that people should be mindful of the community when making lifestyle choices. I'm not saying a person shouldn't make their own choices, but should accept that those choices aren't just going to affect their own individual health in many cases.
I will say that in the long run, it will increase labor productivity and be a good thing. Where formerly there were 100 people manually performing {Back Office Process X}, now there are 5, aided by automation.

But... it's going to be a helluva time between here and there. The erosion of manufacturing jobs and subsequent demographic and geographic sinkholes caused by our society's inability to shift those dislocated into new productive work seems to indicate we (capitalism) don't have much of a plan other than "Hope the market / individual rationality fixes things eventually."

Unfortunately, I think it's the timescale that's going to get us. Holding the human lifetime, initial education, and reeducation (aka time to acquire marketable skills) approximately constant while continually increasing the rate of change of those skills' relative values doesn't give rational actors enough time to course correct.

Which, to summarize it coarsely, leads to people getting @$^!ed through no fault of their own, other than an inability to predict the future.

"I went into management because I felt it was a human-centric role that would always be needed."

(5 years later) "BREAKTHROUGH: New business description language allows for AI-driven allocation of labor and task resources!"
There are two kinds of listening, you can listen to understand and listen to respond.

I read that comment as: "people overload me with facts before giving me a chance to communicate what I'm actually thinking". It's not fun for anyone to have a complicated set of thoughts, get up the courage to share them, and then get cut off before what they've said out loud matches what they think in their head. It takes a really good listener to help people get through that.
Linting for Angular
Sure it might not make sense to use SOAP for communication between an iOS app and its server-side counterpart. However when writing consumers of an existing SOAP service, for example in an macOS or console application; it might make more sense.
1. Shoulda taught them a lesson about self-fulfilling prophecy and commandeered the means of production. By that I mean taking the cash register and feeding the homeless out front.

2. That's the real crime here. That frame was a gift.

3. OK, seriously again, that's very lame. If management brings up politics, they damn well better be receptive to the response. I know small businesses can be "different" but it has little bearing on you working in their store.
Emotion is a valid reason to hold an opinion. It may not be a good reason in many cases, but it isn't invalid.

Having facts to back up your position is good thing, but not having facts backing it up doesn't automatically mean it is an incorrect position to hold.
> The fact you think it's amateurish

The report contained a lot of information in it that suggested it was thrown together by a person unfamiliar with ITSec who was copying and pasting filler material until the report was long enough (had enough pages) to seem substantial, much like the folders full of blank sheets of paper Trump used as a prop for one of his speeches.

> reflects your unfamiliarity with what these documents mean

That's exactly the point. They mean nothing because they assert nothing factual, simply an opinion whose reasoning is left up to the imagination of the reader under the pretense of secrecy.

> Senate Intelligence Committee (chaired by a Republican)

Fearmongering about Russia has crossed party lines, and is concentrated in some of the more powerful members of congress who are on that committee...

Watch a few minutes of Marco Rubio's questioning of Tillerson about Russia, it's as if he's asking a religious litmus test question, not asking about a rational thought process. I found it deeply embarrassing to watch.

> If you do not trust the Senate Intelligence Committee or the Intelligence Community chiefs

Trust should not be part of the equation when we are talking about going to war. It should be abundantly obvious that war is necessary, and we should not have to take anyone's word for anything.

If the report had been upfront about its lack of evidence-based analysis, then it would have been less than a page long. The fact is, intelligence agencies do not worry about all of their analysis being evidence-based, they use heuristics and other models of understanding behavior to formulate their assessment. I'm not arguing that this method is not appropriate to that specific domain.

However, the report was presented as containing the actual evidence that convinced members of the committee that there was Russian involvement.

Most of us are old enough to remember how not long ago an administration presented flawed evidence about Iraq and how that cost the US trillions of dollars and left nearly a million people dead. It was one of the biggest human atrocities in the modern world, and it happened because too many of us trusted the heuristic and hand-waving approach that intelligence agencies use.

That approach is fine when there is a need to make a last-minute decision and no better methods exist, but they should not be used for promoting/propagandizing wars that have not yet started.

