skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you have a job where you are working 12 hour days and weekends, your job is your life. I am actually curious when would an actual appropriate time to ask someone on a date might be - clearly the second someone brings up professional stuff, it should be out the door, but the veil of that can be breached with a simple "what have you been working on lately"
Yes, the problem with ageing population is that a lot of your GDP growth which would otherwise go into disposable incomes etc instead goes to care for a lot of old people.

TBH virtually all developed economies have slowed down over the past 10+ years, I often wonder if this is the real reason, more than just the financial criss. The only spurts of growth seem to be either sudden windfalls from resource extraction booms or big credit runups that tend to leave a big hangover.
> ...there are a big difference between approaching someone and sexually harassment.

100% this.

I absolutely believe people can form legitimate and wonderful relationships with coworkers -- even subordinates. Having a kid is awesome and it's great that you found the right person.

But.

There's a clear and obvious difference between building a relationship with someone (even a purely sexual one!) and trying to exploit a power imbalance for free sex. The clearest part of that difference is that building a relationship involves respecting that other person, not just viewing them as an object to be consumed. I suspect you have a tremendous amount of respect for your partner -- and that respect was probably part of the reason you hit it off in the first place.

People who have power need to be especially alert to this. With great power comes great responsibility -- and all that jazz.
The only thing related to crypto was the use of a crypto name.
Similar in some ways, different in many others. In either case, it's really not accurate to write off the level of diversity in the USA. TV and media give you a very skewed and artificial idea of uniformity in America.
The conclusion here (to paraphrase: "no DRM isn't a big enough draw") doesn't seem to be at all supported. It may be that they want to focus on publishing; it may be that they simply had to charge too much; it may be that it wasn't bringing in enough sales to make it worthwhile, compared to other retail channels.

Without more data (or really... any), this conclusion is pure speculation.
I love your site. /text is great too.
> How would you feel if McClure gay propositioned YOU while trying to apply for a job? You want to work at this VC fund but before you can get your foot in the door he says you are a super hot stud and and he wants to take you home. For a man, it would be awkward as hell but easy to deflect. And you would probably rather not work there (this is where it is bad for business, not just McClure's penis).

When I was in my 20s I had an older female boss hit on me all the time. It made me not want to work with her. And as soon as I could move projects I did. I didn't worry about it past that. It never occurred to me that I should be upset or hurt but her behavior. I just thought she was pathetic.
I've had a gay boss, and would joke with him about how many blowjobs I would need to give to get out of a deadline... point being, maybe it wasn't "appropriate" but we had good rapport. You can laugh about stupid stuff. It's when people get all worked up and start wanting to tell others how to live that I think the real problem kicks in.

> As am attractive woman, this shit happens ALL THE TIME. Please stop defending it as "normal animal behavior" or whatever. Using power to get laid is fine if someone is attracted to that. But using power OVER someone is coersion. Anyone over the age of 13 should be able to figure this out.

I haven't read much about this story past what I saw on HN, but it just made McClure out to be a guy who was super awkward around women. Not in an aggressive predatory way, more just a sad geeky sort of "I haven't gotten laid in a long long time..." sort of way. There's always a power dynamic... some people can offer a job, or more social connections, or physical attraction, or money... it's not just that the guy had power over the girl -- clearly if he's feeling compelled to hit on the girl she had power over him too.
It still is a big deal.

When I was looking at schools in 2012, I remember pretty much every program specifically mentioned their ABET accreditation.
When there is a big power difference for one. If you have control over someone's livelihood, propositioning them is inappropriate.
It doesn't take blocking all the exchanges to cause a big drop in the value of blacklisted coins, and make most people not accept them. And any exchange that freely trades in blacklisted coins can itself be blacklisted, making an escape to another cryptocurrency fail.
it does call her intentions into question.

she was not a neutral party and he should not have gone to her for advice.
How can you see them as people if they aren't being less professional in that setting? What would be the difference? Why wouldn't it be the exact same as water cooler talk?
Is asking a woman if you can buy her coffee sometime sexual harrasment if you do it at the workplace?
You are incorrect: the grammar of both C and C++ is fundamentally hard to parse, let alone the extra complexity of giving nice error message and doing good recovery. E.g. they require context to parse https://stackoverflow.com/a/41331994/1256624 , https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_vexing_parse , and C++ is undecidable to parse correctly http://blog.reverberate.org/2013/08/parsing-c-is-literally-u... .
You can leave Austin and San Antonio out and still have 13 million people on the Dallas/Houston straight line.

And keep in mind that the terrain between Dallas and Houston is basically all flat and sparsely populated, so building rail there would be a lot cheaper than the northeast.
? The only thing that flash crash was about was a bunch of unsophisticated investors setting automatic sells in an illiquid market.
Doesn't help them that the country overall has a pretty pervasive anti immigration stance... and longstanding xenophobia issues.
Technically speaking, yes.

