skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I explicitly put some code samples under CC0 because I want people to feel complete freedom to copy and paste the code without needing to maintain attribution or worry about licensing compatibility.

For example: https://jsfiddle.net/rectang/fwto2ejh/

The CC0 dedication is at the bottom; you have to scroll to it.

I chose to slightly modify the CC0 dedication for this to comport with the fact that you won't receive a copy of CC0 with the materials. I didn't like having to do that and wish that Creative Commons would provide an official accommodation. I'm reasonably confident that my change won't materially affect a future court case over my code though. :)

ETA: I strongly recommend that other people DO NOT change dedications. I'm reasonably educated on these topics for a layperson, but not a lawyer. I mentioned the change as a warning that my dedication should not be considered a CC-approved template.
Almost everything you just said is incorrect.
Imho part of it is that responsibility for the choice is distributed. This makes it easy for everyone (including us Kindle buyers) to say to themselves “it’s not my fault and I’m just going along with what is.”
From AWS Cognito to DynamoDB Using Triggers – DZone Security
Why is "abuse" in scare quotes?
Towards Memory-Efficient Allocation of CNNs on Processing-In-Memory Architecture
I barely graduated high school in 2002 and there was definitely an emphasis on higher education at that time. My family didn't have the money to pay for college and I knew I wouldn't do well in college, I had a hard time learning from teachers, and didn't even take my SATs. I'd messed around with HTML and copying/pasting JS snippets but was not an early coder by any means.

I got a job doing tech support for a web hosting company at 19 (requirements for getting hired included listing 3 FTP clients, listing 3 e-mail clients, what is whois, and things you could teach to anyone). I worked with many high school dropouts as well.

After getting that tech support job, learning about open source (LAMP stack) changed my life. I didn't have much money but I was able to self study on linux, apache, mysql, php/perl/python with minimal equipment. Over the years open source has provided and avenue that allowed me to better myself to the point I've worked as an SRE for Google/YouTube, a Staff SRE for Dropbox, and starting soon as a Staff SWE at Discord. Open source has given me so many opportunities, made me a better person, and allowed me to provide for my family.

There are a lot of people like me in the industry who care about socioeconomic diversity. I will absolutely interview and hire dropouts if they are driven and capable.
These are the slides from Bob Beck (beck@'s) talk at BSDCan 2018 (Jun 8-9th), apparently missing its first page.. [0]

http://www.bsdcan.org/2018/schedule/events/968.en.html

Video should eventually show up on YouTube.

[0] https://twitter.com/bob_beck/status/1005162340956794880 ;-)
The software industry had/has a lucrative, self-sustaining business model that was very much the same as every other business on the planet. I'm a part of that industry, so I do have a business model. IOW, I'm not the one trying to tell someone that they shouldn't charge for their efforts/products, so it seems to me that the onus on coming up with a workable model is on those that have been trying to institute the "everything is free" model for some time, not me.

As for your other comment: I believe there's a saying that covers this:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/if_my_aunt_had_balls,_she%27d...
Can you elaborate on why this is advantageous to the situation in the article?
What do you think of the viability of providing source code with the software that you sell? It would be open source in the sense that you could alter the software and contribute patches, but you had to pay for the software first.

It would have to eliminate forking by necessity. I don't see that as being a downside, though. I think the open source community commonly forks code to save time when the correct technical decision should really be doing ground-up rewrites.

I think the primary issue would be giving away the 'secret sauce' so to speak. But a motivated competitor could still decompile and reverse engineer an application. Would giving away the source code make it easy enough to do that it makes a big impact? like how Android apps are so trivially easy to clone that Chinese competitors can clone an app in seconds.
Google isn't persuing profit via lawsuits... yet. Google is well positioned to patent troll when it stops being the top dog. In fact, Google already has Patent Shield, which provides a latent threat that if you leave their umbrella they can turn around and sue a company that used to use their services.

