skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have nothing against Amazon and I had been a happy customer, but when I ponder which company has the most valuable information about me, it's Amazon - by far.

When it comes to Facebook (or other social media companies) it's all about self-portrayal and in the end we have control which information we provide. To some degree at least.

Amazon on the other hand has direct unfiltered buying behaviour data. Isn't this advertiser heaven?
Google keeps a tight hold on the data, whereas Facebook had APIs that allowed FB-apps to crawl segments of the FB graph. By doing that thousands of times, apps could export a large part of the data, and FB lost control over how the data could be used. By contrast, Google retains control.

I understand your point that we as end-users don't have any control over the way the data is used in either case. But I do think there is a material difference between the two scenarios.
> I can't think of a position I've ever seen where "review X papers" a year is part of the job requirement.

I work in an industry research lab in the bay, and while there isn't a requirement to review X papers a year, it is expected that you keep up with the literature, and actively engaging in peer review is one way to do so. A few of my colleagues are on the paper committee for our major academic conference, and they end up reviewing 40+ papers a year and using a week or so to take part in the committee meetings.
The only thing I know about in this arena other than prior mentioned in the thread is Civil, a blockchain for journalism payments. I think it's super interesting. https://joincivil.com/

They're one of the blockchain projects coming out of Consensys.
This is such an adversarial way to look at it.

I see it as a community. We write and share our papers as part of our jobs, we review each others' papers as part of our jobs, we help to run the conference as part of our jobs. Everyone contributes to run the system.

Nobody buys articles for $35 a piece. All major universities and companies subscribe to the ACM or whatever your field's organisation is for you. And guess who runs the ACM and other organisations? The community does! People from the community serve as leadership and help run things.

Yes the ACM gets some money to run their website, conferences and outreach programs. I don't think that's crazy.
You did something way bolder but I wanted to share another successful career restart story. I worked in tech startups in business roles (ops & product management) but was always excited about the engineering side. I decided to do a career restart at 32 and taught myself the basics of web development using Udacity and other web tutorials. I then went through a coding bootcamp and joined a mid size company.

It's been a great ride, I've worked for about 3 years on both the front end and back end. I've been promoted twice and have started becoming assigned as lead developer on some projects. Overall, I think I'm about 6 - 12 months away from being promoted to a senior developer. As others mentioned, my strong soft skills (being able to project manage myself, communicate effectively, estimate tasks well and honor my estimates) have made me very attractive in comparison to other candidates who have been programming since they were 12 but are much more difficult to work with. The ability to "get stuff done" is underrated.

Anyways, the main point is I am so happy with my career restart into programming at 32. I would do it again in a heartbeat.
Databrokers enable this - take a look at something like Acxiom's developer APIs.[1] You'll find that they have some quite interesting stuff, like whether someone's interested in gambling.[2] Facebook partners with these folks (as do many others) to enable them to build this aggregated database.

Interestingly, you can log in and see your own profile there. I did that a few years ago, and introduced subtle errors into it (e.g. I changed my car to a different brand of car, and the "extended warranty services" robocalls around a year later started calling about my nonexistent vehicle).

[1] https://developer.myacxiom.com/code/api/data-bundles/main

[2] https://developer.myacxiom.com/code/api/data-bundles/bundle/...
I thought this was a totally new item, a lot of the comments don't make sense without the old title
> And I was trying to convey to the parent post that these issues of data use and disingenuous campaign practices would have come up, Trump or not, because it's happening and we don't like it as a society.

Right, but then you said Obama was doing the same thing. He was not. Nor was Clinton. So the fact of the matter is that it may have come up, but there's been literally no evidence to suggest it's happened in the past by any of the winning Democratic campaigns.

That's the false equivalence I'm talking about. You're shifting blame away from the Republican party, the Trump campaign, and placing it solely on Facebook and unscrupulous data collection parties, when the issue should mostly be on the fact that a political campaign not only engaged said parties but won using them.

> No. Sadly we only have a situation where an app was collecting data using Facebook and a video where two individuals were pitching their product by saying things to try and win a customer.

And the words/documents provided by the CA whistleblower. That's immensely important.

> but we don't know that the Trump campaign knew about their data practices any more than their other customers knew.

Steve Bannon knew. Unless you're now claiming that he, as VP of CA, didn't know what his own company was doing.

> We don't know that the Trump campaign knew about this. And we don't know that the recent videos weren't just CA lying to sell their product.

That's because you're removing broader context that shows that we should probably err on the side of "they probably knew about all this" rather than "there's no way they could have known".

The fact is, CA was testing phrases used by the Trump campaign literally years before they approached Trump. The Mercers pumped money into the Trump campaign at a critical time (June 2016), and forced all campaign processes to go through CA. This is all documented. In August of that year, Bannon left CA (which was already running Trump's campaign) and joined the Trump campaign directly.

