skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I meant it the other way around, in case it wasn't clear. My childhood pet is still alive, and it's depressing to think about the fact that it wouldn't be if it had been a dog.
While that is a rather uncharitable reduction of the arguments made, I'm not sure why people are downvoting you.
Bitcoin’s Technical Flaw
I worked at SDG&E shortly after they paid $700M for starting fires in 2007. From my vantage point in the org, I saw that (a) the executives felt pressured, (b) much of the cost was borne by shareholders not ratepayers, and (c) this incentivized the company to invest more proactively in fire prevention strategies.

Sources:

-CPUC rejects SDG&E's attempt to pass on costs: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/energy-green/s...

-Sempra (the parent company) settles for $700M in damages: https://uk.reuters.com/article/sempra/update-1-san-diego-uti...

-Sempra's earnings and shares down as a result: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-sempras-1st-quarte...
Same comment but for MF Doom, Madvillain, etc.

I assume they do this though. When writing about Kool Keith, they reference the album Dr. Octagonecologyst.
Without converting to the same currency it’s not obvious. Which is why you are taxed when an asset is sold, until then it’s purely theoretically valuable.

Suppose you sell it in six months or sixty years. Then, you can compare USD to USD and say it was a good or bad investment. Alternatively, you could say you wished you had waited a year to buy the stock.

This is important for bitcoin as you have people that buy in and have yet to sell and can’t yet say if they made a good or bad investment for them. However, with dividend stocks you can hit the point where dividends are greater than total investments thus even if nobody ever sells becase it fails the company was still a positive net investment across all investors even if some lost money.

Long story short it’s possible for companies to a net positive investment, it is not possible for Bitcoin to be. If it’s value hits 0$ then you look at all the investments and people spent X buying it, payed Y keeping the network running, and made X - Y selling it which must be less than X.

TLDR: Individials can make money in the lottery, from perymid schemes, or from Bitcoin, but on net they are all poor investments.
Rockstar certainly is milking their Red Dead Redemption franchise.

https://youtu.be/cfTnsqNuDg8?t=137
In the case of a startup shutting down, what would be the best way to try to resell the technology that the company has built (with the hope of recouping some money for the investors)?
This is the Greenspan argument. In his own words:

> I always valued men and women equally, and I found that because others did not, good women economists were cheaper than men. Hiring women does two things: It gives us better-quality work for less money, and it raises the market value of women.

But in order to arbitrage this, you have to be willing to pay women and men differently. It's not impossible to see a market where everyone internally values work equally, but believes the market does not, and thus all lower their offers made to women.
So the gap here is entirely due to choices made directly by the employees?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFwbrYCh3Oo
There's a world of difference between designing a chip for a range of customers (i.e. pre-Amazon acquisition) and designing a chip for one customer. So provided Amazon does a reasonably good job of managing the acquisition, this really should be looked at as first generation (despite however many iterations occurred before the acquisition) since their design constraints (workload/environmental/power/thermal) have likely been altered significantly.
This is what Intel supporters always say till the time everyone builds those chips and there is no market left for Intel at all. It is just so sad that Intel, which had such a ferocious lead and was on the cutting edge of processor design/manufacturing, is now dying from a thousand cuts.

Just look at the industry - everyone who is a major player in cloud, AI, or mobile (Apple, Huawei, & Samsung) are now in the chip business themselves. How will Intel grow? And where would this so called scale advantage come in?

Wake up and smell the coffee.
I checked out hypergiant / chicken scheme a year or so ago - and was unable to get certain examples compiling / running on macOS.

While I'd love to play more with / learn more scheme - it's too niche of a language these days even for me (someone that writes a lot of Nim).

The scheme community seems to be very small to begin with, and then you factor in all the implementations - it's worse than the Common Lisp scene.

I do love the simplicity of the language and how elegant scheme code can look - and chicken / guile seem to be very well suited for game development.

I feel like I'd be trading a larger community for a smaller one at this point - and that's saying something, coming from a Nim user.
The group 1 group, which wishes to hire more women to "exploit" this gap, doesn't have to engage in wage discrimination though, do they? They just have to hire at the "going rate" for women, which to the extent that a wage gap exists means they would be hiring mostly women. If they did hire any men, they just need to ensure they are paid the same as their existing workforce.

