skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's asked sooo many times on HN. Here are a few threads to get you thinking:

How much equity should i ask for:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9516991

First employee, how much to ask for:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18052992

How much equity to ask for:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11130492

How much equity is a good advisor worth:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1912588

How much equity do you give employees:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=565045

How much equity should i ask for: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2635050

How much equity should i give my new-cofounderhttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8668290

How much equity to offer first employee employee:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=598509

How much equity should I ask for?https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3904759

That should do the trick. Happy hunting
Isn't over-engineering a type of technical debt? At the very least both can exist simultaneously.
I just about finished reading Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. Strongly recommend it, to ponder over the human condition.
Well, the license specifically says they aren't responsible for negligence and to use the software you have to abide by the license so...
Golden Chance Lotto Result
Software is a creative business, so someone thinking outside of the box can out-gun someone pumping out 10000 lines of code in a week. But companies are testing your ability to pump out nice enough lines of code. What about a coding test where you have to 'delete' the right lines of code. Or a whiteboard exercise where you choose what NOT to work on. Those things are not tested.
That’s why you don’t hire them at all. You use an MSP. Even if you do need someone on prem, the simpler you make your infrastructure, the less skilled your netops person has to be. You can hire someone who basically is a help desk person.

When that one netops person leaves, it usually falls on the developers to manage it.
Web Audio, Autoplay Policy and Games
Alibaba's Jack Ma is Communist Party member: state media
The legal framework around gene-editing babies is murky at best
No, at the time the regulations were written, people were think terrestrial and Earth-to-space links, and the high absorption of 2.4G by atmospheric moisture and moisture in foliage makes it a poor choice for these kinds of paths.
Well they certainly couldn't call it "free software", that involves many more assumptions than "Open Source", and it might not even be free of charge. :) Blame Richard Stallman for using an incredibly common word with many meanings to refer to something that has one incredibly specific meaning which is unintuitive to most people, and to pretty much anyone who isn't a developer.

I think several decades of Open Source boosterism may have eventually given some people the wrong idea about what it's all about. Two annoying trends I've noticed in the last 10 years:

(1) (what this poor guy seems to be running into) People treating Open Source as anything other than charity from the people who put it out there. The people who make it generally don't owe anyone anything, including the people who use their code. I sometimes see very harsh criticism from people within the community that assumes anyone putting anything out there has to accept all sorts of responsibilities: maintaining a community, keeping on top of bug reports, acting as an integrator for people who want to send in patches, making sure that all packaging and documentation conform to some very high bar and/or specification, etc. Just because somebody puts something out there doesn't mean it has to be a second job for them, and doesn't mean that they are obligated to do anything for anyone, including responding to emails or dealing with bug reports or patches. It's perfectly fine to stop maintaining something after a while, or to just throw code over the wall and never touch it again after it's out there.

(2) (not this case) People treating Open Source as some avenue to professional fame or an eventual source of income. Yeah, that can happen, but it very rarely happens, and it's not a good reason to write it in the first place. This is the result of too many people using business arguments as a fundamental justification for doing Open Source, and people saying stuff like they only hire people who have projects on Github, and only if they like what they see. If someone's primary motivation is fame or money, Open Source is a terrible way to accomplish that. It's possible, just highly unlikely, plus I think it's much less likely to happen if that's someone's goal from the outset.
Remembered this when I saw: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18538123
Supreme Court to decide if Apple can be sued for violating federal antitrust law
Proper code search could be a pretty killer feature on its own. Half the time I need to find something on github I just clone the repo and search from my own computer.
Real-time, visual tracking finally provided by Route
Nope. He should ask his kids about that.
AI startup Petuum aims to industrialize machine learning
Thanks for the response!

Did you end up using that patent in any product? What did happen to it?
IBM CEO Joins Apple in Blasting Data Use by Silicon Valley Firms
Not jenkem?
I agree. The author released this library under MIT license which explicitly states that there is no warranty. Yet some people in the GitHub issue thread are acting as though the author owed something to them personally.
The Bare Minimum You Should Do to Protect Your Family's Data
Continuing your list:

- Twitch streamers

- songwriters

- composers

- screenwriters

I think it might be a part of any artistic endeavour: you'd probably have to have a list of creative efforts that don't have this problem to try to get a smaller list.
The Founder of Panera Bread Explains the Economic Forces That Led to Trump
That depends on the license of the open source project, and the way in which you choose to make money with it.
"...the biggest impediment to shipping is the procrastinator or the perfectionist."

I don't necessarily think that it's the "biggest" but I'll agree it's certainly one of the problems. I think I'd put "unclear specifications" as the biggest problem.