You're trying to pretend like there's more ambiguity than there actually is.

EDIT: The latter half of this article goes in depth on how the Mercer's money shifted from Ted Cruz to Trump: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/19/us/politics/robert-mercer...
Have you considered using aluminium wire instead of copper?
This is one of the things I really liked about moving from Mountain View to Los Angeles. Not only breaking out of your company's bubble, but the tech bubble all together.
For how many of your daily searches would you prefer to use voice? Voice has much higher latency and lower bandwidth than text/vision.
Heroku open sources oclif, their CLI framework
In a just world, they'd also be as well-known as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.
I think it's very hard, if not impossible, to write the kind of uniform standard you're talking about. I feel pretty confident that if you came up with an example standard, we could both easily come up with unintended effects and unclear gray areas.
At a previous temporary job posting in northern Europe/Scandinavia I worked with some Japanese men and women (three individuals in total) - all fantastic people by the way, I still regard myself an active/actual friend of all of them - who all basically first went there as part of a student exchange program and then realized/thought they would be happier there than back in Japan and then made an explicit decision to stay and try to get jobs.

I discussed this topic in varying degrees with these people. The message was relatively uniform: they didn't think the Japanese work culture was healthy and what they had witnessed studying in Scandinavia encouraged them to stay there. After a while they made an explicit decision to try build their life there. They had been there for like 5-10 years already when I met them; two had families with young kids and one was still dating.

This kind of "escape" requires quite strong language skills though. And social skills.

Of course these individuals were preselected in various ways, like

1) attempting to go study abroad in a Scandinavian country (that in itself is a fairly extreme decision in Japan, I have been led to believe)

2) deciding to stay

3) getting a position in the multi-national company I was temporarily working at

So I'm definitely not saying all Japanese people feel this way. But still I feel it's relevant to note this kind of escape for Japanese people who feel they are not cut out for the traditional way of doing things.
The author of the paper, Shoshana Zuboff, is also coming out with a book soon:

"The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power"

https://www.amazon.com/Age-Surveillance-Capitalism-Future-Fr...
This looks cool! I've read a couple, and love the diversity of roles and people.
What do you mean "useful"? Every viable product is useful for something. That doesn't narrow it down.
That’s ironic because I have about 500 emails from this Patrick guy spamming my inbox from 2014-2016. I’m quite sure I never opted in; I just searched my inbox for a subscription confirmation email and could not find it.

Seems like Patrick is in this thread, so sorry if I’m off-base, but I really would like to know what I did to deserve hundreds of emails from “Patrick at Price Intelligently,” because I’m pretty sure I never subscribed to his list.

(It’s not just him, btw - the worst are the GitHub profile scrapers that somehow manage to make it into my “primary” inbox)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16609116
Way to go, my friend! Best of luck in your career and life!
Workplace communication between coworkers eg on Slack is not automatically business correspondence in this sense.

In any case, you repeat the oft debunked myth of corporate right to surveillance. It does not exist. There is just partial lack of EU level protections. The national laws can and do say otherwise in many cases. As can/do binding collective bargaining agreements.
I'd guess it was all ironic (?)

quite hard to follow when his main argument is not reversed, but the rest is...
> They have to do it, whether they are on a stipend or not.

This is like saying that undergraduate students are unpaid for doing their homework.

It's part of their education to learn how to take part in the community by doing things like reviewing papers.
Well, Yahoo was founded in March 1995 and Altavista was opened in December 1995, which I think is generally the same time period.

My perception as a technical user at the time is different than yours -- Altavista was much more influential to me than the curated table of contents that Yahoo had.
good question... I'd be curious to know if they block all of Google's IP addresses.
I thought for sure that you were going to be a PDF alternative, but then I remembered the spelling is different.
This information is certainly very important for advertisers. However, if you shop on websites with Google analytics, etc. Google will have the exact same information, combined with the rest of the information it's able to collect.
>You feel it was worth the cost?

Harvard Extension is a bargain compared to most colleges. $1500-$2500 for most 4 credit classes. Don't tell those smart college students that you are getting the same class for less than half the price. I tried the online thing (Coursera, edX, Udemy, etc.) but was never as motivated as competing against real students in a real class with deadlines that have consequences. Fear of failure is a great motivator :)

> Did you do all classes online or did you go in person for some / all?

It was a mix. The online classes were more time efficient. The person classes built rewarding personal relationships with faculty and older students.

> Did you work in technology previously?

Yes, was primarily self taught. Only had access to a lousy community college in my teens. Turned me off school then.
Amazon doesn't have a million photos of me, hourly location data, and lots of other things freely provided by my "friend" network.

I'm glad there are no friends on Amazon.
Saudi Arabia's best cybersecurity body signs notice to US organization
> (Oh, and also Mayer was an idiot.)

