skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I lucked into money.

The basic point is that he gets paid more whilst not doing more "work". For those whom "Work" is the only lever they use to convert into money, they see inequitable work:cash ratios as "unfair" (a morality statement).

Market economies do not function on work, but on value. He did the same work in a high value scenario. A glass of water provided in the middle of a developed city is worthless and thus free. A glass of water provided at the right time in a desert is invaluable and thus expensive.

My takeaway is this: Always meet the highest value need you can, and as well create additional value by helping others to meet higher values than they current do. 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. I dont see it as unfair that a person making $1 a day is unlikely to become a deca-billionaire in their lifetime (total mobility); instead I want to ensure they have some mobility so that they can always better their situation, maybe by an arbitrarily selected 2x multiplier.
The Lego pick-a-brick store is very very limited.

The images are not very useful to me because the images the machine takes are very different from those. But maybe it would somehow contribute. I'd be very ware of using other people's copyrighted content though.

I do use multiple orientations.
But it still contains less errors than if he had done it manually, as they think he does.
I had pretty much automated a past job and when I quit to try to become a software engineer, they asked me for advice for hiring my replacement (what they should be looking for, etc.). I told them not to hire anyone and that I had hardly been doing anything for months. They hired someone to replace me anyway.
> Every minimum wage increase is different!

Sure, but

> You can't extrapolate this stuff.

Why not? I'm not saying it's like physics where we can make nearly exact models, but can't we at least make educated predictions based on previous examples, taking into account the different circumstances?

After all, in your hypothetical you already implicity modeled that a minimum wage a certain percentage of a "reasonable" wage won't hurt employment, while one much higher will.

> The question is not "Are minimum wage increases good in general?" the question is "Given the potential tradeoffs, is this specific minimum wage increase good?"

This only underscores the importance of extrapolation -- lawmakers need to be able to predict these tradeoffs to make good decisions (if extrapolation is possible).
Bad design: “This is what my projector displays on startup”
> set up multiple cameras

I believe he mentioned somewhere that he's using mirrors to achieve essentially the same effect with a single camera.
Yes, but we all buy from markets that benefit from the lower cost of other labor markets or technology (or regulation).
Looks like you unlock new modes as you progress (like Link finds new tools as he goes through dungeons), so you can't get the treasure chest until you have a delete one of some type. I'm a vim noob myself, so I don't know which one you necessarily need.
So Wikileaks is now in the policy of filtering documents and release timings to shape a narrative?

I seem to recall that their claim to fame was that they were above trying to manipulate the narrative and simply dumped documents when they got them.

Why should we trust a cabal of people who are not telling us the full scope of the situation, and instead filtering what we know based on their desire to shape our opinion over any of the other cabals doing the same thing?
Paglia mostly seems to argue that the current state of the field is too abstract, which strikes me as being similar to Computer Scientists complaining about the lack of focus on electrical engineering. She also seems to spend a lot of time and words just calling people smug.

I'm not really up on the literature, but I don't see an inherent problem in focusing on abstract and high level ideas. I'm also not sure that biology offers much insight into the way society constructs gender roles. Even Paglia who you cite only seems to use biology to describe a theory for the underlying causes of sexual coercion.
> I dont see it as unfair that a person making $1 a day is unlikely to become a deca-billionaire in their lifetime (total mobility);

Do you see it as unfair that there are people stuck making $1 a day?
> so they have no standing to sue

Is that true? If Zillow doesn't own the copyright, presumably they have some kind of license. Perhaps it has clauses like "we, Zillow, won't allow/abet/facilitate the use of these images on sites other than zillow.com, and/or for purposes other than advertising houses for sale".

Now, when you take these images and use them on another website for another purpose, who has standing to sue, and for what?

To put it another way, when you visit zillow.com, under what license are you downloading their images to render on your device? Surely under an implied contract you have with Zillow. Does the fact that they don't own the copyright prevent them from enforcing any limitations on your usage at all?
We do Friday happy hour because it's been a reliable method for having multiple teams interact, spread ideas, talk about what they have been working on, etc...
And it's a damn good thing, too. High volatility and deflation would be an unmitigated disaster. The US, UK, and Japan are all currently fighting deflation with QE policies, which seem to be working fairly well.
Parser combinators are less powerful than what parser generators can do, in terms of expressiveness and efficiency. And we've known parser generators since the 70s.

So I'm not sure what the point is of the title of the article.
"I have never been more convinced that sticking to an OLD AND TRUSTED source code base for your infrastructure is the way to go."

I recently (2016) built a little network appliance for a specific task that needed to be safe and secure.

I used FreeBSD 4.11.
> "Fraud" is a _really_ strong word.

