skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Women should start up their own companies and show men how to do it better. They can make a company that pursues financial rewards and also balances humanity, compassion, does not seek to enrich itself by hurting others.

The fact that corporations tend not to treat employees as multifaceted human beings does not strike me as a gender issue. In fact none of the feminist items that I've heard since the late 80s strike me as gender issues. Instead, it seems to me that in complaining, feminists ignore the fact that all the same things happen to men too. Most men are not in power. We get passed up for promotion. We get ignored in meetings. We don't get treated like multifaceted human beings and aren't payed what we're worth -- in our opinion.

Roughly 90% of mechanical engineers are men. Roughly 90% of the people in prison are men. If a feminist is going to insist that one is the result of sexism and the other is not, then feminism is going to have serious trust issues in the near future.

It's common these days for activists coming out of humanities departments to deconstruct some area of enterprise, like video games, according to the ontology of feminism. These people, feminists, have been giving themselves a bad reputation for nonsense for many years now. It's difficult to take much of what they say seriously anymore.

Of course Silicon Valley culture is toxic. People are driven to move here not because of a strange affinity for the soul of the machine; but to make money. It seems as if everyone talks the same way, and has the same bland ideas. I'm sure that it's not really that bad, but it seems that way from what we hear on line and off line. Some of the corporate world is invigorating, especially start ups, and I truly enjoyed PG's essays that talked about viaweb and fixing bugs with the customer on the phone. But much of corporate structure is so empty and even deceptive, it pisses me off.

Women are deliberate thinkers. They ruminate on important decisions. In my opinion women should stop blaming other people and take up their own agency, and show us how to do it better. Lead by example. Not as an employee: you'll have to start your own company. To be blunt I believe such an exercise will be humbling for the women who try it. But there's no reason companies can't be structured and run much better by being run by women. There must already be examples out there.
Tech culture may be considered toxic, in comparison to 90% of other industries it's a utopia.
It’s all shit coins now. Block chain will probably come back someday but it’s all interconnected and will probably be worth nothing after the crash.
You'd use a browser extension, scoped to requests of sites you're interested in, and stream your data back to your infrastructure for processing. You're limited only by your install base and your ingest infrastructure.

Recap [1] does this to extract PACER court documents that are public domain, but access is restricted due to draconian public policy.

[1] https://free.law/recap/
You can't base recycling decisions only on what's "cost effective" while not considering revising the fees people pay to dispose of household. Generating trash isn't supposed to be inherently costless, and it really shouldn't be.

Even glass has become questionable in terms of recycling economics[0] based on current fees, partially because Americans generally fail to clean the containers properly.

"It's cheaper to dump it in a landfill" is frankly, a lame approach that ignores the environmental costs and short-sightedness of creating more landfills. Do you want to live on a landfill, or next to one? They're basically a toxic waste dump.

The obvious answer is to do what other countries do: charge a lot for disposal of non-recycleable/non-compostable garbage, charge much less for recycling properly (and that includes cleaning and sorting), and use the fees from the garbage to subsidize the cost of recycling. This results in 1) less waste in landfills 2) more recycling 3) less pollution and 4) less use of non-renewable resources.

[0] http://www.waste360.com/glass/focusing-economics-glass-recyc...
This is a bit dubious. What if I paint the tape in Monopoly, artificially raising the price of Mediterranean Avenue? Even if we were playing Monpoly for money, it's kind of hard to see how this would be "illegal" (as in, prosecutable given current law).
The well defined Fortune 500 culture prevents identity politics from coming into play - the nebulous SV culture does not, there is no line other than 'be yourself' so the out of line issues can violate peoples concept of self, which is clearly bad, and therefor the punishments must be harsh.

To explain further - in F500 Culture, only a narrow band of self expression is possible - but what is and isnt is clearly defined - in SV Culture, a much wider band is acceptable - but the unacceptable is much less clearly defined.
> Obama administration basically stopped trying to capture people alive to interrogate them and instead just sent drone based missiles to just kill anyone suspected of terrorism.

Not only that but after receiving a Nobel Peace Prize he proceeded to engage in drone warfare. Just in 2016 he dropped more then 20k bombs, in countries which we were not even at war with. Many in Africa. It was surprising how little flak he got for it. Indeed when he was elected in 2008 he got the best marketer of year award http://adage.com/article/moy-2008/obama-wins-ad-age-s-market... and he presented a great image.

> Which is worse: torture or killing?

