skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think it's a combination. It's a natural consequence of both our economic and political model.

Markets that allow unregulated investment of private capital have a natural tendency to concentrate wealth through multiplier effects. Basically the more money you have, the easier it is to make money from your money, and the more money you get.

But wealth is power. As you get more money, you have more money you can use to manipulate the political system in any of a myriad of ways. Everything from donating to campaigns, to hiring lobbyists, to funding ads, to the revolving door and regulatory capture, to just straight up bribes.

So I do think there are natural concentrating tendencies that we can introduce policies, like UBI, to counter-act. But there is also pretty clear evidence of those with wealth manipulating the system to grant themselves more of both wealth and power.

Just look at the lobbying the wealthy have done over the past few decades that have taken America's formerly very progressive taxation system down to where it is today. That didn't just happen. People with wealth pushed for it. The same can be said of any number of other changes to the regulatory and economic infrastructure that primarily benefited those with wealth and harmed those with out (weakening of unions and collective bargaining, the weakening of financial regulations, weakening of environment regulations, and so forth). That stuff didn't just happen. It wasn't a natural outgrowth of the system. People made it happen.
Moving due to the L tunnel shutdown next year, I've been asking if any other train comes nearly as often (I rarely wait more than 5 minutes). This is a very timely list, thanks!
> No mention of marketing, recruiting, facilities, etc...

There is a difference between warranted overhead (what you mentioned) and excessive profit on the back of the laborers. First one is fine, but the second one is what drives the wealth inequality that is slowly tearing apart most Western societies.
> If you're a VP and suddenly someone asks, "Hey, can you promote or fire Person X?" What are you to go off of? Just a manager's recommendation? And you think perf reviews are biased?

This is why I don't work for large orgs anymore. If you can't trust the manager's recommendation then why is that person a manager, in a position of power over people's lives? It's almost like acknowledging that you're too big to know whether your people can be trusted or not, so you need formalized checks and balances. I get that this in fact may be reality, and I also get that we need big companies to create many of these cool things modernity has given us, but man I have no desire at all to be part of such a thing.
Don't you forget a little something ?

Buying the server, reading the docs, setting it up, buying an URL domain, binding it to the server, getting the backup server, setting it up, testing that everything works, training the team on the new UI, documenting the whole things for when you are not available or it's not your job anymore, blocking one team of 5 devs from working for 2 hours (or a man day of work) because something went wrong just once...

It's not just resources you spend on useless things. It's resources you take __from__ useful things.

Or worst, you are in a company. Now you have to REQUEST a server, ask a sysadmin to set it up, the security team to approve your software, the budget to validate the payment and the blessing of your network authorities.

Then, you change job/client/whatever. What do you do ? Do it again ?
Issue tracking is all about managing changes to objects (issues) made over time by multiple people from different machines. Seems like a perfect case for VCS to me.
Thanks for sharing this story!
Google "why does dehydration cause headache" and see "the brain can temporarily contract or shrink from fluid loss. This mechanism causes the brain to pull away from the skull, causing pain and resulting in a dehydration headache"
I do believe that’s on purpose...
"as in the ability to create diff objects and branch and rearrange them arbitrarily in a pretty simple way, and have multiple people working on these branches at the same time and keeping in sync with each other"

I can't truly speak for them, but I suspect these are both (reworking the history of code while its in review, and multiple people working on a branch) things that the Phabricator authors would say are bad practices that your tools should discourage. The arguments that come to my mind are

1) Reworking history during review makes it near for your reviewers to understand what is changing. That should be reserved until its time to merge your code, at which point all the revisions along the way should be squashed.

2) Shared development on a branch means the scope of the change is large, and the branch is probably long-lived too. Both of these are arguably bad; I don't have time to argue why, but chapter 13 of Continuous Delivery lays it out well.
Producing simple text descriptions for AI interpretability of X-ray images
From "hidden" to "onion" is just a terminology change. For the v2/v3 change, not sure there is an in-depth blog post on the differences except for comparing the specs of v2[0] vs v3[1]. There's a wiki page with a high-level overview [2].

0 - https://github.com/torproject/torspec/blob/master/rend-spec-...
1 - https://github.com/torproject/torspec/blob/master/rend-spec-...
2 - https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/NextGenOni...
C doesn't really support properly encapsulated user-defined types, so yes, one can create their own String type but it will still be a pain to use and error-prone.

One example is the stretchy buffer library that I saw posted recently here.
Because economies growing or shrinking generally affects people proportional to their wealth (including human capital). To me, Gini curves seem far more effective for understanding the dynamics of inequality than looking at absolute differences, which largely change due to economic growth.
That's a good point. It's not a 1-1 analogy, but I think the overall principle applies. If it's open source, more people can regulate it, as opposed to less.
Not only that, a performance review is a synthesis.

