skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thats true, if you wanted a large codebase you should stick with Java.

Only half joking.

I like to think the goal is to create a working system. I haven't seen sufficient evidence that Static Typed languages as a category are more likely to produce working systems then Dynamically Typed ones. Feel free to link anything you have on the subject. I would take the time to read meta studies on the subject though, many of which seem to conclude their isn't much evidence either way.

I do believe that "Discovered" languages are more capable then "Invented" ones. Phillip talks a bit about the difference here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V10hzjgoklA&t=2176s
The problem is gender roles. Women are taught by society to think that, as women, they should go into certain careers. These careers, like teaching, tend to be lower paid than the careers men are encouraged to go into.
The point is, they were designed that way. And that's the problem.
I don't share your embarrassment. There's a significant chunk of the country that doesn't understand the issue - they think the claim is about blatantly discriminatory practices. In some cases, I'm not sure that even the people who do advocate for solutions to the pay gap truly understand what the core issue is. Both of this caused by the way all of this has been worded.

Worth clarifying all of this as much as possible to work towards putting everyone on the same understanding of the situation.
In what way is teaching underpaid?
Don't you have to reveal that you're a felon by law?

I ask because we have a student in our CS academy who is in a very similar situation.
It doesn't have anything that could be argued to be intended for payment channels.
Worked first try, with no problems! Thank you, really great solution!
> As far as I know, people value things according to what value they obtain from them.

That's not true. Very easy counterexample: negotiation. Women are generally less inclined to negotiate then men, causing them to earn lower salaries. Does that mean that people value jobs performed by men who negotiate more than jobs performed by women who don't? Of course not - it has nothing to do with the value-add at all.
Point (1) makes perfect sense, except that historically the answer has very clearly been "no", as it has applied to capable women, people of color, LGBTQ, etc. etc.
Paul Volcker's solution was that any time a bank is so big that we need to bail it out to avoid systemic problems, then the bank should be broken up. We can't always see all the problems in advance, but we can break them up in the aftermath.
> 10 new "bitcoins" could fork every day

Not really. You are forgetting how the difficulty works (or simply don't understand bitcoin).

You'd have to have a significant percentage of the bitcoin mining infrastructure. If you have 1% of the bitcoin mining infrastructure it would take 100x the time to mine a block, or 1000 mins, or basically half a day, that would take a week of not getting bitcoin simply to confirm the new chain. As it is this new coin accounts for like 5% of the bitcoin mining power.

To do 10 new forks every day would take a 70% of the bitcoin mining power to sustain for just a week.
So they are valuable, so long as you don't value them with money.
That's a great question, there are so many overlapping factors, such as not even having the right, or not being able to afford both parents on lesser-paid leave, to basic stuff, like they don't do the breastfeeding, or social stuff like there being no "mum's club" for men. That's before you even look at culture but I suspect that when people are faced with financial and logistical limitations then culture and preference are actually not the first place to look for answers.

I'm on paternity leave in California right now and if it wasn't for my wife's employer offering benefits far above those the government offers, we wouldn't be able to afford it.

Two things I've observed so far are that with my wife breastfeeding, she keeps her days full, but I'm bored out of my mind. It's not like the baby does anything other than eat and sleep. The other is that new mothers are typically accompanied by their own mothers - so my wife has her family around, which is great for her - but it's not the same as having my own family around.
Those are fantastic questions. Aren't they worth exploring with further research?
Now that is an explanation I can get behind. I think that there is a degree to which society socializes women to prefer lower paid jobs. That I think is absolutely legitimate. But the idea that sexism causes us to value those jobs less is, I think, absurd.
I know several extremely intelligent people that have trouble writing.
Just had to say that this is probably the best explanation of Reed-Solomon I've seen: practical explanations, useful visuals, good pacing, just enough humor. :)
What do you think causes such extreme gender disparities in positions like CEO, or board of directors?
As a heavy user of Python, and someone who grew up with the "curly braces" languages, I have a question for y'all. Is this really readable?

(setv result (- (/ (+ 1 3 88) 2) 8))

Or rather is it more readable than

result = ((1 + 3 + 88) / 2) - 8

I just... Do you just get used to this, or is it something that you have to keep struggling with? Especially given that the latter is how we do math the rest of the time?
Unless I'm mistaken it seems like surge pricing in one area would encourage drivers looking for rides to go there, which would then cause other surges in the previous areas they were in
That's not sexism, though. That's women negotiating less.
The ancestral flower of angiosperms and its early diversification
> Do the "local militias" referred to in the federalist papers still exist?

"The Southern Poverty Law Center identified 334 militia groups at their peak in 2011. It identified 276 in 2015, up from 202 in 2014" [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_organizations_in_the_U...
Depends on the state. In some, they aren't even allowed to ask (they have to run a background check to find out).
> As far as I know, people value things according to what value they obtain from them. There is no way for that to be 'sexist'.

