skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
text with links.

loads fast.

no autoplay videos

no scroll jack

no social sharing buttons

no tracking scum

no page moving when you are about to click on something because some more bullshit just loaded.

usable in lynx and links across ssh.

so tell me, what is bad about it?
Why did you say women are bad at programming because of evolution and non-whites/asians are bad at it because they're dumb?

I read his paper 3 times, and from what I can tell, that claim didn't exist until you made it.

This is why we can't have honest conversations. By all means, disagree with things that he is saying, and engage him on any points that you feel need to be corrected. But don't disagree with things he quite obviously isn't saying. That doesn't get us anywhere.
I am scared of your response, do yo mean we cannot discuss things because of the consequences? even if we try to improve and fix things with the discussion?
[1] suggests that a suitably designed helmet reduces drag by a fair amount, which probably offsets the weight increase.

[1] https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/7804/Thes...
The main problem with this kind of UI is information overload (which is the desired effect in movies, since the viewer isn't actually supposed to "use" nor understand all of the info displayed). There's no way to make this usable unless you lower the amount of info displayed, but then it will loose its "cool" factor.
Simple answer may be treating it the way hash partioning treats shards, i.e. overallocate to start and map the over allocation to the physical layer.
Fun link on Reddit: http://web.archive.org/web/20070819054905/http://whyfirefoxi...
I can't speak for software engineers as I'm not really one myself, but I have seen evidence that guys in the development and IT fields are legitimately scared of interacting with women and in the process violating some rule they didn't know of [0]. Reality may be different from what they perceive, the but point is that some men do actually perceive this "threat". The motivations of this internal letter, whatever they are, seem to be almost certainly highly emotional.

Whenever a difficult, nuanced topic like the one HN is discussing here comes up, its important to consider the medium by which all of us are communicating. Your quote with emphasis added is a perfect example: it may have been something this particularly frustrated individual threw out without much thought (the entire letter going public at all shows a lack of thought), but it could very well have been dog-whistling to racists.

The thing is, we can't know. Unless we're in a forum (in the Socratic sense) where thoughts can be clarified, I propose we take things at their face value. That's all we can confidently do.

[0]:http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2091#comment-326664
Dollars are not really invested in the market. Every buyer is always matched with a seller, so net cash flow into the market is zero. Dollar flows express valuations but they do not drive them.

This is a technical point, but in my opinion it's also an important conceptual point. Stock market prices do not rise because dollars are flowing into them.
US Virgin Islands are similar as well.

Definitely real challenges though... these places are poor tropical backwaters. It's a shame as it's beautiful and full of potential.
This kind of stuff is fun to think about. In my opinion identity is based on behaviour, not composition. So long as an entity matches a given behaviour profile, then for all intents and purposes that entity IS the thing that the behaviour is normally attributed to. Kind of like Duck Typing: "If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck."

So my response to your car example is that both vehicles are "the same car" since both get you around and both are owned by you.

In that sense, as your behaviour changes so does your identity. If you were able to 100% accurately encode all the actions you could ever take into a Markov Chain, then I would argue that Markov Chain is what makes you "you" at that point in time.
Are you saying that the novices are the cause of overly high valuations? If so I'm rather skeptical because these novices control very small amounts of money even in aggregate.

If you're saying that the novices are just bad investors who always buy at the wrong time then I'd want a little more evidence of that. My base assumption is that the novices do not have predictive power and are simply "noise traders".

Note that I'm not expressing a view on the market in this comment.
There are plenty of resources on youtube, i found Primitive Technology channel quite enjoyable to watch.
I do that (blocking people) as an energy-saving device. Reading messages from people with a completely different worldview than mine (e.g., communists) is extremely annoying. It raises my blood pressure. So, I block them and become happier as a result.
My interpretation is that the author is cheifly concerned with two points: that biology impacts performance, and that dissenting views in Google are at time met with hostility that is more political reflex than it is critical countenance.

The first point should be obviously true, however we live in a time were identity politics on the left tries to shout down any but the hard line reaction to biological determinism. Both extremes are false and saying so should not be controversial.

"There are differences between the sexes." This is a statement about populations not individuals. It is also not a claim of causes only the current state of affairs.

Of all the coworkers I've had in tech, women make up a strong majority of the top 10. Yet of all the women I've known most weren't driven to excel to the same level of most men I've known. Whether you blame culture or biology for that sexism play A role, not the ONLY role in creating the gender discrepancy we see in the fields of STEM and executive management.
Maybe I said something imprecise, but my line of thoughts is that the number of people putting money in the stock market in increasing, as well as the total amount of money.

