skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Who takes more risk, the worker standing 70 stories up on an I-beam with no health insurance or life insurance (couldn't afford it!), or the guy who borrowed money to start a business?

In the capitalist value system, the latter: he might lose (temporarily, at least) his credit rating and ability to acquire capital if the venture fails; all the other guy is going to lose is the life of a worker, and who cares about that?
Except they are arguing that the network is the thing to care about, rather than the people doing the work.
Hey thanks for the reply, these are excellent questions. It's hard because usually the person you want is either happily employed because they are good at their job, or retired because they were good at their job. I've been a part of 3 CEO searches for big-ish startups and it wasn't fun. There is also often a fundamental reality difference between the board, the shareholders, the employees and the world. Getting that part out of the way can sometimes in and of itself take 2-4 months depending on the company. Once you've done that, figuring out what the "type" of CEO you need can take some time, do they need public market experience, do they need a network, do they need to be technical, etc. Then you build the list, and then the job of convincing someone to take the job is often equally difficult. Re: spreading the roll across multiple people. This is what a really excellent CEO does anyway, in fact if I don't see this being done it's a massive red flag. In a great company, the CEO only has two jobs: dealing with real emergencies and being accountable to the shareholders. I think one person being held to account is extremely beneficial though, and I don't think it would be a good idea to switch it to committee, I actually think of all the things capitalism gets right, corporate structure is for the most part quite well thought out and works.
> “Fuck it, we’ll vote on it!” is a lazy solution.

It's a far better solution than no option at all. If people make a bad choice they'll just be back to where they started, with people in charge who care little about their welfare.
Sorry for the late reply, but in a way yes. I'm sort of feeling that movement. The problem is that Brasseries are huge operations and even the terrible ones must be fairly profitable. Evolving them must be seen as even more risky but I'm confident that some adventuring restaurateur and/or their investors will one day realize that a high quality brasserie with seasonal ingredients prepared in-house would have huge appeal both to tourists passing through Paris and locals, especially during off seasons — which are admittedly rare in Paris.
>So much money, and yet, the same horrible open office plans and transparent meeting rooms. Does office space in SF really cost that much?

Personally I don't think it is about actually needing the money. It is about wanting it. Thinking that if you have enough cash to burn, you'll be the next Google.

In reality, 99.99% (if not 100%) of them are going to burn through their bank and fly off a cliff in 3 years.
in the 90s, unix developers built web frontends and they were built in this way - simple, with text. they had no skills in graphic design so they kept it simple.

after 2000, graphic designers took over this work and evolved into "frontend" developers. although there were periodic wins like google maps that would have never been produced by the 90s greybeards...most of it has been an endless stream of garbage. but the goatee crowd should not bear all the the blame, some must also fall on the adtech people who insist I need 15 mb of tracking garbage to read a news story.
>> I'm a big believer that a business must have an owner.

>Surely you are also a big believer that a country must have a king. If not, why not?

No, I believe that monarchies are weak, and risky. There might be modern day monarchs doing best for their realms, but the chance that after 3-4-5 good successions will come a man "who wrecks it all" is just too high. This is what history has demonstrated.

In case of business, the risks are not human lives. In case of a failing business, an employee is free to vote with his feet at any moment, moreover if he is valuable specialist in a competitive market. In such circumstances, business owners are compelled to do well do deter desertions. This is in big contrast to command economies dominated by state businesses. Speaking about command economies, that not necessarily assumes communists countries - just how much of F500 a decade ago were de-facto state co's? GE - with net negative tax rate, GM - needs no explanations, defence companies - being de-facto one with their states in every country, agri businesses with roots in banana republics, dozens of megabanks kept alive by financial life support from taxpayers.
Scientists directly observe bacteria “harpoon” DNA to speed up their evolution
I'm inclined to agree with you, your point about constitutionality is well taken. I know we're getting into thorny political philosophy at this point, but I'd be inclined to support this bill, even if there is a good case to be made that it's unconstitutional. In my opinion, any purpose served by having a constitution is in the benefit of the people and the state, if the constitution proscribes something that would definitely benefit the state, then it is the constitution which is wrong.

Whether or not this would be ultimately beneficial, or the principle that the constitution is trying to protect here (don't interfere in the affairs of lawful citizens) is more important in the end are value judgements, and difficult ones at that. I don't doubt that if my circumstances were different I would be making an argument like yours.
Tech salaries, and tech valuations are both a little crazy right now. It's become very hard for non-funded startups to recruit talented engineers when Google and Facebook are happy paying six figures in stock options every year
Isn't this like an "auto-regressive feed forward neural net"[0]?