So you don't need to engage in wage discrimination to hire women, since that is evaluated within a company, not in relation to a sector has a whole. That is, if McDonald's pays all their employees $10 an hour and they are mostly women, and Burger King pays all their employees $15 an hour for approximately the same work and they are mostly men, I don't think there is any (legal) claim for discrimination?
You act like it's 1820 still and there's still domestic work to be done. The washer and dryer do the work, the dishwasher does at least half the work, the water is already gathered and available to pipe, dinner comes in trays, fat doesn't need to be made into soap, butter doesn't need churning, clothes don't need sewing, etc. etc. The life of a house wife is easy. Take the kids to school, pop a xanax, binge on daytime TV for 8 hours or whatever, pick the kids up, make them a quick dinner, go back to TV or help with a little homework, repeat with miscellaneous responsibilities sprinkled in. Any "job" you can do in your pajamas, well, you've just got to wonder you know? Funny that when a man can get an extra day off from all the overtime mommy's "tough" job can become his luxury: a day with his kids.
If you're talking about singles, then no, not really. You do domestic work for yourself. Men still have to do cleaning and maintenance at home, or pay someone else to do it, or live with the fallout.

If you're talking about couples who share an account, it doesn't really make a difference. The couple ends up with the same amount of money and domestic care whether one spouse does more or if they share responsibilities equally, as long as the total work hours at work and at home are the same.

If you're talking about a couple where the husband works and the wife stays home and the husband fully controls all the finances, then yes, that's pretty unfair.
The coverage on this subject is more and more made to follow a feminist/sexist narrative that wants to prove that the world is patriarchal and against womens.

the common saying "0.70$ for every 1.00$ of a man" is when you average all the women salaries against all the man salaries. It doesn't take into account specific individuals or interests.

I believe the main issue here is that womens are on average more interested in having a better quality of life (as shown with overtime in this paper), and are also less pushy during salary negotiations.
Because clean and efficient fossil fuel is code for removing investment in renewable technologies, and billions of dollars invested show significantly less return than the gains in renewable energy sources.
I was meaning if this same fire happened after PG&E was already broken up into 5 smaller companies, and one of those smaller companies caused it.
I tend to put GDPR and this Copyright bill in different camps. The copyright bill is insane. GDPR is... also a bit insane, but the hard parts shine light on what we probably should have been doing which are now hard to do because we've spent so long ignoring the ethical elephant in the room. GDPR is very far from perfect, but I think it's still directionally good. The copyright bill is just bad.
Pretty funny to see “Dave Patterson” described as “a Google chip specialist”!
Yes, it’s quite the correct sentiment!

https://aeon.co/ideas/how-climate-change-and-disease-helped-...
I think that hit the nail on the head: once you see the arbitrage opportunity, to exercise it you must knowingly discriminate against women, which is unethical and likely illegal.
Might "Atlas shrug"? Company could respond to liability lawsuits by literally taking down its infrastructure, every line & pole.
I too began to detect a hatred of US monetary policy from the most hardcore cryptocurrency supporters.

> Well being a medium for exchange is what gives bitcoins value.

I do want to separate out the concepts of "utility" vs "market value".

Probably a good example for this is a hammer. It has a great amount of utility for pounding in nails, securing lumber, etc. It's just not valued on the market though. $5 bucks maybe? You will save a bunch of time using one. However, being able to pound in nails doesn't justify a high cost in and of itself, since the market is flooded with them.

If, however, the utility of bitcoin(medium of exchange) is the only thing that is lifting bitcoin's market value (price), then its price depends upon it outperforming other cryptocurrencies and instruments of money. And the marginal cost of creating another cryptocurrency is maybe a weeks worth of time?

Because there appears to be an unlimited supply of numbers and algorithms, the market value of any cryptocurrency should approach zero over time even if it has great utility.
Getting an interview when you have a consequent Github portfolio is very easy.

Prospective employers not only do actually pull up your github profile, many of them will find you because of it.

As an aside, writing this makes me realize how successful Github has been at implementing their motto of "social coding" when none of us had any idea wtf that could actually mean or look like.
This comment breaks the site guidelines, which ask you not to insinuate astroturfing or shillage without evidence. If you'd review and follow https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, we'd appreciate it.