I've seen a lot of code delivered on time to meet the deadline that clearly was not ready but was delivered anyway. I've never the temerity to say, "I told you so," but I thought it. There's a balance to be had. Sometimes the deadline and the customer requirements and future maintainability cannot all be satisfied. Something has to give.
> You are perfectly entitled to write that Star Wars fanfic.

Nope. It's a derivative work, and, as such, requires the permission of the people who own the copyright and trademarks.

> You are not entitled to make money off it

This matters less than you may think. There's a four-part test [1], and profit is considered, but the work not being for-profit doesn't make the work legal.

[1] https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107

Here's an old-ish article I like to link to, on Waxy.org, called "No Copyright Intended":

https://waxy.org/2011/12/no_copyright_intended/

> Under current copyright law, nearly every cover song on YouTube is technically illegal. Every fan-made music video, every mashup album, every supercut, every fanfic story? Quite probably illegal, though largely untested in court.

By all means, read the whole thing.

Here's a lawyer's take on it:

https://www.traverselegal.com/blog/can-derivative-works-be-c...

> Image yourself an artist (of any sort) who has drawn such great inspiration from another (copyrighted) work that you would like to modify that work to create something new. Are you allowed to do so? Could you get a copyright to your new creation? As with most questions in law, the answer is: it depends.

> “A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship” (17 U.S.C. § 101) is called a Derivative Work. The original copyright owner typically has exclusive rights to “prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work” (17 U.S.C. § 106(2)). It is considered copyright infringement to make or sell derivative works without permission from the original owner, which is where licenses typically come into play.

Again... make or sell. Not making a profit off the work doesn't necessarily protect you.
Amazing. Your comment is wrong on every respect.

Whether you are entitled to write fanfic is not a straightforward case. As https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_issues_with_fan_fiction documents, some authors allow it, some don't, and fanfic sites pay close attention to who does. The fact that you can write Star Wars fanfic is not entitled under law, it is entitled by implicit or explicit permission from the copyright holder. Star Wars is OK. Pern? Not so much.

Oh, and sometimes you can both write and sell fanfic legally, no matter what the copyright holder thinks. For a famous example, Bored of the Rings is legal because it is marked as parody.

Moving on to open source, you are even more squarely wrong. The definition of open source, as found at https://opensource.org/osd-annotated, in item #6 says that commercial use must be allowed. In other words anyone is free to try to make money off of that open source project they forked as long as they follow the license.

In fact the term "open source" was invented as part of a marketing campaign to encourage the use of free software for commercial purposes. Far from "you can't make money from this", the whole intent was to encourage people to try to make money from it. And seeing that you could, to encourage businesses to make more of it! (This marketing campaign was successful, which is why you both have heard of the term some 20 years later, and everyone uses open source software.)

Now the license may restrict what business models are feasible. For example you can't edit GPL software then sell it as proprietary. But that is a MAY, not a MUST. As an example, selling relabeled BSD software commercially is both explicitly allowed and occasionally encouraged.
That's a gambler fallacy argument. You need to contextualize the price. Why did it rise? Mass public adoption with a wave of speculation. People thought they'd all get rich off it. This is not comparable to 2013.

Calling it a dip doesn't make it a dip. You need concrete reasoning for why it's going to go up to previous prices again if that's what you believe will happen. Many people got burned in the last bubble, so they're going to be cautious about it.
> As far as I can see, there's no particular reason to expect the slide to end here.

The real bottom is underpinned by the "True Blue Bitcoin Believers", who will most likely die than sell their bitcoin shares.

In a few years we'll realize the true value of Bitcoin wasn't the blockchain, but it's existence as a curiosity of sorts, where people were buying and selling purely imaginary things -- numbers -- which had no real value in the real world.
Configuration management provides opinionated abstractions over inconsistent and frequently user-unfriendly systems. You might as well say that C is superfluous because it all maps down to assembly.
A visualization of the use of color in movies
Any license that says you can't try to make money off of it isn't open source. Literally by definition.

If you don't understand this, then you don't understand the open source movement. See https://opensource.org/osd-annotated for a basic primer.
That is also wrong. Not five users per repo but five active users per account, across all repos.
Except you absolutely are allowed to make money from open source projects you fork. The only limiting factor is what license you need to provide with it (and potentially give up your new source code), but you can even make money from GPL code.
The license doesn't really matter here. I'm only quoting it to set expectations. People are showing up demanding some sort of quality standard, when they explicitly agreed that there was no such standard. A related issue is that NPM distributed malicious code to people. That sounds like a problem between people that downloaded the malicious version and NPM. Not sure how the author is involved.