If it were not for the rabid partisanship (not just democrat/republican, there are a lot of vehement anti-Russia partisans in both parties) the report would have been laughed at by the press and no president or intelligence committee would dare release such garbage. Unfortunately, like during the buildup to the Iraq war, such discretion and scrutiny is missing from the equation.
"I don't understand what you are complaining about, I have no problem finding a seat on the bus"

- Some white guy in 1955.
You are confusing what the current law is, with what the law could, or should be, based on accepted moral values.
215-383-1737+Sizzle+Call+Marketing+System+Free+Landing+Page
the design flaw is not what happened to main spillway but that the emergency spillway flows over a dirt hillside that will quickly collapse once used in the situations where it will need to be. And not just Random Internet Guy but many others including Sierra Club noted this more than a decade ago.
A useful technique from "street epistemology" is to ask a person with whom you disagree on facts this question: "what information, if it were true, would cause you to change your opinion?"

If their response, after discussion, ends up being basically "there is nothing that could change my mind," then you are wasting your time. Otherwise, you can have an interesting discussion of epistemology, objectivity, and critical thinking in general, and can learn something from one another.
>Too bad that's not actually a core principle of the democratic party - see what happened under Obama,

See what? That he reduced the deficit during his tenure?

>and see how little one of their biggest fiscal mouth pieces (Paul Krugman) cares about debt or deficits.

Obama took office during an economic depression. This is how macroeconomics works. You spend to goose demand when the economy is down and you tax for the down times when the economy is up. The largest depression since the Great one isn't the time to be worrying about anything but getting us out of it.
> Where exactly is the line? How should someone be challenged to change their positions?

The line is the one that divides their politics from the rest of their life. You challenge their ideas, you don't harass them or try to get them fired.
For people using rsync and the like - Does anyone have data on the amount of wear caused by reading the entire HDD (modulo OS/libs) over and over again to compare against the backup?
It is a basic question about one very narrow skill set that is relevant for some, but not all, programming jobs.

I could just as easily say "we should be asking every programmer to handle a six-box grid layout" on a white board.

It's a skill set that's relevant to almost all of programming jobs. Quick: give me an example of how time/space complexity can be relevant to layout manager code. (Can't do it? Dunning-Kruger just reared its ugly head again.)

You don't necessarily need to write your own layout manager. But to properly shop for one for some demanding use cases, you may well benefit from just cocktail-party level first principles knowledge, so you can pick the right library. Or, do you just have faith that Apple or [Big Company] knows what it's doing, and assume that everything can handle everything you throw at it. That works over 90% of the time. It's the exceptional case where you need the 1st principles, and such cases usually come with outsized penalties if you don't know.
Both the Eich and Thiel situations were downright appalling in how they mirrored the exact kind of Witch hunt and ostracizing that liberalism historically and morally should be against.

The fact that people didn't seem to grasp the hypocrisy and danger of their actions made it even more chilling.
So arr = arr.Select(el => el == condition);

I'd push-back in code-review anyone who tried to do something not in obvious, idiomatic (read: LINQ) C#.
Millennium PAO
> You can't demonize people for wanting to ask legitimate questions and have legitimate discussions.

You also can't claim that merely asking those questions will lead to demonization or ostracism, since we recently freely elected a leader who asks such questions.
> they would consider miscarriages to be the leading cause of death (and thus in dire need of medical research funds)

I think you probably could get a fair amount of evangelical support for this. I've never seen the argument made, but I can easily imagine it gaining traction.
Plus you need to cool that 300W in a datacenter, which costs a few cents I am sure.
Thanks for the update, appreciated.
I think you're missing the point - those things that you don't like about the Google interview process are meant to eliminate bias. Your hiring manager doesn't interview you because they might make compromises. People interviewing you don't review your profile because they might have a bias if they know about you.

All of the things that make those interviews effective are the things that you are complaining about.
A grant-funded, open source, decentralized tool for distributing data sets
http://www.anagrammy.com/anagrams/faq6.html

18 letters

conversationalists = conservationalists

17 letters

basiparachromatin = marsipobranchiata
Charles Holding, 1971

16 letters

thermonastically = hematocrystallin
John Edward Ogden, 1978

15 letters

nonuniversalist = involuntariness
refragmentation = antiferromagnet
megachiropteran = cinematographer
centauromachias = marchantiaceous
Eric Albert, c. 1986
What is the timeline you're putting to this? If it's 500 years, sure, speculate away; but if you think these things are going to materialize in the near future then I think you're crazy.

ML is not to the point where we can hand it a bunch of data, some features, and have it control robotic arms with near human ability. Not even close. There just isn't enough data or computational power (in a small enough package anyway); not to mention robotics are still really in their infancy, we've barely got a four legged robot jumping over a single object head on.

