skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Performance reviews exist only to create a paper trail for HR in case of law suits.
That's quite a cynical way of explaining this. Is it possible to interpret this as it being allowed to use evidence seized illegally if, on balance, justice would be better served?
He's on HN on day 3, just hoping it turns into 2 weeks
> I only remember anticipating needs and delivering results.

Feedback is a gift. Without people around you to give honest, brutal feedback, you have no idea if you are really doing a good job or not.

There's a great podcast episode from Adam Grant's WorkLife about criticism that's worth listening to:
https://www.ted.com/talks/worklife_with_adam_grant_dear_bill...
What? you are saying only young single men are willing to work hard and actually function autonomously? That is so offensive I can't fathom you actually believe that.
I love when it happens like that, but many companies have managers rotating very quickly. So you are left in the dust. Its only fair for the previous manager to formalize their thinking and position on how they felt about your performance. So that the next manager can see that and you're not ending back to square one.
I don't think it's the literal definition that's being debated. The question was about 'do you think you're doing the wrong thing', because saying someone is a scab is a moral judgement, not just a factual one.
Ahh, yes, forgot about that - thanks !
Many Americans say we don't have free speech here in Europe. Does that mean I can only form a "low-information" opinion? I'm curious.
I've heard the same story during strikes over here by public service workers. It's a story designed to engender sympathy from a public most of whom in reality have inferior pay and conditions to the strikers.

The public service are the last unionised workers in Britain and are about the only people who ever go on strike any more.
>While surfing Swedish sites in Tallinn it felt like I was surfing from my home in Stockholm.

You might've been on the same network. Telia is one of the largest (the largest?) ISPs in Estonia.
don't do this please.

I run my own gitea instance, and for repos that are in multiple places, I leave a note in the readme as to what the canonical URL is. If someone wants to open a PR or an issue on Github I don't wanna be hostile by having them create another account just to ask a question. Once the patch is merged, it gets pushed on all remotes.

If you have a large project with lots of contributors and activity, and you actively want to discourage contributions in the wrong place, you can disable issues or PRs for that one repo.

Also, people browse code using GitHub clients, serving an empty Readme is not a good idea to break that behaviour.
I've personally experienced the "effective pause" and strongly feel against it. This assumes that software engineers always have ideas on how to fix things and are not autonomous.

In my opinion, it's helps much more to break down/simplify the engineer's thought and the problem they are trying to solve. And then, try to solve it together...
> We use machine learning to evaluate content against our advertiser guidelines.

This means Google violates civil rights law by maintaining a list of phrenological behavior based on racial, sexual, and demographic data.

Advertisers choosing videos to show up in also means selecting which videos to filter out. This means Google has a list of acceptable behavior for blacks, gays, and women to perform such filtering.
I think the point being made is:

- People on average have less disposable incoming due to rising costs of housing, education and healthcare.

- Some goods (e.g. computers) have gotten dramatically cheaper in the last 20 years.

So you can save a little by not having the latest products and services, but it is insignificant compared to the overall financial challenges people face. [1]

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/16/avocad...
A strike authorization is common during negotiations to put pressure on the company, said UPS spokesman Glenn Zaccara. Even with that, the union can’t go on strike until after the current contract expires on July 31.

So, they still have a bit of time to agree on terms.
Being able to share code is really not that great because you don't share that much code between front and back in reality. Being able to share the paradigms, structure, mindset and tooling (like linters, formatters, code generators, packagers, whatever..) is what's awesome. You remove a whole lot of context switches and cognitive dissonance, smoothing the train of thought which greatly eases the expression of ideas.

Source: used quite a bunch of golang + gopherjs, ruby + opal, js + node
I definitely agree that it’s a red herring - the majority of people are going to judge their position relative to the world around them, not to some time 30-40 years ago.

It’s pretty much the same line parents use on their children - I don’t think it works for them, much less adults.
Article's solution is wrong, but at least the headline is right!
> That's certainly MTA management's narrative when asked by, say, the New York Times.

If you're saying that the MTA is trying to misrepresent their role in their own dysfunction when speaking to the news in order to generate coverage that makes them look more favorable, then the MTA should fire their whole PR team, because they're clearly incompetent.