Even if you have unwavering faith in a company's current leadership, when that leadership is not making money, they will be replaced by someone who is. So if the possibility to patent troll exists, eventually, it will.
Thanks to copyright law we don't need to hide our codebases in order to charge for our work.

I don't understand that part ?
Really it’s not fancy or anything. We used Eigen to represent our normalized bag of words matrix (term-document matrix) as a sparse matrix in CSC and CSR format (which means the data resides in three underlying arrays for the nonzero entries, with indexing conventions for how to use them).

Boolean & multi-choice indices are just companion arrays where position i corresponds to a property of document i in the index: boolean for binary attributes (for example, whether the item has free shipping or not), or using a bigger integer space to encode more options, like say an int8 coupled with helper functions that check which bit is set, maybe for some set of 8 categories the items can be filtered by).

The “index” is just the serialized arrays backing the sparse matrix, the arrays backing the filters, and helper functions for decoding what the filter bits mean.

A query is then just applying the filters followed by performing the sparse matrix inner product and sorting.

It’s very basic, but allows you to heavily optimize it, whether optimizing for deletes, writes, certain heavily used filters, etc.

And you can of course add whatever fancy NLP stuff on top of or in place of the sparse matrix as well.
The only solution to put an end to the current patent system is to overload it. The equivalent of a DDos attack. Companies should file as many frivolous patent as they possibly can. Eventually, we'll have all the IP lawyers at 100% CPU and the world will be a much better place.
Yes living in dormitories and working sixty hour weeks with no overtime and causing permanent physical damage to yourself because of the repetitive nature of your work and having no choice but to work for a company which breaks the labor laws of the nation in which it exists all in order to further enrich the wealthiest person in the world is very fair.
Inflation is a wealth tax.

It's not necessary for the government to ever tax anyone for anything; they could just print the money and all "taxes" would come in the form of inflation instead. And that tax would be simple and unavoidable.

A very progressive tax system could be "print money and give it to everyone equally." If you're poor the guaranteed income would be a huge percentage of your wealth and since you have no savings the resulting inflation would affect you least. The wealthy with savings would essentially be taxed like you describe at the inflation rate.

This is a thought experiment rather than a suggestion for a workable system, but I think like the "ideal op-amp" it might be useful to compare tax systems to this one.
It is simply being fully awake. We take our consciousness for granted, but in reality, we are sleep-walking the majority of our waking lives. Reacting, not Acting.

It is a wakefulness that is universal, I would image another species of intelligent beings also existing with full knowledge and acceptance of existence, be they organic or digital. It is not a human quality, but something much more.
Thinking about Github-as-resume as strictly positive or uselessly noisy probably means you have an overly simplistic model for evaluating candidates.

I'll share a model that's worked for me in the past.
Before you even write the job description, define the 3-7 traits you need to hire against. These can be as fuzzy as "gets shit done" or as specific as "5+ years marketing SaaS to $100k+ accounts" or "is effective at resolving incidents while on-call."
You need to be able to rate people on this. Binary is fine ("yes they can get shit done"). 3-4 levels is good (bad / good / total superstar).

Don't go overboard with granularity: you need to fit this all in your head for a couple candidates at a time when you compare them.
As you go through your process, try to get good information about at least one of these areas at each step.

My favorite thing to do is, between in-person interviews, be able to tee up the next interviewer with "I got mixed signals about communication style. Can you dig in?"
When you wrap up, make sure you cover all the boxes. Don't get smitten with a candidate with amazing experience who can code circles around everybody else who's never worked in a 25+ person team (assuming that's what you agreed was important).
When you're ready to make a decision, you now have a reasonable set of trade-offs to make. I tend to create rubrics where solid scores in 3 of 5 categories is a Hire, to allow us to compare different types of candidates.

Ok, back to GitHub.