If you assume the number of companies and shares is constant, then the value increases. Why some companies and not others? Maybe their ability to attract these money.

(The amount of companies/stocks isn't constant, I agree, that's why I was comparing relative growth.)
Glad to hear! I'd love to know how we could improv the experience if you have sky feedback
Strawman bump
> suburban streets

That, I imagine, is a fairly key difference. A child cycling suburban streets isn't likely to be building up any significant speed (due to lack of training, intersections, not being in a rush, surrounding traffic being slow etc.), whereas an adult commuting likely will. Having seen the aftermath of a ~40MPH collision (car turned into the path of the bike, car was written off due to the extent of the damage), I'd be extremely reluctant to commute at speed on mixed-use roads.
Have you read the article? It defends the original position you quote, especially in the case of jungian psychology and myer-briggs model.

Everytime you hear someone saying you can divide the world in two separate categories, you can know that the vision it creates is blurry at best. Juste like saying pi = 2. It's technically not wrong, but a rather useless info.
Turns out when software engineers try to do psych and sociology research they don't tend to know what they are talking about. These are real fields with real expertise and the author of this thing thinks that he has figured it all out.
This app strikes a good balance between feature richness and UX.
Well, I hate to repeat the classic line: the market can remain irrational longer than you can (probably) remain solvent. It's appropriate here though.

Who knows when this outlandish mass multiple expansion party will end. It will though, they always do; and they always end badly.

Curious historical fact regarding the present context in terms of liquidity / loose money: 5 of the 6 times the Fed has contracted its balance sheet in US history, it has occurred immediately prior to a recession. [1] That's interesting because we're facing a potential double liquidity tightening, with rising interest rates and a contracting Fed balance sheet (supposedly, we'll see if they ever get around to serious balance sheet reduction before the shit hits the fan, I'd wager it's a very slow moving feint meant to restrain asset prices, similar to them threatening to raise rates for years prior to actually doing so).

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/02/fed-balance-sheet-reduction-...
Well, technically speaking, at least for a car, you can draw a pretty clear line. Your car is your car because it is registered in your name through a number soldered on its frame. Changing the frame would change that number and you wouldn't be driving the same car, at least from a legal point of view.

But yeah, is a zoo without animals still a zoo? Hard to say. Even without animals, a zoo would retain its potential to be a zoo. Meaning that you could put animals in it and would be back to being a zoo. Same thing can't be said about a restaurant, for example. You can put animals in a restaurant, but regardless of how good you can lock them in it's still not a zoo.
> Have everyone who works for them fired and become unhirable.

Huh. I didn't think there was anyone even more "kill them all and let God sort them out" than I am. I think the janitors or the accountants are clearly not at fault in this case, and including them would be wrong.
If you have checked luggage, they print boarding passes for you and stick the baggage tag labels on the pass. At that point you have a paper pass so using the mobile one doesn't make much sense.

Also, if you are traveling internationally, the boarding pass is mandatory for the various security and immigration stamps.
> code may typecheck in the browser you tested, but it has to run in other browsers which have differences in their APIs.

If you are referring to an second API that is differently typed, what happens if you do use a dynamically-typed language there? Then you're running under the assumption of one type when you actually are getting another? Your program is in an inconsistent state. Very often, at least in languages like JavaScript and Python, that means that very strange and obscure bugs will eventually start popping up.

Unfortunately, the same can happen with static typed languages receiving data from an external API unless you're doing runtime checks of external APIs (which is often a good idea).

So the ideal thing to do is to runtime validate external APIs and account for any differences that turn up in the APIs. Ignoring the differences in any language is very often the start of downstream bugs, not a graceful way of handling the problem.
I used the gnome theme for the movie Live Free or Die Hard on linux back in 2008 or so

https://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Die+Hard+4.0+-+M...

for reference this is what it looked like in the movie:

https://nmap.org/movies/diehard4/nmap-diehard4-crop-600x300....
There's lots of possible reasons that aren't nefarious. Could be training of pilot or crew (I once watched a passenger aircraft orbitting the base I was stationed at for most of a day. Turned out it was commercial pilot training and check rides). Could be test flights of equipment and systems for airworthiness certfication. Could be DoT testing navigation aids, etc. If the government wanted to surveil Seattle residents for some reason, I expect the NSA could come up with something a little more subtle.
Already in place. Try finance, healthcare or aerospace.
watch this: https://youtu.be/cVaTc15plVs?t=1851 (even better if you see it all)

biology comes before history, history can be a consequence of biology

> If men turn out to be naturally, as a group, less good at math than women, does that mean we should stop training men on math? No. We should train men more at math, because math is a valuable skill

This is what scares me of this society. If someone is bad at something lets force him/her to improve at the things he/she is bad at. Instead of focusing on the things a person is good at and try to put them on the next level and make a difference that way, let's focus on the bad things and get a mediocre individual.