You don't just staple your semester of class notes together and hand that in as your final paper.

A good performance review will identify trends, make recommendations, and use examples while still separating the signal from the noise.
Trying to achieve this task via the API is also problematic, accessing the segment is equally slow.

It would be quicker to just go through the entire list - but the member records don't yet have access to the GDPR fields/flags.

I know some of this is mailchimp just not being ready for the regulations, but it does seem like with the development resources they have, they should be able to fix these issues quickly.
I think the key in the OP's sentence is "who are otherwise unencumbered".

There's a significant amount of privilege in our society for white males, which makes it much easier for the group to offer their employer long hours with initially less pay, etc.
A piece of advice I was given once: "Listen with your eyes." Translated: when you're the new person in management meetings, pay attention to which person commands the most attention at a meeting. At one previous company when the owner/CEO spoke, very few of the C-level people would look at him, other didn't put down their phones. But when the CFO spoke, EVERYONE paid attention. It was a pretty solid leading indicator that this person had the most sway in the company. Later experience proved this out: he had the CEO's ear and anything he requested became official (solid CFO -- what he asked for was good for the company and the CEO knew it and appreciated it).
You have something similar, albeit not as cool, for Portuguese manors (we called them solares) [0]. My father restores these old houses, it's very interesting to see how well they were built, literally designed to withstand for centuries with minimal maintenance.

[0] http://www.solaresdeportugal.pt/EN/casas_antigas.php
In 1997, the 15-day strike cost 15k UPS jobs.

For the drivers, that is a lot to lose.
And we can go a step further yet by assuming that the reason they want to sell that going to their customer is that they're buying it elsewhere. They're doing the arbitrage.
How often do you test your backups? How many places (physical) do they exist? How often are they taken?

What’s your server’s uptime? Is it highly available? How often do you patch? Do you test them first? How do you keep up with security updates from other software on the machine(s).

How is your security team in general? Do they monitor for stolen credentials? Do pen-tests? Watch for network scans and attacks? Look for weird traffic patterns?

Do you have redundant network links? Backup generators? Do you test them? Sure your datacenter SAYS they have them, but remember when Intuit went down for 2 days a few years ago? I bet they had told their bosses they had generator backups.

Is someone always on call? What are they experts in? How do you get support?

GitHub provides a TON of stuff above a cheap VPS or EC2 instance. And that’s not including the network effects of having so many projects in the same site.
Why is it an important limitation in this case?
It works both ways. If you're too lazy to learn a service I chose to host my code, you don't deserve my code.

(Sorry to put it harshly, but it's felt like we're all getting a bit spoiled. Especially compared to the old days.)

For better or worse, you are the product if you use a centralized, free service. And the only thing keeping those dominant players dominant is the blind loyalty we seem to give freely.

It's all about that convenience! I get that. But morals have their place, and in the coming months the world will show whether they care at all about centralization.

It's probably important to stay nervous about centralization. If we let our guards down, we could find ourselves on the short end of an upsetting stick. History has shown time and again that when companies have no incentive to compete, they tend not to try. The reason Facebook can be so free with your data is that there is no way to compete with them. With github, at least there's a way.

Honestly, the biggest thing holding back Github competitors is that they won't just make their service look identical to Github. Gitlab looks strange every time I run across a repo. Instead everyone wants to be different, and usually it's not better.
Renderer3 angular
Short term it might not affect them, but long term it could reduce the number of employees UPS needs, and they might not be able to get hired on at FedEx.
Crypto "exchanges" have a long history of being difficult about withdrawals. Search for "bitcoin withdrawal problems".
There's a lot going on here.

> 1) that all employees regardless of their individual contribution get the same salaries, meaning that over-achieving workers will work less, and under-achieving workers will not work more. (a.k.a. elimination of incentives)

Union representation doesn't inherently flatten compensation. Managers and companies can still promote, hire, and fire employees. Also differences in compensation in non-union workplaces is typically determined by the employees negotiating skills more than merit.

> 2) That employees that do not like how the union is managed cannot work in that place, either because the union would not allow them, or because they have to pay for an organization that they do not belong to voluntarily

Yea the point of unions is to have collective bargaining power, that power is sapped when workers don't participate in the collective part. Also a union is typically run by employees, and union leaders are elected. If things are bad you have the power to change things. You're much more empowered to change things in your union than you are to actually change things in the running of your corporation.

> 3) That the union, having sole negotiation power for all workers, takes kickbacks from the company for lower compensation for all workers.

