skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have a similar situation. While it provides me plenty of space to concentrate, I don't find I mix very often, or run into people very often. I still don't know most of the people in my relevant departments. Most of my communiques occur via Slack, HipChat, Skype, email, and JIRA. I rarely meet face-to-face with people anymore.

I'll have the odd chat with some of my coworkers, but we tend to work outward from our group rather than together so the calls to discuss work are limited.

I still prefer the semi-private or private workstation but would love if there were more thought put into mixing or socializing employees without going overboard. However, much of that is probably more due to the structure of some departments in my office than the space itself.
A world class AI researcher is going to make the same money wherever they go - but "senior level developers" wouldn't, they'll make market adjusted wages.
why "mitigate" anything when you are given a language specifically designed to describe and solve these types of problems? Of course, you can create a custom end-point for any type of request. The point is, you do not really have to. Also, as far as scenarios in the real world go, traversing some kind of graph is practically everyday kind of thing, from structured organizations to billing to who follows a guy who liked some tweet to things like snomed
Looking at Non-Binary Gender in the Greek and Roman World
Snow crash. It's also cyberpunk (closer to neuromancer) and phenomenal
find a job where you do a lot of travelling and the company will likely give you your own office with a window
I think it's relatively common to the RPG genre to have multiple levels going on in a game. Minigames are a hallowed feature of most Final Fantasy installments, for example. Crafting might also be considered somewhat of a game.

_Fractal_ design, though, implies some element of self-similarity between the levels – and that definitely seems like something more rare!
Conflating negativity/criticism/pessimism with intelligence.

Making a declaration about viability of software based on its present state (youtube will never work they'll get sued), (bitcoin will never work because it can't scale), instead of predicting the viability of a future iteration of it.

Nitpicking someone's communication/word choice/edge case instead of focusing out what they were trying to convey
I have been working more often from home in my last two jobs where there have been open offices. I didn't initially realise why, but its been increasingly clear that I just need the privacy to get work done. So typically I ended up going into office twice a week, and work from home the remaining days.

I don't mind if the company has open office as long as they let me work from home.
I've been using coconut oil or butter infused with (mostly CBD) ABV cannabis.

There is no better cold relief in my opinion than a spoonful of this and a steady supply of freshly-squeezed organic lemon juice with a pinch of salt.

Restful sleep, relief from body ache, improved appetite for Phase II; chicken soup.
Ideally, we really shouldn't allow any individual to gain too large a share of any kind of power, whether financial or political or whatever.

Of course, that's probably also a good way to get systems and things which are...well, designed by committee.
What did the police do before there was the internet or phones?
I wish this could be hammered into the thick heads of congress: there is secure, and there is insecure. There is not a gradient.
Scurrilous manuscript that could have undone John Donne discovered
Right? Apparently police never solved crime before they were allowed full access to every aspect of your life.
Design Lessons from the Fastest Q&A Site in the West (2011) [pdf]
I was thinking the same thing. At first instance it reminded me of "Be right back" episode
There are team intangibles that you get with open offices. You get to be more aware of what is happening, in a subconscious way. I’ve seen both open and cubicles, both have plus and minus. This dude clearly has his own taste and thinks he can speak for everyone
The way you describe it, trying to do it formally sounds inefficient and silly.
People who have already have a lot generally worry about preserving what they have, than making say 10% more.

Also if you have luxury for a while, you can get used to it. Some one coming from worse off conditions is likely to work harder.
Presumably someone with a background in ML/AI can cut through the buzzwords used by ML/AI businesses.
> Go's opinion about generics has always been that it should have them, but finding the right expertise to implement them in a non-ridiculous way has been a struggle. They are marked for inclusion in coming versions (2.0).

The fact that people can claim that C#, Java, Scala, Kotlin, Haskell, Rust, Swift have "ridiculous" implementations of generics sounds like a very bad excuse.
I realize I was being somewhat inflammatory with my talk of "being in the majority" and "missing flags" - thanks for being willing to engage anyway. :-) I also like your characterization of "upper-middle-class white-bread cisnormative-with-2.3-kids neighbors" - this is who we're usually speaking of when we talk about the "NIMBYs".

You're right that there is a difference between starting up an oil refinery and building an apartment complex. The problem with many of these organizations you mentioned is that they weaponize their power (intended for use against oil refineries) against people, lifestyles, and forms of housing they don't like. In Seattle (as elsewhere) it is justified in order to, for example, preserve the availability of free public street parking in front of and near their home. This perceived "right" to public, shared property has extended to mobilizing against dense housing like "apodments" for fear it would "take up street parking" in my town. In my opinion, if you want parking, you should build it on your own plot and not expect the city to limit development to provide it for you free of charge.