It's also the correct word; he is seeking to obtain value from another party by material misrepresentation of the facts.

> I think he should come clean about the automation to his employer (he doesn't have to say its been going on for 6 months, of course). Unless the employer is a total ghoul, it is unlikely that this would get him into trouble.

Well, without the intentional introduction of errors, I would agree with you. With that, I think lots of employers would say “Good job on the automation, but you are terminated, for cause, for the deliberate sabotage.”

> If the story is true, the guy is NOT a fraudster.

If the story is true, the guy chose to become a fraudster as a precaution against the risk that the automation might not be appreciated.
The benefit of productive assets is that people who otherwise would not be able to produce high value outputs are stuck making lower value ones. By working with another's assets an individual can create more value than alone, and somehow split the difference with the asset owner. Workers maybe need to start to fight for a better split, but that is beyond the scope of this article.
This question is a beautiful example of typical incentives workers feel and how screwed up they are. On HN people talk often enough about how if you have a worker who gets their job done in 30 hours instead of the company's usual 40-60 hours, you should give them 30-100% more responsibility, but much more rarely "and 30-100% more pay." Butt-in-the-chair hours are super important culturally and it's been that way for a while. Incentives are screwed up enough we're getting questions like this.

If you've ever thought "I'm done for the day, but I'm going to hang out a little longer to leave at a more respectable time," then you're feeling (and doing) the same kind of thing.
I did not expect to see so much contention about this. A company is paying him to do a job, and he is doing that job. Is the problem that he isn't miserable? This baffles me.
Ask HN: I lost my passion
I have been a Developer for over 7 years now and I feel exhausted and losing motivation to continue learning new tech and still be excited about coming to work.
I was wondering if someone felt the same a some point in time and what you did to fix it.

I took 6 months off last year, but the moment I started working again, I started to feel the same.
Maybe, but they've got 213 other items for sale.
> Learning to code is not hard, finding a job is not hard. Most people would be able to do shitty javascript apps if they only put in the time. Stop posting this shit, please.

I can make JavaScript apps, but can't find anyone who wants to pay me to do so. Are you hiring?
I simply don't buy from Chinese sellers on ebay. I sort by location distance and then work my way through that list or lowest price and skip china entries. I am not waiting 3-6 weeks for something just to save $2. Lets be honest, something that cheap, isn't even worth shipping back if its broken ( and most of the time they will just ship another ).
These aren't quite dApps in themselves, but the infrastructure is building to better allow nurturing of dApps.

It also seems like the public chain will be leveraged in other novel ways.

--

Eg.

https://blockoneid.thomsonreuters.com/

https://blockone.thomsonreuters.com/

https://basicattentiontoken.org/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fintech-payments-circle-i... (The IMF recently commented on how virtual currencies would make international transfers more secure, and cheaper which is something Circle is already doing on the backend)
Interesting. So that's what's going on.
It used to be expensive. It is not anymore, as the bigblockers stopped the spam.
Huntington’s Disease: Gene Editing Shows Promise in Mouse Studies
- The truth of the matter is that while you're good at programming and 'tech' in the abstract, you're missing the key production skills that actually make you employable. Spend less time on Lisp and more time on the kind of thing that people post job ads for. Employers will be more satisfied with a decent Django project than a great Diplomacy Adjudicator.

Web frameworks are a great idea anyway, you'll be happy you used one.

- Every project needs an interface, stop neglecting subjects like typography and really learn how to make something good.

- Read CLRS start to finish. This will make you more employable than most other ideas you pursue.

- There's a bus stop just up the street from you, it's not actually that hard to go places and the world isn't that dangerous. You should get out more, it'll be good for you.

- You're going to forget where you're at right now with this place in your life, this is a problem because such amnesia makes it hard to evaluate long term growth. You should write down what you're doing and keep records that your future self can use to evaluate his progress. Start logging your emotional state with the experience sampling method. As a heuristic if you wouldn't be in trouble losing the last six months of skill growth you have major problems.

- Stop focusing on being rich by making lots of money at a job and focus on being rich by investment and steady growth. There are people who make 300k a year in Silicon Valley that live paycheck to paycheck and people who make 90k a year but live like they make 40k while investing the rest. You would much rather be the latter than the former.
Read About Oculus Rift History Timeline
Paves the way for... what, precisely?

This whole idea of "virtualizing" and "democratizing" (read; corporatizing and monetizing) what is already probably the most intense physical and interpersonal experience you can already have; an experience that's not only freely available, but literally at your fingertips, at any time (or not even that: you just need to close your eyes, and think of... entertaining thoughts) -- is profoundly, profoundly depressing.

