skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're right, my one sentence is just trying to explain the basic point to people who may not get it. Its not trying to lay out a complete thesis in support. I'm not sure if thats a necessary exercise, especially for the CEO.
I disagree -- IMO, the only hope in this case to "end the news cycle" would've been to walk a very delicate line where Google's position in the debate was made known, but nobody was dramatically fired in the process.

Instead, Google's leadership decided to take an ideological stance with relatively little regard to immediate PR. The result is further churning and an intensified reaction of the public and media.

This is either a good or a bad thing, depending on a person's perspective. But surely it's a reaction which will perpetuate the intensity of drama.
I have a very unpopular opinion that pulls me in two directions.

Advertisements have exceeded the point of being a nuisance for many years. But adblocking is a fight that solves symptoms and will affect more than just advertising in a negative way.

The best parallel I can draw is to the Napster era when pirating music cut off the head of the chicken in the industry. Hollywood and like were refusing to adjust to digital downloads and streaming. Part of this was due to the fact that it would drive down profits. But people started pirating the content and getting it for free so they lost money anyways. It's not impossible, but it has become more difficult for artists to break into the industry (along with competition) because of the margin of profitability.

In that same vein - publishers and advertisers have resisted the market and have bled their visitors for every penny. Finally the users stood up and said enough is enough - and now we have adblocking. The problem I have with adblocking is that it doesn't resolve the problem, just the symptoms. Adblocking pushes out smalltime publishers whose only revenue are these obtrusive ads. The "big guys" can stay alive as the reduction will be drops in the water for them. The way I see adblocking is that it will only drive the publishing industry further towards monopolies who will push the little guys out. And once you are getting all your content from 1-3 sources and the little guys are gone - there's nothing to stop them from becoming the same monoliths that exist as Internet Service Providers. They control the means and have no urge to change.

I stand on the fence, wishing there was a better solution to this problem but some times the only way to bring change is to burn it down first and start from scratch.
It's what I installed on my parents' computer. Cinnamon by default has the Windows look and feel; it comes with codecs available out of box, and it just works.
Frankly parts of this summary sound like the Admiral spin on things.

> So, Admiral—an anti-adblocker company—contacted EasyList and told them to remove a domain from their list.

In reality, a new Github account made a comment on a commit. That account had no identifying details to link them to a company, person, or anything else. For all intents and purposes, it was nobody.

The account is @dmcahelper on Github. It has a marketing blurb in the bio (which mentions no companies or individuals' names) and has starred one repo, Github's dmca repo.

> EasyList told Admiral that they would only do it if GitHub agreed

A reply said that, essentially, "if you're Github and trying to tell me something, a brand new account isn't one of the channels I'm listening on."

(Anonymous) Admiral didn't reply to that comment.

IMO EasyList had no choice but to thoroughly ignore that comment, as it would be ridiculous to act on it.
I didn't realize that anti-adblock lists were generally maintained separately, and this comment tipped me off to it.

If you're using something like uBlock, it might be worth going into Settings -> 3rd-party filters. There's a few lists in there which are not enabled by default that are curated to work around anti-adblocking technologies. For example, "Adblock Warning Removal List".
Really? Interested in hearing more. To me a big point of his is that on average, there are innate differences between the sexes, which policy should acknowledge. Which, afaik, is scientific consensus. Yet not a single person I've read that criticizes the memo will acknowledge this.
The federal government does not directly subsidize fossil fuel production, distribution or consumption. The government allows for losses, due to failed exploration. Not every well that you drill, brings in oil; or brings in sufficient oil to make that endeavor profitable. Any cost-offsets are in place to help ease the pain of failed wells.
Forwarded 10 spam mails to your service. I absolutely love the idea. Hoping for some interesting conversations.
I don't think he was ever technically fighting that law, it was the access to that public beach through his property that he blocked off.

Yet there's a near universal consensus that "the law" (i.e. the founding statutes regarding access to coastal properties, from the time California entered the Union) mandates that this access must be maintained, for perpetuity, by whoever takes title to the property.

So in effect there's a permanent easement attached to the property (even if the term as such didn't appear in the text of the original statues).
This is an awesome read and hilarious if you have any historical knowledge of networking.

+1 highly recommend even if all you want is a few chuckles.

Well done.
damn if not for the /sarcasm tag I might've actually done it...actually might still could use a couple $mill.
Sundar could have fired Damore without making an official statement. Or he could have made a statement that doesn't elaborate on the reasons for the firing, or that says what you did - that he's being fired for causing bad PR.

Instead, Sundar found it necessary to lie in his official statement about what Damore had said. He defamed him by saying that his memo contained things that are contrary to what the memo actually says and that Damore himself would certainly denounce if asked. Because, presumably, Sundar felt it was preferable to appease a mob by acquiescing in their villification of a Google employee.

