skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the corporate world is still learning how to do effective research. Too many companies think that doing research means replicating a tiny university within their own walls.

I'm not saying industry always gets it more right than academia, but I think even the orgs like Microsoft Research that are basically just clones of academia, are still on a slightly better path. For instance MSR has done a lot of cutting edge research into operating system design. Still, the money was in the end wasted - nothing of Midori ever surfaced in real products.

The gold standard for me is Google. They're one of the few firms that managed to completely fuse research and industrialisation into a totally cohesive whole. Whilst they technically speaking have a research department, the research they're known for is largely not done there and Google has managed in the past to routinely create new innovations from all over the company.

It's worth realising that a lot of industrial and corporate research isn't labelled as such. It's just "innovative product development".

Example: If we look at JetBrains, they developed a new programming language from scratch (Kotlin) that has several innovative and cutting edge features. Do we think of JetBrains as a sponsor of research or Kotlin as the product of research, probably not, yet it solves many problems that were previously unresolved, like how to make a new language that has seamless interop with Java, and how to improve the usability of features like generics and nullity checking. The work involved in creating it explored new frontiers that academia has ignored, simply because usability improvements and practical topics like interop with existing code is not considered 'smart' enough to be worth the title of research.

You see this pattern crop up repeatedly. Academia, left to its own devices, researches ever more exotic extensions to Haskell, knowing full well most programmers don't use Haskell. The corporate funded academic research done by JKU Linz and Oracle has focused on how to make existing languages like Ruby and Python super fast to execute, super debuggable, cheap to develop runtimes for, how to solve the language interop problem once and for all and so on. They've produced something real - Graal - which looks on track to actually let Ruby call into C++ call into Java call into JavaScript call back into Ruby again, in a seamless and fully optimised manner.

Now that is cutting edge but incredibly practical research that could have industry-shaking impact within the next 10 years. It isn't primarily funded by the NSF or EU though. It's funded by a corporation.
I work for an investment bank and have interviewed at plenty of other financial institutions, including other investment banks and hedge funds. Few have commented on my open source work, and those that have basically said, "We checked out your project, it looks pretty cool."

I had one particularly tech-savvy CEO personally reach out and try to recruit me because of my open source work. My project wasn't directly related, but he recognized the similarities between the problem domains, and that impressed me. But his wasn't a financial firm.

I can't imagine any tech-centric organization being hostile toward open source contributors, whether they're an investment bank or not. I could maybe see it on teams that aren't tech-focused and are led by old-school business types who just don't "get it". But teams where tech is their biggest asset, like electronic trading? No way. If you run into this sort of thing when applying for jobs in the financial sector, you're looking at the wrong jobs (or the wrong banks). Look for roles on electronic trading teams or HFT. The work is more challenging, and the compensation is better anyway.

Better still, apply at Susquehanna or Two Sigma, or some other place that really recognizes the value of their engineers. Stay away from huge banks like Citi.
What bank? Between IdeaBank, BZWBK (now Santander) and Millenium Bank, all the applications were mediocre to (in case of Millenium for Business) utter crap.
The first part is the standard "companies think you are not committed" part .. depends on the company. The second part reads like a long version of "I'd like to behave like an asshole without any consequences, here's how to do it". Talking about "attacked for wrongthink" or "are certain that they are not one of the politicians" confirms that suspicion for me.

Long story short: If you want to be an asshole using your real name is probably not a good idea. But why do you want to do that in the first place?
cromulent, huh?
heh
That's fair, it's definitely a way to read this. I shouldn't respond to hyperbolic language with the like. I'll edit it.

Edit: Too late, I can't edit anymore unfortunately. Let me rephrase:

"Behaving like a decent human being isn't that hard. It's work that anyone who wants to work in a collaborative project can reasonably be expected to do. If this is objectionable to you, then maybe this collaboration isn't for you."
Hide your name or else some crazy people might want to destroy your life and take over your project from you.
In my experience programming is almost fractically complex. No matter how far you subdivide the problem you're solving you're making a tradeoff between the complexity of the problem you're solving and the complexity of the tree of sub-problems.

And even ignoring that: writing down abstract concepts is hard. Doing so is (to me) as distracting as dropping my work completely and doing something else for a while.

IMO the solution isn't never being disturbed and it isn't writing everything down either. It's keeping disturbances as few as reasonable and being able to get back to it quickly, even if that means rebuilding your mental model.
Oh, interesting! That's not called out on their comparison chart for the NEO. That would certainly be a tempting upgrade for any NEO users then
Uber and Grab hit with $9.5M in fines over ‘anti-competitive’ merger
I wonder how effective it would be to at first make the programmers realize all the business processes manually so that out of frustration they would start automating things?

