skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't see anything obvious with a quick Google search, and anybody complaining about that seems to start throwing around words like "antifa" so my skepticism and troll alerts are on maximum.

HOWEVER, Damore is a REALLY good example of the kind nitwit snowflake that deserves all the approbation he is receiving.

If you are sitting in a corporation and are about to do something that is going to cause political shockwaves, you need to make sure that your position and stance is absolutely rock solid and airtight.

This is true whether you are talking about technology or social behavior. If you're going to political war, you had better have incontrovertible facts and arguments and they had best be overwhelming. You need to run your presentation past a couple of friends and colleagues to solidify it. If you half-ass it, you're going to get your head handed to you on a platter.

Well, guess what? He half-assed it with a bunch of unsupported conjecture and weak arguments that people destroyed almost immediately with real evidence and research and then whined about the fact that people handed him his head.

Which probably STILL would have been okay if he actually admitted to being wrong and put his head back down. But, no, nitwits like him feel that not simply accepting everything he says as correct is terribly, horribly unfair. As such, he doubled down on stuff that everybody already showed was wrong and basically just tried to shout louder.

And then was shocked when he got canned.

The worst part is, there ARE lots of outstanding questions and issues about diversity programs and initiatives. What should that actual goal of such a program be? How do you measure whether it is succeeding? Is success for the company the same as success for the group? Is success for the group the same as success for the individual? What are the downsides of such programs?
Aha, I forgot that in Thunderbird and other email clients, one needs to click a message to see it in full and read it (right). So then Thunderbird knows exactly which messages one has read, and can highlight the unread ones in bold.

Whereas here at HN, it's a lot harder for the software to know which messages one has read (because here messages are shown without the user indicating what s/he is reading).

Yes perhaps different symbols — actually I'd be happy with just Thunderbird's bold font :- )
If you take a CGI based implementation and constrained it to use only external managed services, and you use Lambda to serve it up, you won't need to manage servers explicitly.

The real serverless apps are pure clients that use 3rd party services for everything - i.e. the developer doesn't write any backend code that runs on their own infra.
This is the thesis of the linked article.
> It's rules for how to work on code without bringing personal crap into it.

The previous CoC did fine at this.

This new CoC almost ensures that what it's attempting to curb will inevitably happen, because of it's existence.
> Alot of websites these days are lurching from one page to another, just to score more page views or something, rather than a Single page app.

All hail the Single Page app! Long live the Flash heir!

I wish more websites were not using the "let's load ton of shit to make the client generate basic HTML" approach.
Years ago, un my home, i used 2 layers of routers: 1 Linux and 1 openbsd.

In front of the Linux there was a cable-modem, and behind there where a couple DMZs, with servers, and wifi, and my home LAN.

I had my own DNS/DHCP servers.

Almost all services were internal (files, webs, git, streaming, databases, backups, monitoring...)

Nowadays, my home is rented, and i live in a nomad way were i get job. Just one laptop.
> The number one benefit you should get from a scripting language (Lua) as opposed to a compiled one (C) is higher productivity

OP is saying that since Lua is cumbersome to write you might as well write in C and get increased performance.
> This, and similar research I'd seen before seems to point to women being equal or better at STEM than men (and also being better at non-STEM stuff)

What I find onerous is that it's perfectly acceptable to make blanket statements about women being better at things than men, while it's now literally a sackable offense at many major tech companies to even imply the opposite. This doesn't seem like "progress towards equality" to me.
It should be noted that HN in 2008 was a lot different than it is now.
Gave me my current job at NuCypher (YC16). I'm doing some cryptographic engineering and building a decentralized KMS.

Honestly, it's the coolest and most fun job I've had to date and I couldn't be more happy with where I'm at.

I got it all because I was browsing HN while eating some food. :)
I refrained from posting this exact article because HN gets triggered by any gender realism
I get positive news about my place in STEM every month, in the form of a paycheck which is more than four times my country's median individual income.

I'll take concrete, quantifiable rewards over nice words in an opinion piece any day.
In actual free market selling at loss is a very short-sighted strategy: you may cause the bankruptcy of your current competitors, but bariers to entry are low, so once you raise your prices back to profitable levels the new competition arises. You would have to sell at loss most of the time which would eventually bankrupt your megacorp. That’s why monopolies can only exist in regulated markets.
How do you swoop all promising new hires if you have a free market? its not like all of them want to work in the same place and the same culture. Even right now we have tons of startups despite the existence of Google, Facebook and Microsoft.
Tracing fake news: characterizing social media messages by how they propagate
You already can on the TTC subway- both on station platform and some in tunnel service. Although it only works if you're on Freedom Mobile:

https://www.freedommobile.ca/network-and-coverage/subway-cov...
They're confused because they're starting from the end (the outcome) and working backward.
This is false. Damore did not get fired "because he thinks women are inferior" which is a simplistic, uninformed, and cartoonish version of the controversy. Damore was fired by Google for writing about scientifically supported sex differences and the social ramifications of those differences:

https://youtu.be/agU-mHFcXdw
What is a Linux 'oops'?
> That means there’s something in even the most liberal societies that’s nudging women away from math and science, even when those are their best subjects.