You seem to have a pretty reasonable expectation of entitlement - no 7-11, but fine with small in-home business - and I wish there were more like you out there. In practice, these "NIMBYs" move to an area circa 1970 and expect it to never change again. This is untenable in downtown SF, Seattle, or any other major metropolitan area, as I think you realize. The natural evolution of these HOAs, neighborhood associations, and like seems inevitably to be towards oppression - anyone more Laissez-faire wouldn't bother joining one in the first place.
Building taller buildings isn't degradation. I would argue that it makes the urban environment better, no worse, even if you ignore the housing supply benefits.

This is because newer, taller buildings are almost always going to be higher quality than the old shit that was already there.
Yes, but the market has risen to the extent that people making 200k a year are having trouble entering it. That's also the key sign of a bubble.

As someone who has spent most of my career working for old line companies, I discount equity in the company as something akin to gambling - I'd rather take cash than options with a low strike price.
As a rule of thumb, consulting work needs to pay twice as much as a salaried job. Salaried jobs include benefits and you typically have an hour of unpaid work for every hour of paid work when you go it alone.

So, your clients need to be paying you $400k to be worth as much as a $200k salaried position.
The only reason python has numerical libraries (e.g. numpy) is because they are written in C.
Hawai'i has a different history of land title than most of the United States. This Wikipedia article isn't great, but has the basics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M%C4%81hele
They should apply the same principle to their cafes.
"Our food preparation is left incomplete as a symbol..."
True, but a lot of people simply cannot work in an environment full of so much clutter, noise, and distractions. Not 'will not', 'cannot'. Their productivity will drop like a stone.

Are your 'intangibles' worth disqualifying a significant portion of your potential workforce? I guess if you're in a leadership role that might seem like a loaded question, but...well, if that's the case then I sure wouldn't work for you. It takes a diverse set of minds and opinions to get the most out of a vision.
Education system is failing, protects Teachers and fails kids, and is protected by a board who doesn’t want to change because their pockets are being lined with lots of money. Doesn’t seem like redistribution to me.
yeah, they can meet with their team in the parking lot 'circle the wagons' and have a standup from their cars. I envision a front windshield that retracts completely to ensure quality face-time
xcat claims support for diskless service nodes on their website. I can't speak for how long it's been officially supported, but I seen to recall IBM claiming support in 2009, when they sold us a pair of iDataPlex clusters at UC.

Amusing side note: That was an interesting project with regard to system provisioning. The team responsible for the "south" cluster was from SDSC made up of folks who developed ROCKS[1], and the "north" cluster was managed by my team at LBNL, made up of folks who developed Warewulf (though at the time it was called Perceus). Each team was adamant about using their own tooling, so it made for some really long conference calls about keeping runtimes in sync.

[1]http://www.rocksclusters.org/
I'm currently reading Cryptonomicon because of somebody's recommendation on here. I'm not very deep in just yet, but I'd already recommend it.[0]

Also, the movie for Ready Player One is coming out and the book is alright, too. Though it's a little heavy on the hipster/nostalgic wankery, it's still a good story. Kept me reading. It's also an interesting take on overpopulation, class divides, and the future role of VR. Steven Spielberg is directing the movie, so I'm kind of looking forward to seeing it.[1][2]
---

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptonomicon

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ready_Player_One

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ready_Player_One_(film)
>I honestly don't know why it isn't more strictly regulated.

Because we tried that once and it didn't work out so well
Remember to compare what you don't like about one system with what you wouldn't like about the other. Socialist societies aren't without centralized extreme power, and how you get and keep that power is arguably much worse.

You also don't need to be socialist to fix the inequality problems.

And simply, there are too many mathematical power laws in any society to prevent the few from having a lot. The intensity is what you need to change. It's difficult.
So, ~2 years. Case in point :(
That's... just not true.

And that kind of misrepresentation just weakens the arguments for strong encryption, because intelligent people will see them as pretty transparent misrepresentations. Have you considered that's why the arguments for strong encryption aren't going well -- that we're not actually engaging with intelligent people trying to understand the issue, we're chanting trite, shallow inaccuracies?

I mean -- "there is not a gradient"? ...what do you call changing key size?

Ed:

I'd like the people downvoting to explain how changing the keysize isn't a gradient of security. (Hint: You can't, because it is.)
Maybe states including California and Maryland have the idea of an "implied" crosswalk. So the idea is if there's an intersection or a large amount of space between crosswalks, that pedestrians can cross with the same rights a zebra-stripe crosswalk would provide.
Spotify Downloader v1.4 Apk [Latest] [Ad Free]
They got a lot of shit for scalability issues but their initial success just took them by surprise, like everyone else in the industry.

