skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd say, get rid of the intentional errors. If anyone asks, it's just because they became so good at their jobs that the work is now spotless. Which, frankly, it's the truth: business requirements were discovered in such detail that automation could be performed.

I don't think it is stealing. In fact, they are getting exactly what they asked for – the job is getting done. The fact that it is taking less work (but it is still taking some work, he still needs to do clean up before running the automation) should be irrelevant if it is his only task.

This is assuming there are no specific instructions on how the work should be performed.

If it were a silicon valley-type company, then it is possible that this contribution would be properly recognized and the employee offered another position due to the demonstrated skills. From the looks of it, it's unlikely to happen.

So here are the choices:

Not disclosing, and getting into philosophical arguments on whether or not they are being overpaid. Depending on the complexity, this is the kind of thing that consulting companies thrive on and charge big bucks for. So, in fact, they may even be UNDERpaid, if this is eventually disclosed and becomes company property (maybe when they decide to leave the company?).

Disclosing, will force some tough conversations to happen. They will probably want the software, which they are entitled to, as it was done on company's time. And, once they have it, there's nothing preventing them from firing the person.

And, to be fair, companies do that sort of stuff all the time. They may start doing things manually for customers, figure out some monetary value they should charge to cover costs, plus profit. Eventually things get automated. Do they reduce their prices? Of course they don't. Cost optimization and the like.

EDIT: typo (also, using gender-neutral pronouns is tough)
Is capitalism ethical though? Isn't every employee an exploited person?

“What is the robbing of a bank compared to the founding of a bank?” - Bertolt Brecht
> (there was a famous study of an Israeli day care that started charging parents a fee if they picked up their child late, then tried to change back to the previous policy)

I see that you too have read Dan Ariely's Predicably Irrational :)

Recommended reading for everyone else, by the way. It was an enlightening on the topic of socio-economics, or the application of psychology to economics.
I think "extraordinary" should be replaced with not common knowledge, "earth is flat" is always repeated in some way regarding assumptions on reality, think quantum mechanics.
Show HN: Hire.Bid – Clients Bid on You
Aviation Enhanced Security Measures for All Commercial Flights to the U.S
> I just don't think we should all be so quick to say, "Oh, well it's OBVIOUSLY fair use."

You're absolutely right on that. ANY time a legal question rests on some multi-prong factor test, it's folly to say that there's an obvious answer. There can be strong arguments one way, but it's never a slam dunk.

Courts and juries are unpredictable.
> Apparently going to high school, studying and passing the SAT, applying and being accepted into university, studying, passing, and graduating university is just luck.

some of that is the luck of being born in the right place.

also, many people did all that and still did not get hired at that place
Swiggle – Save money on your online purchases when prices drop after you buy
When prices drop after you make a purchase, Swiggle works to get you your money back.

Most retailers and many credit cards have a price drop guarantee but, until now, it’s been up to shoppers to check for lower prices and file price adjustment claims.

Swiggle saves users time and money with it's 'set and forget' technology by automatically getting users price adjustment refunds when prices drop.

After shoppers make their online purchase, Swiggle constantly searches for lower prices at over 100 retailers across North America. When it finds a price drop, Swiggle automatically works with retailer to refund shoppers the lower price.
The theory that you're describing holds only if ads placed through Google Shopping outperform whatever other kind of ads might appear there. If the Google Shopping ads (not actually the right term) actually perform worse, then Google will lose money, and the funding will not be unlimited.

The product results that appear in Google Search are called Product Listing Ads (PLAs), and are not a comparison shopping feature today. (I don't know how things worked in the past.) They are simply advertisements.

Individual merchants publish their product catalog into Google's Merchant Center, along with the price they're willing to pay for each product ad. It's similar to adwords, just with product information too (title, picture, price).

Consequently, it's not a comparison shopping system - within Google Search it is purely an advertising feature with more information than text ads. Furthermore, as far as I'm aware, any company can participate in it by listing their products. I also think but am not positive that the only products featured in the carousel will be paid advertisements - another way in which it is not a comparison shopping system.

Note: I'm only describing Product Listing Ads within Google Search results, not whatever else Google Shopping might be. It does appear that the main Google Shopping website also involves payment from merchants, which they disclose on the page.