GitHub can give you VERY STRONG SIGNALS for some of these issues. It's great to be able to know up-front that somebody is comfortable working with teams they don't personally know well (typical in big open-source projects).
The convese to that is that I generally expect some strong signal up front from any candidate. If not GitHub, give me a respected company on your resume. A recommendation from a mutual friend. A well-written cover letter.
When folks complain about 100s of resumes, it's because the problem is this lack of signal.

An aside: it's on you to allow folks with non-traditional backgrounds to succeed at this step. Write a better job req, or go email likely candidates. Diversity requires multiple ways in.
Once you're a bit further, this cuts the other way. If "good communication in pull requests" is important to you, don't spend any time here with candidates who have strong Githubs.

You already have all the data you need. Spend your time elsewhere. There is no extra credit.
GitHub can help you a bunch when evaluating candidates, but it's crucial to stay away from this notion that _anything_ during an evaluation that looks like a silver bullet. You always have to do the work of interviewing well, and it's always specific to your company.

Finally: if you have a process that allows you to fully evaluate a candidate by reading their public GitHub, you're almost certainly hiring for the wrong things.
Yes - Technical Disclosure Bulletins[0]

--
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Technical_Disclosure_Bulle...
It’s a legal method of quoting terms of art.
Yes, forces transmitted through fields act "at a distance", but is that really "spooky"? Do you think it is "spooky" that if you make a wave at one end of a pond, the wave reaches the other end? I don't. I consider the propagation of waves to be a "local" non-spooky phenomenon.

Disturbances in a field propagate through space similarly. A disturbance of the field at a point only affects the value of the field in the immediate spacetime surroundings, just like a water wave. I would call that "local" and non-spooky. Whether or not there is "mechanical contact", whatever that means, is irrelevant.

This is in contrast to Newton's theory of gravity, where the force of gravity was spookily felt instantaneously across space.
Is that an opinion, or a peer-reviewed scientific conclusion? Just curious.
If you haven’t already, stop talking about what it took to create it and start talking about how much value they’re going to get out of it.

Figure out how much time / money it will save them. How much that is all worth. Tel them your software is less money than that.

I have the luxury of knowing I have the best product, but even if you don’t, you can’t give in to the hardball shit. Play hard to get instead. Dare them to go buy the cheap thing and let them feel like you know they’re making a mistake and you’ll see them in a few months when that doesn’t work out. It pays to be cocky in those situations. It starts to make them feel like you must know something they don’t.

It’s the only way. (I sell one of the most expensive software products there is, with loads of cheaper competitors)
While that's true, it's also very inexpensive and very easy to get a GED or diploma equivalent. Intellectually if you're in the top ~75%, you can pass the GED with two weeks of casual studying at 20 years old. Even if one isn't particularly smart (or, say, has a weak education background), that can be easily compensated with several weeks of further studying to pass the GED. Every state has free programs for that.

If the person in question can't be bothered with something so inexpensive and easy to obtain, that meaningfully improves their job opportunities, there's a very fair argument to be made about that being a negative statement on their character and work ethic.
> Can we please dispense with this notion and start realizing one simple fact: people will typically only pay for something if you make them pay.

Things to appear to be changing for the better though. As an examply, Gina Häußge is working full time on OctoPrint (3D printing software) supported entirely by donations:

https://www.patreon.com/foosel

There are probably others too, I'm just not aware of them and have only really started looking at Patreon recently (for a project I'm involved with). :)
Pony 0.23.0 has been released
Fun read. As far as I can tell, deep cave systems are the last places on earth that are

1. truly unknown and uncharted and

2. explorable by certain people with certain skills and attitudes, without huge funding demands (by comparison, the deep sea is even more poorly understood, but deep sea exploration is not something you can do without massive institutional support).

In fact a look through this caving expedition team [1] suggests that many cavers doing valuable new work are hobbyists with pretty unrelated day jobs.

[1] http://www.usdct.org/cheve_personnel_2017.php
Although the author failed to mention, the comments here pointed out the distinction between software from a little guy innovator and a huge corporation. That content was glossed over in the article, but it seems to be a very important part of the conversation about free/paid software.