IIRC they had at least an order of magnitude more users than their more optimistic estimations.

It does not excuse everything but their initial scaling issues are pretty understandable
“Socialist societies aren't without centralized extreme power“

Assuming you’re not living in a socialist democracy but rather a dictatorship, I feel they often become confused and just wanted to point that out.
Yeah, but what I'm saying is that a major reason why it doesn't wind up working for most people is because large incumbent players abuse their market position to a staggering degree, in order to lock all of those people into their platform.

They rely on the fact that most workers will resist changing from their systems, no matter what the executives want. That's how you get hooks into a client's flesh and roughly drag them out of any semblance of a free market. It just seems like gobsmackingly reprehensible behavior.
Their partnership with google and ingress gave them a massive geolocation database to work with. That’s a pretty big moat.
I grew up in socialistic country, and I can tell you, man, I definitely prefer living in US now, where some people got outrageously richer than me by chance. I just don't envy them.
The gotcha here is that most desirable AI startups SV wants to fund now (understandably) follow a pattern more closely described here:
http://www.bradfordcross.com/blog/2017/6/13/vertical-ai-star...

Generally, their advantage is in the way they use data to solve a vertical specific problem. They more "bolt on" AI.
AI isn't really the focus of most of these companies. This is just what investors want to hear about.

The article here isn't calling them out specifically, but AI infra startups are what are being discussed here as the "hammer looking for a nail" startup.

YC funded a few of them including Skymind (my company) and deepgram (mainly audio). There are a lot more of these startups such as vicarious that mainly publish papers but raise tons of funding hoping for a deepmind style exit (they didn't really have a business model).

With that context out of the way, I'll also maybe just state some learnings from the other side of the table.

Skymind has typically made money trying to reduce dependencies on cloud providers by decoupling the AI infra from google cloud and co from the cloud provider itself.

A horizontal play like this is by its nature very hard. We maintain the whole stack including our own framework. We also started in 2014 and have a decent foothold in enterprise. I wouldn't recommend trying to do this in 2017.

That being said, one other semi similar horizontal AI startup that is being started are the chip companies. Those are significantly harder to run than even what we're doing.

The most common "failed" type of startup that I think of when we think "horizontal" plays are Machine Learning as a service, which is hugely a loss leader for the various cloud providers (some companies are building on top of these providers though).

This is where you see Metamind, Alchemy API, Scaled Inference (founded in 2015), even Nervana before they sold were trying to a "nervana asic cloud" among others.

Maybe a lot of investors from SV view this as a waste of time dissecting, but I would personally love to see a bit more content on acknowledging some of these trends in the market.

The allure of "AI as a service" and the horizontal dev tools infra play is that you can try to build the next AWS similar to what the container and database companies are trying to do. Execution is definitely key for this to work though. Research also can't be the primary focus.

I won't comment on what will or won't work there
Totally agree and I shouldn’t invoke socialism because that introduces a huge number of other issues which I’m not referring to. My target is the outrageous inequality of wealth and ownership.
Sean Parker has a knack for making billions of dollars off of unethical behavior.
you could fit a lot of small cabins (or tool sheds) into that huge Facebook openoffice space, one of my favorite lines is from the movie 'America's Sweethearts' where Billy Crystal is telling another person that a film editor (played by Christopher Walken) purchased the Unabomber's cabin from the FBI and now uses it as his editing studio...
Without hesitation, seems like a very worthwhile tradeoff (for any language IMO)
I've tried this, but while I consider myself an introvert, I just can't do the whole music thing all day. People still manage to interrupt, which makes the headphones come off, and I just never remember to put them back in. And noise still gets in, though I admit that I don't have those really nice sound-cancelling headphones, but FFS, how much of my own money do I need to drop to make up for the craptastic workplace the employer provides?

While the headphones can fix the noise/distraction stuff, it doesn't magically make additional space appear. You can see in the image on the Medium article just how much space the author has at home; compare that to the Facebook office picture (I think I might actually have less space.) With more space, you might be able to do things like put up charts/diagrams, put a whiteboard on a wall (if I only had a wall) / have space to have one of those rolly ones like in the FB picture. (we lack the space for a WB…)

Then there's the increased incidence in disease.
The Soft Skills You Need to Ace Freelance Developer Interviews
It depends on what you value. a lot of my life's highlights are those spent over beers with my friends. I'm unlikely to have kids. The way I've seen my relatives struggle in the later period of their lives doesn't appeal to me at all.

But you do have a decade on me and I am certain that adds some perspective. I am much wiser than I was when I was at 20. And I am certainly not pretending that it isn't doing damage.
The United States was designed to harness competition. It is what was supposed to keep us successful. It has done a very good job.