Elaborate?
You'd have the same issue even if there weren't a specific child abuse law. Does letting your 8-year-old walk to school alone count as "general harm"? What about leaving them home alone for a day? A week? A month? Who gets to decide? If the law doesn't specify, the police and the courts decide. And if the police start making decisions that the public disagrees with, then we pass new legislation to clarify what exactly counts as general harm.
Depends on the chemistry. Normal li-ion chemistry is nominal 3.7V, max 4.2V. LiFePO4 chemistry is nominal 3.3V, max 3.6V. Plus there are other variants that have different parameters. I'm not aware of any lithium-based cell that has a nominal voltage of 1.5V, the commenter was probably thinking of alkaline cells.
I've also noticed this trend, at my university and from what I hear many from the region I'm in. I don't think that it is an isolated event.

In many classes attendance makes up a comparable portion of grades as tests, which means in order to pass classes you need attendance points and class assignments, many of which are "effort based", so in most cases one can fail 75% of tests and still pass with decent grades.
That's assuming that your mains breaker is actually functioning, usually not too many of them get tested at 100-300A since the per-circuit ones trip first.

Last time I read up on backfeeding one of the common refrains was that flipping the main breaker on many homes still left one leg hot back to the transformer. Totally out of spec but common enough to be called out. Hence why a transfer switch is legally required if you're going to run your house from a generator/etc.
Mark Zuckerberg at OC4 – New Oculus Go and 1B VR Users
About That Verification… (2009)
I got a blurry eye at the end of 2012. My GP sent me up the hospital straight away because sudden onset glaucoma is very bad.
Turns out it was optic neuritis. The hospital did loads of tests including a lumbar puncture and MRI.
The MRI showed lesions on my brain and spine, combined with ocular bands on the lumbar puncture and the other tests results it was MS.

The first couple of years it was like nothing was wrong with me. Then the last year my balance went a bit and when I was writing my right hand jumped.

We had researched about MS and if there was anything out there that could fix it... Reading about the various drugs and there side effects and long term uselessness didn't fill me with joy.

We read about HSCT, met with a doctor that has been doing it on MS patients for 20+ years with good results, he couldn't do it for me because I hadn't tried and failed 2 DMD's.

We did more research and Mexico and Russia (look up Dr Fedorenko, bit about him here http://50shadesofsun.com/hsct-can-cure-ms-says-moscows-dr-fe...) don't care about DMD's, the critera is you have to have MS.

We applied to a lot of clinics all over Europe, and Mexico and Russia. A few said yes. Mexico (http://www.hsctmexico.com/) could do it sooner so I went there.

It was just over a year ago and it's amazing. Best £50k we've ever spent.

The £30k the news is saying is because that's what it would cost the NHS.

If you google or use facebook just search MS HSCT loads of people are doing it.
Look at page 21 of that document.

"This (pollution) exclusion does not apply to bodily injury or property damage:

...
(3) caused by common household chemicals
used to maintain the residence premises."

Additionally, and perhaps even more importantly, this exclusion is in the "Personal Liability" section of the policy. The coverage/exclusions for the "Dwelling" are on pages 8-12.
I challenge you to find one documented case of the death of a child, of any age, from any number of stuffed animals up to 5 being allowed in the crib during sleep :)

I once spent a bunch of time chasing references from the AAP and others, and could not find anything like that (because I was trying to decide whether to allow a stuffed animal in the crib with my baby). The stuffed animals seem to just be lumped in to the abstract category of "soft things" but all the cases of kids actually suffocating were from other soft things, most notably soft bedding.

I did see one case of a child dying from having a whole crib full of stuffed animals (so the stuffed animals were effectively bedding), hence the limit of 5 for the challenge.
Ok, maybe I'm a complete autist, I simply can't understand where you're coming from.

> If you think the problem is solely (or mostly) on one side (regardless of which side that is), then there's no point on continuing this discussion

Literally, you are saying that unless I don't believe that the "guilt" is exactly 50/50, you won't continue the discussion? I'm communicating in good faith am I not? If not, what am I doing wrong?

Or, is the problem that I'm not agreeing with you? Because that is exactly what this feels like to me, and it is precisely the aspect of the recent HN culture that I'm complaining about.

There is no shortage of conservative science-hating idiots on forums, is that what I am? Does it seem likely that the person who first mentions Jonathan Haidt, and links to a talk very closely related to this subject, is the same type of person "who believes 100% of a communication problem is on the other side"? Political discussion is difficult, that's my point. Human beings of both political stripes suffer from the same psychological shortcomings. I am aware of this. I am pointing this out. I regularly get censored (via time-outs in the penalty box), not for posting crap (which I admittedly do on occasion, largely out of extended frustration from what I'm complaining about), but because I disagree with the general political sentiment. But then if one reads the HN guidelines, considering a downvote as a means of disagreement is correct behavior, expecting anything else is probably bordering on mentally retarded and I should just take the hint.