To your point, if the author added the malicious code, I don't think the license would necessarily protect him. Intent is key. But he didn't.
I have a couple theories. I think there's a genuine attempt to subvert the countercultures and it's easier to do so now than ever before, the decline of 4chan didn't feel organic to me at all, more like the members of the community got crowded out by automated accounts. Then there's the fact that the /punk communities have kind of splintered, I try to get involved in a lot of ecopunk or solarpunk for example, and there are various aesthetics that people gravitate to depending on what they think the solution is. And on a positive note, I think that this might just be a year where a lot of people are building - groups like 4 thieves, the Odin, Blockcon are actually getting after it. People are fairly busy, but this year in particular it's the kind of busy that doesn't make much noise.
No OSI-approved open source license prohibits you from making money off an open source project (forked or otherwise). Though some licenses make it easier to take certain monetization paths than others.
I have to shake my head at TAE, since their approach was brutally critiqued 20 years ago. It turns out being given $500M doesn't let you evade the laws of physics.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235032059_Comments_...
>> you start viewing these passing relationships as disposable.

I would say that all relationships are temporary. Even in marriage, one party usually dies before the other and that person has then left for good. To realize that relationships are inherently temporary does not mean they are disposable - that word suggests something of low value, like garbage. When you accept that things are temporary perhaps it will help you appreciate the people who stick around, or come indoors from the cold/campfire and stay longer.

It's not easy to accept the world this way. It requires (and fosters) a sense of peace with oneself among other things. That's something worth working toward even if you're not there yet.
I think that at least OpenDoor and Atrium can scale at a VC trajectory. There are probably others that I don’t know about.

That said, I agree that a lot of the markets are addressable with tech or tech-enabled solutions, but not at VC valuation targets. I personally see these domains as well as possibly the startup financing world moving more towards a modest but still lucrative business model (e.g., something more like bootstrapping than VC financing).

P.S. You are a pro at getting downvotes simply for raising a slightly contrary opinion. Even when I disagree with you, I find your posts thought-provoking, so please don’t stop!
> I've heard startups justify using Ruby or PHP by saying "servers are cheap", which is just a bad engineering mindset.

But a sensible startup mindset. Use whatever setup allows you to get things up and running the quickest. By the time you run into scaling problems brought about by a choice to program in Ruby (if you ever do) you'll have a viable product, and can transition pieces away as you see fit.
Yeah, but an error error is not really an exception. Often in Go, errors are used to mark different states, such as EOF which are expected and you can deal with locally and have more control whenever you want to return or not, for example, you can test the error in the same if condition and decide whenever to keep going - usually you do. Error handling code is more local rather than all over the place, plus no need to declare more classes for specific exceptions.
In the US, corporations are filed with one of the 50 states. The information that becomes public record varies by state, but you can always get the registered agent and some basic information about it (date it was created, name, etc). Sometimes that includes share counts, sometimes it doesn't. You can also generally pay a nominal fee (tens of dollars) to get an official copy of filing documents.
Oooh, If you're still at the stage of getting ideas for what people want to see...

Merchandising. I'd love to support a site like that with mugs or shirts of my favourite greentexts. You could get memorabilia of the instant when memes were born, and it would fix the monetization problem that pops up when they get big.
Just to make clear, this is a Rust implementation of Open PGP under GPL 3.0. It provides an API for doing things with PGP, but I couldn't tell if it provides any end user applications at the moment. Is that correct?

I'm quite excited by it as I'm hoping it will give a nicer abstraction than GPG -- although quite a lot of the problems I have with GPG is actually baggage from Open PGP.
> All popular programming languages in our timeline are bad

Consider the possibility that you consider all of the popular languages bad because there is something about "bad" languages which causes them to become popular. For example, I notice that all of the examples of "bad" languages are ones which let you push out buggy software that is "good enough".
The NPM organization could go much further to make these attacks harder.

You pitch a really good one: Any time you npm update/install, display ownership changes (especially compared to your prev version).

Another one is to show the source code on the NPM website itself instead of hiding it in a tarball. NPM basically trains people to assume the published code == the code at the linked repository. It's a hacky honor system that only helps attackers.
Yes, I am in this situation right now, actually. I have a project with around 700 stars on GitHub with over a million downloads per month (according to PyPI) which I no longer have the time, interest, or willpower to continue maintaining.

I placed an open call to find a new maintainer months ago, and have received many requests. Every single request I've received has been roughly as shady as the request sent to event-stream. I've declined them all due to their shadiness. I know exactly what could happen (this situation right here) if I give it to the wrong person.
This sounds shitty, but if you have to ask, then you’re probably not the person they are looking for.