Not only that, but there's an underlying assumption here that some person or company has to receive a wage or profit for a software to be maintained or repaired, which is simply not true.
Warning: solipsism ahead!

Are you sure? Perhaps you came up with the idea of qualia?
A somewhat related talk from BSDCan was Florian Obser's slaacd(8) - "A privilege separated and sandboxed IPv6 Stateless Address AutoConfiguration Daemon"

https://www.openbsd.org/papers/florian_slaacd_bsdcan2018.pdf

http://www.bsdcan.org/2018/schedule/events/929.en.html
I’ve seen exactly what this leads to in the UK, so I can only hope to hell our 1st amendment would prevent similar oppressive laws from standing in the States.

Too bad for whoever has to foot the bill for challenging this dumpster fire though.
Ok. Interesting point you have. But let’s dive into something that shows how statstics can get really skewed:

Take money 100 years ago. The richest guy on the planet (ignoring royalty, as those figures aren’t reliable) was John D Rockefeller. He was worth a ton of money, possibly even a billion dollars. Today’s richest man in Jeff Bezos, worth about 100 times that (depending on the stock price, somewhere roughly between 100-125 billion).

So today, people say that the wealth gap is growing. Indeed, the rich are richer.

However, at his peak, Rockefeller was worth about 1.5% of GDP ( a truly crazy sum of money that equates to roughly $350 billion today).

So if we look at inflation-adjusted money, the rich are poorer than they were 100 years ago - indeed, Rockefeller was about 3 times richer than Bezos.

So depending on the metric, the rich are getting richer, and wealth disparities are growing. But when you normalize for inflation one other factors, the disparity is not growing.

Also, if you take the poorest person at the world with zero dollars, and the richest person in the world with one more dollar, than the wealth disparity is growing, and headlines shout out crazy stuff that sets everyone’s emotions.

But zero will always be the lower bound, and the number at the top will always grow (assuming inflation).

So is disparity growing or now? Well, I think the best way to answer that is ask this question: “would you rather be you today, or Rockefeller 100 years ago?”

I’d rather be me. Between the internet, healthcare, cars, planes, etc, I’m way richer than Rockefeller, because despite all that money, he couldn’t begin to buy those things. So society has gotten much richer, and the disparity between me and Bezos is smaller than between me and Rockefeller. Also, I don’t have to really be worried about dying from the flu. Rockefeller did - even a simple infection could kill him, but unlikely to kill you or me.
Probably because

> A 16-year-old girl is cheated on by her 17-year-old boyfriend. She's angry, so she sends several e-mails to her girlfriends disclosing this and calling him names. One of them forwards it to someone who then forwards it to the ex-boyfriend. The boyfriend feels humiliated. That's a crime on the girls' part: She engaged in "repeated" "verbal" "abuse" using "any form of electronic communication," and this "would reasonably be expected to cause ... emotional harm" to the ex-boyfriend, and makes him feel like school is a "hostile environment" (since everyone now knows his misconduct). The girl is a criminal.

Why is the girl the criminal and not the forwarders?
How is this different from of this were done in the real world?
>- There's the dual-licencing approach e.g. Red Hat. (Naturally doesn't work with permissive licences. Requires a strong copyleft licence like the GPL).

Red Hat doesn't dual-license and sells subscriptions (support, updates, backports, KnowledgeBase, etc.) for open source offerings that use a variety of different licenses including permissive ones (e.g. OpenStack).
Good article but didn't summarize properly at the end.
>Tesla literally never says that autopilot system is self driving and has repeated nags and reminders to keep hands on the wheel and pay attention.

When Tesla was debuting Autopilot I got the sense that the system was more than your typical adaptive cruise control + lane assist that was solely designed for long straight roads. That was implied in the marketing, and messaging from Musk. Did the system even provide something as rudimentary as an audible warning if a driver climbed into their back seat like some dumbasses on YouTube?

