skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Unions are no more monopolies than any random company is, and union bargaining isn’t collusion any more than a hiring manager consulting with HR is.

When employers band together to bargain collectively, we call it a “company” and it’s not only accepted, it’s so entrenched in our culture that we can barely conceive of any other way. When employees do the exact same thing, we attack them relentlessly.
You're misusing make here. This should be a shell script or a program that uses inotify/kqueue, or a loop with sleeps and stat calls.
Yes, but the converse is less clear, which is why supporting ideas is more acceptable than campaigning for a candidate.
I know this won't assuage your concerns about officialness, though it's still worth mentioning that Rust does have community-maintained HALs (https://github.com/japaric/embedded-hal ) and tools to generate APIs from official vendor-provided SVDs (https://docs.rs/svd2rust/0.12.0/svd2rust/ ).

There's also a few boards out there that do support Rust natively: Hail (https://www.tockos.org/blog/2017/introducing-hail/ ) and Tessel (https://www.tessel.io/ ).
Hasn't the US labor participation rate been dropping for over a decade?

If that is accurate, it makes sense that unemployment is down and still going down but wages aren't moving at all or as quickly. There's effectively "spare capacity" in the system in the form of people who were removed from the unemployment numbers but still wanted to work.
React-native-google-signin

Seem like the official firebase library may be the only alternative
Sure and restricting prisoners' freedom is distinction enough such that no one would confuse the two. If prison is meant to have a correctional role, to rehabilitate people and prepare them to reenter society successfully, it needs to be more than a building to house people organized around capricious rules that infantilize the population.
Yes, exactly. Real numbers aren't real.
> Because most people sink roots in their communities, they are reluctant to quit their job and move to a job that is far away.

How common is this? As a child, my father changed jobs every few years, and we moved often as a result of that (until I was 10 at least). We even lived in France for three years because my dad thought it would be a good opportunity to learn about other cultures. So personally, I've never had any objection to moving for the best opportunity.

My wife on the other hand comes from a different background; she grew up in the same house in a rural town and thinks that moving hurts children's ability to develop friendships. She also believes that being close to family is more important than optimizing your career (although she has kindly agreed to move should a good opportunity arise).

Is the "stay in one spot" viewpoint becoming more common? I can see how this would lead to competitive job offers stagnating in a region if no one is willing to move into it or away from it.
Analysis of the Alexa Top 1M Sites
This happens because the difference in revenue/profit for tech is huge. One company might make $1000000 per employee, another might lose $2000 per employee. All bosses want to pay their staff well, but few can afford it as well as the next guy.
It sounds like you need a 'reasonable person' clause - when considering bonuses, each metric gets looked at by a randomly selected group of peers and they can jointly decide if someone's gaming the system.

To take a narrower view, it sounds like that place needed to assign weights to the different bugs, so that the big scary bug was worth 20x (or whatever) of the trivial 'tweak the CSS' bugs.
(Or look at Zhang et al 2017 comparing complex architectures: http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/08/11/175406 )
Matt Levine has written about the Spotify direct listing in a few of his Money Stuff columns. Overall he seems to think it will be a really interesting experiment given that no one is sure how it will play out. Another point he makes is that Spotify is still paying investment bankers a bunch of money despite the fact that it is not IPO-ing. Even when you try to avoid paying bankers a bunch of money by skipping the IPO, you end up paying bankers a bunch of money...
I just switched from my final BlackBerry after 10 years in the B.B. ecosystem to an iPhone X. The Android app compatibility extended the life of my Classic for an extra year but was hamstrung by being painfully slow. I could run Spotify or Google Maps but only just so, and forget about multitasking.

I still miss the BB10 workflow. Messaging, multitasking, swiping was all perfected ahead of the mediocre implementation of those in iOS 11, but the X is so fast, I can just brute force my way around the UI gaps and get shit done more quickly.

Nothing will ever replace the Hub, though.
Killed by a Machine: The THERAC-25 Radiation Therapy Programming Fail
I was surprised share buybacks were not mentioned. Seems like every company has been doing this over the past few years. I'm no finance guru: is there a reason buyback money couldn't be diverted into pay raises?
What is frustrating is the problem can be attacked even without introducing any new law.

In many industries the reason employers have monopsopy power is regulations that prevents new players from eating the fat profit margins of incumbent players.

telecom, healthcare, real estate, legal services ......

Just like coders see every problem as a software problem - lawmakers tend to think any problem can be solved with more laws ! not realizing they are also playing the economic game theory charade.

In this case particularly, introducing more laws is going to make is harder for new players from gaining market share.

