skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not quite - if it's not a random person standing next to me, but someone also working in the area, I'd assume that the filtering has eliminated people less competent (if not, then we'd already be at 50/50 equality). To be concrete, I'd assume that any engineer at Google to be about the same competence as their peers. Though it sounds like if you're "diverse" you might have an easier time of getting in, similar to medical school? (Honest question.)

At any rate, how do we get to the facts? Saying it must be 50% by fiat doesn't seem like a way to truth. So far I see one side proposing there might be biological reasons and the other side being offended anyone could even suggest the possibility.
> They're both based on the same false assumption that you can describe mental capacity with a number.

IQ doesn't purport to "describe mental capacity". It assesses mental capacity and allocates a score. This score is information that can be used to deduce ability, and to the end it serves its purpose perfectly.

Decisions based on IQ is another thing entirely.
Would you take it personally if those statements were commonly used to explain why you don't make as much money as your co-workers? Why you're more likely to be neurotic?

Those sorts of demographic statements might be fine to you, because they're not being used to explain why any current discrimination practiced against you is actually fine.
Put a drone up next to it and you will find out real fast who it belongs to.
Send a message to Voyager 1
I'm saying discrimination, meaning non-equal results, is fine. I don't think there should be any active discrimination, and incorrect unintentional discrimination should also be removed.
This essay is just bad.

In section 1 the author presupposes that the facts presented in the original post are false (but then fluffs on presenting any evidence for this). Maybe he's right! If someone else writes that piece, it would be a valuable contribution.

In section 2 he writes about the social aspect of engineering, which certainly exists, but pretends that being engaged and interested in the technical side of things doesn't matter at all. Ignoring technical details while creating your planet-scale system is like trying to fly a C-130 in a vacuum.

Section 3 is straight bullying.
A PM's checklist for launching SDKs
The study method seems to be "rate the letters by how much you like them".

While it looks like the study has been repeated enough to not be total quackery, there is still the question of what's the point. Does your preference for a particular letter has an effect on your choices?

I doubt the research about people preferring brands with the names in their letters has properly ruled out other variables, or would prove to be significant.

How many people actually give thought about what letters they like the most?
I'm guessing the study was the first time the subjects were ever exposed to the thought of liking a letter. As such, ot seems reasonable to go for some point of reference that is simple and available, auch as your own name.
>> At the risk of sounding sexist, I will say that conflating race and sex as being roughly the same level of difference is a little bit intellectually dishonest. I'm not going to sit here and argue about what those differences are, but sex hormones most certainly affect behavior and emotions far more than skin pigments.

It is just a simple fact that the 'biological differences' argument has been used to justify great evils like slavery, eugenics, and sexism. Pointing out that 'biological differences' is a suspicious argument, and for good reasons, is not the same as conflating race and sex.

>> I also appreciate you sharing your story, but I personally find it a bit uncomfortable that these sorts of posts need to be qualified ("As a gay man..."). While I understand you were trying to support the point you were making, this sort of thing feeds into the notion that some opinions occupy a privileged position within our society, which feeds such "screeds" as this. It's almost hypocritical in a way, because I imagine that the anger and "otherness" that oppressed or minority groups feel is not unlike what the author of such a rant is feeling. Basically when it comes to cultural discourse, you're wrong, evil, the enemy, or ignored.

As a gay man, I have had real financial consequences (and other consequences) in my life as a result of millennia of other people's opinions about something I don't feel like I can change.

I feel like there is a reasonable and direct parallel between that and my expression of empathy toward women who experience real financial consequences (and other consequences) as the result of millennia of other people's opinions about something they also can't change.

>> because I imagine that the anger and "otherness" that oppressed or minority groups feel is not unlike what the author of such a rant is feeling.

The author could have chosen a better argument. As it is, the biological differences argument is fraught with peril. I'm sorry if the author of the rant is experiencing a feeling of alienation and otherness - it's terrible when anyone is oppressed, including men.

But it's important to remember, that, for most of recorded history, the oppressor of most men has been other men. Not women.
Read the authors other posts on the same medium blog for his rebuttal of your arguments. I'd rather not paraphrase.
Could you do the stack chart by percentage of the total?
Okay, I've been watching this for a few minutes, and... the 8 second delay is FAR too long.

Doom is simply too interactive. You need to be able to control it in realtime.

I recommend three things:

- Slow the delay right down, and possibly make it adjustable via chat commands. A 500ms-1s delay is honestly going to be the best possible thing here. Yes, some players will lag too much and won't be able to play at those latencies - which is why you make it adjustable.

