skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, I tend to do this, but rarely (about once in a couple of months) traffic gets so bad on a specific part of my commute (where I literally have no viable alternative routes) that I'd wished I'd kept it on so I could turn around and just WFH.

Waze has saved me a couple of times where I find that out 5-10m through the drive and just turn around so I don't sit through important meeting in the car.

Google/Apple maps just don't update fast enough as they're not crowdsourced.
You seem to have hand-waved away the main point I made - I don’t think that regulation is simple at all. “They need to be regulated from the day they start work” - what does that even mean? Even if we accept that strong regulation is required - what are you actually proposing we regulate? You say it’s simple - so what is it?
What if the skill the founder lacks is in leadership or vision? People like Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg who can code AND lead are the absolute minority. I know more than a few founders who, while charismatic, absolutely do not have the temperament or skills to grow the business beyond 50 or people.
According to Zuck, yes.

>They "trust me". Dumb fucks.
I'm sure this has been repeated ad nauseam here, but a good rule of thumb:

Did you pay for the product?
No: You are probably the product.
Yes: You might not also be the product.
I'm not sure how to make my point more clearly - that's exactly the part to which I'm objecting.
Standardization vs. Professionalism in IT Recruitment
Mac and iOS developer at AgileBits here.

We don't use Electron for our app. 1Password for Mac is a vast majority Objective-C, with a smaller percentage of Swift, and a few web based views (for certain 1Password.com features) which load in a WKWebView.

The rest of the Apple team at AgileBits is very happy writing native code.

Kyle

AgileBits
Agreed. And leading and inspiring a team is done by having a burning vision, communicating it to the team, getting them excited and making it their vision too and doing that on a daily basis.

Day to day operations can be handled by COO, CFO, CMO, VP and other lieutenant roles. Why not hire Steve Singh as chief operating officer? Why not even lower down the totem pole? Is it because there's a fear that 'talent' of that quality may not take the job without a CEO title? Money can solve that. If there's an ego in the way, perhaps that's a problem.

I've scaled our business from 2 people to 10 to 20 and now to 30 with high 8 figures in revenue. I'm quite comfortable that I can scale it to any number. The reason is that I am very comfortable hiring people that are smarter than me and putting them in leadership roles in the organization, stepping back and trusting them and heavily relying on them to do an excellent job.

Stepping back and trusting takes an incredible leap of faith as a founder. You also need to be comfortable asking Fortune 5000 execs to work for you in a VP or C suite role. You also need to be able to pay them. If you can do those three things, you can assemble a team of lieutenants that will run their business divisions, provide you excellent visibility in all areas without over communicating and you will be able to scale into infinity as they replicate your strategy for scaling by hiring trusted lieutenants.

It also helps if you know how little you actually know, can be completely honest about that with your exec team and ask them for help and input and trust them to give you what you need.

I haven't experienced this, but it seems to me that firing founder CEOs and 'hiring a mature CEO' is conventional VC wisdom and it's based on a pattern they've seen work. e.g. Cisco. Once you raise big VC, I'm not sure that as a young founder you actually have a say unless you specifically build controls into your funding agreements. In FB, Zuck controls about 60% of the voting rights. He's 33. You have to ask yourself if he'd be CEO if the voting structure was different.
Never asked to change math or stop relying on algorithms. If you think those are the only solutions you're not thinking hard enough. Google is part of the problem, dealing with the problem involves Google solving its part of the problem.
> That a query for an innocent term...

I take strong issue with the "obvious" conclusion that Google knows which terms are innocent. Disclaimer: In this specific case, I agree with you that "black girls" has an innocent connotation and am not suggesting otherwise. Please do not misinterpret my thoughts below.

Shall we require Google to be ever vigilant about the meaning of words in use at various times by the various communities of the world, and to entrust them with the responsibility for determining the innocence or guiltiness of words or phrases for all mankind?

If we shall require such effort of Google, ought we not elevate Google to the role of judge over other matters of humankind given their good stewardship over matters of innocence and guilt?

Taken to the limit the argument advocates the establishment of an echo chamber to wrap tightly around each one's subjective interpretation of their reality. Isn't this the exact opposite of what we should be trying to achieve?

Have we not had enough of this Brave New World?
That phrase is widely misused. The intended usage is where a rule is implied by the explicit stating of an exception. For example, a sign labeled "No Parking 9AM - 7PM" states an exception, and implies that parking is allowed outside of the time. The stating of the exception proves the existence of the more general rule.

In this case, the appropriate term would be "survivorship bias". Those who survive are noticed and used to generalize to the group, even if their survival is atypical of the group as a whole.
Congress hasn't acted to automate the world; they won't act to fix the economic model either.