It is kind of a false choice. But let's go with it, Obama effectively picked both. Anyone remember how he promised to close Guantanamo? Well it is still open. He picked both killing and continued torture. Yet people still idolize him and think he was so great. Again, that's the power of propaganda and marketing at work, AdAge's award was very much on point, better then Coke, Nike and Apple.
This comment breaks the site guidelines in lots of ways: name-calling, snark, using uppercase for emphasis. You can't comment like that anywhere on HN, and certainly not in this thread which was bound to teeter on the abyss from the beginning.

Please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and do a better job of following them.
A coding error led to $30M in ethereum being stolen (2017)
> We have firsthand numbers from companies like Google; after years of concerted effort to recruit and retain women, they just hit 20%.

Is it possible that a "concerted effort to recruit and retain women" perhaps does more harm than good? Med schools in this country are now very nearly 50/50[1] and law schools are very slightly over 50% female[2]. Did medicine and law achieve this by the same type of concerted effort we've seen in tech? I honestly don't know the answer to that but I think it's an interesting question.

I do feel though that we treat females who are doctors as simply doctors (and likewise for lawyers), not female doctors whereas in tech we have a habit of treating them like female developers instead of developers (and I'm referring to when that's done with the best intentions such as female-only hackathons, bootcamps, and meetups).

[1] https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/medical-school-gra...

[2] https://www.enjuris.com/students/ranking-universities.html
Give them a giant beach ball to bounce around the crowd
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments in this thread? and not post them to HN in general?
Yes. People don't want to know how the sausage is made, they don't want to break the law, they want to feel good. Delegating to some place outside the legal jurisdictions and and away from their backyards lets them do that.

You'd be surprised how many people condone and support it. Even people who on the surface would be opposed to it, they'd vote against if presented in elections. If it happened in the next town over, they might call the politicians. But if they have a way of denying that it is happening at all, they'd be happy to not ask questions and turn the other way.
Yeah which is going to cause the next crash as more and more people cash out via Bitcoin.
I'm not sure I see any real change in the status of asymptotic safety. It's a hypothesis. Proving it directly is next to impossible. (Except in spacetime dimension <= 3, when the theory is topological, making the assertion a triviality.) Testing it experimentally is unlikely; the constraints it implies are pretty weak. Nonetheless there are some people working on it, and while their ideas have some merit, they haven't yet caused the physics world to pay drastically more attention.

Also, it's unwarranted hype to call asymptotic safety 'an old theory of everything'. It's explicitly not a theory of everything. It's only about gravity. Couple it to the Standard Model, and you still have a theory which breaks down at the hypercharge and Higgs Landau poles.
Dealing with people who don't register their cars seems like a problem that should be reasonably solvable, if enough people are pissed off by it.

Authorize police to issue tickets to cars with expired out of state registration. Make the tickets dismissible if you have lived in Nevada less than whatever the grace period is they give for new residents to register and you get the car registered in time. Make it so the dismissal happens automatically upon registration. Provide a way for officers to quickly check to see if a car already has a pending ticket for this so that a given car only gets ticketed once.

There should not be many people who are living in Nevada and driving around Nevada with expired out of state registration and are not trying to cheat. About the only such people that come to mind are people who moved to Nevada near when their registration was going to expire in their old state, so did not renew it, and are still in the grace period for registration in Nevada.

Some of those people will have the slight hassle of receiving one ticket, but since they are not trying to cheat, and therefore are going to register by the deadline anyway they don't have to do anything about it. It will automatically go away when they register.

The above should catch a lot of the cases, especially if police are authorized to pull over people to issue these tickets, as opposed to just allowing them to issue these tickets to parked cars they come across or issue them incidentally during pull overs for other issues.

Of course there might be people who decide to fake it. In many states the indication of current registration is just a sticker with year of expiration on it stuck onto the license plate. It would not take a master forger to make a fake sticker. (Heck, if someone's home state is sufficiently cheaper for registration, they might even not let their home state they have left, and keep registering their car there!).

It would be going too far to try to crack down on non-expired out of state plates directly, because a large number of those are going to be visitors, not residents (especially for a state like Nevada that has a large number of automobile tourists visiting).

To deal with the people who fake it (or keep registering in their old state), they would probably have to limit it to checking only when they pull someone over for some other violation like speeding or drunk driving where they can check ID. Unless the driver has kept a current (or fake current) out of state driver's license matching their out of state plates with them, the jig will be up. Make it so that these people get hit with a very large fine.
How would that going to work? The article says they're setting up a nonprofit company. Can't spin that off and sell it.
Other countries hospitals are doing just fine.
Many in crypto consider Ripple king sh*tcoin and I and many others don't even consider it cryptocurrency.

"A defining feature of a cryptocurrency, and arguably its most endearing allure, is its organic nature; it is not issued by any central authority, rendering it theoretically immune to government interference or manipulation."
This helps, but doesn't say what the theory says gravity will do at higher energy levels.