I don't know what determines whether the product carousel is displayed or not. I would assume that it's shown at the top when Google has enough information to display it, and when it's outperforming other types of ads. Anecdotally, Product Listing Ads have considerably higher conversion than traditional AdWords, so I would expect that PLAs will naturally perform better and would justify the top advertising slot.
Even then, the email would need to be signed and verified to ensure the key wasn't modified. You wouldn't want an attacker replacing it with their own public key.
Nobody in the history of pump and dumps invested in one tells people that it is one.
Does Data Compression Matter on a Quantum Internet?
which party is "pro science"?
Unfortunately, the Google Cache is still trying to load data from raphkoster.com

Do you have a pastebin dump?
Ethereum Smart Contract Short Address Attack Mitigation Failure
Property tax is $15 per month in South Bend for a house? Wrong.
Capital gains is taxed lower than income? Wrong -- sometimes it is, sometimes the other way around. Multiple factual errors.
Refusing the discussion is a categorically bad sign, though of course some details won't be public. Best case, the leader is deluded in a way that limits learning. Like an entrepreneur who wants you to sign an NDA to discuss their idea, this sort of behavior is now obviously bad.

Relatedly, when a candidate asks these types of questions during the recruitment process, this signals that you're clueful. A good employer will happily engage. A bad one will switch to a more gullible candidate.
Considering the vast majority of programmers are male, does it really matter if we use male pronouns. What does changing them actually solve? Are women really put off of computing because of that? It all seems so trivial.
I wish that would fit on a license plate. "sexjar" does though, so there's that.
I find it very strange they banned drinking. I work at a large finance company that you have probably heard of, and happy hours are very common and practically encouraged since it helps with team bonding, relieves stress, etc. We even are allowed a beer at lunch if we go out per policy.
Mortified enough to sell/demolish it and buy/build a smaller more tasteful one? [EDIT:] b^)
> Zillow likely has a clause in their contracts with MLS/wherever else they get these pictures, that they cant allow the pics to be used for any other purpose other than for posting on Zillow. They are trying to enforce this since they have apparently gotten dinged by suppliers in the past.

You seem to be just guessing about what might be in the contract, but I'll run with it. Unless there's some affirmative duty to police in the contract, why couldn't they just ignore McMansion Hell? Ignoring is not the same as giving license.
Corporate doesn't like you undercutting and essentially openly competing with the other franchisees in the same general area, but they adjust prices based on local cost of living.

The whole idea is if there are two McDonald's near eachother, and one is known locally as "the good McDonald's", the other is therefore "the bad McDonald's". They don't want any "bad Mcdonald's".
Seriously... Op could quit his job, then go tell his employer he'll maintain the system for a fixed monthly subscription.

They'll have less headcount and op will be free to pursue other activities.
> Banks (where people type on keyboards most of the time) are also AFAIK alcohol-free.

As in, the places you drive up to deposit checks? I have friends who in finance (for banks) and there is a very strong drinking culture at work.
For many uses this is already happening, but for writing an OS, there's no getting around the fact that you're going to need to, say, write to or read from a specific hard-coded memory address that, for a given platform, is magically mapped to a hardware register. That's always going to be unsafe. Certainly, though, Rust lets you sequester that kind of code away and isolate it from things that can be expressed safely.
It's not clear to me why you can draw conclusions about the impact on employees from the UW study. I read it as "minimum wage increase hurts small employers more than big ones", which is less headline-worthy.
What I find is that if I look at them myself I tend to match shape and color, then I have to really force myself to look for the same shape in a different color. Very strange how automatic this is. It's like some subroutine taking over.
I suggest you pick up and read "Galileo's Middle Finger" [1] by Alice Dreger. In short it points to hypocrisy when dogma and science collide. When your worldview is shattered by actual science and how we can be better people by not politicizing science only when convenient.

NYMag had a decent review too. [2]

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Galileos-Middle-Finger-Heretics-Activ...

[2] http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/12/when-liberals-attack-so...
Deploy an Ember.js Listings App in 3 Steps
Being born into circumstances that even enable you to accomplish all of the above definitely falls into the category of luck, in my opinion.

Eg if you're born to wealthier parents, you likely have more time in the evenings/weekends to study, which makes all of the above easier than say, if you were born to a poorer family and had to work 20-40 hours / week to contribute to your family's income.

Next, being born with the right genetics that enable a natural talent/ability to understand a particular area well enough to get through all of that education and into a good job, is also a form of luck.

Sure there's a level of discipline and effort required to get there even when you've got all of the "luck" - but part of the article's point is that there are certain people that are born into certain situations which they can literally never raise themselves out of (without some kind of very very good luck).
> [in the US] people who don’t need their income are taxed less than people who do

I'm not American; I don't know the tax structure. But I can't even imagine that this could possibly be true, or what is true that is meant.

Without looking it up, I would assume that the USA subscribes to progressive taxation, under which the richer pay more tax in both absolute and relative terms.

Even if it has a flat rate of tax, (a structure, incidentally, that makes far more intuitive sense to me) the richer are still paying more tax in absolute terms, and equal in relative terms.

What Earthly metric is the author using?
Please stop calling databases CP or AP
This echoes a lot of the same sentiments that Paul Graham puts forth in his essay "How to Make Wealth"[1].

