skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Basecamp pays well, but from a couple people I know with firsthand knowledge, they don't pay so well that it explains low turnover. They may pay a lot better now, but still that wouldn't explain low turnover over the life of the company.

It seems probable to me that what makes Basecamp retention powerful is a combination of:

(1) Work-from-anywhere remote

(2) A culture people enjoy working in

(3) An extremely selective recruiting process with very low hiring tempo

An important thing to remember is that there are aren't a lot of truly excellent full-remote gigs at high-status companies out there. The fact that Basecamp doesn't hire often might mean that if you leave, you're not likely to get your seat back if things don't work out at your next gig.
I just discovered VG yesterday. I am super excited to really try it out. That is what I loved about Python was Virtualenv and not having to install packages globally. So I am really looking forward to trying VG out.
One year in one country no less...
> smart watches are peripherals, not communications devices, right?

The most popular ones in the US are, but ones that are fully independent phones with their own SIM have been available for some time.

Just for some examples: https://www.smartgeekwrist.com/standalone-smartwatch-sim-car...
More relevant is that a vastly larger fraction of your tax dollars go to things related to the military-industrial complex, aka "defense".
That was not there when I first visited...
How Gullible Are We? A Review of the Evidence from Psychology and Social Science
> They said they verified Spectre attacks on AMD and ARM processors, as well.

https://www.wired.com/story/critical-intel-flaw-breaks-basic...
It's kind of semantics though isn't it? If I write a piece of software that follows the spec and fulfils the customer's need, but then someone tries to do something with it that we hadn't thought of and that results in a security hole... around here we call that a bug, a flaw, something we missed. Maybe it's reasonable to have not spotted the bug, but that wouldn't make it not a bug/flaw.
The 'pump' side of 'pump and dump' doesn't have to be misinformation, does it? Can't it just be a barrage of PR puff pieces?

I'd expect the same here. The information doesn't have to be false for it to be a hit piece designed to profit the stock-shorting author.
I remember me and a friend(same age as me) went to a concert with my brother and his friend(same age as him). We offered them drinks and things, and they declined. After the concert, I was in a state of paranoia and my friend was puking in the toilet. My brother and his friend were just sitting quietly in a separate room, chilling, watching netflix on their own computers.

It was odd.
That's really the key.

"No problem here, move along, move along - you won't be able to modify/corrupt/delete that password, you can only read it in plain text. Nothing to see. Move on."

IIUC - you can transpose 'password' with seemingly anything stored in memory managed by the kernel, so Intel using this sort of deceptive language is poor behaviour.
This may be true, but still I've encountered very few problems installing, updating and removing software on my Mac despite this compared to other platforms I've used. Why would having separate package managers coexist be a bad thing if they can be complementary? (e.g. Homebrew installs different kinds of things than the drag-to-Applications-folder mechanism).
Hm, I honestly don't plug my iOS devices into my computer much anymore, but I bet that process could be automated to run when the computer detects the device which would make it less painful. Thanks for the heads up!
There's another part of the trend that is less obvious: the social giants haven't focused on making it easier to hang out with friends IRL. On the surface that statement might seem counterintuitive; after all, if I want to message a friend for lunch, I can just DM them with messenger/imsg/snap/insta. When I want to invite a bunch of friends to my super bowl party, just create a fb event. Simple right?

Not quite. There are a million opportunities in between to have genuine, in-person connections with friends that don't necessarily fall into those two categories. Just to prove it, here's a thought exercise. Take your top 5 friends, local people you'd be most inclined to hang with on any given day. Now ask yourself, what are they doing tonight on this random Wednesday? If you had trouble answering this question, you're not alone. We're all so busy nowadays, it's become harder to line up those fleeting moments of availability that we do have. Now think about how many intersecting pockets of free time amongst your friends that were probably missed in the past month. Some of these opportunities could've been a quick cup of coffee together, swinging by to watch Isaiah's debut with the Cavs, or last minute studying for mid terms.

Coordination has to become easier, because everything else competing for your free time has become easier. This is one of the primary reasons why I left Yahoo and founded a new startup called Blink. We're creating an app that bridges the gap between your phone and your real life.