To me it seems to imply gravity will get weaker at higher energies? Something about that makes me feel like it violates conservation of energy, so maybe that's not it.
Why would anyone buy a Tether? Are people getting into cryptocurrencies really that clueless? I can see the idea behind bitcoin, that somehow it can hold value due to its inherent scarcity and high demand. But if the Tether supply is unlimited and controlled by a single company, how could anyone possibly believe it would hold its value?
The Post (2017)
> But I doubt that law has actually resulted in companies spending significant additional staff time minimizing logs they didn't really mean to be keeping int the first place. It is not a trivial operation.

This is Germany – the place where the requirement for websites to contain a working contact address in the real world is enforced not through law, but through people just suing every website owner whose site doesn’t have an imprint.

The ISP is only keeping as much as absolutely necessary, because every bit more would be an unnecessary legal liability. Personal data is a liability, not an asset.

Of course, there’s also companies with different viewpoints, but this one doesn’t keep any more than absolutely necessary.
How do you purchase bitcoins using tethers? What exchange will do that?
A rich man desires a simple life. A poor man a rich life. There is little sense chasing to play in a game you can never win.
These Weeks in Firefox: Issue 30
Small point that I think FB's snapchat clone was called "Poke".

Also XMPP sucked when it came to mobile devices - maybe the right answer was to have a RFC for an improvement to the standard rather than create environments outside of it, but I can see a reasonable argument for biasing towards development speed.

Google kept XMPP support the longest - I think they closed it when everyone else was closed and the others were using Google's remaining XMPP support to farm over Google users while not allowing Google access to do the same. It's a problem with incentives - there was a time when cross service compatibility was important.
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. That's against the spirit and the rules of the site, regardless of ideology.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Full population. You do realize that Obama had the exact same ban in place and there was no protest anywhere?

Please downvoted away (I've been shadow banned for just this before) but this is a fact.
I could design such a system overnight. Starting tomorrow instead of paying for medical care the US Medicare and Medicaid programs will simply cut a check to the people who they were previously funding care for. Then those people may choose to spend the money on anything they wish, healthcare or otherwise. The days of not being able to price shop are over, competition will drop prices through the floor.

The hospital can try to be as evil as they want, but their ability to do so in a market that has actual price and service competition will make it very difficult to do so.
Hopefully this fixes the text in the GMAT Prep app.
People will go to jail for this. I don’t know quite what they were thinking.
And another dumb questions:

Is possible to convert to rationals in calculations?

So if I do:

1/3 + 4 + sum / total it record values properly?
Tether is 1/400 of the cryptocurrency market cap. Meaning "only" 1/400 of the money would be lost if Tether does an "exit scam" like Bitconnect did. Oh, and by the way, Bitconnect was larger than Tether.

To put things in context, the MtGox heist was worth about 1/20 of the market. However, back then Bitcoin was pretty much the only cryptocurrency and it was still just a technological curiosity. If Bitcoin could be "hacked" at this level, then people didn't really have a choice than think that maybe this technology isn't all that great, and may actually disappear.

I don't think the market would crash for 2 years straight again if $40 billion in cryptocurrency were stolen tomorrow. It would take a LOT to take down the whole market for good.

Even if you had events such as world's governments uniting to ban all cryptocurrency exchanges, which is highly unlikely (see Belarus announcing to make crypto tax-free today), it would still make crash the market for 2-3 years, until people figure out how to get around those regulations with decentralized exchanges.
I've had good luck with Alpine Linux:

https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/Raspberry_Pi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2_L71lFItk
This was guaranteed to produce an off-topic flamewar, one which HN has already litigated to death and well into zombieland. Please don't do that here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Where do you draw the line? If torture is acceptable in some circumstances, why isn't it in others? If torturing a car thief is ok, why not in a random stop-and-frisk?
>rendering it theoretically immune to government interference or manipulation."

Which is hilariously naive. Governments can manipulate markets with their orders-of-a-magnitude more capital and power. They can set up mining farms, research better methods, or pull a South Korea and straight up make cryptocurrecy illegal.

Also, crypto is hardly the anarchist nirvana people think it is. It's been proven that it's used for buying drugs and illegal weapons... but also human beings.

http://humantraffickingsearch.org/bitcoin-fuels-the-human-tr...

https://www.coindesk.com/vatican-address-highlight-bitcoin-u...

http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/08/16/in-a-step-toward-fightin...
Yes, they are THAT clueless. This is “Boiler Room” x 1,000
In the US there are ~0 rules about invoices. I'm in the middle of implementing EU-compliant invoices for a US-based SaaS offering and boy, y'all need to chill about all this.