I love maths, but are you saying art is not a valuable skill compare with maths? Should the great artist bad at math study math and give up in art?

You might think that not training someone at something that he/she is bad at is stupid, but some people like me think the stupid thing is to no to focus in what make someone special and good at.

And finally, why do you think there is a bias? Couldn't be the reason that there are not more female CS engineers that they choose freely not to be because they just don't like it? The answer is in the video I put before.
Many ages ago I served as defense counsel, of sorts, at a judiciary board hearing at my university. A young man was accused of stealing textbooks from the campus bookstore, and selling them back. I was given wide latitude to investigate, and I poked a ton of holes into that, found there was zero evidence of the crime. Pure suspicion and assumption. Yet he was suspended for a semester having been found guilty, reasoning it was "more likely than not" he committed the offense. This was absolutely laughable.

I am reminded of this because universities have become adverse to conflict resolution, and conditioned to believe ever accusation, and every "victim" no matter the evidence.
How is that racist?

Racist is "I think all Mexicans are dumb, so I won't hire any or even give them an interview. I hate Mexicans."

Racism is not "Groups of humans evolved dramatically different physical characteristics, vulnerability to health conditions, ability to consume foods like lactose, and countless other characteristics. There's some evidence to suggest they may have different distributions of skills required to do this job well. Even if there are no innate differences, there are certainly cultures that prioritize learning the skills we require more than others.

I wouldn't be surprised to see different groups represented at different rates vs. the general population at this job. However, I'm smart enough to realize there are extremely skilled and extremely unskilled members of every group, and I'd gladly interview and hire from any."
It's just embarrassing at this point that an engineer at a well known company like Google even thinks like this. (The original author, not Yonatan.)

Reading the original manifesto felt like something my 17-year-old self would write. Too clever and completely oblivious at the same time.
> If you're going at speed or are hit by a car, the forces the helmet will experience will far exceed the force generated by the impact tests as specified above

Does that matter? It may not be ideal, but even a helmet that only meets those requirements is going to _reduce_ the force experienced if you land on it. My dad was in a crash with a car (impacted the side of the vehicle, went over the top and landed on the other side) - his helmet was cracked into three pieces, but he was fine. I find it difficult to picture him avoiding some sort of head injury without the helmet.
I've seen someone (who was highly skilled and highly qualified for the job) not get hired, simply because one of the interviewers on the board interpreted the candidate's well-founded confidence as arrogance. They deemed the candidate as a "bad culture fit" as a result.

The interviewer then recommended that we hire one of his friends instead.

I've seen this sort of thing happen all the time, at multiple companies.
How New York's Roosevelt Island Sucks Away Summer Trash Stink
> Why some companies and not others? Maybe their ability to attract these money.

It isn't some companies, it's most of the public companies containing substantial invested capital. The S&P 500 earnings multiple has gone up ~60% since 2011. Currently near 25 times, it's at roughly the second highest non-recessionary level in US history.
I wonder where you work to NOT have mandatory security audits.
Show HN: Twitch Plays Doom
This is the inevitable post after jeff_harris released restful-doom https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14919534

twitch-plays-doom is a Python Twitch IRC->restful-doom proxy to control doomguy with a staggering 8 second delay.

The project was Saturday night's 'I wonder if I can make this work' session. Since it's been live there has been a team of four successfully make it to half way through E01M01.

I've since added godmode to the chat (you can guess the command).

This was fun, hope others get some enjoyment out of it.

Twitch Stream/Chat https://www.twitch.tv/dddanmar/

twitch-plays-doom https://github.com/dddanmar/twitch-plays-doom/

restful-doom https://github.com/jeff-1amstudios/restful-doom/

chocolate-doom https://github.com/chocolate-doom/chocolate-doom/
The actual equivalent is that The loophole should only allow you and no one else.. so if rule is set like that who is to blame ?
> There's no point to having science if all we are going to do is assume everything that comes out of the process as the gospel.

As far as I can tell, nobody in this thread is even remotely suggesting that.
Sorry, I can't allow your falsehoods to stand. You're letting ideology get in the way of facts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhVIoj2tYtw

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/most-european...
I feel like hiring is so much like gamble. Lot of time, the hiring manager clearly express I should get an offer or a request for next interview the next days. Only to have radio silent and rejected letter 1-2 week later even me follow up with them.