I challenge you to question if either of these assumptions hold in all cases or just in an idealized world where everyone is a "rational consumer."
This warmed my tiny little black heart. I am glad to see the results were positive!
Very good of PIA to sponsor this worthy project.

This episode, and previous ones with NumPy, Octave and other open-source projects have got me thinking: would it be worth adopting Swedish-style radical transparency and publishing a project's financial status and balance in a standardized format, so that it could become a standard item in a Github repo?

Too often projects die for lack of interest or slow down for lack of funding and it's not obvious because many people don't like asking for money, especially if making money isn't their primary goal. When they do run into a cash crunch, it's embarrassing for them and potential donors have to evaluate the project in the light of a financial failure rather than its best aspects, albeit a tiny failure of cash flow rather than the epic fails of overconfident commercial bets.

And there lies a secondary problem. Because many open source innovators aren't motivated by money, they often don't have a clear vision of how money could help them, and avoid dealing with it because the pursuit of it will take up too much of their head space and distract them from the artistic/ design/ development/ investigative/ scientific/ whatever work they are doing. There's tons of work being done without finance or monetization of any kind that could definitely benefit from both, but where the doers don't wish to be distracted by the questions that surround maximizing ROI.

Could a fully transparent non-profit or non-extractive funding model attract interest and participation from investors, patrons, and commercial sales people who understand and like financial infrastructure well enough to support the specialist producer rather than just maximizing short-term return - in other words, to share some of the structural benefits of working within a firm without the authoritarian and political pressures that normally accompany employment?
Not to mention, not all of the EU is the same.

No, that would be rather dull. But in terms of returning stuff you bought on the Internet, it pretty much is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Rights_Directive_20...

"The current varying lengths of the withdrawal periods both between the Member States and for distance and off-premises contracts cause legal uncertainty and compliance costs. The same withdrawal period should apply to all distance and off-premises contracts. In the case of service contracts, the withdrawal period should expire after 14 days from the conclusion of the contract. In the case of sales contracts, the withdrawal period should expire after 14 days from the day on which the consumer or a third party other than the carrier and indicated by the consumer, acquires physical possession of the goods."
K-12 schools and universities to be specific. My app is a bubble sheet grader that grades multiple choice questions and captures free response-style answers. Much like Scantron, but with automated data entry:
https://swiftgrades.com
This is brilliant. DNS + API is a really smart way to build this. If you haven't done it already, it would be pretty straightforward to post a notification to the child's device (via a companion app on selected platforms) as an additional cue to let them know that they'd used up their time.

I'm halfway tempted to set this up for _myself_. You're absolutely right that 30 minutes is gone in instant when you start in on online entertainment.
For our family, I didn't take any significant time off while my wife did because I genuinely love my work and it's very highly compensated, both of those factors significantly in excess of my wife's job at the time.

She loves the outcome; I love the outcome; the kids love the outcome. It was about as close to a no-brainer decision as I've seen on an important topic.
Running QuakeWorld under OS X
> ... initially drawn to btc as a speculative vehicle? Or is it a matter of principle to hold forever?

I got involved with btc when it was in the single digits, the crowd was very different then - cryptoanarchists. So your call to "diversify your investments" sounds to me much more like "diversify your politics", which is obviously a silly thing to tell somebody - especially somebody whose politics is any anarcho flavor. While I can only speak for myself, I do think this is true for many others: I was already living pretty comfortably and a few million isn't enough of appreciably change one's quality of life as a software developer.
Implying that evolution has 'intent' is pretty ignorant, yes.
>The problem is gender roles. Men are taught by society to think that, as men, they should go into certain careers. These careers, like software development, tend to be higher paid than the careers women are encouraged to go into.

Kinda works both ways as an argument.
If they were so concerned about pay, they can try and negotiate for more. Men are taught/encouraged to do this more from a young age. If you want to be paid more, you gotta haggle, you can't just accept the price on the sticker.
Just because political parties haven't kept up doesn't mean attitudes aren't changing quickly.

In fact, if attitudes are changing fast enough, you'd expect political parties to be notably behind the curve.
Dollar Tea Club – 3 New Flavors. Every Month. $1
In your anecdote you were underpaid because you lacked leverage.

What if you had been underpaid because your name was Carl?
I don't know. There are many possible explanations. One is sexism. Another is that women are less likely to negotiate. Another is that maybe women tend to be CEOs of companies that are less valuable, or that rely less on the expertise of their CEO.
Interesting observations on the sad state of Korean society, but the UBI hook turns it into a poor piece. There is nothing unique or novel about suggesting communism as an "antidote" for capitalism. The author suggests the evils of Korean society are due to capitalism being carried to its logical extremes, without realizing that UBI is fundamentally a socialist idea, which if carried to its logical extremes, simply results in the same evils - having swapped the government for the marketplace.

