skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Alright, let me chime in:

For people that were less political danger, they usually were fired for "Political Incorrectness" and "Agitation and Propaganda", sent to re-education classes, and only given shitty job opportunities from now then. It was a convenient way to keep the less dangerous masses at bay.

If "being conservative" becomes a "fireable" offense in most large tech valleys, then we are in a path to similar stances.

Now, here where I disagree with the memo in general (it didn't seem constructive), I disagree with the way google handled the whole situation overall.

Anyway, this whole episode (if you are not a feminist you are the enemy stance and the black list that managers at google have) starts smelling more of a McCarthyism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

For people that just want to do their job and don't want to get involved in these discussions you almost are forced to do something, otherwise you are an evil/enemy/suppressor/whatever else. That bothers me, as I lived under communism and have lived the results of blind ideology.
Benchmark capital might not value their potentially most profitable investment so far; but if what you said is true, they don't just trash their investments but also their business ethnics and tarnish their reputation.
Because it's just the same shit over and over again
I have no idea why people are giving this guy the benefit of the doubt in absurdum. Apparently if he quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, he is a cat.

I mean heck, among the first thing the guy did is to give interviews to dubious people (with slanted views matching the docs generalizations) and printing up a damn "Goolag" t-shirt?

So even now with the benefit of hindsight people seem still convinced that this was more or less a scientific doc with no ideological bias. The ability to read between the lines seems to blinded by vague links to academic papers.
Thanks for asking this. Here's another one that was posted and then disappeared without a trace:

https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/6t1cpx/if_w...
I have read the memo the entire way through. Can you explain these logical errors that it is filled with?
I can't help but think fondly of the Baroque cycle when reading about the likes of Hooke and Wren.

https://www.nealstephenson.com/baroque-cycle/
Yes, but it's about 6 hours.
because there are still people that think that man is smarter or maybe they convinced themselves that an all male or all female team (and guess which one the team is already) works better. etc.

and that reduces available job poll. which then results in lower offers.
Measuring productivity as a technical founder
What in your opinion, is a proper interpretation or representation of the original memo?
Operation Plowshare
The author seems to be teaching a "student-initiated course." Many universities give students to teach a 1-unit course that is not really part of the mainstream curriculum and does not really count toward the degree.
Pretty much everything that has derivatives tied to it is manipulated. Option expiries, FX fixes as well. Or it was when I was looking at it.

The thing is there are derivatives that are sometimes non-linear, things with triggers and barriers. When some large enough fish has one of these (eg by taking the other side vs a customer) they have an incentive to move the rate in whatever way they can. Whether it's getting someone to submit a bad rate or sitting on an FX cross, it can be worth it.

Before I went full quant I was often looking at the screens manually. You'd often see at around the WM/Reuters fix that the price would move strangely. An unusually large move would happen with no apparent news. You'd get a rumour from a broker, but who knew how they knew? And quite often the move would fade after the window closed.

This would happen even in exchange traded options. If you knew the specifics of the settlement window, you would know when the price would go wonky. You wouldn't know who, but you knew that is wasn't a normal time in the market.

The LIBOR was a bit less obvious, only really clear to me in hindsight. Swaps don't have a common schedule like listed options, so there's a fixing every day that could be in someone's interest to influence. Same goes for FX, but since LIBOR is a bunch of opinions (as opposed to trades) it's not as obvious.
I totally agree with your last point, and I wish more university acknowledged this when deciding who teaches classes. My favourite CS course was taught by a first year MS student. For most universities though, letting an undergraduate teach a class is a no-no and it surprises me that Stanford, one of the most prestigious university in the world, would make an exception to that.

Edit: Commenter above clarified to me that the student is not teaching a full blown 3 unit course.
South Park predicted this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXF8MIG_HQI
I'm quite fond of the "Kill Sticky" bookmarklet

javascript:(function()%7B(function%20()%20%7Bvar%20i%2C%20elements%20%3D%20document.querySelectorAll('body%20*')%3Bfor%20(i%20%3D%200%3B%20i%20%3C%20elements.length%3B%20i%2B%2B)%20%7Bif%20(getComputedStyle(elements%5Bi%5D).position%20%3D%3D%3D%20'fixed')%20%7Belements%5Bi%5D.parentNode.removeChild(elements%5Bi%5D)%3B%7D%7D%7D)()%7D)()
To be frank, after all this, I wonder what tech company would want to hire him and the baggage that entails. I'm not saying he's wrong or right but he now brings with him a lot of unwanted attention. More than anything else, he was fired for bringing unwanted attention to Google. If the media never caught on or fan the firestorm that resulted, I'm not sure if he would have lost his job. I think he recognized as much even in the WSJ article.