If there are 20 burger restaurants, the best burger isn't designed by committee. Each will try to improve to stay in the market and the people who decide who survives and who dies is determined by the people choosing which burger to eat.

It works as long as there is competition. One burger restaurant winning all of the business with a great burger, and then using scale to make competition impossible followed by lowering the quality to find minimum cost with maximum profit... that's another outcome of capitalism, and one we're suffering now.

To make it work you need centralized authority that resists corruption and can put it's finger on the scale to encourage the appropriate amount of diversity.
both buybacks and dividends create jobs. in fact without buybacks and dividends no one would ever start a business and no jobs whatever be created, Other than sole proprietors.
> As soon as it's more profitable to just buy the bitcoin, the miners will turn off the machines. There's no point spending $1.01 to mine $1 of Bitcoin when you can just buy it at market rates.

It's not really that simple because mining Bitcoin is a lottery, and the amount of coins a block is worth is not a constant value due to being able to collect a variable amount transaction fees (Which are becoming much higher then they used too).

You can estimate approximately how much it will cost you per Bitcoin, and you can obviously view historical data on how much the mining has cost you, but there's no way to know going in that it's going to cost you $1.01 to mine $1 of Bitcoin, there's too many variables in play.
"I don't like conflict diamonds, but since I have a bunch I might as well keep them — I just won't wear them."

That's how it comes off to me.
Believing other people are stupid.
Honestly, this site is nicer to use then many I use on a daily basis.
On the other hand all those other people at Facebook have those jobs because Zuckerberg built the company and hired them. How do you prevent Zuckerberg from profiting from doing that without also choking off the funding and investment he needed to grow that company so rapidly in just a few years? If anyone deserves that kind of compensation, isn’t it someone who built a business that provides 20,000 jobs and a free service used by over a billion people every day? Isn’t that the kind of person that, perhaps above most others, knows how to use billions of dollars to do something worthwhile?

How do we make sure he has the resources to build and fund that business, while denying him the funds and resources to do other legal activities as well? Who gets to decide yes you can spend billions on building Facebook, but no you can’t spend it on real estate that’s legal for other people to buy? How do we restrict that by law and ensure the people enforcing those restrictions don’t kill off the next Facebook, or the next holiday resort company, etc? Command economies don’t have much of a track record of economic success.

I say all that without even liking Facebook, I barely use it and am annoyed by a lot of their business practices, but I have no right to tell people which company they should work for or which social network they should use or what company or project allowed by the law that they should or should not fund.

Capitalism is ultimately about the individual freedom of citizens to spend or invest their money as they see fit. How do you justify taking away those freedoms and how to you do so without choking off innovation and growth?
These arguments also seem to confuse energy consumption with the resulting pollution. I’d give it another 10-20 years at most until the majority of energy is coming from renewable sources, making this a non-issue as far as Bitcoin is concerned
I like to think of these two in terms of risk. In gambling, there are odds and there is nothing you can do to eliminate or reduce this risk. With investing, there is another factor called idiosyncratic risk, which is not a systemic risk. This is a risk that you have control over and can reduce. Performing due diligence, diversification of portfolio companies, startup check-ins and report outs, second opinion, etc. These are all factors that an investor can control and can reduce the risk of an investment.

Have you heard someone say "diversify your portfolio"? Its to reduce the idiosyncratic risks that are associated with individual companies. Yes, one company may struggle but another may not. It's because there is microeconomics at play for individual companies.
They do just like they do now: lobby to get more laws to either (1) gain more leverage to coerce compliance or (2) criminalize actions which are tangent to the behavior they want to coerce.

I realize your question was rhetorical.
Honestly, the only reason open offices exist can be described in a single word: control. It simply allows managers to hold sway over their employees by forcing them to look busy and be in their chair as much as possible, and causing undue stress.

It also has the horrible downside of mashing together personalities that will conflict at some point without any guidance of how to resolve the conflicts as they arise. People are dicks no matter how hard they try not to be. Sure, we can try to act like adults, but people tend to defend themselves and their actions in front of an audience instead of talking things through like adults should — which is much more easily accomplished in a private office.
The thing is, when you take away "ownership" in the capitalist sense, de facto ownership and wealth still exists, just with different names.

Societies that aren't hierarchical don't really exist on any but the tiniest scales excluding some situations where individual units are nearly self-sufficient.
Why is it when a Hawain says "stop moving here" it's okay, but when the right say lets reduce the number of people moving here illegally it's nationalism and racism?
Alzheimer's doesn't come onto you because your old. People in their 40s can come down with it sadly. BUT 85+ you have a 32% chance of getting it. https://www.alz.org/documents_custom/2016-facts-and-figures....