That is what is this particular post claims makes Sundar a bad CEO. I don't know if that's true - that is, whether it makes him an ineffective CEO, whether his actions were good for Google in the long run; that remains to be seen. But the author of this piece feels that it was a morally wrong action (and I agree).
Well, the sites that currently fund operations through ads would have to fund them some other way, right? I think many of them would transition to other business models, scale back, or go away completely. I think you'd also see a sharp rise in types of sponsorships that look less like traditional ads and aren't as blockable, like when The Onion has funny original content about cooking at home brought to you by Blue Apron.
Why do you think Lennart Poettering is hated so much?
I don't think such a country exists. The influence of American's empire, and its entertainment industry, is pretty vast.
The line you quote is not saying that all of the gender gap can be explained by biology. It's saying that it is an extreme position to say that all of it can be explained by "differential treatment" (sexism in one form or another).
صور+للتصميم+2017+تنزيل+صور+تصاميم+الصور+جرافيك+للتصميم
>"I’m happy to announce that together with investors The Raine Group and Temasek we’ve just wrapped up the largest financing round in the history of SoundCloud"

After a big round of layoffs couldn't that message have been a little bit more nuanced?

Also if there is new CEO and COO coming on board what will this individual be doing?

Honestly this guy seems a little tone deaf.
DI (digitally imported) does a pretty good job of filling my work-electronic-music fix.
I haven't yet seen anybody pushing for "short functions" literally that didn't want a hardline on the largest function you should create. Thus, I haven't seen anybody explicitly using it as an heuristic instead of a rule.

People have all kind of heuristics that correlate with short functions, like DRY and single responsibility principle. People do apply those as heuristics. But function length is a number, and it is very hard to keep your conclusions fuzzy when operating over numbers.
Thanks! The data is publicly available at http://cams.seti.org/
Rivers can totally form large deltas (dozens, maybe a hundred miles wide for the largest) where the main path of the river is unclear. The Amazon, the Nile, the Rhine, and, of course, the Brahmaputra-Ganges.

Outside of deltas, it is possible, although very rare, for rivers to connect to each other and be able to transfer flow bidirectionally. The Casiquiare Canal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casiquiare_canal) is the largest such example (despite its name, it is a natural river, not man-made). It causes part of the Orinoco River to flow into the Rio Negro and thence the Amazon.
If the refutals are serious, you should be able to eventually find some underlying, simpler disagreement, or some experiment that needs to be done. If we give up, and break the recursion early, we get tribalism.
> I really don't care what political opinion my coworkers have.

Except when you do care?
I'm not sure what the contradiction is here?

Also, I wasn't making any claim about my own feelings, the massive response shows that the memo was highly offensive to many people.
Part of the challenge here is that "the DMCA" is a number of clauses. People who are "against the DMCA" often turn out to have an incoherent position, at least from a legal standpoint, when it turns out they just disagree with one of the contentious clauses.

This would in fact be the most contentious clause, the one about being able to take down tools that enable circumvention, the one that is historically the one that perturbs techies and HN-types the most. I think what we see here isn't so much a DMCA takedown of a single line, but a single line modification in an attempt to prevent someone trying to take down the entire ad blocker, by making it so this particular person doesn't have any standing (in the legal sense) to make claims against the ad blockers anymore.

The copyright takedown clause would be number two, but it has a mitigating factor; the DMCA copyright takedown process that you might see on a hosting site or HN itself [1] has a positive element as well, which is that by conforming to the DMCA a site like HN is able to host user content like our comments while discharging from themselves the responsibility of having to pre-filter every comment for copyrighted content. This clause has certainly been abused, and there is a justifiable case that the Feds have not been adequately aggressive about chasing them down, but on the net I still approve of this clause, personally.

(You also have to distinguish between "the DMCA" and a site's policy, which may go above and beyond. Many or most of the things that people complain about for YouTube, for instance, are their own elaborations on the theme, not the legal requirements themselves. Not all of them, though; YouTube tends to favor the big media companies very strongly when it comes to defining "fair use". But things like taking away your monetization and giving it to somebody else is a YouTube policy, not the DMCA. Or at the very least, it's a penumbric emanation of the DMCA and not the DMCA itself.)

Were I the developers or anyone with any ownership in this software, I would hesitate on putting too much stock in the idea that this was an improper use of the DMCA claim process. It was. But the reward for aggressively pushing back on that may be a proper lawsuit for violation of the anti-circumvention clauses, for which there is not a notification process but simply a legal basis for lawsuits granted, IIRC. Your reward for armchair-lawyering this DMCA takedown request could be a true lawsuit.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/dmca.html - have a look at the footer of this page
I actually make money off Bandcamp. My friend Dub Gabriel does so we'll with selling vinyl on Bandcamp he pays rent in San Francisco from it. SoundCloud was great for new hip-hop acts when you could combine a decent tune with see numbers gaming to juice attention.
What does ad-blocking have to do with copyright circumvention or copyright enforcement? The only think on that list is the domain name.