I think you're really underestimating energy and computational requirements; these systems would need an umbilical cord to a datacenter and power to even function. This isn't even discussing the need for them to learn, which would be a requirement for more complex jobs like folding clothes or moving through unmapped environments.

I think automation has been put forward as a boogieman to those who don't know better so UBI can be pushed forward. We aren't even close to a time when machines are able to repair themselves, or function semi-autonomously in an environment not strictly built to support it.

We're going to be in this kludge for a long long time. Sure unemployment will go up with automation, but it'll be a slow plotting course with a lot of stopgaps put in place. Eventually when that becomes burdensome enough we may revisit UBI, but we haven't reached that point yet, not even close.
Unfortunate that Paul Graham didn't follow his own advice. Seeing him attack Trump supporters with all the negative labels Trump has been falsely portrayed by the media and comparing Trump to Hitler in twitter really makes you pause.
Typo; thanks.
And a third category: people that train specifically to pass the Amazon and Google exam.

I know several people that did, taking several months off to prepare (and got in), and yes, you have to re-learn all the CS algorithms which will probably be irrelevant again after you pass the interview.
Honestly, the primary reason I support this is to get developers out of the habbit of demanding a localized server timezone. As an infra' person, I want system time in UTC. If developers get in the habbit of setting TZ, then I can have this!
What industries does this occur in?
That's a valid point if it's security-critical. My initial response was with regards to grandparent comments arguing over semantics, when the end results in both cases was "successful processing ceased because of an API change."
The 5 times part is surely a joke, but not naming a number is like HN-promulgated salary negotiation 101

http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/
https://www.twilio.com/blog/2016/02/patrick-mckenzie-on-sala...

Definitely would be good if someone wrote a counter-response to this prevailing meme
This was a good read. I think we need more of this. More listening and less demonizing. I too was dismissive of Trump supporters throughout the election. Over the last several months I have started to better understand where they are coming from. Living in Japan has helped me understand why people worry about immigration and cultural preservation. I have conversed with a lot of 'alt-right' people lately too and tried to find common ground and understand their viewpoints. We don't have to agree, but we need to be able to talk.
> Of course, instead of toning it back after the election, many have doubled down. I'm curious how that will play out for the next election.

Given the recent trajectory of the Tea Party, I think it'll play out pretty well—if not the next election, then the one after that.
Work environments aren't meant to be a forum to discuss politically sensitive topics. Would you be able to discuss abortion rights or gay marriage at work? Then why is it so problematic if honor killings are a taboo topic?
Also, what is your interest in honor killings, as opposed to say gun violence? Are more people being killed because of this barbaric custom, or is it because that's what the media and all Islamophobes love to bring up during any discussion of Islam? If you really wanted to educate yourself on the topic you would have easily found a source [1] with contrary information but that would burst the media bubble we are surrounded by in this country

[1] https://blog.oup.com/2014/07/five-important-facts-about-hono...
It might be more productive to just not ascribe all of Antifa's actions to Berkeley or its student body.
>I don't know what is true, but with the media, with some experience, you can see signs.

What experience do you have that differs from typical people which allows you to make these judgements?

How are you determining that this isn't just your own confirmation bias?
It's also complicated by the fact that news/journalism is the process we use to hold the government/powerful accountable. There are serious agency problems that would develop if the government (or any group) were to regulate it. This is why freedom of speech is such an important part of the constitution.

Also the USA would not exist if it were not for fake news. It was the arrival of printing presses in Boston which allowed political groups to create fake news to inflame the revolution[1], so it's not always clear fake news is a bad thing (I'm English but I think the creation of democratic America is one of the greatest common goods the world has seen, though i'm sure we can debate that).

[1] Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Penguin_History_of_the_Uni...
To what channel, exactly?
Avoiding WWIII is in both companies and the publication intrest. Small companies tend to align closely with public interests except a few unique areas per business. It's really only large companies that have lots of points of divergence.

The major difference is a tiny company interacts with other companies largely the same way individuals do. Large companies have far more complex relationships.
Most of the blogs I read on a regular basis will have an About section or What I'm Reading List. I get most of my book recommendations that way. Some authors will have e-mail lists talking about what they've been reading. Ryan Holiday does this.

Another way is to find an author that you really click with and just read everything that he/she has ever written.
There's probably no downside... until there are twenty sacred cows, the aggregate heuristics are filtering out half of the country, and Trump is commander-in-chief...
Professional (code): mostly taken care of by client infrastructure as I'm a freelance developer, but I basically rely on cloud source control (BitBucket, GitHub, etc.)