> Instead of making predictions from a state that depends on
the entire history, an autoregressive model directly predicts yt using only the k most recent inputs, xt−k+1,…,xt. This corresponds to a strong conditional independence assumption. In particular, a feed-forward model assumes the target only depends on the k most recent inputs. Google’s WaveNet[1] nicely illustrates this general principle.

[0] http://bair.berkeley.edu/blog/2018/08/06/recurrent/

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.03499
That article distorts the picture. Gallup [0] has a nice survey that shows there was a big drop after the 2008 financial crises. I know people (including several millionaires) who sold out of all their stocks, and even today, won't touch the market - many of them compare it to Vegas and use the word "gambling" a lot.

Second, there are less than half of the number of public companies as there were 20 years ago [1]. So the investors are chasing a small group with a larger market capitalization. That's due to many reasons, but regulation is a big one (sarbanes-oxley, dodd-frank, etc).

Many people don't have the risk tolerance to be in the market, let alone own a single stock. What happens if that stock were Enron or Worldcom? That's a lot of risk.

[0] https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-amo...

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-04-09/where-hav...
I do think they get a disproportionate share of the reward. And you can't argue that it's because the network contributes more; it's purely because the network has access to venture capital.

Saying capital is relatively scarce compared to labor is flat out false. Look at the last 10 years or so. Venture Captial has been flush just about anywhere you look.
Yes, as we all know. Germany was a total economic failure before the euro was introduced in 1999. /s
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/automatic-rea...
How to Use Bash and Stay Alive
Why is he entitled to my platform and resources, exactly? I own stock in Twitter, why is he allowed to use my money for his voice?

Let him use your property as you see fit, by all means, but don't insist others do the same.

But of course you're equating Twitter with the State or a "voice" which is ridiculous. Please stop.
India has been in a downward trend in terms of freedom of press since 2011. Unfortunately.

Rather than being prentious and accuse others of being half asses, or ignorant, I suggest you only stick to facts as you claim you do.

I am most definitely not denying that everything is perfect. There are things that have gotten worse, however the benefits of what have gotten better are far more tangible, real, and affect daily life than this one data point you provided. There are others which are more tangible that India has faultered on, but again the good far outweighs the bad.
Ask HN: Anyone using Ada/Eiffel/ParaSail?
Every month, I am challenge myself to learn a new programming language and building a toy. This month I was trying to do Ada. I installed GNAT but it kept breaking on me; someone recommended I go for SPARK? Is there a standard way to use Ada? How do you use it?
Breaking it is completely unnecessary too, even with single page apps.

It's not all that hard to build a React or Angular apps that use proper links along with the browser history API. Designed properly, the apps should be able to load their state and render correctly even when deep-linked to somewhere other than the app's top level.

This isn't a new concern - I remember paying attention to this back in the old days of SPAs using GWT back in 2009/2010.

Unfortunately, many web apps choose to ignore this. On the bright side, lots of them get it right, too.
> My point is that a life of comfort is not the ideal to which we should aspire

You are equating a life of comfort with happiness. A lot of people have a more nuanced ways of evaluating their lives, where they value facing challenging and meaningful problems while also seeking stability and comfort.

It's why we have better adjectives to describe a good life than "happiness", i.e "fulfillment".

> humanity's accomplishments have not come from people who didn't want to bother exerting themselves.

Many of humanity's greatest breakthroughs came from people who were specifically insulated from the uncertainties of daily survival. From aristocrats experimenting with physics, to lifetime tenured monks (and later academics) who were given the day to day security to pursue lines of thought that otherwise wouldn't be considered.

Despite the oft-repeated cliche, necessity is more often the enemy of invention. Necessity serves as a pruning mechanism to select the best hypothesis of the many that were created when resources were plentiful.
Build a YouTube Bookmarking Site (VueJS) – Authentication with Firebase
On the contrary, you've spent almost every post in this sub-thread questioning whether it is true.

To question whether it should properly be called profound would be, conversely, to question the paper's methodology. There is, as I said, a definition of bullshit. There is no equivalent definition of profundity. Nor were test subjects asked to evaluate the sentences with an explicit profundity criterion. The so-called profoundness-receptivity metric was actually a measurement of bullshit-receptivity of non-bullshit statements.
Democracy is only selected as a solution to the problem of “how do we select among competing solutions when different people weigh the pros and cons differently”. It is not, itself, chosen as the solution to other problems.
Well, it's a problem of mixing data and visual elements.

In a good model of the web, html is your data, css is your styling, and javascript doesn't really exist.

In another model of the web, your data would be your data, html/css would work together to form a scene-graph. Javascript defines the relationship between your data and it's scene graph.

That friction, are we using html as data or as part of our scene-graph, is what causes a lot of these problems.
My Lisp Experiences and the Development of GNU Emacs (2002)
> EU is not really a single market, they have unified regulations, which is helpful

The EU doesn't really have unified regulations. I mean, regulations passed at the EU level are unified, but countries have a great degree of country-specific regulations themselves.