Unions do have a tendency to corrupt with age, mostly because corporations who are saddled with a union typically find it easier to corrupt its leaders than to actually negotiate. I'd argue that even in a corrupt union you're better represented than without a union. You at least have the structure in place to do things like strike and organize. Often when union leaders are corrupt or just not effective workers will take action outside of the union. Most of the recent teacher strikes were "wildcat" actions taken without the union's consent.

> 4) That even if the union is incorruptible, its optional but its subscribed by most employees, that it actually manages not to decrease productivity, then, there is another company that does not have the same problem, will attract more capital since it gets bigger returns, and the company fails anyway.

This is the same argument people make against raising the minimum wage. "Conform to exploitation or be replaced". A lot of workers worry that fighting for better lives will lead to worse lives, like losing your job, or your company going under. This isn't really shown to happen in reality, but corporations keep pushing the point.

This entire comment reeks of corporate propaganda. Unions aren't a silver bullet against worker exploitation, but having union representation is a hell of a lot better than not.
> 10 years ago there were definitely mainstream people who at least claimed to believe

This is correct even today. Among politicians and pundits there is completely different economic discussion and it's really confusing.

You know, if you would give top 1000 dry academics in any field a way to flag news media or opinion pieces in their specialty with visible [extraordinary or surprising claim] -flag if they do it with 4/5 majority it would be really helpful public service (startup someone?)
Annoyingly the support for IPv6 isn’t everywhere yet. One of my remote colleagues got assigned one and GCP doesn’t support whitelisting of IPv6 addresses in their VPC network firewall so we had to resort to using our flaky VPN connection in the meantime.
I usually prepare a laptop with all the necessary software, give all coworkers a heads up that the new guy/gal is starting next monday. On his/her first day I show them around, introduce the rest of the staff and cover the basic office stuff (where to find food, supplies, etc.). I encourage all staff to sit down with the new guy/gal to get to know each other.

You'll notice that at this point the new employee hasn't touched his/her new laptop yet. I think it's very important that the new one feels comfortable in the team before he/she can be productive. So I'm not convinced you should aim for maximum productivity from day 1.

When I look at the past when I started a new job there were two things that I hated:

1. Not knowing who everybody was / feeling ignored
2. Having to ask all the time for everything (PC, accounts, passwords, access to office, toilets, printer, etc.)

Good onboarding isn't hard. Just make sure that the new one feels welcome!
If anyone has a good idea for a format/protocol to store issues & pull requests in Git itself, I'm all ears.

There is a reason why every single product uses a separate database for those.
This is a job that pays about $35/hr which is what the union helped them negotiate. They'd rather piss in bottles than lose $35 a day on an hour long break. Their union won't force an hour long unpaid break, so the drivers just do their own thing on the clock.

The union also fights against CDL requirements for better/safer drivers and allows excessive overtime because it pays out so much.

Its not a good union by certain measures, like a lot of big unions focused on low/no skill labor it can help raise salaries (and raise product cost) but also not be helpful in anything they think 'hurts' workers like mandatory unpaid breaks, CDL requirements, background/credit checks, etc.

Modern unions have little in common with the unions of old that existed before we had any real safety regulations and far less labor regulation. Now they exist almost solely to return as much financial value as possible (wages) for the investment (dues).
I just want to point out that when my mother was president of her local teachers' union prior to joining NYSUT her stipend was at most a couple thousand dollars for the year.
The reality is no, workers aren’t pissing in bottles.

Fifteen seconds on Google turned up an unofficial forum for UPS workers. Pissing in bottles appears to be extremely common. From perusing a few threads on the topic, the zeitgeist appeared to be "everyone does it, but if you leave your piss bottles in the truck after your shift then you're an asshole".

https://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/what-do-you-do-w...

https://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/urine-bottles-in...

https://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/urine-bottles-le...

https://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/urine-bottles.36...
Safari Technical Preview 58, with favicons, is now available for High Sierra
Show HN: The Best and Worst Stock and Options Trading APIs Repo
You will probably need to push your boss(es) to be accountable but I like to define 3 broad goals over the first week: what you want to accomplish your first month, quarter and year (or 6 months). I further break this down into operational, strategic and personal. It will take you a little bit of time to define longer term strategic goals so this can evolve over your first month or two.

I recently started a new role (~ 2 months ago) and here's mine:
First 30 days:
* Learn product & team process so I can start to contribute to initiatives
* Deep dive 3 areas
* Review strategic roadmap for possible participation
First Quarter:
* improve understanding of function area/ application of product to customer needs
* Master 1 core component of product
* Map/Plan contribution to strategic initiative that matches org needs and my skills
* Increase velocity/effectiveness of team contribution
First 9-12 months:
* Participate in a cross function/team initiative (like shared components, an integration project)
* Take lead role on a part of the technical road map or strategic plan (execution)

Observations:

My plan still has some gaps & harder to measure things (vs true "goals") but is a good baseline and it will evolve,

I had to take the lead in pushing this with my managers, but they were receptive.