People with legit founder tenacity and skills will find a compelling way to be introduced to these folks — note that a16z is always looking for promising founders.
10 Rules to avoid the Software Bolognese Club
"And if you forget your 2FA hint, we can show you your password to jog your memory..."
> I've tried to get the same thing going myself, but have never been successful. I'm not sure how you get that started. Once it's going, it's self-sustaining, but you have to reach a critical mass of participants and has to occur really regularly, even daily. I think maybe it takes a very specific kind of person to be the host.

You don't need to be the host. Indeed, the host can be some organization. A place of worship, if that appeals. Or a Unitarian "Church", if you're not religious. Or a hackerspace. Or really, any sort of interest group. Even the neighborhood bar, if it's a good one.

And maybe, once you get to know enough people, you can host parties, and people will show up.
Compromised NPM Package: event-stream
I don't know what it is about the current environment but it pains me to see people get the life sucked out of them for sharing code and making the world a better place. It's also equally disheartening to see prominent open source contributors essentially close their social media because they're constantly hounded by entitled "community" members and trolls.
I think this is a major loss of innocence moment for open source. The only sustainable solution to this sort of problem is to pay people to do at least minimal curation and maintenance of open source libraries.

In an ideal world, the payment would go to people who actually create open source value. However, I'm cynical enough about human nature and business to suspect that it will mostly go to middlemen like record distributors and academic publishers, who create very little actual value but somehow make themselves indispensable in the ecosystem.
Atlas of Poetic Botany
> Could also mean you write unreadable code and, by extension, unmaintainable code.

In this situation, I think the context is when a colleague is asking for help with their own code/writing a new feature and wants input from someone well-versed.
Add Tasks to Slack
An exact replica of Falcon 9 was impossible 40 years ago, of course. But a replica with 50% lower thrust, 10% lower ISP and 60% it's payload capacity for a similar inflation-adjusted price was certainly possible.

It wasn't the computational revolution that made SpaceX possible, the basic technology is more or less the same as it was in the 60s. The Merlin engine has it's roots in the '90s NASA Fastrac design, evolved for performance and reusability.

SpaceX's success relates to things like market incentives, lean business practices, a fail early and iterate quickly attitude as opposed to "too big to fail" public projects, and so on.
The confinement building of a light water reactor is large because it has to contain large volumes of steam in an accident.

In a molten salt reactor, there is very little volatile material inside the containment building. The salt itself does not have high vapor pressure, even in accident conditions. As a result, the size (and cost) of the containment building can be radically reduced. Moltex's design, for example, reduces the cost (per unit of power output) of the containment building by a factor of 5 vs. LWRs.
I hope you don't mind the feedback: There's no way I'm signing up for a service that I don't get to try first. See what Scott's is doing: You get a 1/3 of the deals--this whets the appetite.
Sounds like something out of a clockwork orange.
> In my opinion, if you're a start-up and you've got all those boxes checked, you're possibly doing the right things in the wrong order, and that's a red flag for me.

In my opinion, that depends on the experience/background of your staff. I have even seen open source projects (not backed by companies) get all the boxes checked in a very short period of time. For a project maintainer who has prior experience, it just takes several hours at most to set up a git hosting server and the CI/CD infrastructure.
The time saved for fixing a single regressing can easily pay off the investment.
Japan to hold companies accountable for AI decisions
Hey, you get a little high from the CO ;)
I remember reading about this in the Anarchist’s Cookbook as a kid. I never tried it, and I never learned that it was a hoax.
Wow, this competency matrix is very useful. Thanks for sharing!
Heh, yes. Github's search is case insensitive and ignores sigils, braces, etc.
EFF to Court: Remedy for Bad Content Moderation Isn’t Government Control
Me too, but nutmeg. I set off the damn smoke alarm and wrecked my throat so many times trying to do that, ugh.
> Package repositories don’t support monetization and there’s no pool of volunteers associated with the repository itself to take up maintenance of what otherwise would have been abandoned.

Your statement contradicts itself: there is a pool of volunteers, — they are the ones maintaining NPM packages to begin with. In fact, the author of event-stream has given control to another person, because he believed, that the guy was an ordinary volunteer like himself. Unfortunately, the reality is a bit more complicated than just that: people will voluntarily help you to maintain your projects, but only if they share your goals. Ideally, one should ensure, that the to-be-maintainer has invested a lot of effort in the project they are trying to take over — reported issues, fixed bugs, added features etc. for considerable amount of time. In other words — ensure, that they can contribute to the project in significant way and move it forward. Otherwise, what is the point of transferring maintenance?!