We are eventually planning to do a "Show HN" to give folks a preview of what we're building, but I couldn't help but notice quite a few here (westmeal, ktta, joaomacp, julianh95 and others) who are both young in age and have quite a sophisticated understanding of how our social trends are evolving. If you're under 25, we'd really love to get your feedback on where we are going with Blink! You can check it out here (iOS only):

https://blinkwith.me/hn-teens-dont-party

We're also looking for a junior iOS engineer who's as passionate about this stuff as we are, but that's also an entirely different HN post altogether!
Actually you should look at the flip side of the coin: We - Germans - just decided that letting Nazis not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value.
Can't this be disabled somehow for internal servers only ? Say disabling it on db servers but keep it on api/web servers.
Again, the effect precedes the behavior change, so is unlikely to be a result of it.
Thanks for pushing back, I think we all come to greater understanding through argument (the good kind, not yelling at each other!).

In that spirit, here's the next volley:

> I disagree. Not every trait has something to do with conferring a benefit. Many traits are simply random artifacts of an exceedingly complex dynamic system.

As I said previously, given how complicated of a feature eyebrows are (they have a skeletal component, hair, and muscles which contribute in complex ways to facial expressions), there is no plausible way the existence of eyebrows is due to random variation. Eyebrows would require a whole bunch of very specific mutations to occur at once and mutations are rare. The specific form that people's eyebrows take probably has a fair degree of randomness, but that eyebrows exist at all cannot be due to chance.

Further, every single person has eyebrows. If whether or not a person had eyebrows were truly of no consequence to genetic fitness, some people would have them and other wouldn't.

> But, it would be reasonable to expect data to back it up.

This argument goes both ways. As you say, I have no numbers to show that eyebrows are under selection, but you have no numbers showing that they are not. But your position is worse than that, since you are lacking a plausible explanation for how eyebrows can even exist, given how complicated they are anatomically, without having been selected for.

> In my experience, I've seen no correlation between eyebrows and the number of offspring.

That's not entirely true. After all, only people with eyebrows have children. :P I am only party kidding about that, btw. Per my previous point, the fact that everyone has eyebrows means that they contributed somehow to people having children.

But more seriously: surely you can agree that eyebrows have an impact on attractiveness. After all, a great many people, both male and female, pluck, shape, thin, or color their eyebrows. And surely you can agree that attractiveness at one point was linked to reproductive success (though I agree that it probably has a limited correlation in modern life)?

> As far as your second point, 3% is enormous. But, in any case, the problem is a failure to appreciate that there is a 'noise' threshold below which a probabilistic benefit will have no effect. That is, the length of my pinky may have some miniscule effect on the number of my offspring. But, if the effect is too low, it simply will not have an effect no matter how many millions of generations go by; the randomness of life will swamp it out. To put it in information theory terms, the signal would be indistinguishable from the noise.

If you make the change in outcome 0.3%, I'm showing that it takes 1,500 generations for for the offspring of the starting 1% subpopulation to reach 50% of the total population. That is all things being equal, etc., etc., but still not very long in evolutionary terms. The thing about evolution is that it acts on gene frequencies in populations. That allows the effectiveness of very minor changes in genetic fitness to be assayed over time. And the larger the population, the more precise the assay is.
So are there any hybrid flash vendors still standing? Tintri I guess.

I hope it worked out well for you Dan.
>Or you can say absolutely no personal communications using the computer you use for 8 hours a day

Exactly. It's a company resource. Most people seem to have / can afford a mobile device with cel/Wifi connectivity. Why should you feel so privileged to go to reddit, Gmail, Box, etc. on a bank network?
These are just some of the ways that Google tracks you around the web
The question is whether it doesn't just mean that new icons are created - or old ones repurposed.
this seems like a red herring or something... are 'calls for genocide' actually a thing worth caring about? is there a legitimate possibility that, say, bob goes on twitter and says 'kill all romanians!' and suddenly there's a genocide of romanians? it's doesn't make sense.

i mean, i get that it's attempting to appeal to one's aversion to a very bad idea, but random bob can't cause a genocide. a strong dictatorship a la hitler or stalin on the other hand... well, that's a much bigger problem than trying to regulate mean words.
Criminalizing speech isn't inherently fascist. It's not really new, either. Most liberal democracies have anti-hate-speech laws and they've never lead to anything resembling fascism.

(Besides, banning libel and true threats is also criminalization of speech. That's not fascism, is it?)
You'll be happy to know that:

[in 2016] the FEC Charged 78 parties in cases involving trading on the basis of inside information.

A number of these cases involved complex insider trading rings which were cracked by Enforcement’s innovative uses of data and analytics to spot suspicious trading.

For example, brought insider trading cases against:

- two hedge fund managers and their source, who was a former employee of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration

- a former Goldman Sachs employee

- a former senior employee at Puma Biotechnology Inc.

https://www.sec.gov/news/pressrelease/2016-212.html
Ask HN: ELI5 how a post I made on HN is resulting in ads targeting me?
I made a comment here on HN about shoes, mezlan shoes, and now I’m seeing tons of ads in my normal browsing activity for mezlan shoes.