Even if it's neo-nazi propaganda, making any speech based on opinions that's not directly causing physical harm illegal is creating a class of thought crime.

What other way could one classify it? People would be going to jail for wrong-think.
Because it's never ok to be sloppy with facts.
I see makes sense.
from what I remember, Khosla and his lawyers were real jerks to the county and throughout the trials but I think their biggest problem was he has to pay for a relatively expensive liability insurance policy for public passage on the private access road that runs on his property, the only "easy" access to Martins Beach. The previous owners just sort of let things fly w/o insurance.

If the road was owned by the county and he gated it somehow he wouldn't have a leg to stand on but the problem is more nuanced ... Should he personally have to incur a large cost to maintain a public good b/c of proximity? It does seem arbitrary. A better man might sell the road to the county or come to some other compromise but he's become obsessed with the principle of the matter.
Fisticuffs Over the Route to a Clean-Energy Future
If you are in an entry level software engineering job after having spent little time and resources, you have very little to lose by behaving in this way.

It's either that or the alternative: working harder than everyone else, learning on your own time, try to push your career forward while completing low risk tasks.
Perhaps best read after the blog post from current O'Reilly media president Laura Baldwin, which makes two important points:

1) Book sales have been consistently declining overall, in all media. It's not clear that DRM has much to do with this.

2) They'll still be selling DRM-free through at least one merchant, Google Play. (It's not clear whether this policy extends to Amazon as well, but they wouldn't be the first publisher selling DRM-free there; Tor's science fiction novels have been DRM-free through all merchants for a few years now.)

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/oreilly-mission-spreading-kno...
> If he was overt, or repetitive, or really sleazy... yeah sure, I'm not on his side.

The apology explicitly states "I made advances towards multiple women in work-related situations, where it was clearly inappropriate."
So, first, I'm no expert in this (and defer to rbehrends's excellent comments in this thread). The law seems to have problematic parts, as mentioned in the article: "the statute gives companies incentives to remove content, and it lacks a procedure for users to appeal removals."

Yet, the issue is not clear cut. There are legitimate limitations on free speech - the famous "screaming fire in a crowded theatre" thing.

So, in Germany (with a history of institutionalised genocide), the lines are drawn a bit differently.

The notion that the ruling party will use it against views they don't like seems far fetched, though again, I grant you that it's a slippery slope - Principiis obsta ("resist the beginnings").

But, I object to the notion that freedom of political speech is fundamentally under attack here.

[As for the Abrahamic texts, there is case to be made that they ought to be banned, though I grant that that wouldn't help much. As for your "reductio ad absurdum" (tabs/spaces): again, there's unproblematic speech, and there's legitimately prohibited speech, and then there's a grey area, and that's what we're discussing here - where in the grey to draw the line.]
Recording TV in Linux: Dissecting the top solutions
Refreshing to see an actual apology instead of a digging in of heels common to tech industry shittiness (see: Notch). The apology may(?) be cathartic for the people he's harassed but the damage is done. He's only apologizing as a forced response from the major public backlash. The only silver lining I see is others will be (and are) scared about this kind of behavior which used to go unchecked.
Your response is 90% opine.

By bringing it up he is giving the company a chance to be aware of its mistake. As long as he is respectful in how its done that's a very selfless thing.

FYI the open-and-to-hell-with-it strategy works well for me, I am very successful by most measures.
The satirist was (and remains) free to express himself.
I think applets gave Java a terrible black eye as a client-side because of how insecure Java in the browser turned out to be.

The market confusion I would blame on Netscape for choosing "Javascript" as the name for their scripting language.
He completely misses the forests from the trees.

Had the woman been hired she would have been denied by him the satisfaction of knowing she earned the position through her hard work, intelligence, and capabilities.

He also does not seem to recognize why he is a creep. Ultimately we find people creepy when they portray themselves and their motives one way and yet secretly or covertly act another.

I recommend therapy so that he can identify his true desires and motivations and then realign his life to optimize for them.
> You want to populate an area, make it accessible and attractive.

You mean "start a gold rush".
I don't see anything wrong with a person calling a head of state mean names.

That's like the definition of political speech.
AMD is aiming for laptops as well:

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/5/18/15657480/a...
If you're working 12 hour days and having trouble with your social life, the problem is _not_ that it's not OK to hit on women in a professional setting. The problem is that you're working too much.
The point is that in Western countries, their entire populations are already heavily invested in those services. Suddenly losing access would be unthinkable.
> The exchanges.