It's not up to Congress. It's up to us.
Same here, would love this when you have Bay Area. But not until then...
Pretty much what one Google CS rep said “you assumed this email wasn’t important, ignored it”
To be clear, the parent poster was arguing that we need to start testing these vehicles even before some sort of tests and legal framework can be devised to ensure them to be road worthy..

My argument was that we have no such urgency, and we can and should wait till we have such a framework in place.
Neither here nor there, but as a conversational style I find that when i'm asking a legitimate but pointed question, people are more likely to take accept my question as an honest one if I open with

> Are you saying that ...

vs

> You are saying that ...
Pssss. Over here. Down in the reply section. You seem to be under a misapprehension so I'm going to let you into a secret; this is just between you and me. I'm going to write in lower case so nobody else sees this, lean in close and don't go spreading this around...

you don't have to buy a phone every year. apple directly supports its phones for 4 or 5 years and even then they don't self destruct. you can even go out in public with an old phone - it is not illegal.

shhhh, someones coming.

HOW ABOUT THAT LOCAL SPORTS TEAM, HUH? <whistle>
I read somewhere that the only way of making truly global software is to sell ads, because it effectively means big companies are subsidizing your distribution. A lot of people in the world don't have money to spend on subscriptions.

Not defending Facebook though. Selling ads shouldn't imply lousy privacy.
> I've known maybe a handful of people I'd consider 10x in my career.

I've only known one. And having that type of engineer isn't necessarily all it's cracked up to be.

The other members of the team would discuss a problem, hash out a couple of potential solutions, and then begin assessing how long it will take and who will do which parts.

Two days later the 10x engineer would drop an amazing implementation of the solution into our laps.

The result is that everyone else on the team got demoralized and stressed about whether they were going to have meaningful work to point to in their performance assessments. The entire team ended up blowing apart.
Incidentally I think - this is how you debias an algorithm: you marginalise on all the discrimination criteria and check to see if it is balanced and respectful on each subdomain. Google should have a set of automated tests for that, and it's not that hard - a team of AI and sociology experts could do it. The same type of problem is the capital sin of FB - they amplify bias intentionally, selling us to the highest bidder.
Capsule Networks as a New Approach to Image Recognition
IBM Plex – A new typeface
Cool idea, but I suspect you are being downvoted for perceived snark.
If Google was still concerning itself with representing the content of the internet, this would be the case, but increasingly Google is tailoring its results for whatever other varied ends.

If it is curating the data, then how it curates matters. In this case, they've curated most of the porn from the first page of results, from the looks of it.

Not sure how that makes me feel.
Agreed. It's amazing how many people (including many here) prioritize being CEO of a successful company over being the founder of a successful company. Attaching your Self worth to the continued adoration of others in the business community is silly and dangerous. I know people who founded hugely successful businesses and their moving on from being CEO played a big role.
Startpage +1
A pringles can, and somebody sympathetic within a mile, and no problem.

Unless they threaten to throw him out for accessing the internet.
What's your take on the recent releases that claim that the US government is funding the Tor network and its development? Information obtained from FOIA requests.
Good content in your guide to your new tech leads, laying out expectations right up front and giving them guidance. Most companies don't have anything like that, in my experience.
from the autojump readme:

> Directories must be visited first before they can be jumped to.

Well that's annoying..
Ah, I see now elsewhere that the driver died in the hospital later...
> So you are suggesting that we regulate

Nope. I'm answering a question about the practical difference between targeted and non-targeted propaganda. I was only pointing out the problem, not suggesting any specific of general solution.

> Should we ban

We don't ban such things on broadcast media, either. As I said above, in broadcast the problem is self-correcting because other parties have a chance to make countering claims (legal solutions are available but that's an extreme that doesn't happen often). The only thing I would consider trying to implement is visibility into targeted-message mediums. I also don't have a detailed proposal for how to do this, it's just wishful thinking.

> just because people are to stupid

We can't lay 100% the blame onto the people being misled if there are significant resources being spent by sophisticated actors trying to mislead them. And regardless, if a voter is misled they are not the only person impacted by that. Their failing is an externality to society as a whole, which justifies the consideration of safeguards.
Well, it's like the restaurant example.

If I search for "restaurants", it shouldn't give me restaurants in Shanghai because that's the city with the largest population. It should give me Northern California, since that's where I live and Google knows that.