It's pretty clear to anybody who's following the issue that the MTA and TWU have an unethically incestuous relationship, in which the TWU and MTA essentially collude to extract as much money from the state as they can while literally not even doing the bare minimum to keep things running.
Cambridge Analytica 'destroyed by bitter and jealous whistleblower'
Why do raises and bonuses have to match up with yearly performance reviews? Why not make them more immediate. Great launch everyone here’s a bonus. You went above and beyond for this release so we’d like to give you this bonus. You’ve been working very hard the last while and we think you deserve a raise. Nothing says it has to be at specific times.
TIL not accepting PRs and issues on every platform is "hostile."
Unemployment is at a record low. Workers are smart to organize and strike now, as it's a (labor) seller's market.
For companies that are physically there, but afaik Mozilla is quite spread out and people work remotely most of the time.
I’ve always thought of version control systems and issue trackers as separate products. GitHub just happens to implement them both in one place.

As others are alluding to in the comments, I’m highly skeptical of coupling the issue tracker and other non-VCS features with git. A far better solution would be to keep them decoupled, but easily pluggable and extendable.

In fact, this is basically the status quo with any issue tracker that has git integration (ability to tag issues in commits, etc.) If this was the only problem GitHub solved, then it would be competing with pivotal and the like.

But issue tracking is not the only problem GitHub solves. The reason GitHub grew so large is because it created a community within a single space. It gave devs a place to collaborate on, and discover projects within an environment highly integrated with VCS and issue tracking.

People don’t publish to GitHub for the issue tracker or repo hosting. Those are solved problems and many companies even use separate software for them. People publish to GitHub for the visibility, discoverability, and community.

There is no technical solution that can usurp the advantages of GitHub as a social network, just like creating mastodon is not enough to kill twitter.

The technology features of GitHub are easily substitutable. The community is not. Network effects are real, and they are the reason Microsoft felt confident paying $7.5bn for a platform that has no major technical differentiation from its competitors, but does have a huge and defensible moat around mindshare, due to its main value-add being rooted in network effects.
Some time in early 90s I have actually set up a small ballet production with that album. :)
A valid argument.
Dane here - we have a pretty mature union culture which is about more than just maximizing the salary. Unions actually become a boon for both employer and employee.

The way we see it, unions are best used when there is a power discrepancy between employer and employee. In the end, your value as an employee is how much it costs to replace you. Simple as that.

So if you are educated in a specialized field, you have bargaining power (and you don't need a union). If you are working in a more generalist area, you have none whatsoever - it is an illusion (exception being if the demographics means 100% employment).

What the union does is of course to band generalists together so they have strike power. That sucks for the company. But what the Danish unions tend to do is demand eduction, lifting the generalist work into a more specialized position. You can always get good at a job.

This means that the company may have to pay a more expensive salary, but get a much improved worker and/or product. Paying 50% extra for twice the productivity is a good investments, even if you have to pay for some of the education of the former generalist.

So rather than just demand more pay, the unions demand more education and higher standards. They also demand better pay, of course - but in the end they are interested in many members working rather than few members getting ridiculous payments.

Mature unions are good for the economy. Corrupt or immature unions can be a terrible ball-and-chain for a society.
That indicates to me that you're probably a bad manager

When I was broke and had no connections, I was willing to work the way you described.

Now that I have options, I'm not willing to expend that energy when I could save it for gym, girlfriend, self-education after hours, etc.

If I'm broke and need to switch to another industry or you're paying me multiple times my next best offer I'll do that.

Otherwise, no, my manager needs to do his job instead of asking me to do it for him

That said I'm now entering a graduate school and am willing to do that in this context because I'm intrinsically interested in learning the applied math I'll be working on

Software jobs, no

You would probably need to hire people who are interested in running their own business im a few years and mentor them towards that end to get that kind of commitment in my opinion
Claiming the presented result as fishy based on the given argument is equivalent to claiming the data has been forged, the scientists are dishonnest and have unethical behavior. Unless the results are proven wrong, such claims of fishyness is defamatory. This is what I call judging by its nose. It's not because such behavior has become common place that it is correct and acceptable.

It would make a huge difference if the OP simply called to be cautious for the given reason. This preserves the status of unknown to the validity of the reported fact without taking position one way or the other.

It is very disapointing that people can't make the difference and I maintain that such behavior is anti-scientific. Claiming the opposit doesn't make your point true.

People who make claims like this fishyness are people who have a very high opinion on their ability to distinguish true from false facts just by guessing. That's monkey science.
I think we should just go back to the old rules of no flagrant political submissions.

I think it's been proven time-and-time again that HN can't handle politics. It just turns in to low-effort garbage.
You're presupposing an old-school 3-tier architecture. Baking that client:server approach into your org structure is not necessarily optimal.
Speaking of capacity, I just got this error trying to build an EKS cluster.

UnsupportedAvailabilityZoneException: Cannot create cluster because us-east-1b, the targeted availability zone, does not currently have sufficient capacity to support the cluster. Retry and choose from these availability zones: us-east-1a, us-east-1c, us-east-1d

But yeah, sure, keep telling yourself the AWS doesn't have a problem with power and compute capacity. Or maybe it's just poor product design?