Without controlling all of the exchanges, including the anonymous ones, and track every other alt-coin blockchain, and every miner that has ever produced a coin in one of those blockchains, including the ones that are specifically designed to be impossible to track, you have nothing.

More the point, everyone who has chosen to actually validate this for themselves knows this already. You're raising points that were some of the talking points in crypto about four years ago. Indeed many of these points have already had specific implementations that exist now to counteract any possibility of a potential weak point for the things you're hypothesizing. With the implementation of "atomic swaps" and lightning this will further make control of the type you envisage even more impossible to do. And for all intents and purposes, it's impossible to do now.
The death of the DRM-free model was a big concern to me, but a recent supplementary blog post from Laura Baldwin, linked-to in the article but not called out, seems to claim that O'Reilly books will still be available DRM-free from Google Books. It's not clear to me if this means the Google Play e-book store, or something else.

Blog post here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/oreilly-mission-spreading-kno...
I would need actual proof that it makes it tough. Having a trusted assistant in the room, always, is not exactly a logistical problem. I'm trying to think of a work situation where it is imperative for two people and only two people to be alone. Seems like a bad thing even for M-M.

I agree its not a good thing, but its the way of a world where accusation is treated as fact and put on the front page and the retraction is somewhere inside the paper in small type.
So it would be weird if he called himself a bitch maybe, but he is a male calling himself creep, so I'm confused.
Thank you for the useful insights.

I worry that the chilling effect, and people self-silencing/self-limiting, are already happening to an extreme degree. One might even regard this law as an expression of that. So I worry that this law is fruit of what is happening, not the other way around. I wonder whether there isn't already too much self-censorship going on, especially with people who just have their own nuanced (harmless) ideas.

HackerNews to me sits is remarkably well inside the eye of numerous storms. Really happy about that.

Outside from here though people might just risk so much when all they want is to try and express those (apparently "arguably") harmless thoughts. The risk of falling pray to all kinds of social dangers can be very scary. Not worth it at all, in fact. So devolves the discourse which obviously gives rise to agression and spite as the most popular clothing of free speech.

To an extent we're doing this to ourselves more than the governments are to blame. I'm not arguing that this law is any kind of solution to our problems. Au contraire - what I'm just saying is that individuals in positions of authority get more than their fair share of spite and hate, so, this is what happens.

Yet however also, not long ago the public discourses that take place at present were unfathomable! The whole world being able to talk together on to such an immense scale via thing called the Internet - which, somewhat hilariously ironically, apparently should be called just internet without a 'the' and capital I from now on, per decree put forth by some editors.

But never mind that. Point is, when we do a thing like this (give ourselves 'an internet' -o, hey!), pain is just bound to start flowing and we should be careful with that. Our social evolution is what feels to be at stake here, with the way things are headed.
When I travelled to the US I was shocked at how squished public transport can be in New York, SF and LA (heh).
The Truth About Coconut Oil and Your Heart
Sorry, but you are wrong. Khosla could have maintained the property in the old state where he charged admission and made no changes to the property. He was warned about this when he bought the property. California law is extremely clear about this, and a cursor check of case law would have confirmed this. Khosla knowingly violated the law in an attempt to remove public access using thin and unlikely legal excuses involving pre-US law. He had his day in court and lost. He has received a court order and continues to be defiant.

This isn't the "property rights" hill you want to die on. This is an utter jerk being an utter jerk. This is a rich man trying to use money as a substitute for following clear Law.

This is such extreme lawless behavior that every time that every time I see a company take investment from Khosla it stains that company in my mind forever.
Ask HN: Can you protect your JavaScript code?
Friends of mine have seen their non-trivial code lifted right off their websites and sold by people on Fiverr as if they had written it. I would imagine a lot of folks on Fiverr do just this: Scour the web for the solution they are being paid to create and simply copy-and-paste it to their unsuspecting clients.

Say you are building a site that will make use of very heavy JS code, to the point that the code is critical to your business and you do not want it copied or stolen. How do you protect it? Can you protect it?

I can't see much past obfuscation through minification. How effective are these techniques?

One thought is to use AJAX wherever possible in order to have that code live server side. This, of course, would result in greater server load.
I looked him up on YouTube. This is simply how he communicates. I guess he started out thinking it would make him sound decisive and effective and now it's internalized. The reason he does it is that he's insecure, like a man speaking with a lower tone than is really his own.
I'd be more worried if he made multiple advances to the same woman after being shot down multiple times by that woman. That's harassment.

He's just... well... he seems like a really lonely guy.
There are good reasons to do it correctly, at least.

Marijuana legalization isn't all good.

Legal cannabis seems likely to be much better for people/countries/states than cannabis being illegal, though there are some downsides.

