skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your stat from source [1] shows a big decline from 2008 to 2009. This suggests to me that the calculation of average hours is skewed by those who are part-time but don't want to be part-time. The source doesn't indicate how the calculation is made. Does the fact that the there are a lot of people who are out of work but don't want to be out of work skew things? I don't know.

I haven't studied the issue but apparently professor Jeffrey Pfeffer has. You bring up some seemingly valid points and I'm guessing you haven't extensively studied the issue either. It seems reasonable to me to believe that the professor has accounted for these possible objections since they are so obvious. It also appears to me that you are implicitly assuming your work experience is normative. I say this because of your sentence:

This means flexible working hours, ability to work remotely and overall workplace environment.

Most people don't have the ability to work remotely or have flexible working hours.

I don't have reasons to assume the author is being dishonest. Instead of assuming the author is being dishonest it is a more reasonable conclusion that you don't know enough about the issue. Unless the professor is incompetent then the possible objections you've raised are probably easily debunked.

When I encounter a conclusion such as this by an expert and can think of a number of possible objections to the conclusion after a few moments of thought about the issue then I assume I'm the one without the facts.
I would just like to chime in to say that users expect links in webpages and not in apps. I fully expect the webpage of hacker news to behave the way you describe, because it's a webpage.

I recently used the best webapp I've ever used - LucidCharts. That was an app, and, as such, I didn't have the expectation that everything I did generated a new link, or that I could even link to certain things. BUT, they also struck the balance of providing web behaviors for things where I expected them.
Because Americans gave up a lot of their rights, knowingly and unknowingly, after 9/11 to keep us "safe." Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are mostly just guidelines now. There's what happens in "public" vs what happens in "private," that you rarely hear about.

> On December 16, 2005, The New York Times reported that the Bush administration had been conducting surveillance against U.S. citizens without specific approval from the FISA court for each case since 2002.

> In 2011, the Obama administration secretly won permission from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to reverse restrictions on the National Security Agency's use of intercepted phone calls and e-mails, permitting the agency to search deliberately for Americans' communications in its massive databases. The searches take place under a surveillance program Congress authorized in 2008 under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

> Because of the sensitive nature of its business, the court is a "secret court" – its hearings are closed to the public. While records of the proceedings are kept, they also are unavailable to the public, although copies of some records with classified information redacted have been made public. Due to the classified nature of its proceedings, usually only attorneys licensed to practice in front of the US government are permitted to appear before the court. Because of the nature of the matters heard before it, court hearings may need to take place at any time of day or night, weekdays or weekends; thus, at least one judge must be "on call" at all times to hear evidence and decide whether or not to issue a warrant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellig...
If someone is always late to everything, and then one day they really do have a flat tire and are late for good reason, and you doubt them when they say they have a flat, and that person asks "What am I supposed to do to make you believe me when I have a good reason?" The answer, though it may seem unfair in this particular instance, is to not always be late to everything else.

If you have a pattern of abuse even legitimate behavior may appear as abuse. The solution is to not engage in a pattern of abuse.
Try searching craigslist for a shared apartment for a couple.

"Sorry, no couples!"
The meta issue here is that they didn’t have a plan to then validate the changes afterwards. And Grab’s contractors being from India know that streets can be unpredictable and change since it’s assuredly the same for them too and not just a quirk in Thailand. It’s an astonishing disconnect from reality based on western standards of paying attention, but I think this is pretty normal in SE Asia and causes a lot of problems. Hopefully they’ll be able to shed these habits at some point.
15 years sounds fine.

I guess I was talking about just a couple.
Are you sure that wasn't just AIM? AIM couldn't be port blocked like IRC. Most all schools had already blocked those ports.
More than that, there are some pretty bad insults, here's one that was removed:

https://git.weboob.org/weboob/devel/merge_requests/228

They then added it back with a different insult:

https://git.weboob.org/weboob/devel/merge_requests/232/diffs...

I mean I can understand the sentiment some might have that overzealous political correctness is taking over. I might be on that side of the fence if this was just purely about the name. But this is on a whole different level. Debian doesn't need to ship this if they don't want to. I personally wouldn't want to make a distro that provides my users software to install that insults them (and not a joking insult, this is just straight up poor taste). It just looks tacky, isn't necessary, and (this is biggest issue) is very insulting to certain groups of people.
No, because Elon hasn't invested his own money into this. He's investing money loaned to him by the bank against his SpaceX and Tesla stock.

