skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You have 2 options:

1. Hire them as "freelancer/self employed" and let them invoice your company. They can either invoice as individuals or through their own company if setup. But laws get tricky depending on countries. For example, if you are an employer-based out of the US and the freelancer is NOT a US person (US person has a specific definition) , you need them to fill out something called W8-BEN form but you need to talk to a CPA/tax lawyer to determine if that's the right setup.

2. If you have more than 1 person from the same remote country, you may have to setup a subsidiary of some sort which again depends on where your business is setup and where the remote team is setup. That subsidiary can then still provide services to the parent company etc. But it then adds tons of overhead for the remote country laws, business setup and also something called "Transfer Pricing". Can get complex for smaller companies. But the advantage of this option is that you have an official local company that can pay employees on payroll, follow the local employment and tax laws etc.
>>Really glad I don't own one of these things.

Until these devices become mandatory, hard requirement by every government to detect and quarantine people carrying a disease spreading virus during an epidemic.

Or the insurance company insisting you install one at home, to screen you if you are a smoker.
What expertise do you have to credibly cast doubt on the self-descriptions of gender-neutral people? Have you seriously researched this? Or are you allowing your feelings to have an undue impact?

Edit: To be fair, I think most people agree this can be taken too far. For example, I don't think we need dozens of new pronouns -- I don't believe there is scientific or psychological evidence for doing so (although I am willing to be corrected about this). But slightly stretching the usage of a single existing pronoun ("they"), in a way that is not entirely new, seems like a pretty small ask.
I think the idea is that the tax would dis-incentivize emissions, so the cost of capture is irrelevant.
>Apple acknowledged in December that it had intentionally slowed iPhones with degraded batteries through software updates to avoid sudden shutdown problems, but denied it had ever done anything to intentionally shorten the life of a product.

>The company later apologised for its actions and reduced the cost of battery replacements. It also added battery health information to iOS and allowed users to turn off the slowing down of the iPhone’s processor.

On the other hand, Apple would be sued over the sudden shutdowns because of the battery degradation, or over the battery degradation because of the cost of battery replacement, or ... etc.

Class action suits are a cost of Apple doing business in giant volumes. They (and every company) are making tradeoffs with their products and I know from my own experience that making tradeoffs is an art and not a exact calculus.

So Apple can deal with the legal actions - they have the money. But of course this is another high barrier of entry from anybody else looking to get into the business.
Tips many founders find too obvious to have told you already
Are Web Components a thing?
You can, of course. The vast majority of the English speaking world will still disagree with you.

Social justice echo chambers don't really affect all that many people. Most of the rest of us simply don't care what happens inside them.
Well damn! This is a really elegant solution for a problem that has been bothering me for quite a while, and for which my own planned solution was much more complex :O
Thanks for the tip. So arbitrary buttons can be placed in widget area?
I want to flag a comment, "I disagree, but this is the most persuasive point someone has made."

In theory, that is my understanding of the voting system on HN. Based on the downvotes I have received over the years, it's obviously not perfect in that respect. But upvote the comments that contribute positively to the conversation, and you might rarely downvote a comment that detracts. I click the up button for plenty of comments with which I have strong disagreement. But if it's a well-thought comment that makes me have to think about a good counter if I disagree, then it's worth an up click.
Not every startup needs to be a “Startup”
Long: Apple & salesforce
Short: alphabet fb axiom and Experian
> Do we want a literal slow-software police?

That obvious answer is no, but as I think back on how many times I've been frustrated by some poorly performing piece of shit application over the past year, it's starting to not seem so bad of a solution.
> But still it was literally a patch to make old devices run slower, which regardless of intention should not be allowed.

Newer iOS updates allow you to disable the CPU throttle. It turns out that "high demand" scenarios that cause the phone to crash can be triggered by mundane actions like taking photos.

If you disallow throttling by law, old devices will just crash all the time.
Absolutely this. I am dumbfounded that some mobile applications are so painful to use when they really don't need to be. Take Snapchat for example. Why is Facebook and Instagram multitudes faster than Snapchat at taking pictures when that's 10% of FB or IG and 95% of SC? What is SC doing that requires so many resources?

And every Reddit client ever, or Reddit in general. Shameless amount of cookies and a horribly bloated UI just to do the same thing they were doing 10 years ago with double the client resource usage.
Suspicious Packages Sent to Time Warner Center, Clinton and Obama
Everybody gets to be on HN, not just folks aligned with our product preferences.