I'm certain that including a name in a list does not fall under copyright (ample precedent that backs it up). In the unlikey (and unfathomable) case that it is protected under copyright, I bet it would fall under fair use.

Trademark law isn't relevant to an entry in a machine database.
The same is true of any other distributed storage system. Adding a blockchain doesn't change the situation in any way, other than making complying with the law far less convenient.

Though I should add that while the DMCA is indeed a US law, and notification and enforcement mechanisms vary by jurisdiction, other countries also have copyright law. It's illegal to publish copyrighted material without permission in any country with a copyright system. That's what copyright is.
He's already a creep for his views (Muslim ban, opposition to Hart-Cellar).

His looks (and prior statements) just don't help.
Weird, the post was flagged/dead at one point, and now it isn't. Of course it has since sunk off the first page, too.
I am a millenial and i like your comment, although of course the "stack" that the article mentions has nothing to do with the "stack" you are referring to...

PUSH POP PUSH PUSH PUSH POP POP POP ...
I'm saying that the scientific research agrees with the point of the memo. Whether or not I agree is irrelevant to the facts.
> Sundar found it necessary to lie in his official statement about what Damore had said

It could be a lie? It seems more logical that it's a misunderstanding. Neither make Pichai look good, especially since he had no discussions with Damore (according to Damore) to clear up any misunderstandings.
Maybe it's time to label "Ubuntu Mate" as the new default Ubuntu, and the current one Ubuntu Gnome3.

Ubuntu Mate comes with the nice Gnome 2 look&feel but based on GTK3.
> I'm not going to try and claim people wouldn't be so stupid as to try to implement it this way.

They aren't stupid: they are incredibly intelligent.

It was implemented this way to weaponize the DMCA, plain and simple.
Arguing someone should be fired from their job for doing a bad job doesn't seem to be over-outrage... seems applicable. Maybe you disagree with his arguments, but seems normal to me.
Consistency is a constraint. Authors have unwritten contracts with their readers. You cannot destroy the readers immersion with the story with something that doesn't fit (readers will get mad and throw the book down). You cannot spend so much time explaining things that there is no action (this makes for a boring story that is never read).

A formula romance cannot solve the problem of a long standing antagonist by having the hero grab a magic wand from nowhere and kill him - readers of romance generally assume a very earth like world because the story is about the romance and changing the world to add and explain magic is a distraction. So the standard course of action is for the hero to use a gun - guns already exist and so very little explanation needs to be spent on where the hero gets the gun before the story goes back to the romantic parts the reader is interested in. That isn't to say the hero cannot use a magic wand in a romance story, but magic needs to be introduced by page 2 at the latest - and some readers will decide that they don't want to read your book because magic is involved.

Note that non-fiction doesn't have that constraint. I can introduce the magic wand used to kill right at the moment in history where the magic wand was used. Readers will go "what", and do some double checking and discover that a magic wand was actually used (more likely the research will discover that nobody knows what was really used, but it looked to observers like a magic wand so that is what everyone says), then you will go back to my story satisfied that it really happened that way despite being unbelievable.
Thanks! I just finished a 14 month class in Optics, so it's fresh for me. The alternative to putting something into space is much more preferable. No matter how big a ground based scope it is, you still have all of that air mucking up the data coming in and you just can't get as good of data. Space is just so much better, as you know, it is mostly empty of the matter we are trying to look at. Granted, for many EM frequencies, ground based is fine. But a lot of atoms we are trying to look at happen to be present in the air too, messing up the data. Space costs a lot more, but I think there is no comparison in the long run. The dark side of the moon would be a good combo of both advantages though. You could build and also maintain and modify a very very large telescope with out any air or other ground based interference. The flip side is that it would be even more remote than current space based telescopes and therefore more expensive to get things to, like people, air, water, food, and fuel. But, hey, it's the flipping Moon! Like, we have a semi-good reason to go back now! For science!
I followed the drama around it and my end conclusion (to paraphrase somebody's tweet)

Mary Beard is respectable, well educated and gracious.
Taleb is right.
Exactly.

Plus, getting average people to switch from services like S3 "because blockchain" is even less likely than getting average people to switch from WhatsApp/Telegram/whatever to Signal "because privacy". It's just not going to happen.
But to an idiot like me, the absolute amount should go down if it is a cut; not up!

So if i spent $500 eating lunch at work two years ago; $600 last year and plan/allocated $610 this year i had a "budget cut?" no. I spent more.