Basically, the claim is "money is not wealth" (or as put above, money is not value). Money is a tool, used for three things:

1. making it easy to trade if you can't barter (i.e., be a medium of exchange)
2. store wealth (i.e., store value)
3. measure wealth (i.e., be a unit of account)

Wealth on the other hand deals with actually making the economy better off. Creating a startup that makes widgets faster and cheaper then ships them out over the interwebs moves the needle forward. Both of these scenarios create wealth.

I think there's still an argument to be made over the apparent inequality between how much work is required to create a certain amount of wealth. And certainly, owning wealth while doing no work is another story entirely.

[1] http://paulgraham.com/wealth.html
"Martin Fowler coined the term somewhere in 2005"

I expected a text about, for example, APSE (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APSE: "Ada Programming Support Environment was a specification for a programming environment to support software development in the Ada programming language.") from 1980 (more info at http://www.adahome.com/History/Stoneman/stoneint.htm)
What do terms of use have to do with anything?
EITC should be axed for one simple reason: It allows people to be dishonest when it comes to social spending. EITC is never included, but it's a wealth transfer before any accounting is done so it's never really talked about.

Welfare should be welfare. Taxes should be taxes. This constant cross-subsidization is insane, and at this point absolutely no one has any idea who is paying for what and how much.
Steemit: on ProductHunt
Ultimate Collection
> applying and being accepted into university, studying, passing, and graduating university

Perhaps he is lucky enough to have parents that could afford college for him so he could invest in property rather than "invest" at getting to a $0 debt level.

It's also luck that the university exists in the first place. The system we exist in has build infrastructure for people to better themselves, and to turn around after earning millions of dollars and say "I did this all by myself" is disingenuous (or at the very least, incredibly ignorant).

I'd attribute most people's position in life to 5-10% "bootstraps" and 90-95% circumstances.
Announcing .NET Core 2.0 Preview 2
> interpersonal experience

> at your fingertips

Can't really have it both ways, there. Otherwise I can only think there'd be far fewer unhappy, discontented people in the world.
Excellent. Downloading now :)

I ran NetBSD and OpenBSD on old sun kit in the late 1990s and early 2000's followed by Debian and then CentOS. FreeBSD got a look in persistently on the side. I'd rather like a step back to the sensibility of times past when you chucked something out and it just did its job until something blew up :)
There are two ethical lines the poster may have crossed.

> I even insert a few bugs here and there to make it look like it’s been generated by a human.

As a few others in the original post pointed out, this seems to be the biggest issue. He is intentionally misleading his employer as to the nature of the work he is doing. The automation itself isn't immediately unethical, but the intentional misdirection could be.

The second issue depends on whether he is paid for his time or to fulfill his job duties. In the case he is being paid to fulfill his job duties, he is doing the job he was hired to do adequately, he is meeting the deadlines expected of him by his employer, at the price he negotiated when he was hired. However, if he is being paid for time, it seems clearly unethical to bill the company for 38 more hours than he worked.
Number 6 (more customization, highlighting complete themes) and number 8 (unique extensions, highlighting Tree Style Tabs) are shortly going to be things of the past. Neither of those features are fully set to make it past version 57 since they will be removing the ability for legacy extensions (those using binaries, XUL, or things of that nature; i.e. non-WebExtension extensions) to function.

Edit: I would like to add that both of those things will have some level of support, but the full range of features is just not there and providing the same kind of experience is just not part of Mozilla's scope, which is now strongly favoring keeping the UI as uniform as possible.
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the terms of Zillow's own license.
A minor point: To be fair, minified JS is not exactly a hard barrier. Conventional minification is just removing extraneous whitespace, newlines, comments, etc.. Except for the lost comments (which are definitely a pity if it's well-commented code), it's easily restored with an unminifier.
Property tax is $15 per month for a house in South Bend, IN? lol.
Capital gains is taxed lower than income? Wrong ("it depends").
I stopped reading there.
How is this the smallest bit unethical?

The person is paid to do a job and that job is done, and seemingly well. End of discussion.
>> we would especially love insights from include women (cis & trans), nonbinary folks, people of color

> Oh. Well this is weird. They seem like awfully indirect measurements of relevant skills and perspective

It might be indirect, but if the empirical evidence says they are under represented, then there is a reason for that. Asking for their perspectives is a sensible way to investigate what the reason may be.

Let's be clear, I don't think it's necessarily within the Rust communities power to change these reasons. If mothers tell their daughters that programming is for boys [1], and discourage them from spending all their time at the computer, then that would be expected, somewhere far down the road, to lead to an under representation of women. That's hard to fix, and it's not something the Rust community can do much about, given that none of the mothers involved would have ever heard of Rust to begin with.