I didn't glean it from the article but if you have can you tell if they suggested a reason for this? What is this "something" that’s nudging women away from math and science?
> Slightly baffling to see this celebrated by men in these careers as some kind of vindication.

An amusing and insightful observation.

I would say it's baffling until you realize that the alternative is that the whole the gap in female STEM employment continues to be attributed solely to male sexism. It's better to be perceived as stupid than evil.

Also, are we all now in agreement that there are likely cognitive differences between men and women, and that it is beneficial to explore those differences scientifically? Honest question.

edit: missing word
Perhaps they are celebrating the possibility that certain people will ease up on the angle that we're all complicit in perpetuating a culture of misogyny and harassment that drives women out of tech.
> But when it comes to their relative strengths, in almost all the countries—all except Romania and Lebanon—boys’ best subject was science, and girls’ was reading

> And the more gender-equal the country, as measured by the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index, the larger this gap between boys and girls in having science as their best subject.

The research seems pretty clear.

> ...the percentage of girls who did excel in science or math was still larger than the number of women who were graduating with stem degrees.

This quote is not related to whether there are interest differences or not. They may be equally good in science/math and something else and decide they want to do the other thing without that automatically implying "society is causing this preference" (and by the way, medicine is not "STEM" for some reason, but no one is becoming a doctor without strong aptitude for math/science).

If the research results I quoted above are to be believed, regarding aptitude, someone may excel in A (say girls in these countries get "very good" scores in math at the same rate as boys) and be much better in B (they excel in reading/other skills at a higher rate than boys) and it would be natural for this person to pursue B in that case, no?
Why are we telling women do do STEM if that's not what they want to do, we should be supporting women want to do that. For example more entry level roles and considering women for those.
That science isn’t basic, considering the period in which the product was introduced. The manner of action is pretty subtle, and an impatient person seeking immediate results would not be inclined to believe in mechanisms that lack readily observable results.

This is why toothpaste’s marketing relies heavily on peer pressure and establishing trust in habitual use. Habitual use also carries the obviously juicy benefit of boosting volume and revenue.
To say that matters are complex is not really helpful, though. We must demand our representatives break down these barriers and eliminate complexity.

The infill argument is totally bogus. The majority of the Financial District, which is where the majority of high rises are today, is on the very same infill you claim cannot support high rise structures. Singapore is largely infill and is mostly high rises. Tokyo is very dense and is in an earthquake prone area.

The absolute area argument is similarly specious. That argument would be valid only if, per unit area, we were already building at a density similar to New York. Moreover, it’s irrelevant how large the city is within its political boundaries if you consider this to be a regional problem, which it is.

So I’m not really sure whose side you’re on in this matter since you muddied the waters instead of clarifying them.

The problem is entirely political. You can either help or make excuses.
It does muddy the waters somewhat and allow for a claim that he is "credited as being part of" that he was listed as an editor on the about page. [0]

In fairness to the author, he does point this out.

If this individual really did do as is claimed and really did nothing other than try to stop TechCrunch's existence, it may seem to some a strange thing to continue to associate with such an individual.

To have provided a link to the website of archimedes ventures [1] on the about page [0] where the author is listed alongside this individual as one of two "general partners" seems like a slightly surprising omission when covering the "real history."

It seems that had archimedes ventures been more successful than TechCrunch has been, the author could have been able to have claimed to be a greater part of that than this article would suggest.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20051024041505/http://www.techcr...

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20051026074846/http://www.archim...
Your Itinerary for Your Visit to Mongolia
A classic itinerary for Mongolia combines the Soviet era architecture of capital Ulaanbaatar, beautiful monasteries, the expansive steppe, dinosaur fossils, towering mountains, sand dunes of the Gobi Desert, and offers glimpses into the nomadic life of the locals with camping opportunities at ger sites around the country.
This article simply means when equal opportunity is offered, there are still fewer women choose to take STEM as their career.

Vindictive? No really. The research seems to suggest woman prefers STEM more, when there is no other viable economic opportunity, which makes such choice a conscious calculation, and do render the past accusation that there is an systematic oppression in the society to keep women away from taking the initiative, groundless.