- Show, inside the video stream, the command that is currently executing, and the username executing from. This will create a unique tuple that will allow players to figure out the sync for themselves.

- A consensus system that tallies up the next key to press, TpP-style, might be a good idea. Right now everyone's fighting to cooperate because it's concatenating everyone's actions together.
Don't completely disagree with you. But,

Gmail:

From my hazy memory of the time it was released:
1. Best usage of AJAX and providing complex interaction without refreshing the page.
2. More storage space than any other provider.

Both, technical feats of excellence?

Youtube:

It was an acquired product, and there were quite a few points at which the YouTube community reacted angrily to Google driven changes, prominently when they made Google+ mandatory for comments.

GPS, Orkut, Chromecast and Homepage decisions: I agree on your point here.
A 120 Days Plan to Become a Better Developer
Cool, so you can enhance your mental capacity by doing this test again and again. In less than a year I will be a genius!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHGDyONZAfc
He wasn't writing an interview so it doesn't matter how hard it'd have been.
Is this peculiar to London or do other places in the UK have the same problem?
Um, isn't that "constant-time in practice"? (Something like log-star.) Am I missing some matter of convention here?
> because I imagine that the anger and "otherness" that oppressed or minority groups feel is not unlike what the author of such a rant is feeling.

No one is going to kill OP for his opinion, or try to rape his opinion out of him, which is something that still happens to gay people.
A Go library for validating structs and fields
I frequently fly international with zero checked bags and about 5lbs of carry on.

I would love to be able to do so for $99 if someone wants to on-sell my checked allowance.

After reading the article I see the pitfalls I had never thought of, and would obviously want some extremely, extremely clear legalities to make it very clear the bags are not mine, and I'm not bringing them into any country.

No, I did not pack them and, no, I am not bringing them into your country.
Just because an item is totally legal to have in China and legal to carry into China on your person doesn't mean you can bring it in for profit in such a scheme.

There are borders where you can carry through alcohol, petrol and tobacco for personal use but people who make a living off of it are breaking the law.

Of course in the first world all you get is a fine and get your contraband confiscated which just sets you back a month or two, but risking that in China..?
No shit. A friend of mine brought an apple from Sydney to Perth. 500 dollar fine. Yes, from within Australia to another place in Australia.
Gobekli tele is between 12000 - 9000 ac
No matter how supposedly hostile the question was, if there really is any genuine law protection of "couriers" - then company rep could just point out the relevant FAQ item.

They are using as "couriers" mostly completely uninformed laypersons, which can't be expected to know what ocs is, ffs!
Yes, but I'm not sure anywhere has the death penalty for unlicensed taxi driving.
Odd/interesting that they don't mention motives. They give one example of using acid to commit a mugging. Yet[1] seems to state that acid attacks are mostly male-on-female violence for relationships/shame issues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_throwing#Epidemiology

So it is a real threat to tourists? It's like when you hear about high crime in some area, but it's mostly gang members killing each other -- it's a somewhat irrelevant statistic for tourists. London should release demographics on who is doing this to whom.
> The world is absolutely full of utterly brilliant women.

... Brilliant women who aren't interested in programming. Why not?

If they're turning away from programming because of sexism, we can and should be fixing that.

If they're turning away from programming because women are less likely to be interested in systems thinking, and thus fewer women find programming as interesting as men do then its fine. Let the women who want to program be programmers. Let the women who want to be lawyers, or mums, or doctors do that instead.

The research suggests that both of these things are happening. If you talk to girls thinking about careers they say "programming is for boys". Also, men and women have very different interest distributions. And one of the clearest ways people express their personal interests is via their career.

You could also ask the same question about a career with an inverse gender distribution like nursing. Why are only ~10% of nurses male? Some of the effect size is probably sexism, but probably a lot of it is that (statistically) fewer men are as interested in caring for other humans as women are. Any sexism found should be fixed. But if the difference is due to expressed preference, its fine and we should all chill out.
Focus on doing the things that you alone can do.

There's a bug in the code: you can fix it. But can anyone else fix it? If so, let them. Even if you can do it better. Let them learn, let them grow.

What can you alone, as the Director, do? Direct. Lead. Set a direction, make sure people are following. Figure out your goals and values, and state them, often. Visibly live them.

Make sure people are following your lead, by knowing what they are thinking and what they are doing. Create ways to find that out, because people won't tell you straight out they think your leadership is shit.
> If I have to talk myself into someone and make a list of pro's and con's, they're usually a bad fit.

