skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This would be somewhat easier if the forest had 'holes' in it, right? But then it wouldn't be much of a (convex) forest, would it.. (I'm assuming the forest totally covers the area it occupies.)

It would be interesting to find the computational complexity of escape as a function of the geometry (a set of n vertices)
Backtick! I came up with it on my own, but a few months ago I did some analysis of tmux.conf files on github (via the GCP public db) and it turns out that it's the 3rd most common prefix (after Ctrl+A and Ctrl+Space).
It looks very interesting (Pocophone, right? Not Picophone? [Even though "Picophone" sounds better to me]). But it's just out, and that too only in India? or at least not in the US, and it doesn't seem to support all of the US bands.

Also, no lineageos support at this point. not surprising, given its newness. But looks like one to keep an eye on!
c-x for me. with control on caps, it feels quite comfortable.
Maybe I'm just lucky, or have an incredibly thick skin, but I don't mind flying that much at all.

I certainly don't enjoy it, aside from takeoff and landing, but I find it easy enough to just take my seat and zone out for a few hours.

I think a lot of it's psychological, people hype themselves up so much about flying. Really, it's just like taking a bus, but in the sky. People hype flying up as this big event when it's not.

I sit for 8 hours a day at a desk, so a few hours on a plane isn't really that bad. I will admit that my desk is a lot more comfortable than a plane seat. I have no problem just sitting there and watching movies or reading books for a few hours.
The inaugural Blacks in Tech conference is coming to the Twin Cities Oct 11-13
I like the idea, but I don't think a random man page is the best approach. The signal to noise ratio is quite low. Maybe look at something like Julia Evans' bite sized linux.
Most people would put sarcasm on the adversarial side if the spectrum.
Personally, I don't see the value in going for something super-exotic.

It's not exactly the fanciest exotic alloy knife in the world, but my Global G-2 is an amazing workhorse of a knife. I've owned the knife for 8 years, and, while I take good care of it, I've never babied it — it's still in impeccable condition and remarkably sharp (I've never gotten around to resharpening it).
> anti-gay marriage, skepticism on transgender orthodoxy

> routinely twisted into "questioning other's right to exist", or denial of basic human rights/decency, or sexist/racist

Interesting list. Doesn't take much twisting.

You're providing a good demonstration of the point here. You don't get to feel comfortable advocating those things, at the expense of the people who live those things. Your comfort, versus their lives.

(Forestalling the obvious response: yes, I did intentionally select the most problematic points you raised to respond to, because they demonstrate the primary problem with attempting to protect "political opinion" in a code of conduct.)

> So are they verboten? Remember this CoC explicitly states it applies both inside and outside project spaces.

Inside a project they're almost universally off-topic. In the rare cases where they're not, it's often because a project actually intersects with such issues, such as needing to handle personal data or similar.

As for outside a project, the topics you listed vary greatly. I seriously doubt you'd find anyone's role in a project at risk because of their thoughts on climate change. On the other hand, if you actively campaign against other people's rights, you may well find that people don't want to work with you.

> I think you'd need to look long and hard to find anyone in open source projects seriously advocating for some group to be wiped off the face of the earth.

Not particularly long nor hard, no; I run into them regularly.

> This is why either "political opinion" needs to be protected, or the whole thing scrapped.

Even leaving aside whether there's any problem here at all, since when have the choices been "perfect solution or no solution"?

If you've got a limited amount of water you start by using it on the houses that are on fire, not the ones who want their grass watered.
this is a knife maker I follow - nice Damascus blades
http://www.bloodrootblades.com/chef-2/
Assuming you get any? There are plenty of 'startups' that offer none.
The discussion is whether the _technique_ is lost, not whether we can reproduce the results. So... yes, it does matter. It is, in fact, the crux of the matter.
"Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untravelled, the naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best."

That's Robert A. Heinlein, hardly known for being a social justice activist.
> Neither the health insurance issue nor the sidewalk was under US government purview.

It is when health insurance is mandatory (enforced by the US govt) and not having it causes you to pay unavoidable penalties which get added to your govt taxes.

> In fact, repair of sidewalks between private property and the street are almost always the responsibility of the property owner.

This really depends where you live. In this case it was the town's responsibility (and it's documented in the town's codes).

It was a really dangerous road too. It was one of those decently trafficked 30 mph suburban roads with properties alongside the road. If you tripped the wrong way on that sidewalk you had a decent chance of ending up in the middle of the road.
I call it the Impact Wrench[∆] theory of Engineer Management. It's widely practiced, sadly to modest success. This turns pressure into torque, so the harder you come down on your engineers, the faster they spin - right until they burn out.