This at least speaks some volume, the current diversity program is incapable to achieve its own goal, thus further enforcing such agenda might not be fruitful.
How iFixit Became the World's Best iPhone Teardown Team [video]
> ... but it is often wrong when examined closely.

Having witnessed the whiplash in scientific understanding I'd almost say that "it's more complicated than that" is a more accurate summation. Since often the approximation isn't totally wrong but it's more a simplification of the issue.
I don’t understand do you think that contradicts me?
I would not say diverse though. This community is hugely biased towards an american, transhumanist point of view. There's an "european" minority who does not seems as egocentric (and libertarian maybe ?) as the majority, which is a bit reassuring.

Anyways as much as I like HN and its often insightful comments, this has proven me that I would have a hard time living/working in the US as we don't share the same values at all it seems. I kinda understand the valley's spirit better though, which is nice considering its huge impact on everyone's tech life.
I disagree. With a large enough pool of applicants, you tend to get adequately talented people. If there were only 10 people who are capable to do what I am hiring for, I'd be at a disadvantage if I discriminated against men/women. But if there are 10 million such people, I can discriminate all I want and I'll still get acceptable results.
Tectonic – LaTeX/XeTeX Restart in Rust with Modern UX
That's fine as long as you don't try to draw any conclusions from your anecdote :-)
A key point of IEEE floating point is that NaN propagates. Any arithmetic operation that involves a NaN returns NaN. So you don't have to check until the end of the computation. Unless, of course, branching is involved.

A floating point type that could never be NaN is quite reasonable for a language with exceptions. But in a language without them, what's supposed to happen?
I thought there were nodes in blockchain.
I've never said not exposed. There's plenty of exposure available via the media. As an example, I've watched Tomi Lahren's commentary on pro athletes and political involvement. No surprises there, but suffice to say I'm glad Tomi's views on the matter are generally frowned upon here in SV.

For most of history, holding progressive or even liberal viewpoints carried social consequences. Polite company was conservative company. Now the script has flipped, and the pendulum swings the other way. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Few months ago I was desperate for a tool that recorded the terminal and allowed me to save the animation as a GIF. While asciinema (at least at that time) didn’t have any straightforward way to do this, I looked elsewhere and found https://gifox.io and must admit have been very impressed with it.
> are we all now in agreement that there are likely
> cognitive differences between men and women

Alas, far from it I am afraid.
Which is very puzzling. Not many will argue that men and women have different physiology, different physical build. But god forbid from making the assumption that cognitive interests may also differ.
Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16407678

(Upon skim, this does not seem to be a duplicate per se.)
Most studies on this seem to show that gender based preferences can be at least partially explained from birth before any environmental factors play a part in it. People have been doing these studies for a long time now, but they get ignored because we don't like the results.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3030621/

And of course, far more studies that have been going on for decades.
coordinated by who?
By negative reports you mean 'something that women do wrong'?
Use of liberal / conservative in this context is muddled at best and misleading at worst.
Regardless of what the legal structure was, it's pretty pathetic to keep calling yourself a "cofounder" when everyone knows you didn't do jack shit for the company.

Kind of amusing because that's what that guy seems to be doing on a Twitter thread https://twitter.com/kteare/status/965488545187147776
Anecdotal +1 to this thesis, which is also presented in the article:

I come from Morocco (quite similar to Algeria/Tunisia, which seem to have the highest % of women in STEM), and people are first looking for a job that will guarantee financial freedom. STEM jobs seem to be the most likely to guarantee this, and as such there's more women interested in these fields.

Looking at the graph however, this doesn't seem to explain the full variance (many developing countries have lower levels of representation).
Only if they could easily assess ability. It sounds like gender is a fairly reliable indicator of performance in Algeria, so it probably helps to just use it. They might miss some occasional great women but will save themselves from the majority of low performing ones. I'm not saying it's right to discriminate like this, just that it could be competitive to do so.
> > We also know that we all have a limited supply of willpower.

> Actually it looks like that isn't the case after all.

Huh? You mean you've read an article, or there are several independent studies showing what you say?

I really doubt that this would be untrue because I can apply it to my life and it makes things better.
>As a final note, I want to add that if anyone was a “cofounder” of TechCrunch it was Heather Harde. She joined in 2006 but she was in the trenches with the team until the very end, working 20 hour days, sacrificing her personal life and giving everything she had to make the company what it was. Heather never sells herself like Keith does, but she should. Unlike Keith, she helped build that company, and gave way more value than she ever took.