That's a pretty good rule, I'd say. There's a more generic and shorter version too, which I tend to use:

If there's any doubt, there's no doubt.
I think you can give it a rest. It has been 70 years.
On that last sentence, that's the whole point. The manifesto claims empathy for colleagues and customers is not required, but clearly it is.
>far more so than I realistically should

I doubt your anger is out of bounds. We are talking about potential - likely, even - smuggling of illegal goods into a country that has a human rights record that is... less than stellar. And their co-founder is childish and speaks in twisted words to try and avoid the truth.

I'd say your anger is very well-placed.
mikeash - for the record, I am not calling you a racist, don't think you are a racist and in no way am implying you are one. It is a pity you drew that line back to yourself as that was not my intent.

I thank you for including the word "basically" in your assertion, as it infers you understand that it does require a leap to connect the dots in my reply to an accusation of racism.

To be clear, '</valleygirlvoice>' was specifically included to define that speech as being an example of someone-else confusing correlation with causation and (this is the critical bit) the ease with which we (all) jump from there to moral judgements and social consequences.
Jay-Z Makes a Statement and Remakes Friends with “Moonlight” Video
> Are you trying to claim it is a purely monetary relationship?

No. "Cost" in behavioral economics is never purely monetary. It includes social, emotional, cultural, personal, moral and relational calculus too. The entire spectrum of the human condition really.

> As soon as the cost for the security controls is lower than the cost of the theft then it will be implemented?

Yes, but where "cost" includes the aforementioned factors. Consider it by way of example, you standing in front of the Airport Lounge, QR code cracker hand, asking yourself one critical question: "Is it worth it?" (what will my friends think, what if I don't and have to spend the next 4 hours in a plastic airport seat, I'm tired, what if I get caught, but oh man I could snapchat me in a biz class lounge and Sarah would see, etc etc).

Store owners and businesses in general have to ask the same question. "Is it worth it?"

> Yeah in the end it all comes down to profit.

Does it? Many of the comments here are people incensed by some version of _moral_ or _social-code_ violations by the QR cracker. Their sentiment and that of any prosecuting 'store owner' is not to do with the marginal "cost ($)" of his offense (which is likely close to zero, and arguably net positive).

> But being nice to your customers also had an impact on your bottom line.

I agree with you.

> What exactly is the crux of your reply?

Humans intuitively see correlation as causation and jump to apply moral judgements leading to (often devastating) social consequences to the wrong people because of it. The line of reasoning that "we're all nice, it's just a handful of bad people out there who are the problem" is the problem.
VM Futures (JVM Language Summit 2016)
Just FYI:

Pasties:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasty

Patsies:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patsy
JavaScript: Are keywords (ab)used too much in upcoming proposals?
Then the founder of the company should have provided said links and documentation in response to tweets and communication.
These statements might be hurtful and counterproductive, but they are a reaction to other statements which are perceived as being simply disregarding the reality of things. I can understand somebody making them just for the sake of reminding others what he thinks reality is. You can imagine plenty of situation in which the truth is ugly and hurts everybody- is that a good reason to let people do all sorts of intellectual contortionism just to avoid mentioning it?

On the other hand, any female engineer in Google earns more than I do, and deservedly so. I don't work at Google and I strongly doubt I'd pass their interviews.
Available evidence suggests that life on Earth has a common ancestor.

This doesn't mean it was the only origin of life on Earth, but it is the only surviving line.

It also took a few days for complexity to arise. About a trillion of them.
I think the delay is due to Twitch itself.
The founder is lame and as /u/wjnc mentioned he has a trump-like behavior. The question is very simple: If there is drugs in the shipment, does the traveller get a FREE pass?

The article is lengthy and kind of make this question vague. In my understanding it is a single question: Who bares the responsibility?

Well, it is you the poor traveller. There is no way in hell you can accept such a deal even if you are flying for Free. In fact, if you are, ask yourself the question: Do free meals really exist?
Продается квартира 1/3/9-27000у.е на массиве Госпитальный
Does this represent a sui generis rise of violence or is this the result of substitution of weapons to commit crimes (like mugging, say) that were already happening?
I think the lack of substance is due to the lack of substance in the answers provided by the company.

If I was a potential user of the service and I received these responses I doubt I would feel comfortable in accepting the offer.
The whole article is based on a single, short and simple question. I don't think the blogger is looking to interview him; or really want/need to.
I read the patch and linked issues. It looks like an OpenZFS bug to me, which wasn't ported to ZoL until recently but it definitely doesn't look like a ZoL-exclusive bug.

Not to mention that the issue description doesn't say it's a data loss bug. It's a bug that means that ZFS send would not include holes in very specific scenarios. On-disk data would still be safe as far as I can see (though I'm not an FS expert by any stretch).
>There are more bacterial cells in your body than there are human cells.