I am not also just making this up, France has some of the most progressive labor laws written with the best of intentions - but lawmakers failed to see the economical ramification of their laws. It made employers reluctant to hire full time workers - creating a painfully high unemployment rate.

A lot of American multinationals also have most of their growth happening outside US borders, I think stronger Unions and ill thought out reform is going to result in more aggresive offshoring.

I know supply side economic arguments has gone out of fashion - but by allowing entrepreneurs to more easily embrace globalization the same way as larger companies exploit it will more comfortably increase income without causing massive spikes in inflation.

This also includes less regulation so that workers can strike without legal trouble and cause trouble for employers, by dragging the process through the court system will just mean more money for lawyers - and large companies have deep pockets anyway to fight any potential lawsuit. Think about how things like fraud are already illegal but companies seem to get away with it anyway.

The only power labor has to collective withdraw it - which painfully show up in the balance sheet in every board room, its the only language capital understands.
HotSwap: Bringing Hot Code Reloading to Buck
I was gonna say, I got the 2015 MBP and this is a great machine. So many ports!
No. This is completely wrong. A company is not by default a monopoly - a union is.

Imagine if there were 10 different smartphone suppliers but all the suppliers agreed that they were only going to let you buy from 1 of them - company X. Company X would just charge you whatever the hell they felt like because you would have no other options. It would fricken suck. It would feel the exact same as a monopoly.

Now compare this to a union. Company Y's employees are all unionized and the union forbids company Y from buying labor from anyone but them. Even if it's not forbidden , new hires are typically glad to join the union too, and in some cases the law forbids otherwise. See how similar that is? It's still a monopoly - just a monopoly against a single buyer.
Wood houses don't get blown over or eaten by termites very often, but they do get torn down and rebuilt larger every ~50 years due to rising land prices.
So, abundance of supply, because young people want to make AAA games?
How Ramanujan became a Fellow of the Royal Society on this day a century ago
Also worth watching the Dirty Money episode (Netflix as well) on the pharmaceutical company Valeant. Ackerman was heavily involved here on the flip side (he was helping the wrongdoers rather than trying to short them and expose the fraud)
Interesting...maybe in an ideal world...but in the real world where business owners currently have the upper hand (and congressmen and congresswomen basically on payroll), I'm perfectly fine with unions acting as a counterweight to corporate power.
Trial Without Error: Towards Safe Reinforcement Learning via Human Intervention
“Pascal's Sphere” (1951) [pdf]
Multi-polygenic score approach to trait prediction
It’s not becoming more common not all people have equal situations. Maybe you have parents that can’t take care of themselves. Maybe you can’t take of yourself. You could even like the weather or were you are born. Not everyone wants to live in New York or Silicon Valley. Not every person has rational actions or needs either .
(October 2015)

Earlier discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12201147

Investigation paper published by IEEE:

https://www.cse.msu.edu/~cse470/Public/Handouts/Therac/Thera...
>In a new study for the Brookings Institution’s Hamilton Project, we report survey results in which we find that one in five workers with a high school education or less are subject to a noncompete.

That by itself is a remarkable statistic. The original purpose of non-compete laws was to honor the value of an invention or trade secret and stopping key inventors from directly running away with an invention and thus lowering the incentive for innovation.

But surely not every fifth worker with a high school degree or less in the market is a researcher or crucially involved in the generation of trade secrets. Many people are simply selling their labour, and this data point suggests that non-competes are being abused to an extreme degree simply to chain employees to a business.
One should choose one's enemies carefully. You become them.
Most employees get fired for trying that. Glibly saying "supply & demand" doesn't erase the massive power imbalance between employer and employee in most businesses.
EU GDPR may make non-private blockchains illegal
That's the article where I first encountered that idea indeed.
Since I have an ear here, I have to say I hope the EULA doesn't require arbitration in Delaware like the Basic license does. These sort of terms make this a no-go for us - same as when Atlassian required mandatory arbitration in (New Zealand?); out lawyers refused to let us use JIRA because of that, and other clauses in their license.

I'm about to uninstall x-pack for the same reason. Hopefully we can use the 6.3 release, but it will depend on the terms.
Modern nations have a different version of national. It is more like a certificate you can apply for. By that definition, national identity is made up.

The other def, national identity is carried by the bloodline through the father.

But I believe that one way or another every society converges to a nation anyways. By the bloodline. When there are enough marriages several generations later.
Amid Calls for a U.S. Uranium Mining Renewal, Recalling Its Toxic Past
I've worked at different companies that just culturally have very different approaches. Where I am now, I will basically corner people until they help me or provide a better option on where to seek the help I need. At my previous employer, there were certain mailing lists where you could ask questions and if your questions reflected real effort, you could expect helpful responses.
That, and because most roles in most projects don’t require stellar talent, just the ability to shut up and code. If you’re willing and able to monetize a sub-par product, as so much of software from games to IoT seems to be, then it works.