Fuck this. And while I do love the shoes, I’m pissed off at HN for enabling this behavior.

How do I stop it? And HN @dang shame on you.
That term 'hate speech' - what does it actually mean?

This seems like another assault on free speech to me and there is a danger in limiting the online Overton Window to a massive bland snooze fest.

The current joy of the internet is being able to read all sorts of perspectives from 'sensible' to radical and I really hope that continues...I worry for all the citizen journalists and investigators who have been so magnificent in the current western 'glasnost' era online...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
> We are not average computer users.

Exactly.

The "average" computer user may not notice the difference, but servers running Intel processors are used by businesses, hospitals, government, the military, cloud providers, and on and on. Often these organisations are thrashing this infrastructure to within an inch of its life.

Until fairly recently I was consulting and, no exaggeration, one of my former clients: if their SQL Server host takes a 15%, never mind a 30%, performance hit, they're screwed.

I personally have just been the prime mover in the procurement of a server costing £25k with a 3 year support contract, pretty carefully specced according to performance. And you're telling me I should be OK with that machine taking a 30% performance hit below what we specced? No way.

EDIT: Sorry, original version of last sentence was a bit out of order - the tone of that release got under my skin a bit.
If it's not in your self-interest what's the problem? They're certainly not immigrating for your benefit.
Cortex-A processor may have a similar speculative execution kernel memory issue
Meltdown and Spectre: Bugs in modern computers leak passwords and sensitive data
Imagine if they spent that money on infrastructure upgrades instead of on ads
Buy bitcoin on Coinbase, transfer that to poloniex, then buy ripple using bitcoin on poloniex.
It's just bad writing. There's a way to make the point you're trying to make without directly confronting someone about their childhood and their parents. "Well actually" is a super useful, easy way to make points on a message board, but there are things we should be extra carefully not to well-actually.
Inciting violence is already illegal. Additionally, some protected classes are ideas (religion, usually implemented as being a member of a major religion) rather than intrinsic values (which I believe do deserve some degree of protection).

The protection of religion comes from sectarian violence, but this is better covered by other laws, and disliking a particular spiritual belief is no different from disliking any other belief.

You're free to call me a taig and papist, show Sinead O'Connor ripping up a picture of the pope, or exhibit Serrano's 'Piss Christ'. I'm free to laugh, realise that O'Connor was making an incredibly accurate complaint about the church's abuses, and pay for tickets (Serrano's an excellent photographer, I've not seen his sculpture first hand) accordingly.
I am from Iran and have actively participated and watched these protests. If anyone has any questions about current situation in Iran, I can report from what I have seen.

I will write my take from this article in 1-2 hours. Right now I am not in situation to write. But I have to mention Iran current political system does not have reformist. Most reformists suppressed in first years of revolution. The only trustworthy reformist remaining was Mir Hossein Mosavi. But he has been in house arrest for last 5 year. People (like myself) hate these reformist because that is only a show. Saying they are reformist is just like saying Dianne Feinstein is a reformist. They are ceneter’ist whom benefit from current situation and do not care about people. And their reformist figures is just to use and get peoples vote. Other than one (yes, from 150 reformist in Iran congress, only one has defended people) no of those reformist do care or participate in political discussions.
Ideally, anything that requires maintenance and upgrades is handled by a private company. In Stockholm, for example, the publicly-owned company only provides dark fiber. All of the active equipment (switches, routers, etc.) is provided by private companies.
Holy Mackrel! This is insane, I've trusted NYT for so long for news even during the election. I always wonder if I am on the wrong side of history based on the news I read
‘Fake News’: Wide Reach but Little Impact, Study Suggests
I completely agree. There are a few contributing factors, none of which are unsolvable. But it seems like the way to solve it is to essentially fork HN.

The current plan is to create a "mirror" of HN's front page, but with a smaller community. You'll be bale to keep your HN name, because you won't be allowed to use someone's existing HN name on the new site unless you claim it.

Then, we'll need content. This was the secret sauce in the early HN days. The sole reason for people to come to the new site would be good conversation, and I think recruiting a few of the writers from HN would be enough to bootstrap it. Part of HN's early success was that pg actually participated in HN. Whereas the current mod team just shows up to beat us over the head and little else.