Personal (photos, etc.): Don't really trust the cloud, so I have a QNAP NAS in RAID1 configuration with two 3TB WD red drives. We upload photos/videos from our phones (and also store important docs/files) here. I replicate this drive every 4-6 months and store it in a safe deposit box at our bank (in case of fire). Not perfect, but I think good enough. Haven't "tested" it, but since family photos and videos are the most important part of it, there isn't really much to test (we view pics off of the NAS regularly).
Serious question: why would an American citizen choose to not learn the national language? Doesn't that disadvantage you severely in life?
Why not? In what warehouse are the airframes being stockpiled while increasing numbers of them wait to be turned into completed frames?

Or are some significant fraction of airframes scrapped due to defects before the next stage?
China has a distinction between Urban and Rural status, which means that rural citizens literally have to immigrate (sometimes illegally) into cities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system
It's an unreasonable ask.
Not a single engineer stays his whole career with the same manager.
Furthermore, needs change since demands and projects change.

Therefore at a big company the best strategy is to check fundamentals.

I agree that it's a BS strategy. I would love that the hiring process is a internship or some other real work simulation. Unfortunately they do not scale.

Maybe the author should consider a smaller company where one can predict the future role.
How the Netherlands' Amazing Bike-Friendly Roads Work
Ease of deployment? At least for corporate interception the answer seems to be just how much easier it is to deploy a central proxy than to make sure that client software is up to date. (Forgetting, conveniently, that you have to update client certificate stores every so often.)

Similarly the "it's how we've always done it" defense because companies have used that approach for HTTP for so long they don't want to invest in a new approach now that HTTPS makes it much less viable.

As for consumer AV products, I have no idea how they defend that other than "let's have our tentacles in all the pies".
> Telling people that they cannot 1) have their records management system and 2) have internet access on their computer is simply unrealistic.

I bet 100 years ago it was considered unrealistic to tell white collar employees that they could not bring booze to the office. Today it is a firing offense in most jurisdictions.

After all, people are already aware there is a distinction between their professional personna and their private self. They know there are things you do under one identity but not under the other, and viceversa. Merely adding one tiny thing to the list will do little.

Sure, executives will push back. I bet they pushed back even harder when accountants told them that "No, you cannot put your stripclub bill into the corporate credit card; and I don't care if it was a business expense, either."

That's the meaning of being a professional: telling the higher-ups that there are hard rules (natural or otherwise) that don't give a flying-fuck about their social status. Doctors know it, lawyers know it, accountants know it, but for some reason IT people does not seem able to figure that out. Compensation aside, the social prestige that comes with each of those professions is directly proportional to their ability (and duty) to enforce those standards regardless of what their rich and powerful bosses think about it.
Again, people are worried about being murdered by radical christian terrorists. Worried about not being allowed to come home after leaving the country for a vacation. Worried about their healthcare and reproductive rights being taken away.

You are worried that a private organization that someone no right to be a part of might not want to have anything to do with the alt-right?
If some values (e.g. abortion rights) are more important than others (e.g. constitutional rights), then the supporters of the important values should be willing to compromise their positions on the less important ones in order to build common ground.

You can't force other people to find your values important. You can't twist human psychology so that 'empathy' constantly will overrule self-gain.

What you can do is compromise. If the democratic party were pro-guns, pro-rural development, and also pro-abortion then you'd be surprised to find how many people would stand with them.
So, in a way our President is actually standing up to the corporations and fighting for human rights?
The Business of Gaming
Blowing terror incidents out of proportion is the exact same rhetorical tactic used against Muslims. In general, I think this cherry-picked focus on extremists is what got us into this mess. We need to spend less time spreading one-off news stories and more time listening to and empowering the actual people we're arguing over.
I actually find the Chemex as simple as the Aeropress. It has replaced it for my morning coffee.
Blasphemy laws didn't make people more religious. They just made it so people didn't talk about it. It's the same here.
I like your logic. "You know, I have never been a victim of a murder, therefore murders don't happen".

When a company publicly announces "we're affirmative action company", I understand it as they openly exercise racism and/or sexism against me.

And trust me, as a divorced guy, I've experienced institutionalized sexism A LOT.
I was always fond of "presbyterians" "britneyspears".
Fascinating. Are there other examples of industrialists from that era building their own towns? I know I have heard of some, but none come to mind right now.
Google is renewable at this point I believe.