Similarly, Google might reasonably infer that if someone is searching for their own race, sexuality, or religion, they're probably more interested in information or support groups than porn. Not that both can't be served as results... just... priorities of what people are looking for.
Apple needs to vocally lobby for privacy legislation or it'll be way too easy for the internet industry to squash it. Facebook and Google have been using trade groups to fight privacy legislation for years where it can be "out of sight, out of mind" [1][2]. Having the most valuable company in the tech industry go against them in a public way would expose the rest of them in a way they've been able to avoid until now.

[1] https://calmatters.org/articles/facebook-even-as-it-apologiz...

[2] http://fortune.com/2016/06/30/facebook-google-facial-recogni...
Only if the technology exists to do so.

Given the above discussion about a nuke plant, think of all the complexity inside it:
- monitors
- alerts & triggers
- valves
- compressors and other rotating equipment
- fire safety
- electrical systems

All of those have to be checked, tested, maintained, and fixed on a periodic basis over their lifetimes.

An incompetent person (or group) will eventually be the cause of something.

Maybe 100 years in the future we'll have self-operating nuke plants, but doubtful in my lifetime because of the incredible scale of complexity.
I'm only interested in 2 things.
a) Is he happy, was the journey worth it?
b) How much money did he make?

So long as he is happy and he didn't expose himself to any financial ruin. It's all good.
I agree, I don't think it said that when I wrote my comment.
that is an intense google sheet. :)
> I have already fully served any theoretical (I haven’t been charged) ‘bail violation’ whilst in prison and under house arrest. So why is there a warrant for my arrest?”

Not in the least bit arrogant. "Well, I hid out here because I feared extradition. That should basically count as my sentence for violating bail, right?"
Counterpoint: Apple doesn't want to lobby for privacy, because it's one of their selling features.
Yeah those are good points.

It is a pity Reddit has become the go-to discussion platform because you have one identity tied across multiple interests (unless you happen to create specialised accounts). It's also plagued with the eternal September because users easily hop between subreddits. As such, few people bother reading the FAQ or searching before asking a question.
Was this article supposed to be a joke at the time it was written? Facebook had been open to the public for a year at that point and it was clear that Myspace didn't even have a monopoly left to lose.
If the 'right to be forgotten' is enforceable worldwide, it will be enforceable regarding the internet archive as well.
> It also seems easy to post a notice saying: "Hey, searchers like you have found this query to contain many irrelevant or inappropriate results. Beware!"

They did exactly this in 2004, when searches for "jew" brought up anti-Semitic website "Jew Watch" as the top result (because, as a linguistic quirk, "Jew" tends to be used in a slur-like way and Jewish organizations tend to use "Jewish," and the algorithm at the time considered those as different words): they placed an ad at the top of the page with an explanation of the "Offensive Search Results," distancing themselves from the content and explaining the "Jew"/"Jewish" thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew_Watch#Google_Search_result...

http://sethf.com/anticensorware/google/jew-watch/jew-watch-c... (and yes, that's Netscape Navigator!)

http://web.archive.org/web/20050123081919/http://www.google....
What did she expect for "professor style"? If I were hand-delivering results and knew it was from a black, asian, or white person in the US, why would I return different results? Someone entering a general query like that probably wants what the common interpretation is. Which is not going to be a black professor. Searching "professor style for black women" returns the results she presumably thinks should be the default for her.

As much as I hate Google, they seem to be delivering exactly what they should. Their job isn't to try to change people's minds, it is to find what they are looking for. What's next? Search for "geek guy" and it's all white. Should we be upset? Someone searching for "geek guy" is probably looking for exactly what Google returns in this case and all the others she highlights.

As far as "black girls"... What kind of results are people expecting? Who is actually searching for black girls? Probably people looking for porn... Why should Google return suboptimal results because you got offended?

Same for "three black teens". It's not Google's fault that so much news is reporting on crime committed containing that phrase. Did she actually check crime statistics? Maybe "three black teens" get mugshots and commit crimes together at a vastly higher rate than "three white teens". Outside of porn, who is searching for this phrase? If you want "clean" and friendly results, try searching "stock photo three black teens".

If anything, this article shows that Google's personalization should detect people that want to search things (that they wouldn't really search for in earnest) in order to be offended then display poor quality results to avoid this "issue".

In truth though, I would imagine that if she and other black women often searched "professor style" then didn't click any results and immediately searched for "professor style for black women" then Google would pick up on their results being suboptimal and change. My guess is that no one actually makes these searches outside of making a political point, so personalization cannot fix it.
Well, we do employ "true" managers (if by true you mean "people" managers), too. There are two types of managers in our org: people managers and technical managers. Tech Leads are the interface between product and engineering. Engineering Managers are the interface between Engineers and Webflow/life/career/support/advocacy. Tech leads do have to possess some people skills, too, but their technical expertise makes them key for playing that role and for setting expectations. That said, they can improve their people managements skills as well, which gives them a glimpse into if they might enjoy moving into Engineering Management.