Compensation is an intense topic for obvious reasons. There is a lot of variance in the data and it is anything but transparent. It's not surprising that people would create accounts to post sensitive information about it. I haven't seen examples of abuse in this area, but if you or anyone think you're seeing some, please email hn@ycombinator.com so we can investigate.
If you could actually show examples at reasonable scale, I would be very impressed and maybe even go anti-capitalism.
"and nobody is unseating Aesop Rock"

I was going to say that. Several years ago I saw either this list or a similar one on Reddit and a lot of comments wanted to know why Aesop Rock was missing. I grew interested and people gave "none shall pass" as a good first song to listen to if you want to get familiar with his work. My only problem with his stuff is that I have zero idea what he is talking about. It's basically just a lot of words jumbled together except for that song about the dog saving a little girl from drowning. I've heard it 50x now and still tear up.
Intel has always been a process first, design second company. The company was founded by physicists and chemists. Their process has always been the best in the world until just recently.

So they had a particular advantage, and exploited the heck out of it, but now the potency of that advantage is largely gone?
The market is not efficient.

Even if there really was a pay gap of that magnitude, it could still persist in the short run (compare to, "in the long run we are all dead"). The wonderful thing about high-prestige fields is that nobody really knows how to measure productivity.

There's also the possibility of bias in school or training programs, which would lead to differences that the labor market is not responsible for because they exist earlier in the pipeline.
Can we make any generalizations from this study? Especially to non-union, private sector jobs? This seems like a great study because it was very limited, but are the results limited as well?
It's a proprietary design :)
What you say is true, but is entirely tangential to the topic of Equifax breaches.

> Don't worry though, since they all look pretty similar and there's no check digit the people who don't have one long learned to give a bogus SSN, probably belonging to somebody else.

Its trivial to use US Government sources to do a name-check on the SSN, to ensure that you've got the right person.

https://www.ssa.gov/employer/ssnv.htm

https://www.ssa.gov/cbsv/

The latter costs money, but not much money in terms of doing business.

---------

The fact remains: People use SSNs because the Social Security Administration is very good about keeping SSNs in order. Perhaps the number could be designed a bit better, but the system has been in use since the 1930s and there's no better number to use in the USA in most cases.
The report linked here is the House Oversight Committee (Majority) Staff Report.

Another report from the committee's minority is also available.

https://democrats-oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversi... Minority Report - FINAL 12-10-2018.pdf
If you think I support Louis Farrakhan, or Twitter in general for that matter, you are confused. Twitter's current stance is wildly inconsistent, and there are plenty of people that they should have banned long ago but haven't, Farrakhan included. They've probably banned some people they shouldn't have, as well. I don't trust them much. But the gaggle of racists and Nazis they've already banned is a good start.

> In your last sentence, are you admitting that Twitter doesn't yet ban far-left groups for cause?

Nope! I'm saying that I think you don't actually care about free speech for all.
Because there is no such opportunity. This whole "0.70$ per 1.00$ from men", doesn't take into account different professions for example.
"The Camp fire happened because we received precisely zero inches of precipitation from the beginning of April, to the end of November this year, not because of a spark."

absolutely ridiculous assumption and overreach.

There are far too many people looking to point to climate change for every natural disaster that occurs. Many areas in California are naturally hot, dry, and prone to fires much of the year.

we are building more and more houses / structures in fire prone areas, making it worse.

"by 2050, 645,000 houses in California will be built in “very high” wildfire severity zones."

https://www.vox.com/2018/8/7/17661096/california-wildfires-2...

we also contribute to it beyond just starting the fires directly (power lines, vehicles, appliances, etc), we make the conditions worse with poor land management

"Some researchers said that logging in the burned area after a fire in 2008, which was intended to clear out fuels and make this part of Northern California safer, may have had the opposite result. The logging may have left fast-burning weeds and young trees in the fire’s path."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/us/camp-fire-paradise-cau...

A study published earlier this year in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, or PNAS, found that 84 percent of wildfires are ignited by humans, whether through downed power lines, careless campfires, or arson.

“Human-started wildfires ... tripled the length of the fire season, dominated an area seven times greater than that affected by lightning fires, and were responsible for nearly half of all area burned,” the paper reported.
DMX would have scored a little higher had barking sounds been counted as words.
> No, I'm saying that the fact that we can see down to a subatomic level which adds considerable complexity to a hypothetical simulation is not evidence that it is impossible that we live in a simulation.

Okay, but I suggest you be a bit more careful with wording in the future. "These are both somewhat my logic" made it sound like the complexity was reinforcing the idea, rather than merely not completely disproving the idea.