Launching the actual product was easy. Complying with EU rules has been the nightmare.
Why not set a forward filter based on the subject on your end?

Been doing that for years...
we are witnessing the birth of something completely new here: The market that was too dumb to even realise that it should crash.

It's not so completely new. There was this old Warner Bros. cartoon trope about characters floating in defiance of the law of gravity, because they, "never studied law." (Though, perhaps Wile E. Coyote running halfway across the rift before he realizes he should fall might be more apt.)
This veers way off topic, guarantees a flamewar, and is nothing that HN hasn't gone over dozens of times by now. Please don't wreak this kind of damage here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> So then is AAPL stock a shitcoin because it was 100% pre-mined (the founders started with 100% of the equity)? That logic make no sense.

Of course not. Judging by the fact 75% of the top 20 coins on CMC are premined, the only people who have an issue with founders premining the coin are delusional.

Even if you did want to launch a coin with no premine in today's market, due to the insane amount of interest in cryptocurrency, it's virtually impossible for founders to mine their own coin en masse (per Satoshi). In the absence of an explicit premine, industrial scale miners effectively "premine" the coin in lieu of the founders premining the coin.

And typically, coins that claim they aren't premined have a checkered history of ninjamining or cripplemining or instamining etc; while the founders tout "no premine" to noobs, in reality they just played games to get around the (pointless) stigma of it.
That's an interesting narrative but, again, how do you explain nobody is complaining about these apparent frequent and wanton harsh punishments and firings? My guess is because nothing of the sort really happens, statistically speaking.
> Its easy enough to say "don't comment on a coworkers physical appearance" or something equally stupid, but "any non-zero subset" offended by any particular behavior doesn't seem reasonable.

Maybe it isn't, but it's a pretty good yardstick to hold things up to. If you can actually say that no reasonable person would be offended by something you want to say, then say it. If you're not sure, or maybe can think of a few people who might be offended, then you can make a choice. If you still decide to say it, and then someone comes to you and says they were offended, you'll probably want to apologize. Or not; that's also up to you.

At the end of the day it's about recognizing that the things you say and do can affect people in different ways, and being thoughtful about that.
This is good but I think there is some parallel between Bitcoin bubble and the unicorn building frenzy a few years back. Maybe they should make a video about that too!
I don't agree with your interpretation of the memo, however, you definitely touch on a challenging point -- what was actually being said?

I don't entirely agree with this article I found either, it actually skews more to your point of view, however it was quite interesting.

The author's description of the challenge the Damor memo touched upon:

"What we are dealing with here is the problem of how we might offer possible explanations for what is going on, while at the same time keeping in mind the impact those explanations might have on the people and phenomena we are trying to explain. It is important to understand this problem, so I will explain it here. Technically, this is called “the problem of the double hermeneutic”. A hermeneutic refers to a method or system of interpretation. In psychology and the social sciences, hermeneutics refers to the ways people develop systems of meaning and justification that allow them to make sense out of the world."

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theory-knowledge/201708...

That makes sense you would find that notion demeaning. I do as well. As I said to someone else, if you took offense (which wasn't intended) from my comment, I'm sure you can understand why many people would take offense from Damor's memo :).
I worked as a high school teacher, a college instructor (PhD student with teaching responsibilities), and in local government before becoming a software engineer, and I have to say that my experience does not much what you've reported at all. My coworkers in tech companies have always gotten away with expressing more or less whatever they want. This has been my experience in start-ups, mid-sized companies, and big tech cos.
This is an interesting point, until now I thought blockchains were only useful for decentralisers, which in turn were only useful for people who wanted something like censorship resistance.

But here is a different use-case -- keep records well. Traditional systems are actually pretty bad because of the incentives. My bank statements for example are often very confusing, and online data only goes back 18 months, because the bank has little incentive to do better.

And that is in a relatively benign market. Title deeds, and the kind of loan documentation you are talking about create positive incentives for abuse.
> ..it's worth thinking about how the particular abstraction mechanisms used in software impact a new contributor's productivity, vs. the productivity of someone more familiar with the codebase, especially for projects that are developed in the open, or with high developer turnover.

Oh yes. I work on this[1], and require very little inducement to talk about it[2].

[1] http://akkartik.name/about

[2] For example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743#13570092
Yeah the rumors sound pretty bad.

I meant more like, Uber is one particular example (of which there are many) of tech companies or startups where the behavior of their employees is clearly not "docile."

I suppose you could use, perhaps, Google or Github (I'm making some assumptions about what you mean so forgive me) as examples of "docile" tech employees.
Machine Learning for Question and Answer Understanding at Quora
Don't have any points to add that haven't been mentioned, but wanted to say I think the piece was well written.