skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Things getting better in the average doesn't mean they're getting better for you. It does mean that they're improving though. Imagine how hard you'd have it had the average fallen on all these metrics instead of getting better.

None of that means its all great and well. Which I assume is your point?

Would be interesting to see a plot of this graph at the p0 and p100 (min/max) to get an idea of the baselines.
To write code that performs decently in Emacs-Lisp, you have to work with buffer contents rather than substrings, and it is just another frustration, the primitives for working with buffer contents are low level and heavily stateful, you end up writing imperative code that looks a lot like pascal or whatever, while loops conditioned on regexp searches, tons of setq's, moving point and mark around etc. It isn't a convenient way of programmatically modifying text. The basic examples of doing search and replace described here:

http://ergoemacs.org/emacs/elisp_find_replace_text.html

give a flavour of this (and of not having keyword arguments, of libary functions relying on global variables, ...).
I am tempted to say "Ah, how mislead you are, when did you last go to university?", but perhaps there's really different universities from what I see as the norm, who knows, I'd feel you either experienced a stranger university, or you don't remember it well enough.

Anecdotal: I am constantly on the verge of failing classes because to me it's really difficult to attend class, and because many points are assigned to the busywork that is attending class, I lose them, at this point it's a ritual where the (often really bad) teachers pretend to impart knowledge for two hours just to earn their wage. I easily perform way above other classmates when it comes to big projects and tests, of course I have to make up for my grade, but it's bullshit that I am "on the verge of failing" when I demonstrate great understanding and knowledge of the class material. Why is this bullshit? Because I am paying to be taught pertinent information, not to be put on trial for how much busy work I can put up with. But this can be explained because universities are not primarily interested in benefiting the students, their primary interest is on working as a gatekeeper for employers who (the majority) care a great deal about obedience above smart work.

There's extremely few professors good enough to truly warrant 2 hours of focus per class, yet many of them feel literally offended if students don't show up for class, it's a crooked system.

> In most schools you don't even have to show up or do much frankly, you can just 'write the final' if you think you're a genius.

my experience has been the absolute contrary.
This moral high ground is a very tricky thing. We need to accept different parts of the world operate differently and not to deny them from participating in technology. You could find something uneasy about anyone and anywhere. China, Israel, Gulf states, and of course USA itself.
Discussion on perlmonks: https://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=1220426
Ben Hunt pointedly said in his recent article [0]:

"With Saudi Arabia, the ubiquitous private information was that Saudi Arabia is a thug state and their Crown Prince MBS is a wannabe Bond villain. But no one acted AS IF they knew this until a Missionary event – in this case Turkey’s very public denunciations of the Saudi government’s murder of Jamal Khashoggi – turned that private information into common knowledge, something that now everyone knows that everyone knows."

He coined the term >common knowledge game< [1] as the "information, public or private, that everyone believes is shared by everyone else".

In the case of MBS, or Saudi Arabia specifically, everybody (privately) already had the information that this is a brutal regime. But they acted as if no one knew this. Until the tragic and brutal death of an exiled journalist in a consulate and the public denunciation by Turkey. Now it has become common knowledge and actions must be taken accordingly.

[0] https://www.epsilontheory.com/saudi-arabia-and-the-common-kn...

[1] https://www.epsilontheory.com/sheep-logic/
You can find that too in the US, just not in major coastal metros.
You’re describing a need for a standardized protocol not a blockchain.
Wait till SV learns that DST is Putin’s money. Once you start down this rabbit hole, where do you stop?
Complex Hearts
If we’re evaluating cost, surely micropython is at least $5 of lost functionality for a single chip. Only at scale would you see any savings.
I appreciate that this route can help counteract the self-selection bias for narcissists in higher level roles. Most managers/directors/VPs/CEOs etc only become such because they think they belong there. We probably want more humble individuals to get pushed into those roles because others think they belong there.
Pretty much every single comment so far is cynical. "No one really wants to know how the sausage is made", lots of money is tainted anyway, it's just PR fluff, etc etc. The classic HN Middlebrow Dismissal in full effect.

Counterpoint: cynicism is too easy. Actually giving a shit is harder, it's uncomfortable, it involves compromise.

Yes, if you refuse investment from any country that has ever violated a human right, you will raise $0. But that doesn't mean all money is created equal, or that Fred Wilson's effort here isnt worthwhile.

He's simply calling for VCs to a) refuse money from the worst offenders and b) be transparent about who their LPs are. He's also calling on startups, founders, engineers etc to demand this transparency, to care who they ultimately working for.

It's a simple ask.
And any day of the week, with their lawyers' approval, apple can release an update where they pester you with a fullscreen notification until the end of time asking you to upgrade to a new OS version where they do send all of that data back
At some point, the cost to package & bring the milk to the store will exceed the price of selling the milk, so you’ll hit a price floor regardless.