And besides, with all these must, dead-trees 17th- 20th century smut novels to read -- who can possibly find the time?

Forget this online stuff. Get out of your apartment, and find a real, actual person to talk to. I know it can seem hard, sometimes. But really, is isn't.
While Spanner has only been available to be used outside of Google very recently (GA in May), it's been in production at Google across hundreds of products, including AdWords, since 2012.. with global consistency to boot...

(work at G)
Haha, this is hard to play with cVim bindings on Chrome.
An insert mode inside an insert mode.
EITC encourages some negative behavior and should actually be axed or corrected. it is not hard to find stories of people only working part of the year so as not to void their EITC money.

a better incentive is to raise the wages of all those earning below certain wage per hour with the money used to fund EITC. We all win this way, people working know they are going to have enough money, we don't have people sitting around with idle time which is not good for them or others and we have the community investing in others through their taxes directly benefit low wage earners regardless where they work. We also take a load off small shops who might be able to withstand a pricier market.

there are really no negatives to boosting hourly income through taxes compared to just handing them money for earning less than X per year
Today's secret word is "teledildonics"! :D
Learn live how to create an AirMech clone in C++
Are language workbenches dead?
Super Nintendo Chalmers!
Agreed. A better "grey area" solution to this dilemma would be to keep the data pure, spend some free time on the resume and some new job interviews, and at the right time show the employer the cool new script you made for them.
Could you explain why you believe this is about opinions and interpretations, not the technical facts? I disagree with that assertion, but would really be interested to know if there is something I am missing.
Is it possible to have "parser generators" (not necessarily in the formal sense of the term) that produce recursive descent parsers? Even if mathematically they can't be perfect, could we have "good enough" ones? Nobody uses parser generators because even though P.G.s "work" on the barest level of ingesting source code and spitting an AST, they don't do anything beyond that. For example, trying to get helpful error messages (think: from old GCC to Clang) from a P.G.s output is close So instead everyone writes custom parsers, and that introduces these problems.

Can't we have smarter parser generators that do make debugging nice, but are still formally verified?
If they literally are "stuck" . Here we get into a nasty debate about spectrum of probability vs effort and the multipliers that should be reachable by end of life.

I definitely agree that a 0 probability despite maximum effort is unfair. In between is a grey area though.
From the article:

Huntington’s disease occurs when a person inherits from one parent a mutant copy of the huntingtin (HTT) gene that contains extra repetitions, or a “stutter,” of three letters (CAG) in DNA’s four-letter code. This stutter leads to production of a misfolded protein that is toxic to the brain’s neurons, triggering a degenerative process that, over time, leads to mood swings, slurred speech, uncontrolled movements, and, eventually, death.
While you're right that people sometimes value operations that take time, that's certainly an edge case - in general, snappiness leads to a better user experience.

Also: if an operation is fast, you always have the option to make it appear slower. The inverse is not true.
Retail often has employee discounts, does that make it a great sector to work? Free drinks cost what, $100/employee/month? That's nothing.
I think it depends. Is $1 enough to grant you housing, food, healthcare, and free time to see your family?
Hum... put yourself back in the 60's. Imagine you're signing a contract that says "I, the Postal Service of the country NNN, will deliver any letter that comes from any country to any city that I reach, no matter if it'll cost a 3 hours plane flight to deliver a 1 oz envelope".

Fast forward to 2017, yes, now the agreement seems unfair because the deliver of goods changed a lot. Perhaps should be reviewed. But I wouldn't say it just worked on theory back then, neither will I say that now it is unidirectional in practice (because you still can make it go in any direction).

And the main point isn't just that things made in China are cheaper. It's that China has so much freight going to all parts of the world that putting one container full of envelops with a single button inside doesn't cost a thing, so they win in on how much it costs to take an envelop from a post office inside China and deliver it to a USA / Europe / South America port.

It costs about US 1,900 to take a container from Shangai to New York (source: https://www.searates.com ). That is cheap.
The problem is for a lot of people, they'd need something more like a 10x multiplier or more. (Eg the folks he references trapped working as cheap labor that can't even leave without the company's permission, who likely can't even afford travel).
Awesome. I see now that this context is two links away on the main page.

Its particularly interesting to note that the respondents gave a figure for LGB that falls within most estimates for population percentage (and hence doesn't form an underrepresented group here).
Intentional Software bought by Microsoft
Architectural Dependency Analysis and Refactoring for C++
"Teledildonics is the new block chain!"
I think the practical thing to do is for them to assume that this won't last forever and start using some of that spare time to improve their employment prospects, i.e. looking for another job that isn't in danger of evaporating if anyone looks at it.
> Butt-in-the-chair hours are super important culturally and it's been that way for a while

it seems to me that this is directly related to the fact that many parts of management theory have been developed as part of a manufacturing industry instead of a service/"tinkering" industry.

