skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This seems to be a personal or philosophical stance of yours, I'm talking specifically about legal requirements of GDPR. Those are different than the legal requirements of the cookie law.

As far as the tracking tool knowing nothing that the site doesn't already know, in real time that is true, but the GDPR addresses your site's 'memory' and in that case it is obviously false - which is actually sort of the whole purpose of the logging tool isn't it?

So, as an easy to understand example, in my current work at a telecom we have a map where the user can add in address information and find if there is any outage happening in their area.

We were logging the addresses entered.
For GDPR reasons we removed these addresses from the log. We have set up temporary logging of the addresses that raise certain kinds of errors so that we can examine those addresses later - this is a reasonable usage and we inform the user 'We may save the addresses you enter here for a short time for the purposes of improving the performance of the application' (not exact message).

The tracking tool would retain the data we have decided not to retain, admittedly in a more difficult to extract format, but the GDPR does not make allowances for that and really it would be silly if they did.

Furthermore, for our site and service (and for any services that could be argued that people need to use) I believe stating if you're not okay with us keeping your data don't use the site would run into non-GDPR legal problems but would also be contrary to GDPR requirements and is as such a no-go for anyone wanting to remain in business - and anyway it would probably piss off customers.

I could give other examples, but as I said your argument seems based on philosophical grounds that I believe if they were accepted by a European court would render the GDPR effectively useless, and as such I doubt it would be accepted.
Finally people are waking up to this.

Summary of Tether for the uninformed:

1. Their terms state that they owe you nothing in exchange for Tethers you hold

2. This effectively means Tether is backed by nothing. The 1:1 peg with USD is a total farce

Tether must and does at all times reserve the right to refuse to issue or redeem Tether Tokens...

No Representations & Warranties by Tether: Tether makes no representations, warranties, or guarantees to you of any kind. The Site and the Services are offered strictly on an as-is, where-is basis and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, are offered without any representation as to merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.

What this means:

Tether can print 1 billion Tethers, buy up 1 billion Bitcoin, and then cash out into dollars. In other words, they have engineered a way to more or less counterfeit U.S. dollars by counterfeiting cryptocurrency.

I hope they go down hard.
A physical entity exists if and only if it is the actual cause of something else
> white, male, nerds who’ve dropped out of Harvard or Stanford,"

Literally 99% of white, male, nerds don't fit this description. Every day in Silicon Valley people show favoritism to individuals that, for purely economic reasons, got into Stanford or Harvard.

Investors that went to Stanford invest in founders that went to Stanford because their own investors (LPs) that also went to Stanford will favor them.

This is literally racist because it's a bias against socioeconomically disadvantaged people, of which people of color are disproportionately represented. And yet, this bias is openly accepted in Silicon Valley and even celebrated!

Looking at most investor bio pages, you would think the 99% would have almost nothing to contribute: https://www.ycombinator.com/people/

The 99% need to start a social movement in Silicon Valley to reform it into the semi-utopian meritocracy we all wish it was. We should demand an end to socioeconomic discrimination, which will enable people of all walks of life to lift themselves out of the shadows, turning Silicon Valley into the cross section of society it rightfully ought to be.

We should be calling for investors, universities, and companies in Silicon Valley to move to blind admissions and interview processes, and an end to all forms of "culture" testing.

We should call for #EqualOpportunity.
Absolutely brutal. First were the Japanese and now the Chinese with that kind of insane work environment. Nothing interesting or creative will comes out of it, just copycats of US companies.
If these tethers turn out to be impossible to trade for dollars, then the best way of getting out of them would be buying BTC, right?

Fun times...
Are you ready for a great counterexample to your "knowledgeable" friend's claim?

Look at Ethereum on CoinMarketcap.com.

Next, find Counterparty.io on CMC. You'll have to scroll to page 2.

What you'll notice is Ethereum is worth over $100,000,000,000 today while Counterparty is worth about $100,000,000. It's a difference of 1000X.

Importantly, Counterparty wasn't premined whatsoever (wow!!11). Conversely, 70%+ of all ETH which will ever exist was explicitly premined by the Ethereum Foundation and investors in the Ethereum ICO. At this point, in retrospect it would've been WAY better for the founders of Counterparty to premine the coin and ICO it to smithereens. At least then they'd have millions in capital to hire people with, while the founders would be heavily vested in the coin.

But this didn't happen, and since then we've learned real world investors don't care at all about fairness in coin distribution. It isn't like any coin, to include Bitcoin, is "fairly distributed" by any reasonable definition of fair. Something like 90% of all BTC is controlled by less than 10% of all Bitcoin holders, meanwhile billions of people don't own any BTC whatsoever.

Of the top 10 coins on CMC, 70% are premined: Ethereum, Ripple, Cardano, NEM, Neo, Stellar and IOTA. Of the top 20 coins, 75% are premined.