A so-called FDD - frustration driven development.
Striking Satellite Images of Cities on the Brink
I don't understand anything to fusion (except basic stuff), but I like these : https://lppfusion.com/
They publish results often and it's quite entertaining.
It will only outlive you if you are a trained expert. They die quite easily when owned by regular people.
To me, it seems that the biggest lesson here has to do with cults of personality. No matter how awesome he is, Linus should never have been put up on such a high pedestal, given such a complete pass on everything he said, for so long. The longer it went on, the more he attracted both imitators and detractors. When he had a change of heart (and BTW I think the person who talked to him and finally made a difference was probably his daughter), neither of those two groups knew how to handle it gracefully. I've seen plenty of BS from both the Reddit/4chan troll army on one side (quite prevalent in this thread) and the anti-LF clique on the other (haven't seen them here yet) since then.

It's particularly interesting to contrast this with the relatively smooth process of the Python community. They adopted a code of conduct a while ago, and more recently Guido van Rossum - he for whom the term "Benevolent Dictator For Life" was invented - stepped down. There was some contention, but nothing like what we're seeing for Linux. I don't think it's because of the two projects' prominence. I think it's because Guido was never as polarizing as Linus. Again, the lesson is perhaps that nobody should be allowed to drive a project of that size toward such a cliff.
Encrypting SNI: Fixing One of the Core Internet Bugs
Show HN: Back endLab – code free web app back end builder
"Sorry Jane Doe (victim), I can't prosecute your alleged assailant because I didn't take the sexual assault portion of law school because I just couldn't even, even though I'm a man, I'm an ally and this needs to stop, but someone else needs to do it."
Not as far as I'm aware. A few firms do compete in the market for job candidates by adopting unusual languages that correlate well with passionate / mathematically inclined developers, but it's not really about the tech itself. Jane Street are famous for using O'Caml but that's about it? Most finance is Java, even the HFT stuff these days.
I'm guessing... Austria? They only accept specifically Maestro and not Mastercard? N26 by default gives you a Mastercard but they also offer a Maestro if requested[0]

[0] https://support.n26.com/read/000001452?locale=en
SiriusXM to Acquire Pandora
Make Your Special Day More Special with Heathrow Taxi
Unless you scramble the cube using more than 20 moves.
http://www.cube20.org/
Show HN: Land More Freelance and Remote Jobs
On /r/linux of all places..?
In my experience being asked questions you can retrieve from memory aren't too distracting. Questions you need to even fractionally think about however cause the whole house of cards to come down.

"Did you see my email about thing?" is going to get a prompt no from me. "What's 3*9" is going to get you about 30 seconds of huhs and hold-ons before I realize it's an unimportant question (at which point it's too late to recover).
If you have extensive background knowledge of finance and investing:

Corner of Berkshire and Fairfax forum
http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/index.php

Security Analysis subreddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/SecurityAnalysis/
Encrypt it or lose it: how encrypted SNI works
Huh, I haven't had that problem in about 7 years of using a custom domain name. Maybe the distinction is that mine is a .com? I feel like enough businesses themselves use custom domain names that dropping unknown .coms would break a ton of legitimate B2B traffic, but perhaps .me less so.

How did you notice this?
I understand that. Hence my question, what difference does it make? Are we going to investigate if Blacks are "full of shit" when they argue "for affirmative action"? What are we supposed to do with that information?

There's already endless evidence that people are full of shit, one shouldn't presume that somebody arguing for or against anything is doing it with the noblest of intentions. That should be irrelevant to judging the argument in question.
Personally, I like to consider Linus taking time off to work on his social skills (whether it is really necessary or not) a sign of personal growth.

Time will tell how things will change in the Linux development world, but on a personal level, I think it is kind of admirable to face such an issue and be so open about it.
Most of the evil on this world is caused by too many levels of abstraction.
Thanks for all the links. I was going to share that last one -- a contender for the greatest award acceptance speech of all time.
Killing processes that don't want to die
Indeed, the Dirty Computer emotion video is basically this.
I also use MxRoute. No problems so far. I would recommend it too, if you don't want to run you own email server.
Also push works with macOS and iOS.
Is Self-Serve Data Prep Easy Enough for All Users?
Technical coach here. This is a passion of mine. I've seen far too many teams waste far too much time with horrible, horrible backlogs and tooling systems -- usually set up with the most sincere good intentions, by the way. I care so much about it I wrote a book on managing project information. The key example, repeated throughout the book, is a small team meeting folks and starting to make stuff people want. (Obligatory link: https://leanpub.com/info-ops )

I believe if you can get the small team scenario working over-and-over again scaling will work itself out. So far I have no reason to believe this isn't the case -- and I've applied the principles in the book both to functional coding and program management.

mjul's comment is the key one: you can't know everything before you start. That doesn't mean you can't know anything. It means that there is a "progressive elaboration" that has to happen on an as-needed basis. Otherwise you're stuck either not knowing enough to get going -- or having created a monster or a tools/information system that ends up running the project instead of the team.