It’s all part of the race to the bottom we’re getting to live through.
Reader, and its shut down, were mostly irrelevant for Google.
Actually what I am trying to say is that politics in China runs very differently than it does in other countries.
> Ahh, okay, now im understanding the point of this article. Lets fight monopolies with more monopolies instead of solving the underlying issues!

If an opposing force of similar power is not the best strategy, what do you propose as an alternative?
>Every criminal justice system has to balance (1) the risk of convicting the innocent,

But that's not balancing it. It's just convicting the innocent automatically.

>We don’t like pre-crime convictions because we believe risks 1 and 3 outweigh any gains in 2.

There is no such thing as a pre-crime conviction unless a crime occurs.

>But it’s at least debatable.

It's debatable in the same way any nonsense is debatable - you can put the words together in a sentence - but in the colloquial sense of "debatable" it really isn't.
> Most employees get fired for trying that.

If one goes about it like an @ss, and without doing one's homework, sure. The way to do it is to deliver value that is worth more money, and then approach management with a proven track record of you being worth more money. It worked for me.
I understand the theory thanks, I'm just disputing that this scenario is anything other than exceptionally rare. Parallel construction is used to protect sensitive sources, not cover up illegality.
One definition of "embedded" is: does the user treat it like an appliance or like a computer? If it's the former, it's 'embedded' even if it uses a reasonably powerful processor or does not have hard real time requirements.

I use Erlang for that kind of thing and it works well. Rust is, I think, more performant, so if that works for you and what you need, go for it.
they could be cross platform, but thats not really what people think.. when someone says cross platform i definitely expect windows support
I suspect many of those noncompetes would not hold up in court.
Pay raises lower the stock price. Buybacks raise it. CEO compensation depends on stock price. That's all.
I have some family pretty deeply trapped in Lularoe's "MLM", the fact Herbalife is still legal and solvent doesn't give me a lot of hope for a rosy outcome for my fam
What a sad indictment of modern American life that our baseline for happiness is "not destitute". Really, I think that's telling, and as a millennial with lots of student loan debt and friends in a similar boat, it's not surprising one bit.
If it is already erroneous to expect a single individual to act as a rational economic agent, why should a rational economic behavior be expected from a loose aggregation of individuals?

What I've learnt from working in such companies is that individual career trajectory and team politics is the real focus of anyone attention, and that the external world appears as abstract and distant to them as these internal manoeuvers are opaque to outsiders.
You obviously didn't read the article and appear to be just spouting talking points. The three laws proposed in no way impede small businesses. Prohibiting anti-poaching , Limiting non-competes, and considering the labor market effects of mergers will primarily impact large businesses.

In fact, all those changes reduce friction and increase competition in the labor market. These should be precisely the kind of changes I would think you would support?
I can understand why they do it, having someone incompetent in an important position is way more dangerous for the company than having someone competent stuck in a lower position.

But it's still a risk to lose good employees, talent is very valuable.
Note: that documentary is in support of Bill Ackman.
Protip: canvases are relatively expensive, so practically all artists recycle their own and others artists' canvases. Painting over someone else's image is also a way to get free inspiration when you're not sure what you want to paint. Newspapers love running this story because there are almost as many hidden paintings as there are famous paintings.
how easy would it be to VPN to a LA country, signup for the plan and then just have service for $1.5?
In the good old 90s, we talked about improving reboot speeds by removing destructors from software.

I don't think the project ever got anywhere, but back then, your KDE desktop spent a good 15-30 seconds carefully deallocating all objects.
(I am a former Triplebyte employee) The Triplebyte process also involves talking to an actual person; how are you proposing to game that?
We don't need any new laws.

We just need to get the union-busting right-to-work laws off the books, and let the free market sort things out.

Right to work laws are a restriction of free, voluntary contracts between employers, and their employees. They forbid employees from demanding to be a sole supplier of labor for an employer, and from negotiating special, union-only employee agreements.

It's absurd that someone selling cabbages to a grocery store is allowed to enter into a mutually voluntary contract that makes them the sole supplier of leafy greens for that grocery, but the people working for that store are not allowed to enter into a mutually voluntary contract that makes them the sole supplier of labor for that store.

Given the vicious opposition of business leaders against the freedom of workers to enter into meaningful collective bargaining agreements, it's clear that they are not actually interested in free markets.
A few points:

1. Unions are not often a counter balance. They are usually just additional monopolies[0] where there was none before. The airline industry is incredibly competitive but yet airline pilots still decided to unionize and price-fix.