Possibly adopting a less strident tone will find a more favorable audience for what are admittedly good points.
Something interesting is that the more money you have, the more you're worth to advertisers, and the more money you could earn from your data. But the data you least want to share (I have disease X, I was just in a car accident, etc) would by far be the most valuable.
Everything bad is modern. Things used to be so much better back in the before times.
Deploy a Back End App as an Android Engineer – Iterate Faster with Ktor
Why not just use Haskell? Python has OOP baked into the language. Also, your responding to an article on introducing OOP with how not to use OOP, which seems tangental and deserving of it's own thread.
Depends on if we're talking about US poverty or 3rd world poverty.
> The construct has been used incorrectly for many years, to the point that most people hear it and don't shudder over it anymore even though it's incorrect.

You're contradicting yourself. If most people don't shudder over it, and people understand what is being communicated when it is used, then it is correct. Any opinion stating that it is incorrect would have to rely on authoritative sources, which do not exist in the English language.
How to Repair a Leaking Bathtub Drain Sink
Well I know for 4chan, each thread is ephemeral and depending on how active a board is, the thread will be deleted. Which I think is the challenge citing it. Since even a day or two after finding it, it can be lost.
I hate to jump straight to Docker, but that seems to be a quick way to restrict access to the local file system. This of course limits utility, but would be much safer. Plus I think the usefulness of a tool like up is primarily in munging the input text anyway.
You're absolutely right!

A well-executed, professionally administered, and properly run defined benefit pension system is by far superior to every other option on offer. It offers predictable costs for the employer, predictable benefits for the employer, and all of this will continue without the company for as long as the pensioner lives.

In practice, there's been a lot of subtlety to this. It's very easy to make changes with low-visibility long-term negative impacts and high-visibility short-term positive impacts. Public-sector pensions in the US have famously assumed unrealistically high discount rates, among other things, because that turns into small contributions in the short term which employees and unions love.

Decades down the line, everyone gets screwed. But the people who made the bad decisions are well beyond accountability at that point. Since they know this, everyone involved is incentivized to think short-term. Never mind the issues that arise when life expectencies increase well beyond what pension fund planners knew to work with.

The popular workaround for this is a 401k or similar. This isn't ideal by any means. It takes away the defined benefits and the predictability and certainty for pensioners! The main upside is that it also removes the kind of misaligned incentives that can encourage poor decision-making and provides more assurance that something will be there later in life.

You're completely right. Pensions, when done properly, are amazing for everyone! The alternatives kinda suck by comparison. But they're much better than the answer many pension funds have provided.

(Salaries, being compensation for a defined term as well as defined amount, can be terminated, and are also compared to current value provided. And aren't assumed to generally last until employee death.)
A more detailed breakdown of how they built it here:

https://homebrewserver.club/low-tech-website-howto.html
I'm not sure it even boils down to doing the right thing for the customer. Apple want you as a customer. Google want you as a user. It's that simple.
"I think his heart is in the right place and as much as a corporation can, Apple generally does the right thing."

Don't assume moral disposition when a CEO is talking his book.

Maybe Tim is really a good person, who knows?

But if Tim were the CEO of Facebook he'd be singing a different tune.

Don't underestimate the ability of CEO's to align their personal views with that of he company.

Apple is sensing blood in the water on Google and Facebook, and this is a smart, basic PR move to go on the offensive against those companies.

Now - I do think it's likely that Cook does actually believe what he is saying - so I'm not fully calling him a hypocrite or anything. But he is a business guy, and were he to be the head of a company for whom this angle would not apply, I suggest strongly he'd have a different story to tell.

When businessmen speak, it's mostly 'just business'. I don't mean that cynically, just pragmatically.
> How do you tell the difference between an object that is the String class, and an object that represents the String class?

Hah, I think "an object that is the String class" begs the question :-). I think that `String.class` is an object because you can do objecty things with it (call methods, assign it to a variable etc) and `String` is not an object because you can't do any of those things with it.

To me they're not the same kind of thing, though they're intimately, inseparably and exclusively related. I personally would say even if

new String()

was just syntactic sugar for

String.class.newInstance()

, and all other "bare" uses of `String` were similarly shorthands for operations on `String.class`, I'd still hesitate to say that `String` itself was an object.

My logic is probably less useful than yours, though. I'd say "`A` is a `class`, but `a` is an instance of `Class`" and in your system where `A` and `a` are "the same thing" there's no difference between being a `class` and being an instance of `Class`. Because the things appear in different namespaces (as you say), and are related one-to-one, we could as well say they are two ways to refer to "the same thing", with different operations possible "depending on the phrasing."

Shrugs, it doesn't come naturally to me, but it's at least a self-consistent system.
You make a bunch of unjustified statements, so I'd ask that you justify them before we continue. But I'll also clarify things.

>Correct grammar is important in a discussion of grammar, is it not?

Justify this.

> It's still grammatically incorrect.

Justify this. You make this claim, but you haven't ever justified it. At this point this conversation has become "Singular they has been used historically, is currently used now, and while previously controversial, is now considered by many to be correct". Your response to this is has repeatedly been "ok but its still wrong". And given that common usage and available experts both contract that statement, I'm unclear on what you're basing this opinion on.