Then again, maybe some daredevil startup could find a way to exploit his fame.
"The value of 614K ETH has ranged from 92MM USD to 240MM USD in the last two months,"

As I see it that's irrelevant. Whats relevant is the value at the time of the investment. As of yesterday, they raised Ethereum that had a then value of $186m. The fact that it may go up or down tomorrow is irrelevant.
> I engaged in reasoned discussion with some of my peers on these issues, but mostly I was ignored.

So as long as the memo was internal, nobody cared. It looks like he was fired because the memo went viral, not because he wrote and submitted it to the diversity groups (which happened a month ago).
I get on the phone and call people even before building anything, especially with B2B products since their phone number is easier to find. Email works too but it's not immediate and it's easier for people to not reply than it is on the phone. I used a book called Talking to Humans (free) [1] that talks about how to validate ideas.

The main way to do so is to listen to the potential customer and not even mention your idea or that you are working on something. You must first understand their true problems, not your idea of what their problems might be, which many technical people especially do and rush into building a product that people may not even want. Ask them about their problems in their daily life and if you keep hearing the same thing over and over and it aligns with your idea, then build the product. Even if it doesn't, a repeatedly mentioned problem is still one that could have a good solution.

[1] www.talkingtohumans.com
I think a lot of people struggle with the idea that how you say something matters as much if not more than what you say. And Damore definitely seems to suffer from that. He's focused on the fact that his document was to his mind well reasoned and factually supported (it has citations I guess), while ignoring the problem, that it was also incredibly tone deaf and to an uncharitable reader offensive. Assuming you take no issue with the evidence he cites, his reasoning is at best flawed, he ignores a lot of easily cited counter evidence, and worst of all uses a lot of strongly coded language. I'm fully willing to believe his intentions were as he stated but the fact is his memo doesn't present well unless you're already inclined to believe his argument.

Also generally speaking, upsetting a large number of people you work with is a good way to get fired. Sound arguments or not. People have been fired for repeatedly microwaving smelly food in the kitchen, and other comparably minor offenses. Releasing a document which criticizes the companies hiring practices and can be validly interpreted to call into question the credentials of many of your coworkers is a no brainer pink slip.
Ok so I'll just turn off Skype for the day then.
Good! Let's hope they make this possible for major releases as well.
> The point of diversity isn't to force everyone to think men and women are identical in every capacity.

I don't think he thinks that. At least not if we are to believe the memo.

However I do think many of the responses took offence with the idea of biological differences between men and women. And maybe rightly so, since some of them referred to seemingly good research showing that he at least overstated his claims.

What many of the responders don't seem to get, is that a good reply shouldn't dependent on whether differences exist or not. Instead it should tackle the question of how we treat different people equally. When should we try and level the playing field, and when should we accept that gender gaps (and other kinds of gaps) appear?
Is there any guesses as to what said wiped out employees might do in regards to sticking around?
Now is a good time for me to plug Reek's Anti Anti-Adblock: http://reek.github.io/anti-adblock-killer/
I completely agree, she deserves more credit.

BTW, I have always seen her name written as Lisa Su. Why do you write Zu?
I'm assuming you didn't do the math there - in your hypothetical scenario I'd likely be dead within a year if I rode a bike every day. Then I obviously wouldn't do it.

But the point of bringing up the statistic is to check "is this risk worth worrying about, to the extent that I'm not gonna do thing X"? That's what a rational person does in all situations - is the risk of flying so high that I shouldn't go on holiday? No. Is the risk of falling if I climb that cellphone tower so high that it's not worth it for the view? Yes.
I find the "talk to them" part kinda hard for some audiences.

Some people make money with "talking" to people and want to be paid for answering any questions,even if you want to help them.

Some people are rather protective of their knowledge, too.
Al Qaeda Targets U.S. Trains
> But that would defeat the purpose of streaming services: convenience.

Many of us oppose this level of convenience as it cheapens our art. I'm happy to hand out mp3s or even allow them to be downloadable, if someone wants them.

And it looks like HQ streaming disappeared as a feature, just like communities. Unless it's still on pro, but I wouldn't know since at some point they converted my pro account to a free one.
Machine Learning at Sophos [pdf]
Uh. No. If I were a federal officer I would just contact amazon and find out where the money went. Paypal or Bank account - game over. Contact whatever bank he picks it up from get security camera details, address info, on and on. I would also grab all the ips, entered in info and the prints from the box. I bet he would be in my office by lunch. Plea dealed to 5 years by monday.
They release every other week updates to Safari Technology Preview as well as daily builds of Webkit. Both include new features.

They have blog posts about feature development as well here: https://webkit.org/blog/
Same! I really need to read up on the actual history a bit more, as it was a golden age of really cool (and bizarre) things happening.
What big problem did the early internet solve? Sending messages between universities? Why not just use a phone?
It's worth mentioning (if it fancies interest) that the individualism-collectivism and relational scales vary across cultures. Conclusions about these scales and overlaps as it relates to gender and culture in and of themselves fall prey to cultural bias.