I can't predict that he has not made any substantial or meaningful improvements to tunneling technology to date because (a) that's not a prediction, it's a statement of current affairs, and (b) it's already quite clear that he hasn't--and based on the Hawthorne tunnel, it appears that (c) Elon has actually regressed from current tunneling technology.

But yes, I am willing to predict that Boring Co will never make meaningful improvements to tunneling technology. Everything they've already suggested as innovative has already been done by existing players. BoringCo's road map for innovation for the next 10 years is literally them just playing catch up to everyone else.
Its scalable in terms that if your total data doesn't fit into single machine, you can distribute it between shards in mongo, but can't in pgsql.

replica set is for redundancy and availability, but you can use replicas for reads, so scale your reads traffic. pgsql works absolutely the same way, you have one master which accepts writes and read-only slaves/replicas.
But sanctions do not just happen from one day to the other (usually). At least in the case of Iran my understanding was that there was a political declaration to withdraw from the Nuclear Deal and impose sanctions, but not immediately. So business did have the opportunity to prepare a transition.
Is it just me or can no one else find how to actually send the log data to Loki either?
It might be that in order to have a coherent discussion about this we need to separate the concept of copyright into two areas.

One is the right to exclusive distribution of the original work. The other is the right to make derivative works from that work. In both cases the commercial/non-commercial distinction may also make sense, but I think these are the gross categories. Let's call these two new rights "cloneright" and "adaptright"

Since we lump them together, these two things get mixed up.

Cloneright addresses concerns about the ongoing availability of a work (or translating the work to a different format) causing problems -- old video games, old films, old music, out-of-print books, things like that being lost or hard to obtain because making electronic versions of them is not possible without the approval of the copyright holder. It seems reasonable that this should lapse on a relatively short time horizon.

Adaptright is a different matter, and is harder to quantify. I don't think it would be acceptable for other authors to write sequels to an author's books, or studios to adapt them without the original author's permission, for a longer timeframe than cloneright makes sense for. Saying that the lifetime of the adaptright is tied to the author's lifetime makes sense here. It can take a long time for a book to be adapted into a movie, and it makes sense to have the original author to have some say in that (unless they choose to forfeit that right).

It might make sense to break this further down by commercial/non-commercial usage, or even by type of copyrighted work (relatively few songs, for example, are successfully adapted to movies or books, so adaptright might have to mean something else there) but I think this is a better framing of the copyright discussion than lumping the two gross categories together.
We have people doing exactly this with fly.io, you could also do it with lambda@edge if you're a masochist. Or with Cloud Flare workers if you dislike small startups.
> No point of using Rails/Django like stuff unless you have an extremely good case to, which is certainly not the Guardian use case.

Django itself was literally developed to suit the use cases of a newspaper.
Probably not the strict definition, but they are looking for information from employees they can use as leverage or in a lawsuit against the organization.
> (Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take the train. Kind of a no-brainer.)

I agree, but as someone who hates flying, and is very bothered by TSA's production, I would hands-down take the train over the plane in almost every circumstance.
Blessing in disguise here for Amtrack and a great opportunity to do an overhaul of a subset of the one of the oldest railroad infrastructure in the USA. Many lessons we can learn from European counterparts.
I don't understand... Apple is supposed to be the company that produces premium technology, their products supposed to signal status, it's supposed to be the epitome of aesthetics. How come in the recent years they're doing these easily preventable mistakes? I don't think Apple doesn't have a well-paid QA team. They probably do. So they found this bug and decided to ship it?
I posted an analysis of this situation the other day which got downvoted harshly. I'd be curious to read any thoughtful rebuttals:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18716646
That’s pretty much the point of sanctions, what did you think was going to happen, people of sanctioned countries getting a medal? The point is to put as much pressure on those countries as possible and there is no better way to pressure a country than to pressure its people to force a change. The question should be whether or not Iran should be sanctioned. But if you agree that it should then this is an example of a perfectly reasonable outcome.
> Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take the train

Baggage? Taking one or two bags up to 50lbs each on Amtrak looks to be always included.
In the Bay Area today, a section of Amtrak's Capital Corridor passes through the salt ponds and the Baylands marshes which is also quite reminiscent.
I admit the skates were missing from this demo and no mention of them was made. Maybe the infrastructure for the electric skates (deployment, onloading, etc) is just too impractical. Building a self driving pod that transports passengers through these tunnels...would be relatively trivial for Tesla or any other electric car manufacturer.
Some don't even need GPS, just an inertial measurement unit onboard.
I think the idea is any extension beyond the fixed term would require registration (as it does in existing copyright law). So you would always be able to determine if something is in copyright or not if you had the copyright date.
That said, if someone can strike now, it is possible to displace FB. Or at least put up enough competition to sadly/ironically get bought out by them.
> because that technology is missing a "real names" reverse directory lookup database.

search engines solve that somewhat ... but you could have a directory that points to the correct address (a bit like a web directory or a phone book)... maybe the government could even host that...
> Facebook is a bit more than just personal pages.