2. Monopolies should be fought with regulations targeted at increasing competition and lowering barriers to entry - not with more monopolies. Fighting a monopoly with another monopoly just hurts the consumer and hurts our country in the global economy.

3. unions have congressmen "on payroll" too. In fact in some states some industries have state laws that forbid people from working outside of the union. Only 27 states have right to work laws.

[0] Per-company unions are the easiest monopolies to create because the scale of them is much smaller than the scale of the whole industry. Its very easy to get all your coworkers at company X to unionize and forbid company X from hiring elsewhere - and often new hires are happy to join the union too. But its very difficult for your company X to achieve a monopoly itself because it has to dominate an often much larger global market. For an example, see here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16489013
Do Ladies Need Their Own Scotch?
> In Haskell, sometimes this is not possible, because sometimes the type of the subexpression is constrained by something higher up in the AST.

The point is that this constraint always have the exact same format. It may have some different semantics, but Haskell makes you abstract over those to get into the operational function, while the compiler verifies anything that isn't local operations to fit your overall structure.

Really, learning Haskell is the process of learning to abstract semantics away from your code. It's a hard process, it's not something natural.

> What are "matched operators"?

Those are operators that require a matching. Usually parenthesis, square brackets and braces. Haskell has the unmatched operators `.` and `$` that people use instead, and for reading it you do have to understand their priority. Most operators do not a set fixity, but those two are a must.
> "...a modern day union is."

This is also wrong. Your straw man union isn't true across the board.
It doesn't matter what the state of the company's margins are. If they need a certain skill set, they are going to have to pay market value.

True, if they only need junior developers and you've worked your way up to be a senior dev as far as skill set, you may be more than the company needs.
They don't have to hold up in court to have a significant chilling effect on the job mobility of the employee who signed it.
Net Neutrality: The Complete WIRED Guide
I agree with the GP about Discover Weekly; it works great for me but I'm guessing maybe that's because I have a lot of saved playlists I've accreted over the years.

I disagree about the native app, though. PWDs are where it's at now. Native apps are doomed.* I didn't even download it on my new MBP, it was slow and buggy. The web version is good enough for me, combined with web-scrobbler for Chrome so I can still scrobble to Last.fm.

[*] https://medium.com/javascript-scene/native-apps-are-doomed-a...
I disagree. A manager should be skeptical to ensure everyone is pulling their weight and being truthful.
i read that part but the explanation is poor at best... basically they dont like the jvm because. and thats all that they really said
I'm completely in this boat at the moment. We are doing a hardware refresh of our embedded platform and I'm looking at the feasability of using Rust.

I'm at the point where I think it is close to being viable, but seems very young. Most likely we will go with a platform that can support rust, and write the low level modules with the intent of using rust, but not use Rust just yet, but do a side project to asseses the viability of doing as much of the software in Rust as we can. ( and get the devs learning Rust ). I am what I like to call a multi stack developer, so I'm super comfortable with a lot of languages and platforms, but the embedded devs I work with are microcontroller focused C devs and it will take some time to be convinced, conceptually they like the idea, but as soon as they try and write something serious they are going to feel frustrated and likely make a mess.

But Rust has a LOT to offer the embedded world.
On the contrary, I think software/technology is a field where objective assessment of candidate's competency is relatively easy, and the professions requiring accreditation/licensing are relatively rare.

Do you think requiring those credentials would benefit software industry as well? Is that enough for top companies to base their hiring decisions on?
Vero – An ad-free social network
Because folks without a highschool education can afford to fight a major company in court. /s

Sorry about the sarcasm, but this kind of abuse of the contract system needs to be stopped. You can only really invalidate an individual contract (ianal) as I understand it. So the fight would have to happen for _every employee_. While case law makes it cheaper, the reality is most of these folks can't afford to higher a lawyer for a few hours, let alone a few days.
Unless income is randomly assigned, how do we draw any causal conclusions?

For example, what if being predisposed to certain kinds of anxiety tend to cause one to both make more money in order to have more security, and never be satisfied with that security?
I find the editorialized title a little bit harsh on author's intentions...
Unfortunately Office for Mac does not support this, just find out...
It's my personal belief that this line of thinking, which is common among "geeky" types but not among the general population, is a form of slight delusion or power fantasy.

Is there anything you can provide to convince me it's remotely possible?
I wonder if non-compete agreements actually matter. I mean, come on. Lewandowski landed at Uber after Google. Does anyone cares if some dude from burger king will join KFC? Will BKing really sue him?
> This is not as insightful as it seems....risk tolerance should be a function of percentages, not square numbers.

Percentages are hard to calculate in large companies. Is it a multiple of the engineer's salary? A percentage of the team's budget? The org? The company?