"Culture, gender and self. A perspective from individualism-collectivism research"
http://www.gelfand.umd.edu/Kashimaetal1995.pdf
> ... Google had absolutely no option but to fire Mr. Damore once this blew up into a firestorm ...

That's a bold statement. Care to explain? Why were all other options unacceptable?
1.Have you tried setting up a Paetron account?

2.'If you enjoy our content, support us via PayPal'

3. And once in a month or bimonthly sharing your expenses and asking for support.

4. Contacting relevant youtubers for traffic or brand campaign where you can embed their videos along with the newsletter.

5. Finally, Checking with Book Publication to add relevant new releases as Sponsored.
is it mail fraud because they used a bogus return address?
I see the "Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14990494 from 5 hours ago with comments from 2 hours ago, so flagged within an hour doesn't match. 400+ comments.

"Why I Was Fired by Google (wsj.com)" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14993683 isn't flagged. Or maybe it was and now no longer is.

Personally I get tired of yet more opinion pieces on the same topic. After reading through 5 long threads I feel like I've seen every opinion and counter opinion.
For folks who feel like they knew about this story already: read the article.

LIBOR fixing is one thing. But the realization that there is no market that LIBOR measures is truly astonishing!

2021 will be an interesting year...
No.

The first anecdote is about a TrueOS box — which previews what will become FreeBSD 12 — and the second is about a macOS Sierra box running OpenZFS on OS X.

Since TrueOS, O3X and ZoL are all based on OpenZFS, I expect that you will have the opportunity to replicate my experiences should you have disks that die. Now I don't know whether to wish you good luck or not. :)
This reminds me of a post about reinforcement learning agents, I think from OpenAI. They found that to get the agents to coordinate as a group, they had to judge and criticize other agents' actions in addition to their own.
That's great news!

I don't particularly aim to shit on it, but I've been on the vanilla train for awhile now. So when I see something I'd like to try out to solve a specific problem, having it pull in jQuery for a dependency is kind of frustrating.

Especially when (and I'm sure Bootstrap does more with it) the only reason it's pulled in is to replace document.querySelectorAll and fetch/xhr.
I litterally never noticed that.

If you hide it YOU don't see if. If you flag it NO ONE might see it.

The flagging stuff on these kind of topics always seems like censorship to me by those who feel attacked. (Irony not purposeful).
>Does it have to be addressed?

Yes.

>It went largely ignored for months. I suspect the reason this went viral was the offended parties recirculated it amongst themselves.

But we don't know how widely circulated it was during those months, in fact we don't really know anything about it's release. It seems to me that it was circulated among what was probably a small group who agreed with damore (a boys club if you will :P) and then broke out of that group, other people started reading it and all hell broke loose. The fact that no one discovered it for months doesn't really change anything about the memo or its contents.

>If the explosion is the problem, consider the gunpowder, as well as the spark.

I do consider both. Damore wrote the memo (gunpowder) then released it at his workplace (the spark.)
Can anybody please talk about the actual science here?

As far as wikipedia is concerned, yes there are biological mental differences between men and women. I see a lot of "This is so disgusting I won't even respond to it," which is a cop-out.

But here's wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans#Psyc...
VisaDB is outdated. Ukrainians can travel to EU Member States without a visa.
https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/ukrainians-can-now-travel-t...
Looks cool but the demo does not do anything on iOS.
It was not signed for.

There are many dispositions once usps presses delivered. One is "to an individual at address" that is what i interpret - not signed.

Some other dispositions: at or by box, other or garage, office, (there are many more)

So the usps carrier pressed 4 - individual at address. He she handed it to someone.

Also, the exact gps coordinate of the initial scan is recorded. So the carrier scans the amazon box... That time&location is address knowing. In fact, the usps can turn on a feature that tells the carrier "you are more than 200(some distance) away from the address" this is used primarily when sunday newbies are delivering.

It sounds like amazon does not receive all the data collected from the carriers handheld. Also, there can be multiple dispositions for a parcel. Like "damaged" and delivered.
BTW I feel the same about calling Trump a "Nazi". For people whose family members have been killed by the Nazi, it sounds like mockery.
Any evidence? The biggest crises seem to be outside of the board’s visibility: (1) Susan Fowler (2) TK berating a driver on video (3) TK and his exec team having a file on rape of someone in india (4) Greyball etc. etc.

I think it is hard to argue that Benchmark made Suzan Fowler write her blog post etc.

The counter argument is that Benchmark seems like the grown up and Uber is lucky to have them on their BoD.
This article contains a rather poor explanation of what LIBOR is and the history around it. Matt Levine does a much better job: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-07-27/the-end-o...