There are some sanity checks for whatever backlog/requirements system you are using. Instead of my continuing to pitch, I'll just list the things that your system should do no matter what kind of system you have.

- Handle whatever detail is needed before actual development happens.

- Be able to "flip-around" and start from scratch within an hour or so. (And "starting from scratch" means beginning with nothing and ending with the team starting coding) While keeping all that detail in test 1.

- Be reusable with other teams doing similar work. A backlog/requirements system can't make work fungible, but it can enable better conversations in other teams without being a burden.

- Limit meetings around organization to under an hour or so. Yep, you gotta have those "meta" meetings from time-to-time and talk about things like release plans. But they shouldn't take over your afternoon.

- Help the larger organization (if there is one) learn and grow over time. Orgs learn from the bottom-up. Good tools should facilitate this learning.

- Drive directly to acceptance tests. Good backlogs are testable. Things shouldn't be in there that don't drive tests.

- Have controls in place to prevent abuse. As soon as you create some tool for the requirements/scoping phase, somebody is going to go all architecture-astronaut and overuse it. There has to be controls to prevent this from happening. The tool should facilitate the work of understanding and scoping, not replace it. (I think even a lot of tools vendors get confused on this one).

I even wrote an analysis compiler that demonstrates all of this as part of writing the book. So if you think all of this is impossible -- happy to do a demo.

There are a few other testable criteria for whatever your requirements/backlog system is, but that should be enough to get you started deciding whether some system is better or worse than another system.
I use Safari for browsing and Chrome for development. Recent changes from Hangouts to Meet has also forced me to use Chrome for video chats.

I've never been a huge extension user (ad blockers and some development tools), so moving to Safari was easy. The big thing I missed was favicons, and those have been in the technology preview for awhile now.

I may explore FF for development, but I'm not sure there is a need since I've already relegated Chrome to a specific task.
>If that is the case, surely we can find better ways to uncover the requirements, and better tooling will help solve the problem. Experience tells me that people don’t know everything beforehand.

This is highly context dependent. In some domains the business basically just needs to throw random things at the wall and see what sticks because nobody can know what they really "need" until it's tested in front of a customer. In other domains they have an incredibly detailed view of the behavior that they need.

In some businesses they're in a weird situation of just not being very good at figuring out what they need and an improved process would save tons of time and money.

In others nobody even thinks about any of this because their requirements are so simple and obvious nobody needs to.

Iterative development is a lot of the time but it's not a panacea and it's not a replacement for fixing a broken requirements process when it's needed.
Probably a silly idea, but I wonder if the cube will maintain zero net entropy through this self-solving process.
The enemy? That is an easy answer: The enemy is the public/private parternship! It's not just the NSA, not just corporations. No, it is the seamless melding of the two which are wreaking havoc on our civilization. Freedom of speech is on the chopping block right now today.

Even HN has shadow-banned and otherwise taken part in censoring me and only because I express unpopular opinions about government and business. I get 1 post a day on this account. Why? What are they so afraid of?
دكتارين – حياتنا الصحية
One thing about how laws work, is that they only become facts on the ground, so to speak, in the interpretation.

Courts change the followed interpretation of law all the time without amending the written law.

Often the written law only gets amended when the difference between the definition on paper and the definition in common practice can no longer be bent any further, after decades of plain conflict in language.
You could have shuffled it into a position where it takes less moves to solve than you made while shuffling.
I'm a Protonmail user. E2E isn't snake oil but it does assume you have an alternative secure channel for password exchange.

I like the fact that my mail archive is encrypted even though I don't send encrypted mail to others.
That's so cool! When I was figuring out how to solve it myself (took a year of tinkering to come up with an algorithm) the first big revelation is that the centres always stay fixed relative to one another.
PolaPi: Building a Polaroid Camera with a Raspberry Pi and Thermal Printer
When I've seen mastodon in one of the titles for the first time here I was surprised, because I thought that one of my favorite bands are being discussed here.
> That somehow because a zillion people find something interesting, that I should, too, makes clear that the best we've done in filtering is assume people are sheep and need to be "fed" as such.

No, it's just basic human pshychology. People imitate other people. People like what other people like. This is wired into us on a very basic level.

Yes, these basic patterns are often stupid, from a purely rational persperctive. And yes, those of us who are trying to act more rationally (the HN, LessWrong crowd and others) see this behaviour as stupid. But it's irrational and naive to assume that it's easy or even possible to completely get rid of this basic behavioural patterns: they're wired in your brain on a very basic level, and you can only steer them and restrict them, but not remove it completely.