>My "belief" isn't so much based on what I learned but on how the language has been used.

And your belief here is wrong based on how language has been used and is being used, which is what I've been saying. If you're belief that something is bad grammar is based on whether or not it is in common usage, then showing that it is in common usage and has been used should be enough to demonstrate that perhaps you were incorrect, and that it really is correct. But for some reason this isn't enough, and you've been very coy when explaining why you disagree. Hence my request to justify the claim that singular they is incorrect grammar.

>Yes, there is no "central authority", but then you appeal to authority throughout the rest of your comment.

No, I justify the claim that use of the singular they is widely accepted in academic and "serious" grammatical settings, indirect contradiction to your claim that

> You won't find it any different in any academic setting or any other setting where grammar is important.

As for Stallman's comments, I'm not telling you to use singular they. He is, or at least he is if you use the GNU mailing lists. What I am telling you is that your reasoning for believing that singular they is wrong is not well reasoned, and you've repeatedly not addressed that central point, instead choosing to focus on a typo.
You'd be correct: they do the exact same thing. But people need to justify their opinions when they are inconsistent with reality, so here we are. Android and iPhones both have always on mics. But nobody is dropping their phone.

I don't see a conflict if people admit the potential invasion of pirvacy is worth the utility of a phone, but not the utility of an Echo device. But apparently that alone isn't good enough.
Cast doubt? I haven't. I've simply stated the attempt to force me to use incorrect language constructs based on their beliefs is not useful and has not been successful.

Quite frankly, I don't care how other people choose to speak. I care when people try to tell me how I must speak.
Disclaimer: I use Apple products, and trust them slightly more than anything Google/FaceBook/startups because they don't have a business front selling my data to advertisement companies or 3rd party miners(as much as I know of).

But, I'm baffled by this PR as if they are the privacy messiah. Didn't they just sellout their Chinese users icloud data to the Chinese government?

Yeah. "It's the law, and Apple has to obey the law" is an argument, but here is a company that is willing to compromise their user's privacy in order to be able to sell phones in China. So, if US govt finds a way to say "it's the law" to reveal user data, I'm sure they'll bend over. This grand stand in media is just sickening and theatric.

/rant.
>I'm being maximally charitable when I say that I'm not sure why RMS's personal views on what constitute "correct" pronouns merits mention on an organization's code of conduct.

To provide an example of a what an alternative third-party gender neutral option is. Even with this example, you assumed he meant "they don't want to acknowledge gender identities outside of the male/female binary."

His blog post is more about his personal preference and reasons for them, not about what is "correct."
> Wanna increase salaries and stock grants? Sure, do it. Two quarters later Wall Street will fuck you up because your new shiny compensation model just shaved the company revenue. And guess what, they will punish you at much larger magnitude than your declining revenue. So that 5% of lost revenue is going to cost you 20% or 30% of market value, and now all those stock grants are 30% less valuable. So your great initiative just put you in a negative spiral. And now your employees will be pissed, and the press will come and write an article claiming that your once frugal company is now a money firepit and that morale is low, completely forgetting their initial narrative on how you used to fuck over your employees.

This, in a nutshell, is why capitalism is fundamentally incompatible with human flourishing. Because of the process you just described, the only possibility is an end state with a very small number of capital holders prospering and grinding the rest under their boot.
Silicone prosthetics are nearly perfect disguises.

And if you pull off a female illusion well, youd be surprised that most people wouldnt think twice about your voice.
You could easily make rm inactive (remove execute flag, move it, ...) and make rm an alias for send to trash (gvfs-trash, trash-cli, or whatever).
Assuming that the battery performed well for the first year while it was still under warranty, why wouldn't Apple want customers to ask for a new battery? They would replace the battery at a profit and get them into the Apple Store where they could try to upsell them on a new phone.
Then ship security updates independently of bells and whistles updates that make old phones dog slow?
Opioids are no better than standard painkillers for longterm back and joint pain
Speaking about unblockable ads, I had to set up a pi-hole to block ads at the network level because I couldn't block them on my ipad on any browser. Why does Apple make it so hard? Am I missing something?
While I’m not particularly hopeful for actual positive outcome of a larger study I must ask: isn’t this how studies are supposed to be done?

You devise a hypothesis, you confirm it as good as you can in an experiment and document the procedure. Someone else then peer reviews your study and finds any potential mistakes, if the research looks promising enough an independent research team will devise a larger study with more funding to verify the claims, repeat this X times until some sort of conclusion can be made.

Again, I’m partial against this study but at least it’s a study.
Fwiw, in the Netherlands most startup founders have a limited liability holding company to own the shares, and also use it send invoices from the holding to the startup. We don't, because being employed by our own conpany instead of sending invoices allows us to benefit from some R&D related tax cuts. But at least for Dutch law, founders sending invoices is allows and super common, maybe the same holds in the UK.
> Why is that hypocritical? Apple does not require that you upload personal data to their cloud, and Apple has no say in Chinese law.