>This message is repeated during onboarding, training videos, and manual etc. 99% of Tesla owners follow these instructions.

I bet it is now.
Send an email to hn@ycombinator.com
And there are also many of us put in situations of reviewing resumes and interviewing that don't have college experience who don't care what school you went to, or if you even did.

Going to college definitely makes things easier, and I don't advise people to take the path I did but there are paths other than college that still work well for this industry.
> He also said "real fighting was in the east", so you can guess the source.

It's called stats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_casualties_in_World_War...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_II)

The vast majority of the german military and casualties, were in the eastern front.

> Edit: also the claim "most of our casualties on that day was friendly fire and accidental drowning" is pretty ridiculous.

It's pretty much common sense. Considering the low number of german troops, the poor coordination on our side and of course the odds of accidents and friendly fire incidents. It's pretty much a statistical certainty that most of the deaths on D-Day were accidents and friendly fire. But lets throw out common sense and statistics out the window.

The germans had no navy. They had no air force. They had nothing. Against the might of the US and British power on D-Day. But we can pretend that the germans managed a 2 to 1 casualty victory. Or I'm sure that's what your "sources" will try to convince us.
That's true, but you seem to imply that this is a bad thing. It's not. A municipality that does not borrow must either tax its current citizens to raise the money to pay for capital expenditures, or stop investing in infrastructure. Neither option produces vibrant economies, particularly in a country where people are relatively free to move.
Because the point is to make the organizer feel important and having a large number of people attending does that. Deepak is a draw.
If they don't have overlapping lifetimes, there would seem to be very little risk of accidentally considering them to be equal, because you could never reference them in the same expression.
This article sets chatbots as endangered, and then works very hard to reset their context.

I'm don't work within an industry where chatbots were a solution.

From this naive position, what are the exemplary examples of chatbots?
Do you have product like op created in his personal time ? I have seen people without any degree get hired in FANG. If you don't have exp in java .net then you need to show ghis to a company by creating public projects.
Wisconsin reeling from tariffs coming from Mexico, Canada, Europe
Suppose that a copy takes 1 second to complete and the computer's power supply unit draws 400 W of power during that 1 second. How much does it cost to complete that copy? Hawaii has the most expensive electricity¹ in the United States, averaging at 29.23 cents / kW * h. Let's use 30 cents / kW * h.

If we have 400 W sustained for one second, that equals 0.000111111111 kW * h. (400 Watt * second) * (30 cents / kWh) = 3.33333333 × 10^-5 U.S. dollars. In Hawaii, that one copy would cost $0.0000333333. If one were to make 100 000 copies of that same data, it would cost $3.33333333.

¹ https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/
If we are talking about videos and pictures of genitalia, where the person involved is not identified (i.e. face not visible)...
This is how the Delphi and Turbo Pascal 3rd party markets have worked for a long time: you pay for 3rd party components/libraries, but they almost all come with source code or an option to purchase the source code for an additional charge. It works really, really well, especially for larger organizations that buy from smaller organizations that want to ensure the continued availability of the software and/or audit it for security purposes.
"its outputs are not solely governed by its inputs"

Philosophically, is this actually better?
You would probably pay for: the replicator, the recipe,the ingredients and the energy used by the replicator. However, Star Trek has a different economy from ours.
the metal doesn’t need to be exposed to the contents in order to serve its purpose. It just needs to be on location.. could it not be enclosed by the same material of the straw?
Platform partnerships that get measured, get managed
Depends on your personal situation. It's possible it's also worth joining it.
What's missing in this win-win equation is Google's image. It's another instance of Google getting lots of negative press, where they are portrayed as the bad guys. So whatever the patent outcome, with respect to their image, Google is certainly not winning.
It seems like a stretch to think the N.Y. Senate is really stupid enough to think this is good legislation. Which makes me wonder if some of the unfortunate side effects are actually seen as a feature rather than a bug.