> Universal Basic Income (UBI) is one policy proposal that would eliminate the dependence of people on jobs...

...and replace it with a dependence on the government.

Rather than receiving an education for "a humiliating life of poverty, unrespected work, parental dependence, and limited dating options," one could receive a UBI check for a humiliating life of poverty, no work, parental dependence, and limited dating options.

> Rather than an outdated industrial-education complex that breeds overly passive and obedient workers...

...Korea would have an outdated industrial-political complex that breeds overly passive and obedient workers.

> All the time wasted showing facetime for one’s boss and all the commoditized companies endlessly competing against each other in zero-sum games could become...

...time wasted showing facetime for one's party bosses and state-capitalized companies endlessly competing against each other in zero-sum games for government favor.
There's a huge difference between eliminating known mutations and somehow engineering for enhanced positive traits. The latter requires knowledge that we simply don't have.

Even if we did obtain it, it doesn't follow that Jo Slow would be worse off. We're all of us already better off living in a world with smart people in it. We're obviously better off living in a world with healthier people in it (reduced healthcare costs)

Futhermore it doesn't make sense to be personally jealous of smart people. It seems that being smart can be a significant burden; you're an outsider at best or you veer into mental disorder at worst. Only rarely do smart people flower into creative geniuses, the kind of people who contribute to progress. Most people use their smarts to be more normal than the norm...
Afrika Needs to Integrate Technology into Health Systems to Help Combat Diseases
Men are pressured to be breadwinners, so they are more likely to pick careers based on pay.

Women are not pressured to be breadwinners, so they're more likely to pick careers that sound fulfilling and satisfying, but are less lucrative.

Media likes to focus on the pay gap, but has anyone investigated the fulfillment and satisfaction gap? I wouldn't be surprised if overall men are less fulfilled and satisfied by their jobs.
The trick to advancing your cause, is to do more than whine incessantly about it.
And job differences are individual decisions. We can finally stop the "women are being paid less/discriminated ...yadayada..." -horseshit.

Teaching is done/funded by the society in most cases and paid with tax dollars. Some jobs being "underpaid" or paid too much are problems that come from the lack of real capitalism where everybody would be paid their actual market value and we could remove the whole word "underpaid" from the dictionary.

It embarrasses me to see someone not realizing this.
A 51% attack could be done by someone who hopes to dump their gains before the market reacts, or it could be done by someone who wants to see the value go to zero. Bitcoin Cash could start checkpointing itself, but at that point it'd be centralized and you're right that its value would probably go to zero.
Yes, the wage gap isn't literally about cigar-smoking men in dark rooms deciding to systematically pay women less. It's more like someone who claims not to see gender paying women less because men negotiated or "seemed more confident".

I'm embarrassed because this kind of stuff can and will be used to continue the narrative of "women make just as much as men" which isn't true.
It's just training. Buy and use a RPN calculator and lisp suddenly seems normal.

(To answer your question directly, yes it's readable. You learn to look past the syntax in lisp the same as you stop reading semi-colons and curly braces in other languages)
It's not necessarily just about moral standards. China's government has a recent history of strong policy on matters of population and birth, the One Child Act being the most well-known. There are still regulations on reproduction in the name of population control, such as making it illegal for unmarried women to freeze their eggs:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/world/asia/china-us-women...

> According to the National Health and Family Planning Commission of China, assisted reproductive technologies are denied to “single women and couples who are not in line with the nation’s population and family planning regulations.” Even married women must provide proof of marriage, a license to give birth and evidence either of infertility or of medical treatments that could impair fertility, such as chemotherapy.
Then what do you say to all the men who either die or lose their health doing difficult and dangerous jobs, often for
peanuts?

If you can't prove me men teachers are being paid more, your argument is invalid. Women choose very different careers and that's fine, but the choice is there.
It's not individual sexism, but it _is_ systematic sexism.

Women generally don't handle negotiating the same as men. But negotiation skills aren't relevant to most jobs. So if that's a factor in how people get paid, it's _systematically_ sexist.
yeah I'm using this https://twitter.com/semil/status/892163113159544832 as the basis for the term crypto now meaning cryptocurrency
New docs: Otto deal couldn’t happen until Uber agreed to protect co-founders
Doesn't this article refute that idea? If the pay gap is less than 1% for same rank/same job that means whatever is causing that 1% delta is pretty small. How much of that can you attribute to a lack of "negotiating" and is that 1% significant ?

That would mean basically a woman accepted 99K where a man accepted 100K. At that scale negotiating and gap is almost non-existent.