As someone who's also been an early employee, I totally see why Heather does NOT claim to be a co-founder. When you work your ass off alongside the founders, you learn two things:

1. Building a company is incredibly hard.

2. Nobody takes it harder than the founders.

Yes, I have worked hard. In the last six years, I always worked parts of my weekend if not my vacations (which were few and far in between early on). I pulled off all nighters as well as a last minute trip straight from work to close a customer. I fell asleep on my laptop answering support questions. There were many nights of dry tears and waking up in cold sweat from nightmares that were all too real.

But what I went through is a fraction of what the real founders went through. And I saw their ups and downs up close.

Startups are hard. Incredibly hard, especially for those who has to lead the ship from Day One. Early, dedicated employees see this first hand, thinking to themselves, "Man, I thought I had a good/bad day, but they are probably having it better/worse". That's why we never claim to be the "founders".
A little off topic but somehow related: Can a jack of all trades do jack shit? Just curious.
no matter how she's talented because of so many reason most of them are racist

I don’t think that means what you think it means
No, I stated clearly that I generally agree that building more housing would help. I don't agree that the problem is entirely political.

Characterizing my comment as merely making excuses and being part of the problem is not good faith engagement. I am bowing out now.
A job, doing what I love, with conditions I never dreamed possible for someone with poor formal qualifications but an insatiable desire to learn and prove my value.

I am grateful.
Still no charts. I don't see them communicating with me.
A taste for n-gate
Sex differences in children's toy preferences
Wake up Sheeple
(Sorry, I had to)
Ask HN: I Wanna know about hashgraph projects and want to share it in my blog.
> Huh? You mean you've read an article, or there are several independent studies showing what you say?

He is pointing to the fact that the studies that originated the "willpower pool" hypothesis have been increasingly discredited.
There have been several studies that have failed to support that now 20-year-old hypothesis: https://digest.bps.org.uk/2015/06/24/new-research-challenges... https://hbr.org/2016/11/have-we-been-thinking-about-willpowe...
That's assuming an internal company culture couldn't be created based on shared understanding that would lead to competitive advantage. Eg, if you create a company with only black women, you may not necessarily get the very best individuals, but you could create a very unique culture. That culture could empower the whole team to work better with each other with the end result being a more productive team even though individuals may be less productive alone. It could also reduce turnover and increase job satisfaction, leading to less time spent training and cheaper and more productive overtime for the company.

Such a company could be at an advantage in a free market where there were no rules on employment discrimination.
Another Meme Coin
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
A cool Sammy sticker pack has been added! :D
I did take this class at CMU in 2012; I liked it a lot and it's good to see the curriculum hasn't changed much since.

That said, working with highly-bespoke R packages made life crazy, and I'm thankful that post-graduation ggplot2 was an option for R data visualization and the development of the rest of the tidyverse packages after I graduated let me use R now in a much less messy manner.
Once I met an engineer who was running an ad tech startup and competing head-on with companies having 300 devs+

He said he hates dealing with people. Even today, he has just 3 devs and still operates the same way handling multi-million dollar ad revenue.
https://www.idmcrack.ml
Evidence in Damore's lawsuit has some rather interesting tidbits about antifa, but while they are not very nice people at all, they are not really relevant to this discussion, I think. It also has evidence of physicasl threats. Those made it to the recently dropped/dismissed NLRB complaint, and it seems (was mentioned in a thread on HM, for sure) that peple involved had received very stern slaps on their wrists.

Now, Damore may not be a very nice person himself (he did go to work for Google of his own free will, after all), but he did a) what Google asked him to do -- provided feedback on some corporate training that he was forced to attend. He backed it with some arguments that while not necessarily water-tight and incontroversible, were stronger than any debunkings of his memo that I have seen, which mostly amounted to calling it "pathetic bleatings" and claiming that it is wrong because it could not possibly be right.

Saying "you are a terrible person and I will hound you until one of us gets fired" or somesuch is not quite "handing him his head". If anything, it conmfirms that Damore is probably more right than his detractors. So while it certainly might have made sense for him to shut up, make a Cultural Revoluition style confession and keep his job. But faulting him for being fireed over a memo that he didn't leak and that is, if anything, far more reasonable than many an action that seems to be accepted at Google (viz. the story of Corey Altheide).

I just don't see how he is a big snowflake here.
Buy B12 Lipo Shots at Discounted Price- BUYMICB12
Photowall+Canvas+Prints+And+Wall+Murals+#Photowall+-+My+Silly+Little+Gang
I think the problem with how these new concepts are presented, is that they are taking these ad hoc methods of doing arithmetic and trying to turn them into algorithms. My guess is that this is driven by the need children have to know how to get the “the right answer.”

The traditional algorithms aren’t very intuitive, but they work. Trying to make an algorithm out of the various ways you can break up a problem, ad hoc, seems bananas.