Thats how i think
The DMCA is United States-specific. Copyright laws are very widespread and harmonized to some extent by international treaties such as the Berne Convention; a Google search for that term can lead you down the right path. (I'm not trying to explain anything, just give you some good search pointers if you're interested in researching yourself.)
If you are informed that you are safe to openly express your opinion, you should have a reasonable expectation that you do.
This is a ridiculously cherry-picked statistic. Pediatricians are the worst paid doctors. In fact, most of the specialties in which women are more common are lower paid:

https://wire.ama-assn.org/education/how-medical-specialties-...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2012/07/20/the-b...
Open culture does not mean that actions that make environment more hostile to some group inside the company should not be punished. The 'memo' definitely did that to his female coworkers. That's why the story is not about open culture or freedom of speech, but in the first place about creating unhealthy environment for a particular group inside the company and setting a really bad precedent. Maybe the guy meant well, but the fact is his actions ended up harming both a particular group and the company.
SoundCloud, if you want to make money off of me, a devoted listener and user of the platform for 7 or 8 years, it is really easy:

Create a frictionless way for me to send a few dollars to artists hosting music on your platform, and you take a cut.

I don't want to pay $10 or $20 every month that gets dispersed into the ether. I want to directly thank the DJs and creators that enable me to be productive during the day and relax at night, a few dollars at a time.
Well, it sounds reasonable to ask that question if so many people have Adblock installed?

I have always blocked ads and always (try) will be, but I this is the outcome from Adblock going mainstream. Yes, the ad networks/sites were the reason in the first place, but it doesn't matter. Another side-product is (hidden) "native advertising"... so many tweets/share/likes are purely marketing. That gay marriage article Madonna tweeted? Think twice before you believe he does it out of morals, most likely she is being paid to share that out with her audience.
Setting font size in pixels on an inline style is as fast on the Web as, say, changing the font on an NSTextFieldCell. Why wouldn't it be?
I had never heard of this until now, thanks!

Now the tougher question, what can we do about it?
We've been testing phone support, and we're working to roll it out very soon.

Last week, we expanded live chat availability, and it's now available 24 hours, Monday through Friday.
I used to teach meditation and yoga for a while. One of my teachers said that meditation should make you less resilient to stress and make you realize that need to change your life. So if someone credits their material success to meditation it's best to view this as an abuse or misunderstanding of the practice.

It took me a while to accept but now I agree with this viewpoint.
How to get more women in tech after Google memo, with latest education research
(4) the end is coming to EUROPE
Don't worry, SoundCloud has been driving away core users and artists for years now. Can't see what's wrong at this stage with a final throw of the dice from someone with different ideas.
I see. Well I'm saying it does not. Obviously we disagree about what the scientific research says.
> I guess hard to guess b/c the new CEO will presumably make some changes

That and there are going to be some seriously restrictive terms to that money. Also I think part of it is used to pay debt.
SoundCloud's problem was going too big too fast. The investors think that SC is going to compete with iTunes/YouTube/Spotify/etc. It's not. It's an audio file hosting service. It has incredible professional use cases, but it is not a mass market audio streaming service.
I disagree, due to the not-so-coincidental timing of the introduction of hybrids and all-electrics, to coincide with augmentation of the CAFE standard, implementation of incentives for production and consumer purchase of said vehicles, etc etc. Where it not for the push and pull of incentives and regulatory pressure, they simply would not be on the road, today.
I also find this surprising - in fact I had to scroll up to check it wasn’t from 2013!

Would love to hear views from anyone with a seed stage startup.
Did you understand the comment you replied to?

The DMCA is not just about direct copyright infringement, but also about preventing the circumvention of technological protections for copyrighted content.

No one is saying there was copyright infringement here.

You can think that this is super bogus (I sure do) but make sure you understand the nature of what you're mad about. ;-)
Obviously I have my own worldview and biases. That being said, I've tried painstakingly to develop a worldview that is accurate and not based on wishful thinking. Yes, I do base what I eat on nutritional facts, rather than just cultural norms. For instance, I don't eat vegetable oils hardly at all. I do periods of water fasting to initiate autophagy in my body. Neither of those things is culturally common in my circles, in fact, the vast majority of people around me are fairly unhealthy.

"Everyone is equal" is absurd, fantastical thinking. A criminal serial killer with a 70 IQ is not equal to Einstein by any metric. Whereas, the precept of, "Everyone should be given equal opportunity under the ruleset," is a noble ideal worth pursuing at nearly any level of policy.

When I read Damore's memo, I was nodding, not because I was being uncritical, but because he's right, as far as I can tell.

He's saying Google is chasing a fantasy of equal outcomes, rather than providing equal opportunities. That's correct, they are. His suggestions were to treat people more as individuals, rather than ham-fisting treatment based on perceived group identity. I think that's very obviously a better approach.

And like most responses to his memo, you can't say (or haven't said) a single thing you think he is wrong about. You can't, or won't, dispute a single line he said.

Just because you come from a good family, and believe that centrism is always the way to go, doesn't mean you're automatically right.