I suppose as a last request, I'll ask for a favor: what should I have written in my previous reply? Other than just completely agreeing with you (which I don't, and makes conversation a bit pointless), I honestly can't think of anything that would be appropriate.
That's essentially what Medium is. If you consider that their goal is to get newspapers to publish on their platform, their premium subscription is basically what OP is describing in his post.

Edit: Samschooler beat me to it.
I think Mozilla has some weird structure where it's a non-profit foundation that happens fully own a for-profit corporation. I'm not an expert on the topic, though, so maybe that counts? Probably depends on the state where it's incorporated.

The only big PBCs I've ever heard of were hospitals and private colleges. But you are right that the way Mozilla is set up, it is focused more on pushing the technology and mission of the foundation forward rather than on delivering share price increases or dividends to shareholders.
You can't be brave unless you perceive a threat. Being oblivious to a threat, or being in denial of a threat, is not bravery. Bravery requires well-considered acceptance of a recognized threat. It's a matter of being able to justify taking a risk.
This isn't remotely unsatisfying to you? Is E. Coli E. Coli, or a quark a quark, only when we pass a law that says that it is?

You don't see how this view (arbitrarily assigning personhood as a result of legal decree, rather than assenting to the plain natural, empirically verifiable fact) commits you to all sorts of morally untenable positions?

For example, "because they're human beings" is no longer a tenable objection to the person who wants to kill Jews on account of the law they passed precluding Jews from personhood. How would someone, like you, give a defense when you no longer have recourse to the plain, natural, empirically verifiable fact that they are human beings?
I worked for AOL, who Verizon recently merged with Yahoo . It was inevitable they destroyed the startups . Yahoo processes made us look lean in comparison, and we were another old web 1.0 company . The first thing they make you do is port to their tech stack and so much time is spent on that process and approvals from central teams that it's a wonder anything gets done . They've got their own package manager, own internal ec2 clone, own build system, own Linux distro, own deploy system, and if any of those things were good it might make sense, but they're mid-2000s tech in quality .

Flickr disappeared for a crucial year post merger, and apparently they were porting to Yahoo's internal account system: https://gizmodo.com/5910223/how-yahoo-killed-flickr-and-lost... . At least that produced some user facing unification compared to some of the tasks we had . The attitude has not improved since .
Steve Jobs actually envisioned building an ads product where the ads were actually beautiful and enhanced the user experience, in his final years. That was the idea behind iAd. I occasionally get these types of ads from youtube where I'm actually glad they showed it to me. No other ad product has ever met this bar for me including fb so that's why I think they deserve the market's current skepticism, that and allegedly selling political ads at different CPMs to different parties (this is not legal in other types of media).
I don't have a huge issue with the ACM or even so much with IEEE. But have you ever submitted to or reviewed for Springer or Elsevier? It's an emasculating and thankless experience, and Springer and Elsevier go get to make huge profits off of everyone's free work. (haha, we just did it for exposure, right???)

I don't mean to imply that peer review is this shitty thing that we "have" to do. I review papers regularly and generally enjoy the process. But I think it's important to point out that no, we are not being paid for it, and actually typically the incentives in our jobs mean that peer review is a "thing we have to stuff in there somewhere", and certainly not a primary task.
Become a Successful Self Publisher with These Online Courses
Move the steps around to remove switching between apps. My recommendation would be: 1, 6, 4, 2, 3, 5, with title and background info/other info as "advanced" config.

Make steps have sub steps, so step 1 is use this template, step 2 is prepare the spreadsheet; sub-step 2a is "press publish", sub-step 2b is "edit title on the main-page sheet"
Step 3 is "Publish!" With sub-step 3a being copy url, 3b paste, etc.

It requires changing the code a bit, but should feel simpler, since there's no switching back and forth, and some complexity is hidden inside the sub steps.
Testing Anti-Pattern: Setup Data Leak
http://www.zdnet.com/article/chilling-effect-lawsuits-threat...
The problem being that I don't want to read individual newspapers. There are pretty much no newspapers where I read enough of them to justify subscriptions. But there are dozens of newspapers where I read an article or two per month

Consider changing your habits. I felt this way before, too. Then I subscribed to the Washington Post and New York Times and weaned myself off news aggregators and CNN.COM, in favor of just scanning the front pages of both. I am blown away by how much better informed I am on most stories than I was before.

Something that was easy for me to miss before was that the selection of stories on aggregator sites is itself a form of editorial control. The algorithmic aggregators do a pretty terrible job; the popular vote aggregators... yikes. If you want to read a couple of articles from a lot of different sources, you're going to need to pay somebody to "design the menu" for you.

The major newspapers have spent the last century working on that problem, and I'm not sure anyone's really giving them a run for their money. Consider an NYT, WaPo, or WSJ subscription.