With that clarified the rest of what I said is useless and a waste of both our time.
It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. We ban accounts that do that, regardless of their politics, so please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and don't do that.
Analogies are fun. If you have a tower of sand that collapses, do you find the grain that started moving first and put the entire blame of collapse on it? Your example is of relatively stable system (presumably healthy human life) that takes a big external disturbance to cause failure. The sand tower is an unstable system that takes a tiny disturbance to trigger failure. I think the California forest situation is somewhere between these two extremes.
This is kind of my point - we would like developers to learn this kind of stuff but there is no financial incentive even if it is good for their employers. There are a lot of facets to our work that are like this, for example some soft skills would be in this bucket, except for the soft skills linked to becoming a 'team leader'.

Why would someone only do something for money? Well perhaps they have time and money commitments that makes it hard to justify doing stuff that is not for money, unless it is super important for some other reason. So charity work might trump learning visual design, but visual design is also trumped by learning React because that looks hot on the CV.
One of the original complaints of feminism was that we had developed a culture where both men and women work all day long, but women’s work was unpaid domestic work while the men got the paycheck. That gave men huge power over women in a society that still relied on the women’s work.

So we can identify a problem. The society (of the 1960’s and before in particular) required women’s work, but women were not compensated for their work. Given how critical that work is for society, it does strike me as a real problem.

A secondary question is what to do about it, which I believe you are asking. That is much more complicated. We have identified a problem, but perhaps have not identified a solution. However the lack of a solution does not mean it is fair to ignore the problem.

I bet feminists have suggested lots of solutions to this, but it’s telling that you and I (I expect) are both ignorant of them.

However, I do think this expectation of necessary unpaid work is unfair. Can anyone comment on proposed solutions to this in the feminist literature? Thanks!
wasnt miami supposed to be in the ocean a few years ago according to al?
Says you, a random internet commentor.

Meanwhile international diplomacy's track record is clear.
Yes, I developed it myself. From the end of 2017 to the present, about one year.
I agree and that's in line with the solution I have in mind. There is a lot of regulation around that in the US though.
Heh, this is quite believable too. Anyone found their LinkedIn profile?
Learning how to properly use paper money was something I learnt at age 7. Debit card at age 15. Credit card at age 23. Bitcoin at age 31. Bartering hides with the natives at age 90.
The thing that defines Amazon in recent years is their desire to make everything a third party service (AWS, Fulfillment, etc) and they may in fact do that for their own chips.

AWS was Amazon monetizing its own infrastructure. Maybe they're thinking of monetizing AWS's infrastructure? Instead of being in the gold rush, sell the pickaxes and backpacks in a general store. Then, when people realize there's a lot of money in those stores, start selling store shelves and offer wholesale logistics.
It's not like the man uses the overtime money to buy a new Porsche for himself and a new dust mop for his wife. Also nobody is forcing women to do household chores. It's just how many couples choose to organize things.
You can charge $400 if you are famous enough https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rxCD_bMhZA https://www.retromodding.com/collections/preconfigured-build...
It's probably hard to replace people this way in existing companies. But the incentive is definitely there in many cases. There are for example companies staffed with mostly disabled people getting extra tax subsidy.

But the biggest issue with that is: you basically wrote "if there is systemic sexism, there's profit in exploiting that". Why would anyone want to work for you in that case? You're not improving the situation, and benefit from it continuing - that's what's wrong with the idea.
Please don't foment gender war or any other kind of flamewar on HN. You've done this before, unfortunately. If you do it again we're going to ban you.

Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use the site as intended, by posting civilly and substantively, or not at all.
Source? GloFo stopped pursuing 7nm but that is far from shutting down.
The analogy was that Equifax lost all of its assets and then some. It failed in the only job it had, protecting users' data, its only asset. It lost credibility and could be argued that its name became toxic. Its very similar to Bear Sterns and Enron, IMO
Check out how Equifax started rolling heads starting on page 50. They pinned the fact of not patching Struts on a SVP who was one of hundreds of people notified of the need to patch Struts. But he didn't forward that email, so he's toast!

Now pardon me while I go route my patch management procedures through the nearest baffling and inane dependency.

A senior Equifax official was terminated for failing to forward an email – an action he
was not directed to do – the day before former CEO Richard Smith testified in front of Congress.
This type of public relations-motivated maneuver seems gratuitous against the back drop of all
the facts
Like the ever popular and powerful Pablodraw[0], this is a .Net application.

I tried a few CLI ANSI and ASCII editors on Linux recently, and it was not a great experience. Most are fairly inscrutable with limited documentation, and at least on my OS, some were just plain broken.

Ah, bitrot.

[0] http://picoe.ca/products/pablodraw/