I'm experienced and confident enough to push for this approach; junior or new employees could easily do nothing beyond the typical corporate "justify your existence" career plans, which I think would be a real waste.
This is false for Google (I created and owned the relevant policies).

Google publishes it's open source docs, so you can just look:
https://opensource.google.com/docs/using/agpl-policy/

We also banned patching agpl projects, I'm just too lazy to find that link for you.
Ok, then please point me to an authoritative source where this is described, because I can't just take your word for it.
Hmmm. What in the Tolkien canon, or in his letters, suggests that any of his works are propaganda?
Exactly, the bottles are a clear and understandable symptom (literal, figurative, or somewhere inbetween) not the sickness they are trying to highlight.
Delta flight attendants aren't unionized (my step mother is one) and they are very anti union. They believe pretty strongly that they have a good relationship with management and do no need a union. From what I gather it's pretty unusual at least in the (US) airline industry.
Are you saying that people in other fields, or office jobs, need to piss and shit themselves because they don't have the time to walk to the restroom located a few doors down the hallway?

Because we have at least 2 reports of it happening to UPS employees on this (currently very short) thread. Extrapolating the UPS rate of self-soiling to the entire economy, there should be literally thousands of people just pissing and shitting themselves at work every day.

But there aren't. Because most people work in jobs that let them take restroom breaks frequently enough that they don't need to soil themselves, and have access to a restroom during those breaks so that they can actually do so. UPS drivers don't: they may not have access to restroom facilities when they actually need to use them.
I'd call this code out as unusual at the very least, particularly if this code appeared in a loop. In that case, I'd normally expect to use a for loop, where the ++ operator appears only in the increment part of the loop declaration.
> are you predicting the outcome of an effort under your development?

That's an ad hominem and still leaves my point of how huge the amount of underestimated work there is. The problem is the volume of work first, the quality of work (by both OP's self-admitted juniorness and by lack of time for a full-time project) second.

Also, your standards are high for ecommerce but you don't think a lot of effort is required to do as-good or better than a specific one you didn't like?

> It's for his friend's craft "business", not some client who needs a copy and paste effort ready by 9am tomorrow.

His friend probably doesn't want to wait a week everytime he thinks of a new basic requirement built into the vast majority of ready to go ecommerce CMSs.
I don't really care either way about performance reviews. I've found the difference between average and superior amounts to no more than 2% raise if that.

I base my own "performance review" on my skillset and what the market is paying. If the market is willing to pay me more than the company I'm working for - it's time to jump ship.

But I don't ignore performance reviews. I take them as constructive criticism. Even if they are "unfair", I assess what I could have done differently either technically or politically not to be in that position.
>what sense does it make to employs a highly skilled java expert in ordinary java dev role ?

Because, even though ordinary pays less than senior, most people prefer to be employed than unemployed.

$some_paycheck > $no_paycheck
Don’t know from my limited exposure I would be really surprised if Intel and another Foundry would encounter the same problem on a level any more granular than “issues with Cobalt” since there are so many factors that impact the process.
Intel and GloFo produce completely different silicon and it becomes more and more dissimilar with each step of the process so many factors impact this from where your raw materials come from and how long is the path between step 23 and 27 in the pipeline to what latitude your fav is located at and where does it face.

The example I gave in my previous was simplified the actual root cause was much weirder and included a condition where the flow rate would have to get to X and the temperature to get to just an exact Y for thermal expansion to apparently compress the insulation enoguh for it to matter if the temp would be a tad to low it won’t impact anything if it goes above the next level of flow rate it wouldn’t have an impact yet again because it would drop the temp.

Intel’s whole conflict free campaign was a marketing spin on a real problem and a way to benefit from the extra cost of materials and that extra cost wasn’t because of children in African mines.

Intel needs so much control over the raw materials to prevent contamination that they issue orders on what fuel, hydraulic fluid and lubricants can be used to mine their dirt to prevent or at least reduce contamination.

Heck I’m sure if one will read what ever T&C they attach to their supply contracts the metal composition of the pickaxes will be specified.

They survey and sample everything and essentially tell their supplier ok you can mine this specific area everything in the top 1m you get rid off everything below 10m we don’t want.

Like honestly at this point I think the only way for GloFo to have exactly the same problem as Intel is we live in a simulation.

They will however have their own problems with leakage, bonding, crystallization and w/e else can go wrong with this insanity with Cobalt but likely they’ll have completely different root causes and different solutions.