Now, technically states within the US have the ability to regulate things at the state level, but due to various aspects of Constitutional law (the Commerce Clause, and case law such as the Sherman Antitrust Act, etc.), there are far fewer state-specific regulations that companies have to worry about for interstate commerce within the US than international commerce within the EU. Unless you're dealing with very specific regulated industries (money transmission, health insurance, etc.), you generally don't have to worry about a lot for basic interstate commerce in the US.
Dynamic memory allocation in SQLite
I suspect manager here does not mean high level manager, but someone who has at most a dozen or two people under them.

And yes, effective culture around PRs seems valuable. My current team seems to have very inconsistent expectations, and would benefit from someone with authority steering people in the right direction.
That's what I was thinking - maybe something under the link. Could be optional as well.

I'd been remembering how Marginal Revolution, which despite having a fairly educated/technical audience, still often writes its own link text when linking to papers:
e.g. item #1 here https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/08/sa...

But obviously that would have a big impact on UX for submitters and readers which I haven't thought through in detail!
This is not really a great argument as it assumes workers would willingly internally vote away their own jobs, and that's likely to not happen. Nobody wants to be unemployed.
I wasn’t implying that workers are incapable of judging who the best candidate for a director level job is. Rather, I was suggesting that they do not have the information necessary to make a defensible decision. Therefore, like all elections, the process is reduced to popularity contest where employees could just as easily vote for a candidate who is detrimental to their interests without even realizing it.
Are you referring to full-moon parties? I was hoping for a mention in the article. I would guess their origin also took inspiration from these parties, considering they started in 1983/4 i.e. a few years before the raves of the "early nineties".
Post-tax income is an irrelevant metric because higher taxes are compensated by the services they pay for. Our level of defense spending is not insignificant, yours is offensive. We don't need to outspend the rest of the world, we just need to convince Russia that invading the EU is not worth it.
How big a difference does the sleeping after studying does for you ? And do you usually dream ?
Sweden has lots of wealth inequality
Even if it can steal all your private keys?
List of Machine Learning / Deep Learning Conferences in 2018 / 2019
Investors always own corporations (via their voting power). That's what a corporation is. Some companies have different classes of investors (e.g. restricted stock that isn't traded and converts when sold) to protect against things like hostile take overs, but it doesn't change the overall structure.
It's not the 90's... WebApps and PWA's require JS. And Javascript in browser is secure as it is sandboxed. Minute privacy concerns are not enough for 99.9% of the people to disable js either.
Sustaining the city required a continual influx of residents. To be fair, a lot of the deaths were from slaves, but it was something of a deathtrap between the high heat, humidity, hot nights, disease carrying insects, flooding, and hurricanes. Were it not such a valuable port the city would probably have died out.
Bumble announces a fund to invest in women-led businesses
Ask HN: ShOulD wE do AwaY wiTh CASE sENSItiVITY?
Before Unix, programming languages were careless. Unix was only cased as a simplification. No natural language is case sensitive, esp bcs they come from spoken language, which can’t be cases. Case errors are probably the most common simple bugs. Let’s please end the madness.
Because they don't solve any actual problem? Races typically occur due to the asynchronous nature of _external_ inputs (packets arrive...whenever, for example). This project doesn't solve that problem because it only enforces determinism _within_ the program. I'm sure you _can_ design a program such that it suffers from entirely internal, self-generated races, but that would be what percentage of all race bugs? 1% ?
This is a fantastic book - the name doesn't do it justice.
I've actually helped people out on welfare. One family had a big screen TV, everyone (even the kids) had cellphones, and so on.

Some people are poor, but some are just dumb. I wish I could fix poor, but I can't fix stupid. And there is a lot of stupid around.

I know many people who make a few hundred thousand dollars (in Texas, not silicon valley or NYC), and they live paycheck to paycheck. That's stupid, not poor.

So when I see stats like that (thank you for the links), I always wonder what the real number is - how many are poor, and how many are just stupid.
>> If by 'you' you mean 'the owners' who are the share holders, then yes.

NO. I guess what I mean is that the FOUNDER(s) of a company have a reason for it to exist. They get to define everything about it. If at some point they need to raise money by selling shares, they get to define what the shareholders get in return for their investment. The share holders are free to take it or leave it. This scenario was probably present in every public company at some time in its history. AFAIK no company has ever been created via IPO.