With manufacturing, more hours directly correlates to more units produced and thus more value created.

This is not the case anymore thanks to a high degree in automation.
Frinkiac does pretty much the same thing but in a more entertaining way: https://frinkiac.com/
I'm sorry for those who, thanks to the MW are,

- because they are perhaps not very bright, maybe mentally-disabled (Downs syndrome people for instance), possibly just naturally very slow, inexperienced, very young, very old, physically feeble or otherwise considered to be unlikely to be productive would-be employees who

- are then legally prevented from getting a job unless of course the state wishes to force employers not to hire the most productive staff to be paid the minimum wage. And that's not going to happen in a free society and nor should it. Everyone has their value. But don't let's pretend that value (for a specific job) is the same for all of us.
The myth is the relationship between the price increase and wage increase. There are more cost inputs than just labor and of course the consideration of profits.

It's true the price of goods may rise, but relative to the increase in wages to workers, it will be a net win for redistributing wealth to the lowest earners, with the cost born by the variety of cost inputs (and profit) for the business.

The second argument is that shifting money towards the lowest earning group will stimulate economic activity and unlock more wealth potential for the local market, thereby in some ways compensating for the increased prices by bringing more prosperity for all.

That's not to argue that increasing wages always results this way, just like one would not argue that you can boost the economy by simply reducing or abolishing the min. wage.
This may be going against the grain, but I think the real question the OP needs to ask is whether he really cares whether what he's doing is ethical or not.

Evaluating decisions like this really comes down to understanding your values and owning them.

Values are the measuring sticks by which people quantify success in life. Whether or not we realize it, we constantly measure our actions against our values, and how we 'measure up' determines our self-worth.

In this specific example, there are two conflicting values: integrity and family. They are in direct conflict, which is putting the OP in a stressful situation -- acting in the most honest way here will lead to a worse life for the OP's family. Creating the best life for his family requires that he must lie.

So, the OP needs to ask himself:
Do I value integrity? Do I value my family? If I value both, which do I value more?

Personally, I don't think there's really a right or wrong answer to these questions. There's no intrinsic value in the universe -- but assigning value is part of the human condition and we feel fulfilled when we lead a life of purpose (however arbitrary). When faced with difficult decisions like this, it's important to be aware of what your values are. The 'right' decision for you will be apparent.
So we just need to keep building up our own new languages of hate, adding in new divisive words to get around filters and say "it's not x, it's y". What I call racist, you call white nationalist. What I call offensive to women, you call pro-men.

It's not about what is said, but how you said it? I'd almost rather they just stop trying. Then at least the jerks would be easier to spot.
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. Since they found a blog that explicitly stated "i got these pics from Zillow," they had a lawyer who had apparently been working there ~1 month send out a standard C&D letter, even though the facts didnt exactly fit (when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, etc.). It obviously became a PR disaster for them but could also have just gone the opposite way where a no name blog using their pics stopped doing it. It was obviously a mistake but I'm sure there was no malice on their part, the rash of people rushing to condemn them for stifling free speech are being silly. It was a standard process thing that didnt quite fit and got blown out of proportion, i'm sure everyone has encountered some form of it in their job before.

All she has/had to do was take out that statement that 'it's from Zillow' and the problem goes away, Zillow doesnt care where you get pics from as long as they have no liability.
Plenty of Google's products use Spanner and have for years.
Does anyone have any idea on how these sites make enough money to offset the enormous bandwidth costs? The scale is phenomenal.
When I was a student I took a work-from-home job manually generating HTML pages for an online furnishing shop. They somehow had a successful web presence but all sales were done by phone (early 2000s).

They wanted to pay me by the hour, but I negotiated paying by the page instead.

Of course, I automated the job. And surprisingly, at least to naïve me, they were annoyed that I automated it. Even though they got the same result for the same money, and we had explicitly agreed to do it by output, not by time.

I learned something that day, though I'm not sure what.
The problem here isn't that capitalism lets you have productive assets that give you a return. It's that when r > g (when the rate of return of capital is greater than the growth rate of output), inequality increases dramatically. The greater the difference between r and g, the greater the rate of increase in inequality.

This is laid out super bare in his example: he bought a house. That house is in an area that surely is past its prime in terms of growing rate of GDP growth. Which means r > g. And that means his assets give him relatively good returns, which in turn compound, which has the net effect of him getting far, far ahead of everyone else who lives in that area.