Back in the 1960s, a Greek banker in London[1] wanted to find a way for banks to make syndicated floating-rate loans. He found a very simple answer: The banks would lend money to a company, charging their cost of funds plus a spread, and every three months, you'd go out and ask the banks what their cost of funds was, and you'd average their answers, and that (plus the fixed spread) would be the new interest rate on the loan. This was a simple product for the banks: They could pass their costs on directly to the customer, and make a fixed profit (the spread). And by surveying all the big banks and throwing out outlier submissions, you could get a pretty fair approximation of the overall funding cost for banks.

And so this -- Libor, the London interbank offered rate -- became the normal way that everyone did floating-rate loans, and then it became the normal way that everyone did interest-rate derivatives, and then it became the normal way that everyone did ... sort of ... everything? Libor just sort of became The Interest Rate, used for discounting cash flows in all sorts of transactions, "the most important number in the world." But it was always based on a survey of banks' funding costs, and so it was always a little hazy. One problem was that the banks could lie. But a second problem is that the banks might not even know. Libor surveys asked banks each day what they would have to pay to borrow money unsecured from other big banks, but over time the banks sort of stopped doing that, particularly in some of the more obscure combinations of tenors and currencies that nonetheless reported Libor rates. So the banks' Libor submitters would guesstimate their submissions based on deposit rates and commercial-paper rates and secured-borrowing rates and other tenors and what brokers and their buddies were telling them. It was all more or less good enough as a casual system for resetting the rates on a few billion dollars worth of syndicated loans, but it was not accurate down to the hundredth of a basis point as a foundation for the financial system, or as the source for pricing hundreds of trillions of dollars of derivatives.

[1] Minos Zombanakis: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-11-29/the-man-w...
Another reasonable, fairly noninflammatory piece of writing from Mr. Damore. I'm sure this will be read carefully by his critics, so they can provide a rational, articulate rebuttal.
An Overview of JavaScript Testing in 2017
There are so many bilateral derivative contracts tied to LIBOR what would it even mean for this benchmark to go away?
This isn't a legal issue in that the laws are bogus (I mean, they are but it is not the issue here). The real issue is that this company is bully and using the legal system as a bludgeon. These abuses should be penalized and they would happen less.
Right, but the issue right now is that everyone is pushing an agenda. The only constant is the literal text and the current research which, by accounts from qualified people, don't seem to be in conflict.

In the conversation of this issue the facts, what tribe you belong to, and what ought to be done in response to them have been tied together. Unless we can disconnect those everyone's reality is going to be shaped by the latters rather than the former.
Well, your age group used the internet, but people now in their 40s and 50s built the internet. I would say the difference is more in areas of expertise: I've noticed that older programmers tend to work more on system code -- operating systems, databases, routers, networking stacks, real time applications, etc. Stuff that's just a magic black box for most younger programmers, who focus on web applications and concentrate in javascript. The C/javascript divides separates older/younger programmers quite clearly, although of course many older programmers work in javascript and many younger programmers work in C. Now with WASM, things may be turning full circle, and then next generation will have grown up with Assembly!

But most older programmers also had access to computers -- they just weren't on the internet, they had to type their programs in from magazines (as hobbyists) or load them from magnetic tapes shipped from Berkeley :)
That's certainly part of he problem as well. People tend to vulkanize pretty quickly so the discussion doesn't change much unless something REALLY big happens (obviously depending on their definition).

By being flagged more people don't see it so even thought there is discussion there isn't as much.
> isnt disruption the whole point of Silicon Valley?

I could stand next to your desk and smash two pots together thus disrupting your work; surely you see how disruption of a market is different than disrupting co-workers...

Simply because the word "disruption" can be used in a positive context to describe aspects of Silicon Valley doesn't mean it's always positive regardless of context.

> Capitulating due to media pressure, if that is the reason, is extremely weak leadership and only made the problem worse.

This was never stated as the reason as far as I can tell.
I'm not an expert on the subject. However, in his interview with Jordan Peterson [0], whom AFAIK is an expert on the field, the following claim was made: "I would like to state for the record that I believe that what you said in there, if not accurate, was at least representative of the current state of the art among well-trained psychometrically informed psychologists who are experts in the field of individual difference."

Peterson points out a few issues in his writeup as they go over it. Considering the author of the memo is not an expert, I think it's reasonable to be a bit more charitable with his writeup.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEDuVF7kiPU
http://archive.is/Ltjzw
I don't think the author specifically claimed that men are better at engineering (if he did, I'd love if you could point me to where).

I think he said that biological mental differences on average are one possible component of why engineers tend to be men.
There were articles a while back mentioning AMD's success with Jim Keller in the past and hopes that his return would bring that kind of success again: https://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/2344223/amd-to-design-n...

I think assuming that the reason he's getting credit is specifically to slight a woman being CEO is baseless.