And one more thing: these patterns are quite often good rough heuristics to solve a lot of problems that we don't want to waste a lot of resources on. For example, if you don't want to be a fashion icon (reasonable assumption for most audience on this site), you can always just buy clothes from the most popular brand out there, and with very high probability, you'll get clothes that fit, are of reasonable quality and have neutral social signalling. Of course, if you invested a lot of time into your own research on the matter, you'd be able to find clothes that perfectly reflect your personality, more thoughtfully use cultural context, are of superior quality and may cost even less - but would you bother? Most of HN readers usually answer "no" to that, because they have other priorities in life.

Well, a lot of people just decide that their information diet on YouTube doesn't deserve such attention, and they're ready to watch whatever funny videos are just popular to fill their lunchbreak.
Which, I believe, didn't have enormous shock value either. Like, just another criminal getting hanged...
> ...but it does prove that you fear his message and it strongly suggests that his message might be correct.

I find it strange that one would believe this A) means people are scared, and B) means the message is more likely to be correct.

For example, if we were to watch two random idiots arguing or "debating" over a complex and highly nuanced topic, if neither of these "debaters" has any expertise or really any understanding of the wider issues which may need to be considered, its incredibly unlikely either of these people will come to anything close to the "correct" answers. While one of them may make more convincing arguments, this means very little.

If my car mechanic makes a convincing argument,links me to a bunch of youtube videos, and official looking webpages which all tell me I should use homeopathic medicine and the guy I'm sitting next to me simply says "Nah, doctors are totally way better, dude." Neither of those two people are trained in medicine, but should I listen to the mechanic because his argument was more convincing? No, of course not.

Having an innate ability to use Sophistry absolutely does not indicate whether or not their position should be trusted. And refusing to engage with a Sophist is in no way an indication of being fearful of their message.

It's so weird when people believe "debate me bro, a random idiot, or you're wrong and I'm correct." is in any way a rational conclusion to make.
> There's a reason civil engineering isn't "Agile"

There are plenty of reasons why engineering isn't "agile" and it's only usable in software development, and one of the main reasons is that software development projects manage a single resource: man/hours. Building the wrong or inadequate solution has its cost, but rebuilding something from scratch does not require additional resources to be allocated to the project: just keep the same team working on it and results will pop up.

Engineering projects are very different than software development projects. Materials and components are the driving cost of a project and there are plenty of stuff that must be done right from the very start. It's unthinkable to scrap a machine or building or tunnel midway through, and it's inconceivable that some disaster happens at all. Engineering either gets it right at every single stage of a project or there are serious consequences to deal with, which in some cases might even be criminal charges. If for some reason a prototype crashes during development then the project might be forced to shut down.
That's the heart of the issue. The JD has recently become the envogue MBA. So it's been getting a lot of students who aren't there to actually learn about being a lawyer.
But is it actually "solving" itself? Or just recording the scramble and playing it back in reverse order? I realize it's an artificial distinction, but if the cube is tracking its state and then running a solve algorithm, that's more interesting (to me) than if it's just popping a stack.

Either way, it's extremely cool.
Scroll-Worthy Cloud and Tech Blurbs
I hope you're not naive enough to think that a user is obligated to have his computer render the exact thing a server sends, no questions asked.
To disable this feature (at least for chrome 69, not sure if it will change), go to account-consistency: chrome://flags/#account-consistency and select disable.
>"anosognosia"
is a terrific word.

I think of it as "ignorance broad enough to encompass one's ignorance"
or
"to not know _that_ one doesn't know"
The number of solve moves appears to be 4x the number of shuffle moves (?)
It always was. When I started using Firefox it was an alternative to IE6. It was the browser you used if you were a web developer because it had things like Firebug (which Google copied and integrated into Chrome). Chrome didn't convert many Firefox users, it just did a much better job of converting IE users than Firefox ever did, but that's no surprise given that they could directly market it to users through google.com.

Chrome initially was faster than Firefox because it lacked features. This is a common pattern if you've been in this business long enough. Firefox itself was originally the fast-but-cut-down version of Mozilla. Like Firefox, Chrome quickly gained features and bloat and became just as slow as Firefox and everything before it.
If the CoC is used to bully people, then fight the bullying. It's a false dichotomy that we have to accept one type of bullies in order not to empower another type of bullies.

That said, your link also just peddles various conspiracy theories as "proven", and imagines a vast conspiracy of SJWs who specifically target powerful men. Which, BTW, should it exists, is clearly utterly ineffectual.
I haven't read all the comments but so far from what I have read I haven't found anyone mentioning Protonmail. Is it bad? Or not that known to people?