[∆]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_wrench
Ask HN: What should I ask a successful startup CTO?
I'm a software engineer who's casual acquaintances with the CTO of a growth-stage startup, a successful person with multiple exits. We often have coffee, informal chats, etc. I have aspirations to be a founder myself so I feel like I could learn a lot from this person, but I'm not sure I know the right questions to ask. I'm senior-level with solid experience, yet it's hard for me to figure out how to best learn from someone at a much higher level of experience/accomplishment. Advice appreciated!
Pay here in Vancouver is definitely below the bay area or Seattle. As for doing exciting things, I guess that depends what you find exciting. Several big tech companies have decent sized offices here, Microsoft and Amazon being the most visible examples. There's a lot of games companies, EA being by far the biggest but there are numerous smaller studios. There's quite a few tiny AR / VR startups but they're mostly operating on shoestring budgets. There's quite a few people like me working remote with US companies which can be a good option if you can get it.

If AR / VR is something that interests you, come to one of the events at the Cube and you'll be able to meet some of the companies in that space.
http://archive.is/6AyZy
Makes sense though really. It's a pretty rare service in that it can be price comparisoned so easily.

The core service is pretty much exactly the same. Get you from A to B in the same amount of time. Even comparing a bus and train isn't as similar even if it does the same route as the bus is likely to take way longer.

The additional differentiation is pretty hard to be concrete about. Eg, you may pay a load more vs another carrier to have a flight with WiFi and power outlets but then find out it is out of service or they swapped planes.
Where can I find Chinese electric bikes in the US? I don't even know what brands to search for.
>"don't pay very well." is a key point in Canada.

You say that, and it's probably true on average, but I'm making 33% above the average salary for my province. Granted, I don't live in one of the "big" provinces and competition for tech jobs is not as high as it would be in hotspots like Vancouver/Toronto/Ottawa/Montreal.

Granted, I'm making less than an equivalent job in one of the big tech hubs in Canada, but the cost of living is a fraction of what it is in the bigger cities as well.
I too believe those 2 sets of qualities are separable. I'm less concerned about that fact that Linus' exist as I am about the fact that some of those traits are often correlated with success, and people idolize the successful ones without separating the 2 qualities. I've seen people emulate Steve Jobs to the point of dressing like him and using his mannerisms during presentations, and then also lash out at colleagues for not meeting some arbitrary quality bar with vague comments about it not being perfect enough. Assholes often make it to the top. You gotta admire the parts of them that aren't assholes.
Also don't deal with them by phone. Use written letters, sent by certified mail.
There is a difference between blunt and abusive. Don't conflate them.

"This code is wrong. We should not be doing things this way, and I'm rejecting the patch."

vs.

"You are a fucking retard for submitting this patch. Anyone who thinks like this should be retroactively aborted."

The first style is blunt and to-the-point. The second is unnecessarily mean.
I'd bet people tend to cluster onto the line
separating "agreeable and lax" and "rude but
firm" (as a sweeping generality)

Consider this:

A third category of people who are able to accomplish their goals by rallying others to their cause. They are essentially imposing their will on others, but are able to do it in a way that is not "rude." This is called charisma.

- "Agreeable and lax"... you allow them to paint the fence however they want, even if their work is shoddy. you may wind up doing it yourself because you don't feel comfortable enforcing your will on others. or perhaps you just wind up with a crappy looking fence.

- "Rude but firm"... you don't care about others' feelings and force them somehow to to paint the fence to your specifications. either by physical force, economic force (you have money they need) or some other means

- "Charisma"... you convince them that painting the fence the way you want it painted is the best possible thing they could be doing. they willingly paint it for you because they believe it is a good cause and a good use of their time. (note: this does not necessarily imply dishonesty or trickery. arguably, the most charismatic people might be those that are true believers)

https://www.google.com/search?q=tom+sawyer+fence

Somewhat tangential, somewhat related: Sun Tzu wrote that the most perfect form of victory was adding the enemies' forces to you own by convincing them to support your cause.
- With emotional support rabid wolverines.
Parsimony would dictate that a plan that involves them getting their asset back through a convoluted series of timing decisions the U.S. made that were completely beyond Russia's control is a terrible plan, and one that could have easily been replaced with him simply flying directly to Russia the first time and not leaving.
See, this is the piece that makes me assess this as an abusive thing to do:

The key, I find, is to be extremely direct and brutal in one on ones.

I have two special needs sons. I'm a former military wife. I tend to err on the side of being super, duper blunt and, no, my kids don't get "hints." But that doesn't mean I have to be ugly about it most of the time either.

Real life example:

When they were little, I would say "The trash is overflowing and needs to go out." My oldest would look over his shoulder, see that this statement was factually true, acknowledge the veracity of it and continue playing his video game. The fact that my statement was intended to get him to take the trash out did not quite click.