They have a say in whether they are complicit. That they choose to operate in that anti-privacy market while demeaning others choosing to operate in their anti-privacy market is hypocritical. Could be considered worse if you factor in the consequences of that data.

> A real hypocrite would actually have to enable oppressive behavior

We disagree on whether providing technology for oppressive behavior is "enabling" it.
Rust has higher kinded types already, but only sinners can use them
Your phone is always listening for the command "ok, Google" or "Siri" in the exact same way the echo is listening for "Alexa". So there's not a huge difference. They are the same thing.
Verandah Builders Adelaide – Multi Choice Carports and Verandah
I'm fairly certain it's baked into the chip or part of the firmware which is not easily writeable, which is why the wake words are static.

One can check if a device is compromised or not behaving as expected fairly easily by monitoring network traffic.
Not a political or historical backwater, but also not the booming metropolis that was Tokyo. It was a backwater in terms of urbanization and urban heat island impacts.
What's hard is to not base a company on data. When you have more than a billion of active users, and you don't have just another app, you have the entire operating system and you are the sole gatekeeper to third party applications.

How many investors did Apple lose for not data mining users?

Look at the P/E of Google and Facebook and then look at the P/E of Apple... Apple sweats every dime of their $1T valuation.
How to Go Monorepo and Publish Packages Without Refactoring
Our revealed preferences often paint a bleak portrait.
I’ve noticed, still after a decade, people who know what they’re doing will self organise into an “agile ish” way of working similar to the points you make.

If you prescribe it you end up with a mess every time.

Agile occurs naturally if you’re team isn’t dysfunctional. If you have to force it in, its dysfunctional.
You can also do data analysis locally, reducing the information down to something you can believably argue does not contain the information of what is said (like spectral analysis etc.) and then periodically upload that. You can claim that your product is not 'listening' in the classic sense.
Any info on the hardware/software they use, rules and stuff like that?

Also, does anyone know of any good free software implementation of tetris? (no, don't suggest emacs :P)
It was only about one year between Swisstables being generally available within google and the absl release, which isn’t bad at all.
https://updown.io/

Best value of any tool I've ever used. It does literally everything you asked. I didn't even know it checked SSL expiry till it pinged me.
This is directly addressed in the comment you're responding to.

> "And you have things like the internet archive or Webcite[0] to make sure the web document doesn't disappear."
No, I'm not.

Just the fact that some group of people regularly uses language incorrectly does not change my opinion of it, nor does it change how I use it. I simply recognize that those people use it incorrectly. That doesn't make it correct.
A bit tangential because of my interests, but it makes me wonder why they ordered 'Foundation' series. It would seem they might want to 'break the ice' with some original content, but it's such a difficult pick... But on the other hand, I feel with psychohistory idea, it could really resonate with other things company identifies itself - privacy in the age of Data Science/Big Data/Massive Statistics. Would be interesting to know if someone there thought about it on this level.
All Applicatives have those two variants, not just Applicatives which are also Monads. There is a Backwards newtype in Control.Applicative.Backwards which reverses the order of effects for any Applicative:

GHCi> import Control.Applicative.Backwards
GHCi> :i Backwards
newtype Backwards (f :: k -> *) (a :: k)
= Backwards {forwards :: f a}
GHCi> forwards $ (++) <$> Backwards ("foo" <$ print 1) <*> Backwards ("bar" <$ print 2)
2
1
"foobar"

As you can see, the result is the same but the effects are reversed. The definition is simple:

instance Applicative f => Applicative (Backwards f) where
pure = Backwards . pure
Backwards f <*> Backwards a = Backwards $ (flip ($)) <$> a <*> f
Does YouTube Underpay Artists 13B a Year?
> For those not familiar with the series in question, there's a reason why, if you're going to choose a TV series to discuss permutations, you'd choose Haruhi.

An other good pick would be Firefly, famously aired in complete disorder by Fox: the broadcast order was (numbers referring to DVD/canonical) 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 4, 5, 9, 10, 14, 1 (which is two parts) with the series cancelled before 11, 12 and 13 were aired.

Not only that, but other broadcasters opted to set up their own wacky broadcast order:

* in Mexico, MundoFOX took the Fox order but replaced 1 by 12

* in SA SABC3 used the Fox order but did broadcast 11, 12 and 13 as well (in that order, after 1)

* in Portugal SIC used the Fox order followed by 13, 11 and 12

* Australia almost followed the intended order but swapped 1 and 2

* NZ followed intended order until 10 then used 14, 13, 11, 12.
If it could be activated only by hotkey, that would be helpful.