And you don't generally negotiate position and or rank. You apply for or get recommended for a job and get it or not, negotiating is usually about the dollars and cents after being in strong consideration for a position or after being given an initial offer for a position.

If women /are/ discriminated against you might even argue, based on this data, they are better at negotiating than men and that could make up for them being so close in pay for same rank / same role jobs. The point is the data doesn't support it.
It's absolutely sexism that salary negotiations favor behaviors that men are comfortable with and women are not.
This is still full of "toy porn" -- unboxing toys, opening eggs to see what's inside, or just an adult(ish) person playing with toys acting out some scene. While it's not "disturbing" (so far as I've seen) it's mindless and still an utter waste of time to watch.

You can block channels, but there are so many of them that it's a losing battle. I would really rather just whitelist some specific channels, but I haven't yet found a way to do that.

I want to encourage my 2yo to be able to use technology like the tablet (and in fact, it's frightening how good she is at figuring it out) but I also don't want her watching this garbage. If she picks one of these and I turn it off, she gets annoyed at me and doesn't understand. I'd rather be able to let her pick her own show without worrying about exactly what it is, by having things like PBS, Sesame Street, TVO, etc pre-approved.
No, certainly it doesn't happen in all cases. But the idea that there is a systematic bias against female-dominated professions is just silly.
Wow I've been doing EXACTLY the same game with my daughters! They have to tell me to go and stop and turn and stop, and if they don't say stop I walk into a wall and they laugh and laugh. Lots of fun.
The way its done here in Europe (don't know about USA) is to have most of your spending billed to the company as an expense. You take very little to no money out of the company.
HIRED has a report out which reveals demographics on what the employees themselves ask for, and what employers offered them.

It reveals, as in a piece of data that wasn't typically part of the conversation, that some groups ask for less to begin with while the employer offers them more. But this 'more' amount is still less than employees that asked for more than that to begin with.

The average of black candidates, and women candidates, simply asked for less than the average of white male candidates. Got offered more, took the 'generous' offer and retroactively find out they are on the lower side of the pay gap, again on average.

Much of the discussion seems to place a blame squarely on employers, describing a cabal of shadowy prejudiced men in the board room ensuring someone gets 30% less or 30% more just because. And I think that is not an entirely productive discussion, if all the reactionary HR training fails to find this while other aspects aren't even discussed at all.
Location: Bay Area, California

Remote: Yes

Willing to Relocate: Yes (Preferred)

Technologies: C, C++, Java, Python, Robotics, ROS, SharePoint 2010 & 2013, SharePoint Designer, Android, SQL, MySQL, HTML, PHP, JavaScript, jQuery, Bootstrap, CSS, Media Query

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/a/people.unr.edu/file/d/0B6J1T41pB2...

Email: meerasebastian@nevada.unr.edu

LinkedIn Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/meera-sebastian-777aa665

Education: Masters in Computer Science (3.95/4.00)
You just made a sexist comment. Did you mean to?
You should at least consider the possibility that intelligent, charismatic women may not be as willing to pursue 'STEM roles' as equivalently advantaged men.

If someone is able to teach occasional yoga classes, do little PR work, and still travel internationally 3 months out of the year... who is to say that is less desirable than a full-time, higher paying job?
Million WebSockets and Go
You can't pick on education and then talk about negotiation; educators often are represented by unions, which means that you're talking about a completely different ball game.
I'd be more inclined to day that let mostly encourages you to write zillion-line functions (instead of lots of small ones), simply because with it you "mentally can" since you can see the scope of variables better.

But.. do you really prefer to write huge functions instead of smaller ones?

Also: I think Python's default args being evaluated at function definition time kills the need for the usage of let when defining closures inside loops (you can just pas the value you want to capture in a closure as the default value of a param) or other things like that.
From a long-time Lisper (Common Lisp, and now Clojure): not, this is not comfortably readable.

That said, I very rarely write code like this. I tend to split operations over multiple lines, so that you don't spend so much time digging into and out of nesting levels. Prefix notation is not ideal for reading math. People have been writing infix math notation libraries for CL for exactly this reason.

It's not a showstopper, though. Also, I do find that sometimes having + and < to be of arbitrary arity is really convenient and makes for nicer code.
To the extent that women negotiate less due to biology, it's almost definitely not purely down to biology.

That means there's likely some kind of societal pressure keeping them from negotiating as much. There have been plenty of studies that show assertive women are seen as just being bitchy while assertive men are seen as strong leaders.

That societal difference is sexism. Individuals don't have to be consciously sexist for implicit bias to affect women.
It hardly seems like a fair measure of pay gap if you don't take into account disparities in promotions.

At the same level, company and function the pay gap is small. Yet, women are stuck in lower-ranked positions in greater proportion for some reason.
There are male teachers, too.