There is nothing whatsoever abusive about changing that statement to "Son, you need to stop what you are doing right now and take the trash out." That's just clear communication.

I am well aware that some people think saying something like that is somehow emotionally abusive or some nonsense. I have spent plenty of time on parenting lists where people were horrified that I would tell my sons something directly instead of dropping hints or some nonsense.

I'm quite fond of the movie quote "I'm too truthful to be good." I'm also very fond of a rubric I learned long ago that "Those who believe in telling the brutal truth value brutality more than truth."

I can be very, very, very blunt. I try to always be kind, to the best of my ability. I see no contradiction between the two.

Learning to tailor your communication style to the needs of individuals on your team is just good management and doesn't require any meanness whatsoever. In fact, it's a kindness.
Newton was much more humble. Shoulders of giants and all.
Why not invite him to join you?
About 40% of economics experiments fail replication survey (2016)
There are different ways to oil the machine, I'm not throwing out the baby along with the bathwater in naivete. Lots of cultures encouraged being direct, were insanely productive, and oiled the gears in a different way. The current cultural trend is just fashion, it will pass, but things will get worse before they get better.
Linus may know that there is some value in people being afraid to come to you with sloppy execution, bullshit ideas, or misrepresentations of facts.
> You're defining proprietary to include source-available.
> That is part of what I mean by "the two-party system" of
> thinking, forcing options into one camp or the other.

It's not a two-party system -- there are many possible options for open-source and proprietary licenses. This does not change that the distinction between "open-source" and "proprietary" is inherently binary. A license either meets the OSI definition or it doesn't -- you might argue that a license could be constructed to be right on the border, and that's true, but you'd still have to acknowledge it's on the border of something.

> Practically speaking, code developed in the open, by a
> diverse set of contributors, under a noncommercial
> license permitting redistribution, is far more
> comparable to open source than to Windows.

Yes, that's true. Many proprietary licenses are closer to open-source than Windows is.

> Doing otherwise risks forcing developers onto open source
> licenses when they're suboptimal, and nursing a
> misconception that the benefits of available source code
> accrue only to available source code that is also licensed
> under OSI- or FSF-approved terms.

The benefits of being open-source ought to accrue only to software that is open-source. If software under a proprietary license would like to publish its source code to encourage community contribution, it's welcome to do so, but should not deceptively claim to be open-source.

> Your conclusion on the enforceability of copyright use
> restrictions is incorrect. Look at Vernor v. Autodesk
> and the MAI Trio. Look the CC-NC litigation.

None of those cases are relevant to this discussion. The MAI cases are obsolete (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117), Vernor v. Autodesk covers whether possession of physical install media implies ownership of a license, and the only hits I could find on litigation related to Creative Commons non-commercial licenses seems to support my interpretation: https://creativecommons.org/2016/08/30/defending-noncommerci...
The world needs more License Zero, I'm always happy to see this important work on tha the ttop of HN.
It's really quite surprising how much energy/effort can be required to wind back that lizard brain in all of us when we're particularly agitated.

It's really hard to respond effectively when someone is doing the WRONG thing or they completely misunderstand your stance & modus operandi.

It takes a lot of effort to mentally model the other parties in the conversation and generate the empathetic response that hopefully is interpreted by the others in exactly the way you intended, so that everyone is back on the same page. An impossible endeavour.
Success can hide a lot of problems. Companies with wildly successful products have a strong bias toward "we must be doing everything right," when in fact the truth is only "we did some things right at some point".

That bias can make it hard to change things, even clearly broken things. It can make it hard to introduce new products, since anything new will be tiny compared to the old successful product. It can make it hard to get rid of bad managers, since their bottom line looks great.

For a view from inside this phenomenon, read http://www.paulgraham.com/yahoo.html
Stylus is a fork that (supposedly) doesn't track you.
Canon EOS R: A deep-dive Q&A session with the Canon engineers
Could be. Bezos also bought WashingtonPost but he did not run for office.
Do you think it's acceptable to send a public email saying someone is fucking retarded, or that they should be retroactively aborted?
>> Neither the health insurance issue nor the sidewalk was under US government purview.
> It is when health insurance is mandatory (enforced by the US govt) and not having it causes you to pay unavoidable penalties which get added to your govt taxes.

How does that follow? The government says you need insurance. It doesn’t say you have to buy from that company or that companies can’t compete on customer service.

If your car insurance company has bad customer service, do you think it’s your state government’s fault, too? My mortgage company requires homeowner’s insurance – is it their fault if I pick a company with bad support?
I lived in Ottawa for a long time and worked in Montreal before finally moving to SV.