It seems like hiring requires a lot of decisions from multiple people. And they want to be safe, so all have to give a yes.
Having a single static type system that captures all differences across all versions of all browsers is not realistic. But even if it were, there's a bigger problem: static type checking happens too early. The browser can rev and change its APIs after your static type checking is performed.

You want to type check with the actual runtime environment, not just a static guess at it.

I guess by "graceful," not segfaulting would be a good start.
One point of view: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve
Yes. It is the is-ought [1] distinction. People differences may be a biological fact, but this factual knowledge does not informs us what to do with it. We can do then anything: amplify it, suppress it, or don't care

"Natural"[2] - if it has any meaningful definition at all - is not an ethical category. Evolution is not normative.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is–ought_problem

[2] For example for a naturalist everything is natural :)
Perhaps more interestingly, the author does not appear to understand engineering.

This guy gets it. It's a deep temptation to abstract engineering away from humanism, but the idea that code can solve problems is an immature understanding of software. People have the problems; people provide the solutions. Code is a tool & intermediary, and hardly essential to the act of problem-solving.
Hold on, do you deny that IQ has a strong heritable component and that there's a well-documented IQ difference between different populations? Cause that's all he's saying, while also emphasizing that these statements mean little when referring to specific individuals.
The center of every galaxy is a black hole. Lol so the center of this creature would be a black hole?? Some weird creature
> When was the last time you saw a cyclist try and text and ride?

Few years ago, when I lived in Cambridge, I saw someone cycling with their phone in one hand and a cup of coffee in the other (i.e. no hands on the handlebars). Some cyclists certainly do take stupid risks.

> "Cyclist maims SUV driver in brutal collision"?

May not happen often, but it can.
I would love for you to be right, and in general I believe that the history of the world can be summed up as "and then things got better". So, I will say this: if those things happen then yes, they will be at least as big as the internet.
Ad-hominems aside...

That's clearly not an ad hominem -- it's not even close to the definition! And, the rest of what you said is even more incorrect. Fortunately, no one is obligated to spend their time to refute your bullshit.
It sounds like you think you're disagreeing with me, but I'm not sure how that's possible given the near total lack of opinion in my post. In any case, the aspect of the parent comment that I was thinking of when I posted that was the part where the parent points out that Ubuntu has ZFS and how that could be a problem for RHEL. Yes RHEL offers a number of other FS options, but to my knowledge only ZFS and btrfs currently offer checksumming, which IMO is a big differentiator vs. more conventional filesystems.
This is not exactly the answer to your question, but others have posted many resources in this thread. While you spend time to learn from those resources, I have a few words about what could be done in the first few weeks, and this is based on my own experience (i.e. I wish someone told me this).

I would not change anything in a hurry just to prove that "I've got this one." You are promoted to Director (you do not mention this but I assume) because your management sees you do at least some of this job already, and they also see that you have demonstrated potential for growing in this role. (The other possibility is that someone got fired and you are asked to step into that role, in which case, that is a different game altogether.) So, here are the Dos and Don'ts.

Do:

1. Own the tech roadmap. You will not know why some of the items are on the roadmap and now is the time to find out and be able to explain why, and at this stage you need not be convinced that each item on the roadmap should be there.

2. Build relationships with your business stakeholders in order to understand what is their definition of success, and what is your and your team's role there.

3. Take a look at your team again. This time you will see a different perspective. You want to quickly reach an understanding about your team's strengths and weaknesses.

4. Reevaluate your communication style. What worked so far, may not be suitable or sufficient in your new role.

5. Meet with as many of your team members 1x1 and ask them what they think is working well, and what they think needs to change/improve. Just listen and take notes, without agreeing or disagreeing to what they are saying.

6. Be prepared to receive feedback. From anywhere -- your team, stakeholders, management, customers, etc.

Don't:

1. Try to prove yourself a good leader. This is something that takes time, and there are rarely any actions that can be taken directly only to accomplish this goal. Also, if you think too much about "am I a good leader," you will stress out very quickly.

2. Make changes in the roadmap too soon. At this stage, you are more likely to not have enough information and context about why the roadmap is what it is. If you make changes too soon, be prepared to change it again after you have gained context in the next few months.

3. Make changes in the team structure too soon. In your new role, you are likely to change your opinion about some of your team members' effectiveness and impact on business.

Over a period of time, you will intuitively know what needs to change, and that is the right time to start making any changes in the way the team operates, the team's priorities, the team structure, etc.
Living sponges, possibly bioengineered, with an immune system that keeps itself healthy/clean?