IMO the only conclusion we can draw from this is cryptocurrencies are de facto bearer share companies, and investors in these companies actively seek out coins where the founders of the company scoop up a good amount of the pseudo-equity for themselves. It vests the founders in the project, and gives them a source of funding, if indirectly.

While I for one really do wish your "knowledgeable" friend was correct, alas.
Yes. This type of innovation — where you can demonstrate evolution on an existing product class — is very much in our wheelhouse.

And, yeah, FDA recently increased the range of condom sizes they would accept, thus enabling the kind of thing you’re proposing.
I think there are studies that showed if children received messaging about their "inferiority" (in one sense or another) before taking a test, they did worse.
[Edit: Ah! The term is "Stereotype Threat": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat]

This article was more about the effect of teacher bias in education, however I think there is a study showing bias having a cognitive effect on how students perform.

http://time.com/3705454/teachers-biases-girls-education/

"The impact of unconscious teacher bias is long understood and well-documented. This new research confirms decades of work done by Myra and David Sadker and Karen R. Zittleman. Through thousands of hours of classroom observations, the Sadkers and Zittleman identified specific ways in which implicit and stereotypical ideas about gender govern classroom dynamics. They, as others have, found that teachers spend up to two thirds of their time talking to male students; they also are more likely to interrupt girls but allow boys to talk over them. Teachers also tend to acknowledge girls but praise and encourage boys. They spend more time prompting boys to seek deeper answers while rewarding girls for being quiet. Boys are also more frequently called to the front of the class for demonstrations. When teachers ask questions, they direct their gaze towards boys more often, especially when the questions are open-ended. Biases such as these are at the root of why the United States has one of the world’s largest gender gaps in math and science performance. Until they view their videotaped interactions, teachers believe they are being balanced in their exchanges.

The two reports released last week were focused on girls. However, the same biases have been implicated in teachers unconsciously undermining boys’ interest in the arts and language, enabling harmful gender gaps in self-regulation, and tacitly accepting certain male students’ propensity to believe that studying is “for girls” – all factors that contribute to boys’ lower academic performance."
I forgot where I read it, maybe on the Southern Poverty Law Center's site, but I could be wrong, but they were talking about a similar thing -- how to convince people to change their mind. The example was about how to change people's opinion in regard to transgender people. The idea was similar -- beating them on the head with 140-character sarcastic blurbs, showing stats and facts, insulting etc, just doesn't work. What works is to talk to them face to face and to present a case of one particular individual, not a hypothetical one but one whose name is John or Jane and how they are struggling and how they face hate and discrimination and how it makes them feel.
Well that’s silly, but you also chose to ignore the other link.
It's not just that this is illegal and immoral (which is the most important point) it's also that the perpetrator has sacrificed the interests of the corporation to his (or her) own appetites. Not something the law is going to shape itself to tolerate, or ought to.
All of this can be true at once—I have relatives who hold all of these positions. Like the US, China is a big country, with folks on all sides of the political spectrum.

(the following is based on personal experience so YMMV) If anything, they have a longer term perspective on history. It's an ancient civilization and they have seen it all. There are those who think it's inevitable that China will eventually be on top once again, but generally, even they are pretty humble going about it and eager to learn from Westerners and imitate what works (sometimes resulting in IP violations or cargo culting).
To complement what you said, this has already happened with MtGOX in 2013. The price rise in Bitcoin up to $1000 was largely due to trading bots in MtGOX who purchased bitcoin with fake money. When MtGOX finally broke we say prices exploding inside it, as people desperately tried to cash out, and plummeting everywhere else.
I would encourage it. LLVM IR is fairly easy to understand. One of my first forays into rustc was looking at the IR for iterators to see why one version was show (turned out to be that the bounds on the index variable couldn't proven tight enough to eliminate the bounds check, iirc).

Try writing the same simple code as D and compare the two IR representations.

And no matter how much I slag on rust being difficult, the community is really good about helping and teaching.
Ha, thanks for reminding me of Planet Source Code. I remember winning a Superior Code Award for a submission I made on there when I was a teenager and feeling incredibly proud. I even included it on my resume when applying for internships during college.
My naive answer, but I'd think that the heavy lifting for bundlers like this lies mostly in the external packages that parse and modify the code (Babel, uglify, postcss, etc). The core work of the bundler to wrangle which dependencies to pass to those external libraries probably isn't a performance bottleneck, surely?
The anti-FUD version of how crypto market manipulation really works
I'm focused more on infrastructure than software engineering lately: AWS/CloudFormation, but I still write some Python/NodeJS/Bash, mostly infrastructure glue rather than actual apps.