And it becomes the same issue: you now can’t sell the excess milk but you still have all the production facilities. So you store it in your buffer and hold onto production, and eventually if you end up overflowing the buffer, you’ll have no choice but to drop production (which is expensive to bring back up, so highly avoidable)
lol.

Ever heard of Singapore? Hong Kong? Switzerland?
Now sell me this pen using emotions
I'm confused, I took a brief look at both of those articles and they don't seem like a "failed shitstorm". Sure, there are points to improve, but it doesn't seem terribly bad. Which one is supposed to be the "failed shitstorm" and why? (I've been called an SJW before, so I might have some left-leaning bias here)

But those articles are irrelevant to the discussion. I've contributed to Wikipedia for years and I've got a good idea of how to add things from a neutral and objective point of view. My point is exactly that the existing article is not objective. For example, pretend the article of the Charleston white supremacist mass murderer said the following:

"Roof was involved in the controversy of the events of June 17, 2015. After a flurry of media attention, he became the lead defendant in the trial United States v. Roof (2:15-cr-00472), which was noted for the request for a bench trial..."

The above is entirely correct, and written in a neutral, flat tone, but it completely misrepresents the situation. By noting tiny, irrelevant details like the request for a bench trial and the criminal number, the article both becomes uninteresting and hides the truth. If you read the snippet you wouldn't get the idea that he was a mass murderer.

The same thing applies to the article about George Beto. He was objectively a monster. He used prisoners as literal cotton picking slaves, he operated a system that forced prisoners to mutilate themselves, and his direct subordinates shot people for no reason and let them bleed to death in an occupied dining hall "as examples". These things are not speculation, they're not partisan comments on Twitter, they're not even reporting in a possibly-biased newspaper - they're proven facts that were litigated to the highest courts of the land! These things are not even buried in court documents from decades back, they've been reported on and published! There is no reason for them to not be on Wikipedia.

Meanwhile, his page is about as dry and non-negative as it possibly could be. It reads like intentionally obfuscated, reputation-managed doublespeak, and only makes reference to some of the things he was convicted of in vague ways. It's a tragedy.
One of the biggest upsides of capitalism, where upside is defined as increased economic activity, is that it hides morally dubious actions behind a simple monetary exchange.

You get to buy goods, and you only need to think about the price at checkout, whether virtual or physical. You don't need to think about how much human suffering or environmental degradation you're funding, where each sliver of profit goes, and what plans those people have for your money.

If you have to visit your butcher and look them in the eye to buy your meat, with sawdust underfoot to soak up any fluids from the carcasses still hanging, you might have a greater appreciation for the sacrifice of the animal. All nicely packaged up in plastic, in a standard unit, coming from a centralized slaughtering system, it's easier to forget that your clicks & coins fund killing. And that's just stuff we've largely morally made our peace with, at least until there's an equivalently tasty alternative.

A large part of government regulation is to add back more eyes into the system when your own eyes can't see beyond the immediate transaction and the supply chain leading to the transaction is too long for you to research, never mind perceive at the point of sale. Labour laws, food standards, inspections and regulations - far more oversight is made necessary due to capital's natural obfuscation.
That's a typical attitude for someone who makes enough money to live where they are living. Sure, why not, you can just upgrade houses.

But, how much money would it take for you to quit your job and leave your home, family, and friends behind? Because that's what it amounts too. Few people are able to sell their newly expensive place and find a cheaper or equal option that doesn't require completely uprooting.
You don't need decentralization for this.
>Statistical averages are an awful way of measuring anything beyond 100 - 1000 people and I am surprised to see statistics is still practiced in its classic form to this day.

That is only true in the sense that a person who won the lottery would say that "you loose money on average playing the lottery," is bad advice.
I'm not the OP, but can offer two reasons:

1. You'll be labeled as disloyal. Which is euphemism for: someone at HR is already looking into replacing you.

2. Whatever problems prompted you to want to go away are still there.

Similarly, never offer a counter-offer as a manager. Because:

1. You don't want to send the message to others that it's a valid way to get a raise.

2. Whatever problems prompted them to want to go away are still there.

There reportedly are exceptions when things work out on both sides of the fence. But in almost 20 years, I've yet to see one first hand.
That's true for any "side", corrupt or non-corrupt -- you want more money because you trust your moral vision more.
I whole-heartedly agree that 6-monthly is no where near enough.

>If you don't know the names of your directs' (or manager's) spouse and kids then your relationship isn't good enough to trust the other with priorities at crunch time.

That's a bit far. You can have a great professional relationship with another person where there's both skill growth and career development without getting into their personal life.