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/eks/latest/userguide/troubleshoo...

They should've called it Generally Available(ish)
I don't believe this. People tend to max out what they pay for their mortgage so if they have a tax deduction they just will pay more for houses. Which then benefits the owning class.

If you remove mortgage deduction, I'll buy 10 houses just because others can't use their deductions to offset the mortgage.

There are all cash buyers sitting around the corners.

I advocate for capping the total mortgage deduction.
In exploit development parlance, a gadget is a block of assembly instructions executed outside their intended order by an attacker-induced control transfer. A gadget might start in the middle of a basic block, for instance, and be invoked when an attacker uses a memory corruption vulnerability to overwrite a function pointer with an address they control.

"Return oriented programming", which is kind of a dumb name, is the idea of harvesting gadgets from the text of a program and then using them as primitives for a new program. Gadgets are stitched together by the "return" instruction (hence the name ROP). When used by attackers this way, "ret" isn't really "returning" so much as it's being used as an arbitrary indirect jump mechanism.
I think a lot of people prefer to be part of a team as it helps spread the responsibility (and more importantly, blame) around. I've worked a few "high powered" corporate jobs, and most so-called team-players at that level are really just team-blamers, yet conniving enough to single-handedly take credit for anything good that happens, while still appearing humble. It's pretty much why I quit and started my own firm. I like having the responsibility on my shoulders and enjoy putting my neck on the line. When I get something wrong, I'm only answerable to me (rather than be reprimanded by some know-it-all boss), and I can pick myself up quickly, reaim and try again. It's a less stressful experience with better results. For my staff, we discuss things, but I will never ever talk down to them or reprimand them like kids. If I do, I bet they'll just leave as soon as they can, as I did.
Torus: A Toolkit for Docker-First Data Science
I don't pay enough attention to know how this is different from what PaX team did with RAP 3 years ago:

https://pax.grsecurity.net/docs/PaXTeam-H2HC15-RAP-RIP-ROP.p...
When you couple services together, you decrease the potential user base.

For example, Github issues are underpowered for many people. But at least you can ignore them and use your own service.

Many source control systems tried to offer all-in-one platforms but it’s never worked so far. In fact, we don’t even do PRs the way the authors of git intended.

For integrations, it might be better to settle on a configuration file format and maybe some conventions. Maybe that could be checked into your repo.

But then you need fine-grained control over who can modify that, and encryption to keep passwords secret, and those aren’t standard features of source control either.

Maybe we could come up with conventions that were great for hobbyists and the enterprise. But open source communities and standards committees are really bad at that, compared to just leaving it the marketplace.
data syncing
"People aren't as idealistic as they used to be because they were taken advantage of and learned from it."

Those of us that are trying to build high-performing organizations will still avoid and remove those types of people. And we will continue to reward and not take advantage of our people to fill our end of the bargain.

Further, those of us that are also highly self-motivated will continue to leave bad situations, not become slackers in response to being taken advantage of.
> One way to think about it is in terms of economic theory. Negotiations are fairest when both sides have equal power. But you have approximately one job, and a company typically has way more employees. It's more painful to lose a job than to have 1 employee quit. So the negotiation is fundamentally unfair.

This is not correct. The company competes with all other companies for the same job. Not only that, but companies go bankrupt more often than people do. Businesses are the frail side of the equation, if you make any.

> o when it comes time to negotiate your annual raise, it's not you alone dueling with your boss (and the whole corporate hierarchy backing him up). Instead it's you and all your colleagues getting together, sending in some representatives, and saying, "Profits are way up this year, so we all deserve decent raises. Let's talk numbers."

Now let me answer with actual economic theory: microeconomics. The fundamental way to make something get a higher price is to increase its utility or to decrease its supply.
Unions can increase salaries if they increase productivity (which they dont, in fact they do the exact opposite in the majority of cases, worker health being the best exception to this rule) and decrease supply (not allowing to hire other workers).
I fit this profile a bit, and it's hard to get hired because that quality is not a tag on a resume.

Alas it even caused me harm in college, teachers weren't very welcoming my enthusiasm.
This assumes there is now way to find a company that fairly reward the effort you make, at least according to what you are content with.
The Island dance
Do you have kids? Does his neighbor have kids? Maybe he has sensitive plants and the acidity will kill them. It doesn't matter. Some rando is pissing on his property. It isn't a huge deal, but it is unpleasant.
When feedback is continuous and healthy throughout the year, I think the review itself acts just as an amplifier. It lets you really praise someone officially in a big way for good work. If someone has been seriously troublesome, it should never be the first time that has come up, but it lets you magnify how important it is that their performance issues get resolved. In that sense, it can serve a dual role as a sort of PIP. The review is also an opportunity for the manager to sift through all that continuous feedback over the entire past year and condense the important stuff down into some easy-to-understand big picture ideas.