Even if a group of founders (who may also be initial private investors) creates a new company, they define a purpose. It may be to "make money doing X" or it may be "develop a better Y" just because they are into Y, Or "cure disease Z", establish a human presence on Mars, build a better search engine. Most founders probably want to make some money - otherwise we call it philanthropy - but that doesn't mean they are mutually exclusive. But in every case I think the company exists prior to 99 percent of the investment that comes after something has been defined beyond profit.
Please don't cross into flamewar mode. We're trying to avoid that here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Pretty much, I just said "haha" and I got 5 downvotes in 20min. :)
This analogy is one of my personal favorites for software development. The machine that is going to be running the software could be considered our building. The hardware of the machine is designed to exacting specifications by people that typically hold university engineering degrees and is much more reliable than software typically is, it has to be or nobody would use it. Failure of the building is catastrophic to the tenants.

A process could maybe be considered a room within that building and adding functionality to that process is akin to adding furniture to a room, or I guess, doing a buildout for a tenant. You add specific furnishings to help you accomplish specific tasks within that room.

This analogy breaks down pretty quickly, but think about the room here. I can now explain to a non-technical person that this software (a single process in this case) is like a broom closet that we've shoved full of old furniture for the last 5 years. Prior engineers have stacked tables to the ceiling, filing cabinets have locks without keys. We don't even know what's in the back of the closet at this point, and getting a peak at what's in the back will require unpacking everything at the front.

On the other hand you could have a different room. It has doors for egress and ingress. It has glass walls so we can see what's happening at all times. We carefully arrange the furnishings for efficiency, and can swap out old furniture for new in a matter of moments. We regularly clean the room, removing unused/aging equipment etc... When people enter that room to work (end users) the workflow is effortless and intuitive.

So as a software developer/engineer or whatever you call yourself, we're more like the contractors that buildout interiors for specific use cases. We equip the rooms for doing specific jobs. You give us the building or even just one room and we'll make it useful.
It massively increases readability.
Apple argues its $1bn headquarter is worth $200
I often wonder how many of those same paycheck-to-paycheck Americans are driving leased cars, cars under 5 years old, smoking, own the latest smartphone, and/or are regularly eating/drinking out.

I get that there are people living genuinely frugally and still struggling. It may just be observational bias, but I suspect there are a lot more people struggling who are not choosing to live frugally and where that choice would help them quite a bit.
I certainly think there is a contradiction. If you want to base your opinions on some grand theory that is on you. How to apply Adam Smith's theories in modern society is certainly up for debate, e.g:

https://aeon.co/essays/we-should-look-closely-at-what-adam-s...
Questions about post-screen world as Alexa and Cortana now talk to each other
Get rid of the workers and what do you have? A failed company. The workers are the most important part and without them the business cannot survive. The most important part of the business should have a say in the business.
These grilling sessions do nothing. The person being interviewed simply gives memorized responses, feigns ignorance, or attempts to pass the blame.
I dont see how that is any less true of the mass of public stockholders. (Or, he citizens of a democratic state.)

Yes, people with voting power can make mistaken decisions that are contrary to their interests. Giving all of the voting power to people whose interests are systematically and fundamentally in conflict with the group at issue on many points does not, however, reduce the likelihood of adverse decisions being imposed on them.
It's such an extremely simple litmus test: if it breaks the back button of the browser, it's the wrong design. The closest thing to an exception being cases where one needs to be logged in to see a page, or when links are consciously invalidated for some other reason. And even then the website/webapp should still just signal this to the user without a bazillion redirects.
Wrong. A lot of people grew up before this started. And no, I removed the Mandarin-as-an-additional-language people from the number already. (Mandarin 1st + Mandarin as a 2nd or 3rd languages speakers) = 1.1 billion. Population of China, 1.4 billion. 1.4 billion minus 1.1 billion is 300 million.
Not only that, but renters in the US pay a substantially higher proportion of their income on housing than in Germany. (See http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/brief_intern...) I'd bet the story is similar for transportation.
More discussion on Hackintosh VMs at https://www.reddit.com/r/hackintosh/, just search for KVM, ESX, or Proxmox.

For any one interested in using the Ryzen Threadripper for a Hackintosh VM, see https://www.reddit.com/r/hackintosh/comments/8knz91/threadri...
Please don't break the HN guidelines by insinuating astroturfing or shillage without evidence. That's an internet trope that poisons everything it touches.

If you think you see evidence of abuse, let us know at hn@ycombinator.com. In this case, though, what you're seeing is evidence of the topic being divisive. It's natural for a large community of users to include opposing views.
When you are dealing with an open source project, people will just show up with small and sometimes large changes. In that case, you may need to review design.

There is also "minor" stuff a linter won't catch, such as bad naming. IMO naming is actually quite important.
Society has the right to change the rules on you. The system belongs to all of us.
First, that was from last month, before the Uighur issue was blowing up, not today.

Second, that was a positive followup to a negative story, not a new negative story.
You haven't spent a lot of time around Marxists, now, have you?