I don't ask direct reports that much about their personal life beyond asking about weekend plans. Through that, I sometimes learn of their families and spouses through information they volunteer, but it feels invasive to go fishing for it otherwise.

I've also reported to people that have been great to work with, been fully invested in my goals, yet didn't know much about my personal life, because it's none of their business.

Through that, I've still felt a great deal of trust that they can deal with the aforementioned priorities.
So much this. The average Swiss person eats Fondue 1x per year, similarly Raclette.
>>>> 8) Death in childbirth is rarer

>Well most of the progress were down in the 19th century, so >they're counting mostly insignifcant things (statistically, >I don*t mean childbirth is insignificant at all, got kids)

The data shows a good progress the recent 2-3 decades for Asia and Africa.

>>> 19) More people are going to school for longer

> What about the other countries ?

The data shows the same trend for most countries.
It seems that we don't currently have a milk price floor in the US, although farmers are lobbying for one.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2018/05/01/ame...
It's more than just MacBooks manufactured by internal migrants in China[1]. You also have many Chinese tech giants with SV offices: what, refuse to rent them RE, or refuse them building permits? How far does this go?

[1]https://www.ft.com/content/463b162a-8a3d-11e8-b18d-0181731a0...
I only mentioned taxes. But there are a lot of other living expenses that go up due to gentrification.
Scala has many problems as well, but I’d say at least two orders of magnitude fewer than what we encountered in haxe. Scala was chosen for various business compromise reasons, not any particular preference for Scala.
Lithium giants feud over competition, brine in Chile’s Atacama Desert
I am saying that this claimed economical well-being is still largely clustered by countries or even regions. That I am struggling means nothing in the global scale, that is true -- but when you see almost everybody around you struggle then you have a very hard time believing these articles.

My mother got a slightly bigger pension -- which changed it from 55 to 60 EUR a month. That's not a typo. Hooray for 10% improvement?

I feel these stats would be much more credible if they gave you your actual % more direct buying power in terms of food, tech or leisure time based on your country -- not on a world-wide average which is non-informative. The way these stats articles are currently framed though, they are all but useless.
I'd be concerned if the world didn't average one testicle.

I understand the min could have gotten worst, the max higher, and the middle unchanged. And its not like we should all pat ourself on the back and stop trying. But, if the statistic were showing things to be getting worse, it would be way worse. So I can't really agree with the defeatist attitude here, there's no way to put this data in a bad light, this is the trend you want to see.
They do eventually
It's also invalid for filenames to have a slash, but I don't think that's very relevant to the discussion at hand.
Big brother sings to little brother
Completing assignments and tasks that are not about learning, as they are about compliance. Examples: attending class (big one), repetitive assignments, pointless assignments where learning is minimal but tedium is maximized.
The difference with storing data on a sufficiently secure blockchain is that it's totally immutable and public. Yes the government could run a database with a public API but that requires much more trust that it's coded properly and that a hacker doesn't gain access.

This is why people are distrustful to voting machines and other techy solutions. Having everything verifiable in public addresses these concerns.

> There is an authority (the government), so the lack of centralized trust of a blockchain adds nothing.

The trust needed is for the government to distribute keys/votes instead of trusting the government to store and count your votes as well.

> a malicious actor will simply spend $20m of compute power to reverse votes or otherwise stall out democracy.

Yes they could. It is however easy to detect.

> so it seems likely if the US uses $20k of computing power to secure the "vote blockchain"

We would of course embed our votes in the much more secure Bitcoin ledger which is much harder to attack and runs without any help from the government (although they could help make it even more secure).
I disagree. Competition is important, sure, because every customer will evaluate you against them and will only decide for your product if he finds it better. BUT, you don't need to be better in every aspect. You can represent a better alternative for only a subset of customers, and still have a big enough market share.

I think most businesses, when they are driven out by competition, actually fail at delivering value. Competitors just show them how it should be done. Unfortunately it is almost impossible to change how an existing business entity operates.
So he doesn’t eat corn, tomatoes, peppers, quinoa, etc... from the new world?

Even brussels sprouts doesn’t pass that test.
I agree. But you should go for monthly one on ones at the minimum.
To quote you again:

>perhaps your feature request wasn’t deemed to be thought out enough?

Why jump to finding fault with the OP, rather than accepting feedback about the process? AFAICT you didn't actually check OP's proposal before assuming it was lacking. And OP's experience isn't unique.

You're evangelizing Haxe in this thread, but here you just paper over valid criticism:

- "arrow functions are slated for the next major release": sure, it only took four years!

- "I also think most languages’ directions are decided by committee in a similar way": I'm not aware of any other language that has a proposal process inviting community participation, but doesn't follow it and discusses those proposals in private. Point me to one. Surely you can understand that this can be frustrating when someone tries to participate and is shut out.