Reviews can also be an opportunity for the direct report to get career plans in writing from their boss. For instance, if you want a promotion to X, the result of the review may be a written plan by your boss on how you can achieve that promotion.
Again an article about the economist magazine...
I don't care what Apple claims to care about, just like I don't care about Microsoft's newfound love for free software (haha).

However, I highly doubt that government and enterprise purchases make up a large share of Apple's income. And consequently I'm convinced that news of a backdoor in iMessage would cause Apple way more financial damage than these things did to Microsoft: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5728294, https://www.scmagazineuk.com/skype-backdoor-missed-by-micros... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-...

And the more Apple doubles down on protecting its users, the bigger this financial incentive becomes. Of course that doesn't stop me from supporting better legislation (GDPR was a great start).
This post speaks to me as I've spent the last 6+ years working on making performance reviews better. There are many things wrong with performance reviews. For me, the worst thing is that usually they are done only once a year.

We tend to remember most recent things and assign them greater value. This means that if a below-average colleague did something phenomenal a month before the review, they will receive a more favorable review. Along the same vein, if a well-performing colleague slips up right before review time, this will unfairly penalize her. Annual performance reviews are bad because they are done 50 weeks too late.

We've been trying to address this at the current company I am working with. At 15Five we are building tools for continuous employee feedback and performance assessment.

There should be multiple communication processes going on all at once, with different cadence, that all add up to one's perception of an employee's performance.

We have weekly check ins, which are meant to be answered in less than 15 minutes and reviewed in less than five (hence the name!). People set goals one week and rate them the next. This has a biweekly cadence. Longer terms objectives and key results can be tracked as well, usually on a monthly or quarterly. All this feeds into a performance review, which ideally should happen quarterly, but can be done less often. The difference is that you don't spend a week before the performance review is due trying to remember how each of your team members did. You have that right in front of you, as you've spent the last X months interacting with them, having conversations, and earmarking notable feedback and conversations.

Our customers are happy with this process as an alternative to annual performance reviews.
That's not the only definition of "fair". I agree with you, but a lot of people see fair as having equal representation of each sub-group according by their overall percentage of the population.
I feel like everybody is overestimating the cost of self hosting. I run my own instance of GitLab, but the "costly" part was setting it up and making backups. Since then I just "apt-get upgrade" and there is a new version and that's it. Since I set it up, I haven't touched any of the configuration files.

The availability guarantees are much easier to keep for a small team than for thousands, so you don't really have to worry about that either.
You find it hard to find someone who works as well as you do but wants to work for less than equal partnership? Interesting.
We should just store the database in a database. Easy peasy.
I'm sorry this comment is being down voted. It's possible that its tone is very slightly questionable, but the meat of the comment is actually an interesting point I'd never heard before. So, TIL. Thanks.
I don't think anyone believes a strike is a great business move.

Strikes are to be avoided if possible but they're a forcing function to improve work conditions, not a strategy to boost revenue.
Our team doesn't do performance reviews. We publicly praise good qualities in people and reward them for doing wonderful things. Having a culture of appreciation inspires people to become the best person they can be at a pace they are comfortable with.
Which part of history are we rhyming with at the moment?
Build Your Own Free, Serverless Comment Box – Part 1
High grade sarcasm detected.
I agree with you completely and am flabbergasted you're being downvoted on an ostensibly startup-oriented forum. The comment you replied to managed to be ageist and sexist, too.
The Education Tax Reduces Inequality and the Incentive to Work
Could you educate the rest of us on the difference :)?
> Do you know what the rules are around defining a bargaining unit? Is this completely up to the union? Or are there rules?

The union can basically claim whatever unit they want, within reason (and then some). It's completely legal to define membership as a requirement for inclusion in the bargaining unit. Beyond that, the boundaries are usually drawn by things like job title, role/responsibility, geographical location, etc.).

Unions can also retroactively redefine bargaining units after elections and use that as an argument to invalidate elections that they lose. In theory the NLRB is responsible for judging this, but they tend to favor the unions heavily, which is one of the reasons that decertifying a union is nearly impossible in practice - even if the employees win the election to decertify their union, the union could claim that the bargaining unit is different, and that they didn't get a majority of the new unit.
I didnt understand why this mattered either.

One is storage of data that can be downloaded whenever, the other is basically a comment field.