If you want to help plan this out, contact me (email's in profile). I think we have a shot at this. Some past thoughts on the topic:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16064078

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16044466

Getting away from the heavy-handed moderation will be the best part. Comments will be free to flow into tangents, as long as they're substantive.
This feels pretty deceptive when the most relevant competitor, amd, is not susceptible...
You are confusing technology, defined as "the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes", with smartphone/OS design choices taken by companies that want to create addiction in users.
Euler and Gauss are (for now, at least) in my opinion the greatest mathematicians of the past two millenia (1000-1999, 2000-). Al-Khawarizmi takes the cake for the millennium before that. Then it's Euclid all the way back ;)
> note that they simply won't reply to you if they get busy or don't feel like it.

That is misleading. We reply to almost all emails, and whenever we don't there is a specific reason. "Not feeling like it" doesn't enter into it. It is true that we sometimes get busy, but the email replies which that delays are the ones that require some careful thought. Straightforward issues like an IP blockage are easier to take care of right away.

Since you've repeatedly expressed upsetness that you haven't gotten a response to every email you've sent us—how many of those have there been?—and even pasted the texts of email correspondence into HN threads, I have to assume that this feeling is carrying into the comments that you're posting here. That's not ok, first because it leads to offtopic and unsubstantive posts, and now because you're misleading other users by giving them answers that carry an edge from your own unrelated experience. Please don't do that.
That does not make sense whatsoever. They should have just hidden the tweet then. They have built technology for that - I have seen some tweets that got banned because of the NetzDG. The law is very controversal and is making waves in germany. This article just chose a terribly example - but then again thats propably iconic for most of the fears about this law.
Jon von Tetzchner, the remaining co-founder of Opera (the other one, Geir Ivarsøy, has passed away, RIP) has now launched another browser, called Vivaldi. It's also based on Chromium, so Chrome extensions are compatible with it. And it's probably what Opera would've become...
Yeah, as someone who works in healthcare IT, what we call "insurance" in the US for healthcare in no way resembles a proper insurance model. It's heavily slanted in favor of the insurer, who have zero hesitation kicking people out of the pool, despite having accounted for their costs in their actuarial tables. Despite the fact that the risk of having condition X in the population doesn't change, you're subject to limitations and/or outright rejection should you choose to use that free market you seem so fond of. You can equally be kicked out of that pool despite having made that sacrifice you describe.

For example, health insurers have been found to have done such things as kick cancer patients off insurance as a pre-existing condition, based on previous general practitioner visits. "Oh, we, and you, didn't know it was cancer at the time, you were just sick. But since you were sick shortly after getting insurance, you most likely already had cancer. Therefore it was a pre-existing condition, you didn't disclose it, whether or not you knew about it, and we are terminating your coverage back to the first physician visit about your illness".

Or "We are refusing to cover the costs of the ambulance/air ambulance ride that ferried you to the trauma center after your MVA, because that ride wasn't pre-approved by a call to the insurer".

Both of the above examples happened. I'm not sure what should have happened in either case, but I'm pretty sure in the latter it wasn't, "Hello, Blue Cross? This is John, I'm a paramedic working on one of your patients who was hit by a truck. We would like to fly him to the hospital due to his extensive multisystem trauma but we need your approval. His name? Hang on, let me find his wallet. No, that's Smythe, S-M-Y-T-H-E, sorry, it's a bit loud with the jaws of life in the background... Yes, I can hold for a nurse consult..."

Health insurance in the US is amortization of costs, and has little to do with risk pooling and actuarials.
> This is deceptive. It immediately mentions AMD to give the impression that AMD also suffer from the problem.

It looks like (some?) AMD processors might be affected as well: "These vulnerabilities affect many CPUs, including those from AMD, ARM, and Intel, as well as the devices and operating systems running them."[1]

[1] https://security.googleblog.com/2018/01/todays-cpu-vulnerabi...
There are already laws against speech that incites violence as well as laws against violence, no?
Sorry, here's reality for you. A lot of unpleasant, dangerous, and clearly wrong ideas are present outside your filter bubble. Being aware of them may be also unpleasant and dangerous, but pretending they do not exist, and are not being voiced, is delusional. Choose your poison.
> Admits responsibility and says their current course of action

And specifically avoids mentioning that reading data is possible:

> Intel believes these exploits do not have the potential to corrupt, modify or delete data.

That's not taking responsibility. That's downplaying that the flaw exists.

A flaw their key competitor doesn't have, but they go on to mention several times just after they say things like " with many different vendors’ processors and operating systems — are susceptible to these exploits."

The entire thing has been written to be misleading. To pretend that the bug doesn't exist, and that AMD have it too, which is false.
You're doing mixed reality wrong
> They have until Intel ships a microcode fix

Sounds like microcode fix isn't possible.
They're rebooting to patch the host, not your VM.