The pay in Ottawa/Montreal is a disgrace compare to USA/SV.
Why assume that things happened according to a/the plan? Things often don't happen according to plan. I was just reading that some people think Guccifer 2.0 was actually a response to blown cover.
he's almost always right... so yeah I enjoy his rants.
To read Time Magazine you'll now need to make a Salesforce account, the physical copy will be sunsetted and replaced with a Salesforce Cloud version, and it'll be made entirely in Quip.
math applicant
I have been listening to Isaac Arthur lately on the drive in to work - can't say I learn anything amazing, and he stretches his stuff out, but I haven't found anything better to fill the time.

I.e. it's more history channel than a tutorial, but you might be introduced to something to google later, maybe.
One person's rational doubt is another's paranoid doubt. I thought the original article expressed rational doubt.

Without evidence, I lean towards assuming Snowden's motives are what he says they are. But after all, none of us (I assume) actually know him. He's a person in the news.
The question isn't whether the price is right or wrong, but what it's a price of.

For example, the market cap of Tether is a couple billion dollars. This doesn't mean that Tether as an abstract concept is worth a couple billion dollars, or even that market participants think it is. It just means that there are a couple billion Tether tokens floating around, and people are confident that they'll get $1 for their Tether if they want.
I would never work for this asshole. I have not granted any one the privilege of being disrespectful to me. No, no one has my permission to be unprofessional and/or disrespectful towards me, no matter the cost. Everything else is fair game. To be clear, I have had a fair amount of criticism on my work by all kinds of people (and most of them I deeply respect and consider my mentors).
I think it will be quit the opposite. It will be run like the Washington Post and it will free them up to actually focus on making great content vs. making spammy content to drive clicks and sell magazines.
Monty Montgomery's explanation of digital audio might be the best explanatory video I have ever witnessed, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM
If we can map all possible ways of making the material, surely one of them must be the ancient technique.
I wonder if the negative behaviour was essentially knee-jerk lizard-brain reactions against other developers that wasted his time because they don't share his values for Linux.

If he maintained a manifesto of values for linux's kernel, always kept it up to date with the new technological choices and so on, maybe that would've kept the bike shedding away.
Comments should stand on their own. Nobody learns anything with a “because I said so - just trust me” comment.
> For example in today's environment when someone suggests something stupid, it is no longer acceptable to say "this seems stupid to me" because it might hurt someone's feelings.

What is no longer acceptable is to personally insult a developer for breaking things, poorly designing an API/implementation, etc. By "personally insult" I mean call someone names, curse at them, sarcastically suggest they should have been aborted, and many other such tactics.

Judging from Linus' post, he agrees that stuff like that is unprofessional.

And there are plenty of examples of Linus' posts where he clearly called particular developer stupid, as opposed to calling their ideas stupid. I can provide examples if you've never read one of them.
I was forced to take a unit of postmodernism as part of my studies and came away no wiser as to what postmodernism actually is.

There was a bunch of dense, impenetrable academic word games that seemed to be asserting that all truth is culturally relative.

I don't find gravity or physics to be culturally relative.
Dont forget United DLC:

Watch your pet get killed on the tarmac

Pay $15 for garbage lunch

Fight Club Mode: get tazed and beaten by the police for having the audacity to sit in your seat.
> That’s actually the very definition of abuse.

No it isn’t. From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of abuse

1 : a corrupt practice or custom — the buying of votes and other election abuses
2 : improper or excessive use or treatment : misuse — drug abuse
3 : language that condemns or vilifies usually unjustly, intemperately, and angrily — verbal abuse a term of abuse
4 : physical maltreatment —child abuse sexual abuse
5 obsolete : a deceitful act : deception

They explicitly said they were upfront with their peers about how criticism is delivered. Whether that is true is beyond the scope of discussion; what has been said is nowhere near gaslighting or other forms of abuse. I don’t understand what has happened as of late, but the western world has taken a very strange turn in redefining terms to make the smallest of infraction or abrasiveness a great harm. Criticism does not need to be laced with praise to be useful, and justified critique does not equal abuse. That’s complete nonsense. Delivering it in private rather than publicly, if anything, seems more in consideration of the recipient’s feelings anyway.

With respect to the topic of this discussion, I will refrain from passing a judgment on Torvalds’ change of heart until we see quantitative data on how this has impacted the kernel.
Was there a public discussion that led to this change? The 'Contributor Covenant' contains this line:

> Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting

which is essentially a carte blanche for any actions based on 'violation of the code of conduct', especially with the inclusion of public spaces in it's scope. We've seen it being (ab)used many times recently in open-source projects.

Most recently it's been considered legally binding, and the wide net it casts seems to be a huge liability for contributors (not a lawyer, so feel free to school me on this one).
It doesn't sound abusive to me at all. "Criticize privately, praise publicly" is a well known management trope.