But maybe there will also be some ways to be more welcoming, and I'd expect that to overlap somewhat with the latter points (that you approved off) that have a more clear cut causal hypothesis associated to them. If you were discouraged from playing around with programming as a kid, you'll likely have ended up learning programming later in life. If you were socialized to avoid conflict, then a high conflict environment will be a turn off. Asking what makes it better for people with a different background has the potential to make it better for people who might not share the background, but the handicaps it confers.

[1] http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~abaron/downloads/Croft_Schmader_Bl...
I would argue I know because I have done many interviews, not nearly as many as the author of the article. Most interviewer candidate are about as qualified as a stuffed animal, except I would allow a stuffed animal in the office because they tend not to break things.

I agree with you that on your points about books and project founding, but I would hear a candidate out and not make hard unchangeable presumptions.

As for how do I "know" I can't know, I am only in the interview for an hour or two. The best I can do is get a sense. If the candidate nails fizzbuzz, explain the nuances of git v mercurial for 20 minutes and provides a plausible explanation for his previous place of employments toxicity then that affects my decision making one way. If it feel as though their reasons are thinly veiled excuses, they don't know foundational tools or fail at fizzbuzz... well I don't let interviews proceed to where people fail all three when they start with some minor points against them. Too many red flags and I call it done.
buying through tor and paying with bitcoin seems like an oxymoron - do you have a magical anonymous wallet or were just trying to dodge a firewall?
Webarchive works for me:

http://web.archive.org/web/20170628133305/https://www.raphko...
It's enough to get a can of Coke (not everywhere though).
If my employer tried to enforce a rule as puritanical as "no swearing" my response would be "fuck you."

Provided you have the FY money sitting in your bank account to be able to go that route, that is.
Americans drink less then the UK and virtually every eu country - let alone places like Russia.

Don't try and project your biases onto 320 Million Americans many of whom come from different cultures
More emphasis should be put on this. Those who know how to reverse engineer apps already look at the code, regardless of source code availability. But posting some machine code to debunk the original story would not do much good, seeing as those who might be unsure would likely not know how to read assembly.
Mozilla has never run under the model of a traditional closed-walls corporation, at least with respect to personnel.

It's first and foremost an open-source community, and some people are paid by Mozilla Corp. or Mozilla Foundation to dedicate their entire working time to that community. Allowing open dissent has always been one of the community values, so long as it's otherwise respectful.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/part...

At least as of a couple of years ago when I left, there were no internal guidelines above and beyond these.

Socially, of course, you could shoot yourself in the foot just like anywhere else, but we did enjoy a great deal of intellectual freedom and were expected to be vocal if we thought something should be different. I can't possibly view that as a bad thing.

The Eich situation was and still is touchy, and I won't go much deeper into that other than to echo Fabrice's comment that it was originally driven by a handful of Foundation employees that weren't part of his company (Mozilla Corporation is a different corporate entity than Mozilla Foundation) and to add that within Corp there was a diverse range of opinions, both privately and publicly expressed.

As for "wouldn't fly elsewhere," there's never been any particular ethical reason why an employee shouldn't publicly speak their mind short of spilling trade secrets. The reason has always been fear of being fired. Influence via fear has some pretty sharp downsides, and I'm happy to see the current trend of people submitting to it less.
> Low placed people may not be able to "work" their way to upper echelons, but they can invent, intuit or otherwise create high value leverage of their's and others' work.

How would you suggest slave-labor in Qatar, who's lives are literally disposable to our global society, create this leverage? [serious]
"Save money."
Real life isn't just an elaborate Austrian economics simulator. In this case, there are a lot of complex dynamics at play: will workers emigrate elsewhere if trained well (Basically the IIT problem)? Are constituents/subjects ok with reductions in their quality of life so that other people can be provided these resources.

To act as if the market will magically fix this is lazy and not realistic.

Also yes of course I used "should", as I am giving my opinion on this situation.
> It allows people to be dishonest when it comes to social spending. EITC is never included

“Tax expenditures” are frequently included in analyses of social spending, and often broken out as a separate category. EITC is the headline example of the category. Your basic premise is false.
Workplace.stackexchange.com makes me cringe. It seems every post is written by socially challenged people with absolutely no social awareness or confidence. I had to stop subscribing to it.
You have no idea how much I hate the people who are paid for 8 hours of 'butt in the chair' but they only show up for 6 and of course it's their code that breaks first and of course they've already gone home when the bug report comes in and of course the code is so obscure that one would have to ask them or else spend 5 additional hours on it.
just throttle your connection ;)
I believe the author is referring to the lower tax on capital gains than on income in many situations. I haven't read it personally, but I understand that Thomas Piketty's “Capital” discusses this at length where there's a built-in structural favoring towards capital's rent over labor's wages.