> How do you deal with the fact that most developers do not like management?

The role is completely optional. It's a "hat" that our engineers pass around when someone wants to improve in that area or wants to create momentum in something they believe in. Once a project is over, the Lead can simply take the hat off if they do so choose. It's our job to make the role so enticing that they _want_ to pursue it. That's tricky, but that's why we write these kinds of guides. :)

> Have you ever had a Tech Lead who didn't want to actually manage other devs, but just liked having extra authority and access to stakeholders?

We've normalized the Engineering, Tech Lead, and Engineering Manager hierarchy. Each have specific roles and responsibilities, but they are all considered the same level, and have relatively the same access to stakeholders and possess the same authority in their respective domains. We want someone to take on the Tech Lead role because _they_ want to, not because it's a power grab.

> What do you do, then?

If that were to happen, however, we'd likely encourage the behaviors we wished to see by also demonstrating those behaviors ourselves. We try and remove the "power" incentive from the equation, and instead reward the role for being a force multiplier. This is a trick I picked up from some of the amazing managers at NoRedInk. (thanks Josh Leven!)
What do you think are they key deficiencies in most founders that prevents them from being able to scale their businesses? I'd be very curious to hear.

(Are they unwilling to delegate and trust others to make decisions? Overly focused on trying to be involved in and influence everything?)
Operas VPN is not even a VPN tho. Check their phrasing they call it 'Web vpn' or something like this and already committed in the past that the naming scheme for their proxy was just a marketing trick.

Written from Opera tho. So not saying it sucks :)
Check mine out, moreencores.com

Specify your nearest major city for best results
I think you're reading too much into it. "Advanced" doesn't necessitate any change or advancement over previous models. It's imprecise marketing speak.
For more information on how to connect the cluster to GitLab please see https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/clusters/
>> you dont make your company succeed by giving up control.

Of course you do. Every time a new hire is made the founder gives up some control. The secretary now chooses the paper for the copy machine. The sales guy now enunciates the detail of the offering to the prospect. The engineer codes in her specific way. Growing a company is ALL about giving up control in exchange for accelerated growth of the business.
New Tower in Public Beta:  What's New
That's my thinking as well. Regulations help the incumbent, not the up-and-coming.
And likewise, I can tell you from experience that nowhere near even 50% of the people brought in that supposedly have the ability to scale a company don't really know anything other than just enough pattern matching to cosplay as Jack Welch in front of investors, and how to minimize their blame when shit hits the fan.
many years ago, i had bet a friend that facebook would begin to decline in 2016. seems like i might have been off by two years. shucks

my bet was predicated on (1) people realizing the insidiousness of facebook, (2) the cool kids moving on to other platforms, and (3) mobile communications being omnipresent and eclipsing facebook (solid but not earth-shatteringly original reasons).

i'd attribute the demises of friendster and myspace primarily to #2 (with underlying product and marketing issues exacerbating it). but more than that was required to topple the massive network effects moat that facebook built. notice that it wasn't another social network (e.g., snapchat) that will have overtaken it but rather a confluence of other issues striking in concert (some self-inflicted).
It's a difficult discussion because if you look at the literature regarding algorithmic fairness, there really is no measure of equality that satisfies all notions of fairness. If you force representation of seemingly underrepresented patterns in the data then you implicitly engage in social engineering.

This might be legitimate and reasonable, but you probably should be transparent about the fact that you "unbiased" your data by externally imposing a certain view of what the "fair" data should look like.

Ultimately it's a discussion for social scientists or laywers concerned with discrimination, it's not really in the realm of being fixable by engineering or computer science imho.
I think you’re being unsympathetic and overly dramatic. We’re all human and mistakes are inevitable. Some mistakes could cost a person’s livelihood or safety.
Drupal Core – Highly Critical – Remote Code Execution
This is a terminology problem. If you are using a VPN, a browser could not possibly leak your real IP, as all traffic would be encapsulated by the VPN.

What is being described is actually a proxy.
This is the quality content I come to HN for hahah.

Psss. keeping it on the down low, I do think apple should've been louder and more clear about the whole battery thing. Cynics could interpret that as forcing upgrades by making people's phones slow. The repairability and upgradability has also been not great lately, but anyway, my Apple products have still lasted me a solid 3-5 years (:
...but, if you're growing too much, you might be cancer.