I couldn't believe this was true so I looked it up. Apparently it really is! Of course the bacteria are on average much smaller and lighter than human cells. Also this:

>The numbers are similar enough that each defecation event may flip the ratio to favour human cells over bacteria
The article also mentions study of charity donations.
It used to be very common, but improved routes from FedEx/DHL etc and increased security have ended the business.

https://www.gonomad.com/6364-air-courier-flights-have-lost-t...

http://courierlist.com/ -- which has an announcement from 2005 saying the discounts aren't worth it any more!
Yes you can greatly enhance it, here is a thorough review of the state of the art:

http://www.highiqpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Morrison...
Did you actually read the answer? Nowhere did he say that those traits don't matter, or even that they are too hard to measure (although he did say they are less predictive of success than IQ).

He says the concept of EQ is worthless because it just bundles together measurements of completely different character traits in a pretty much random way and creates a less-predictive mess as a result.

It's like summing someone's weight in kg and height in cm and saying that's their "physical score". This "physical score" is pointless even though we can measure both components accurately and measuring them is not useless in itself.
ZFS has definitely been used in very large production deployments in a variety of scenarios for well over a decade. The question seems reasonable given that history. ZFS isn't some toy filesystem hacked together over a weekend.
The author goes on to point out that there are real, measurable, predictive personality traits like conscientiousness and they still don't come close to IQ.

It should also be noted that IQ is five or more times as powerful a predictor as even good personality trait predictors such as conscientiousness. The true relationship between grades, for example, and IQ might be as high as r = .50 or even .60 (accounting for 25-36% of the variance in grades). Conscientiousness, however, probably tops out at around r = .30, and is more typically reported as r = .25 (say, 5 to 9% of the variance in grades).
You can't just invent a trait. You have to define it and measure it and distinguish it from other traits and use it to predict the important ways that people vary.

EQ is not a psychometrically valid concept. Insofar as it is anything (which it isn't) it's the Big Five trait agreeableness, although this depends, as it shouldn't, on which EQ measure is being used (they should all measure THE SAME THING).

What precisely do you disagree with? Let's enumerate some possibilities. Feel free to pick one and argue your point:

1. You can just invent a trait.

2. You don't have to define a trait, measure it or distinguish it from other traits or use it to predict the important ways that people vary.

3. EQ is a psychometrically valid concept.

4. It isn't the Big Five trait agreeableness.

5. EQ measures shouldn't all measure THE SAME THING.
You've made the 'monkeys do <x> ... draw your own conclusions' argument more than once and at this point I can't help but feel it's not an argument in good faith.

The person you're responding to went out of their way to acknowledge that there are indeed differences, so they are not in disagreement with this point.

Rather, The argument is that it's difficult to make a clear connection between these low-level 'nature' difference and the much higher-level issues we're discussing. That seems like a decent argument considering 1) how much of our world is socially-constructed, and 2) how often the argument '<group x> is inferior at <thing y>' has been used to maintain the status-quo by the status-quo, and more importantly how often it has been proven wrong.

To be clear, personally I'm in the 'genetic differences matter more than we think, in general' camp, to an extent that I don't always feel comfortable talking about it in public. And I do think there's something of a bias in the social sciences towards blaming nurture over nature.

However, first of all I'm not sure if, in practice, this bias is a bad thing for society. But even if it is, arguing that male babies act different from female babies and that somehow this explains many of or societal issues strikes me as extremely spurious and downright disingenuous when such an argument is used against people who already openly acknowledge that there is clearly a genetic element to the whole story.

Furthermore, while things might be different in SV, in my neck of the woods I'm pretty firmly in the SJW- or feminist 'circles' and I rarely meet anyone who truly believes that there are no genetic differences. It strikes me as odd that so many arguments primarily argue against the view that it's '100% nurture/cultural', when as far as I can tell very few people actually defend this point of view. It reeks of strawmanning.

(not that these people don't exist, I'm just saying they're a vocal, extreme minority in my day to day experience)
"to a willing person, injury is not done...is a common law doctrine which states that if someone willingly places themselves in a position where harm might result, knowing that some degree of harm might result, they are not able to bring a claim against the other party in tort or delict."

For those who didn't study Latin or law :p
No ones going to want stolen cheeseburgers that have been smuggled in someone else's gastro intestinal tract.

That kind of venture was doomed from the start.
You can simply have a different front that looks like your average courier service. Call that front Airline Express, where you would try to look professional and trustworthy.

Kind of similar to how Nestle has brands that appeal to different groups instead of calling everything Nestle.
Sure but my past selves are also part of who I am. Without them I would not be me, and so I think they are more me than not me.