The key to keeping yourself relevant is understanding the big picture, and learning stuff that is outside your area of expertise. For example, I started as a network engineer, but got into UNIX because I wanted to know how the provisioning systems worked that ran on Sun boxes. Then I moved into UNIX sysadmin work, and I found that I could run circles around most sysadmins because I understood how the network functioned and could troubleshoot beyond a single box (hint: it's (almost) always a DNS problem... :) After you've stood up a few complete datacenters or soup to nuts web infrastructure for a few medium sized companies, you move into architecture, but you need to keep yourself relevant and current. Here is a rough timeline of what I was focused on:

1990-1994 - Novell Netware, WordPerfect Office (became Novell Groupwise)
1994-1999 - Network engineering at an ISP, got into UNIX.
1999-2005 - Solaris system administration (2001-2002 was rough and was out of work for about 9 months during the dot com crash)
2005-2008 - Linux system administration - got into storage administration and became a SAN/storage architect. Started going really deep on configuration management, CFengine, later Chef/Puppet - automate all the things!
2009-2013 - VMware and private cloud - my skills as a storage architect led me to a natural role as a VMware architect, and automated provisioning infrastructure as a service.
2013-now - public cloud/AWS.

Keep reinventing yourself, and you have to really enjoy learning new things, or you won't last long in this industry. I think that's probably true of any job, though, honestly. Would you want to see a doctor that hadn't learned anything since he left medical school? I sure wouldn't...
As a Rust-curious C++ / Qt developer, I've been following this project with a ton of interest. Will the FOSDEM talks or slides be posted online?
I think you should look up how stock dilution works, how that typically destroys share prices, etc. I would like to suggest learning how finance works, starting from Investopedia /s
Oculus Start: Technical and Financial Resources for Beginning VR Developers
Why should I trust it?
Fair point about managing versus not having emotions.

For me the following hits home for me recently

>One easy rule is that if someone says "Only talk to me about work." then the other person has to respect it. No forcing of social acceptance , no shaming the other to believe what you believe, just focus on what you were hired for.

I don't think of my company or coworkers as family. I have my life outside of the office and prefer to keep it personal and private for the most part. Likewise, I not that interested in talking about what happened in everyone's 16 hours out of the office. I am interested in discussing the problems we are facing at work and getting work done, which ironically can involve this very topic and conversation we are having right now. I want to put 8 honest hours in, not 6 honest and 2 talking about outside matters, not 8 honest and 2 talking about outside matters. What sucks is culturally I seem to be a misfit because others apparently think I am anti social. But I don't believe I am. I don't come in in the morning and say hello because I don't believe my arrival is so important that I should interrupt people that I assume are hard at work focusing and concentrating. If you're at your desk, YOU need to say hello to me as I walk in so I know I'm not interrupting you. But also not get mad if I all I say is hi and blow off any small talk. On my commute in I am thinking about what I want to accomplish within the first hour of work so I'm already focusing on doing that. Want to chit chat? Catch me at lunch.
Let's not forget that they explicitly disclaim that they have any obligation or responsibility to turn the Tethers (that you can't buy, unless of course you're one of the institutional investors supposedly giving them $100MM/day) back into USD at any point in the future.
The later authorized and issued shares are NOT considered equal to the initial class A shares. Here's a tutorial on the difference between class A shares, class B shares, and so on...

https://www.delawareinc.com/blog/change-your-companys-number...
So you're saying tech companies have vague 'cultural values' that encourage a certain degree of non-conformity and then harshly punish/fire non-conformists? That doesn't really make any sense, at least, not in the non-specific form you've put it. Right at a time of a fair bit of tech-company culture examination and critique, this particular complaint seems to come up mostly never. How do you explain that? The docility? It gets a little circular.
Your comment is just classic whataboutism. I don't doubt that there are problems with diversity and discrimination in non-tech industries, but that doesn't mean we don't have some serious problems that need to be addressed.
How do you be "highly political" on Facebook?
Well, it's a good thing they don't have anything like this in their Terms:

> "There is no contractual right or other right or legal claim against us to redeem or exchange your Tethers for money. We do not guarantee any right of redemption or exchange of Tethers by us for money. There is no guarantee against losses when you buy, trade, sell, or redeem Tethers."

Oh, wait, that's exactly what is in their Terms...
At the very least a coin should function as a coin. Over the last two weeks I evaluated the user experience of several coins based on the following steps.

1) Buy the coin on an exchange.
2) Install the wallet from the coin's official website.
3) Get a text based pass phrase or private key so that I can restore the wallet at any time from a paper backup.
4) Transfer money from the exchange to the wallet.
5) Restore my wallet on another computer using step 3 and verify money from step 4 is present.
6) Transfer some coins back to the exchange.

Ripple only passed steps 1-3. It failed for step 4, in the sense it was a bad user experience, because you find out the wallet will cost you 20 XRP which you can never get back ($40+ when I tried it). It failed step 5 because the website suddenly stopped letting you download their wallet, which is still in Beta, even if you agreed to all the popup warnings asking you to accept the risks.