- "I’m sure the Haxe community would love to see examples..."

I would be pleasantly surprised if I saw the Haxe Foundation engage in some introspection and actually take steps to change or at least be more transparent. So far I don't see any introspection, only defensiveness.

And FWIW, I used to be part of that internal Slack channel for team members and was a Haxe contributor. I tried to make progress on these issues for years before giving up.
how many lunches do you eat in a work week? that sounds like a lot more than 5 1-on-1s each week
Defend this country from what? The most relevant threats I see to the country today are erosions of our traditions of civil discourse which is fundamental to a functioning democracy (e.g we disagree, and through civil discourse we identify the precise ways we disagree, then we peacefully elect representatives to represent our points of view without resorting to violence. If we lose the ability to peacefully disagree or fairly elect our representatives, we are left with only one option and that leads to the destruction of our democracy and then our country is gone one way or another)

and secondly the threat of large-scale conflict with an adversary with a comparable military.

I just don’t see how increasing the efficiency of an already effective drone program protects against either of those threats.
And as to the question of wanting people at google to work on it... I don’t think this sort of thing is what people join google to do. People interested in weapon systems probably go and work for known defense contractors and those companies do reasonably good work within the confines of their structure.
Let's not forget one church building archiving the internet several times over.
Isn't that a problem the EU created though?

Isn't this a pull the beam out of your own eye first situation?
Vidmate for Android devices
Actix is trying to be a decent actor system for Rust, but I haven’t dug into it enough to know how it would compare to OTP.

Also, you should take a big look at the Pony language if you haven’t yet. It’s much earlier days than Rust, but comes from people who know and love Erlang.
> and the USA prefers have its massive subsidies.

There are no dairy subsidies in the US right now.
> the illicit drug trade has been with us forever.

Indeed. Century of Humiliation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation
Getting started with DTrace
It was ubiquitous information, but it lacked relatability, strategy and focus.

Erdogan has been playing this one very well. The chap is relatable - an American resident, writing for a US newspaper, critiquing a government, just the kind of thing westerners like to venerate in their cultural products. Erdogan has drip-fed the media with information. Since it's so lurid, each extra dose gets more headlines - it's concentrated, potent stuff. And he's kept Saudi guessing - threatening that if they don't come out with the truth, he'll release the details.

He'd lose all leverage if he actually did release everything, but the strategy works very well. Everybody knows MBS almost certainly ordered this clumsy attack in a very naive way. But Erdogan has used the unknowns of the information, and gradual disclosure, as a lever to make Saudi replace their lies repeatedly over time, eating away at their credibility. By keeping western media on the boil, he encourages western politicians to say that Saudi isn't explaining enough.

It's been very interesting to watch, a master class.

(It's not the common knowledge, or the crystalized idea that everybody knows that everybody knows. That's not right at all. It's political pressure being maintained by someone with leverage, a steady hand on that leverage, and a strategy to move things. The lever is joined up: leaks -> western media -> western politicians -> Saudi. Without the continuous pressure, this would all blow over because democratic citizens have pretty short memories most of the time.)
Early test...
One of the interesting things that is opaque currently to everyone is where varied interests lie in investment, specifically in silicon valley.

We have the CIA/.gov investing in companies left-and-right, and their investment portfolio companies' tech being used in intelligence gathering activities by global intel/security operations.

The depth of investment in tech by parties who have less-than-perfect records on every aspect of rule is wide and deep...

Who has invested into what companies? Certainly there is money coming from funds that are seemingly US based - but backed and funded by foreign interests.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-Q-Tel

[1]: https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/in-q-tel/investments...

[2]: https://news.crunchbase.com/news/heres-20-q-tel-investments-...
> I've thought through many approaches here, from realpolitik pragmatism to ethical fundamentalism but none feel correct.

So, vet your LPs case by case, discuss with your partners and use your moral judgement.

If a North Korean or Syrian national wants to invest, you are legally required to refuse, in the US.

Saudis? Legally allowed, but you have a moral imperative to refuse.

A Chinese firm, or maybe Jared Kushner's fund? That depends on your outlook and situation.

Just be transparent about who your investors are.

--

This idea that it's "virtually no way to avoid tainted money" is pretty cynical and self serving, IMO.
Where does testing fit into programming by teaching? I've worked with people who write some code, refresh the screen, write some more code, refresh the screen, etc. Is that programming as teaching? They definitely produce at least 10x more code than I do, but it is instant legacy code with no tests. Do you go back and write tests after everything looks like it is working?
I find they all eventually are tainted as they are on a path of profitability or sustainability and that comes by way of ads funded by companies and billionaires.