See:

http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2016/11/amer...

https://www.vox.com/2014/9/23/6218695/case-against-pot-legal...
The word "unwanted" is troubling, because it means the alleged victim gets to personally decide whether the act was illegal/punishable or not, based entirely on their own subjective feelings.

So I guess, if you're good looking, it's legal, and maybe you end up marrying and having children (as people often do in these situations). If you're not good looking, it's a violation and you should be fired/prosecuted.

This definitely isn't a clean or fair way to write or enforce laws or standards for conduct and punishment in the workplace. It might still be necessary and it might be the best we can do, but it's definitely all a big gray area, not just in its interpretation, but in its literal definition ("unwanted").
If someone uses their work email as a username, they loose their ID if they leave the job. Even worse, the employer may give the same email address to someone else.
Show HN: Metricizing Memes
Coinbase is well known to randomly lock people out of accounts - they're the Paypal of Bitcoin wallets. They are likely associating accounts with 'bad' addresses and doing what you describe.

The downside here is that a lot of people don't use Coinbase, i'm not sure what their upside is. They aren't exactly earning a reputation as a safe Bitcoin space.
I'm sick of seeing people running to get capital to start a project instead of actually putting their own money down.
At least in Germany, laws often have the amendment "Der Versuch ist strafbar.". Attempts to commit the the crime are punished just like actually committing it, which makes total sense to me: When you are a bad person, you should not benefit legally just because on top of it you are also incompetent. This makes sure that you still get punished for murder if your victim somehow lives, because a doctor reanimates him or her.

I do think if someone is for example requesting to kill a person/group online or is searching for people to join him to do something like that, a judge should decide how severe the case is, hand out a warrant and the author should be held accountable.

Of course you have to consider the context and tone. It is also very difficult to check whether someone is just thinking out loud (e.g. "one should") or actively requesting something. That's why I don't think this law is a good idea, because that's something judges should decide not some Facebook interns afraid of a 50 million dollar fine.

I don't know whether hate speech is actually that big of a problem. If so, what we really need here is a streamlined way to complain to the police, gather all the evidence, categorize the issue, pre-check it and then hand it over to a judge. This process could be half-automated and have very narrow questions for the user (e.g. "Is this a death-threat?", "Is an exact date mentioned in the threat?") to exclude as much as possible as early as possible and need as few policemen as possible.
I believe I did? But you have to follow the rules regardless of how badly someone else broke them or whether they started it.

I know how annoying that is. But it always feels like the other person started it and did worse, so if we don't approach the problem this way, it's a downward spiral for the lot of us.
> It is mutually beneficial, but you're probably looking at a 30:1 (or higher) benefit ratio here, in his favor.

Sorry that's wrong. What you're saying is she's overpaid by a factor of 30. Kind of insulting to her no?
>There's no fundamental reason that road vehicles couldn't exceed 200kph

Then a blown tire will be a deadly accident.
Just curious doesn't this further stratify the power classes? I can't make advances on someone who earns less than me now?
lol why are you talking about this 10 years later? aren't there bigger atrocities...
> There is a ton of information of healthy living

Where is this "ton of information on healthy living" and what level of evidence do you have for it?

I don't doubt that there is a set of things that people can do to be healthy. I do not think that there is much information about what those steps are. Again, there is plenty of writing on the topic, but little information.
You should ask your female friends! In all seriousness.

Maybe my basic advice is: Don't "proposition" people. Forget the phrase "hit on." Don't lead with your dick.

Meet people. Learn about them. Establish rapport. Maybe something happens, maybe not. When people are legitimately excited by one another, romance can follow. But be respectful enough to not cause harm. Don't interfere with their work life. Don't accidentally or purposefully threaten their careers or companies. Do no harm. Maybe you miss out on a romantic encounter or two, but you'll be a better person. You might actually get some really cool friendships out of it! And when actual sparks fly, you'll know it and it'll be great.
IANAL, etc. Some common themes of sexual harassment training I've taken:

- Boorish behavior crosses the line the first time. Assume this follows the "would you want it published in the New York Times?" rule of thumb.

- For more ambiguous cases (like asking someone on a date,) it's only OK if you don't actually know if the advance is welcome. Once you get an answer, and it's "no," then anything else is an unwelcome advance. I actually saw someone fired because of this, so don't take it lightly.

- Sexual harassment laws exist to protect people against those with positions of power. One training instructor said, "the reason the laws are designed protect your reports against you, and not the other way around, is because you can fire them."
A casual and jovial atmosphere doesn't alleviate you from social consequences.
This scares the hell out of me.
Why would a company like MS, who owes everything to science, let these anti-science zealots have any kind of influence on their decision making?
this is because men and women are not the same. they're different.
The rich have principles. They're just more sociopathic principles, IMO.