Some other results...

ADA/Cardano: I tried installing their wallet 5 times on 3 different computers (macOS and Windows 10) and just got random errors or hang ups. I got one wallet to work out of 5 attempts and was never able to restore that wallet from my pass phrase.

ZEC/ZCash: The macOS GUI wallet often crashes immediately. When it didn't crash it was easier to find a "donation" address than my own public (send to) address.

PIVX: Fails step 3.

Verge: The video at the top of their website to "learn more" before installing the wallet is beyond words bad -- I couldn't bring myself to perform step 2.

NAV: Great, passed all steps. Just not sure how it will compete against Monero long term.

Monero XMR: Looks good so far. But my exchange (Binance) charges about $15 for each transfer to my wallet. Transfers for most coins cost under $1.

ARK was absolutely the best experience. Passed all steps first try and took very little time. I really loved the UX and UI.
If the person chiding you was a co-worker and not your manager then you can just tell them that you feel like they are harassing you and that you would like them to stop. If they don't stop then go complain to HR.
Automattic is a good remote company to work with https://automattic.com/work-with-us/
It would destroy the issuing company in a similar way that Tether refusing to pay out would destroy them. The analogy holds.
Their terms of service currently has this clause:

Beginning on January 1, 2018, Tether Tokens will no longer be issued to U.S. Persons.

https://tether.to/legal/

So these USDT are being issued to non-U.S. Persons. How does that work? A non-U.S. Person wires funds in their local currency to tether who applies the current exchange rate for that currency to USD then issues an equivalent number of USDT? Why would anyone do that instead of just purchasing the tether for their own currency?
This goes against the narrative and against the hedged interests of SV elites.
how come i and he don't see it?
> How fast can you get lending users to put $100 million to a billion into your non-blockchain platform?

Do you mean a stock sale? Once it's passed all SEC certifications and so on for going public and done your IPO, a company can do that in as simply as filing a form with the SEC and directing the sale of the stocks.
Does anyone know if there is an open source alternative to Sketch/Figma?
http://www.smallake.kr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Bodek-H-Sh...

It’s secondary to my point, though.

Certain types of market manipulation are encouraged by exchanges in order to provide liquidity. I wouldn’t be surprised if the major cryptocurrency exchanges engage in market manipulation. In fact, it would be trivial to do so. They have access to the order book before anyone else, and they write the matching engine.

My main point is that regulations come after the fact, not before. Until the SEC states otherwise, cryptocurrencies aren’t securities. So why would securities regulations apply?
Ah, good point, I do remember that false negative bit. That was actually the first thing that jumped out at me, because it seems incredibly implausible and ridiculous!

Here's why I think he's full of shit on that one. Reducing the false negative rate without lowering the bar is an unambiguous positive. He's asking me to believe that Google invented a better interviewing process that will save them tons of time and money in recruiting, and chose not to use it widely.

I simply can't believe it. Not with the salaries they and their competitors are paying. If they had a magic bullet to get more just-as-qualified candidates through the pipeline, they'd use it everywhere.

And in a world that loves to write articles about interviewing / click on those articles as much as this one, I think we'd have heard about it by now.

(Yes, the media coverage contributed to everyone else thinking he was judging them, but so did the text itself. But, in turn, you (and he) are missing the most likely explanation for why Google says they want a diverse workforce: not to discriminate against men, but to look good in the media without intention of actually making major changes to follow through, as their actual recruiting policies appear to be stuck in the same place they've been for years, based on the recruiters I've talked to there. Lotta algorithm questions, lots of years-of-experience and existing-knowledge-of-language-details crap. All stuff that's gonna favor a certain typical profile at the screening stage. PR BS is PR BS, in other words.)
> I am genuinely curious - do you think it makes sense to extrapolate from your own individual experience to all other nonwhite people, or to women?

I'm speaking of my own personal experience but you seem to be speaking for all of these other groups (nonwhite people and women). There's no way we're going to agree on things like affirmative action and diversity programs but I hope you can at least understand how some people may see that as condescending and racist/sexist in its own right.
You may want to consider a better metric than market cap - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16182896
The Sensel Morph is a trackpad, keyboard, joystick and editing bay all in one
"...probability that a person doesn’t know something based on how long they’ve been actively tortured."

I, actually, have nothing I can say to that.

Are you listening to yourself?
+1. The introduction to "Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness" discusses how choices about food placement in cafeterias influence students' dietary decisions.
> encouraged to speak their minds.

Damore was fired though.
Has anyone (sane) ever theorized that the ripples in spacetime in some cases may have existed before the masses of particles (ie. planets / stars) arrived at those locations?
Google’s Fuchsia OS Running on the Pixelbook