I'm going to argue on the following points based on observations.

> - It has built-in authentication and ACL, you get to choose who sees your stuff or not (not counting overarching privacy issues).

Almost nobody knows well about how to control who see what, and even when they do, hardly anyone changes it often. Almost everyone leaves it at something that may not be appropriate for all the content they're sharing. Facebook, after its many privacy blunders, reminds people about the audience setting sometimes, but I don't see people changing it. Also, "lists" as a concept to control who sees what was stillborn. Less than a fraction of a percentage in my circles would even be aware of it (this despite me trying to educate people about privacy).

> - It has built-in syndication, which means that it's easy to follow everyone's updates.

Here again, it's easy to follow updates that Facebook deems the best to keep the person coming back to show more ads and make more money. Almost nobody knows how to choose to see someone's posts always and how to avoid someone's posts short of unfriending them. The default is users not knowing that they can control it, which means practically they don't control what they see and what they don't see.

> - It has discovery abilities that helps finding people you want to connect to.

The same argument in the previous point applies here too. Facebook focuses on making people come back often. So the discovery feature may be useful in some cases, but usually it tends to create an overload of people, groups and pages to connect with. Search on Facebook is dismal, and the main "discovery" mechanism is Facebook's suggestions (which is incentivized for ads).

To summarize, Facebook's features work to maximize holding people's attention on its platform and showing ads. How well this matches with one's individual choices varies a lot. Facebook isn't really doing anything phenomenal in surfacing relevant content to people.
> Offering insurance as compensation started during WWII when wages were frozen by the government.

Absolutely true, and those regulations haven't been in effect for the better part of a century now.

If you want to argue that long-discontinued government programs can entrench systems that continue to produce market distortions today then I'm happy to agree with you, but that's the exact stated rationale for the broad suite of civil rights regulations that in my experience most libertarians oppose on economic freedom grounds. I don't think you get to have it both ways.

> There is also the fact that employer-provided insurance is almost entirely untaxed.

Again, true. But I think you're drastically underestimating how beneficial it is to an insurer to cover groups of mostly healthy people (i.e. a company's entire labor force) instead of groups of mostly sick people (i.e. those most motivated to acquire private health insurance).

In order for the market for healthcare to be truly free, in the sense you're describing, medical professionals would need to be willing to consistently refuse service to people who can't pay, which is frequently in violation of their professional ethics. Since that (entirely private and voluntary) market distortion isn't going away any time soon, insurers who can find other mechanisms to incentivize relatively healthy people to contribute to the risk pool can provide the same coverage at a lower cost per person.

That means that, tax incentive or no, insuring a broad cross section of mostly healthy people as a group is always going to be cheaper than insuring them individually. And the more healthy people can be incentivized to sign up, the cheaper it becomes for all participants, which gives whoever is making decisions on behalf of the group an incentive to encourage as much of their potential pool to participate as they can. The taxes reinforce this system, but it would still be self-perpetuating without them.
I, for one, welcome our bot overlords!
London's Gatwick airport suspends all flights after 'multiple' reports of drones
And they've been plenty active in court; SCOTUS just turned down an appeal for the Microsoft case a few years ago

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/04/28/victory_for_microso...
It's more likely to make the congestion problem worse than better. Induced demand in large cities is massive.
I don't know about sea level rise prediction accuracy, but temperature "hindcasts" hold up pretty well:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-m...
Chimps Have Better Short-Term Memory Than Humans [2013]
So, what the author is saying is that we should make something just like Facebook, only:

- Harder to find

- Harder to update

- More expensive to run

- Prone to falling over / being hacked

- Non-standardized

- Doesn't provide instant feedback

The reason why we post on Facebook is because it is much (as in an order of magnitude) better and much more convenient than having your own website. Most people do not have their own "platform".

The reason why most people gave up blogging is because they discovered that shouting into the void (and then having to repost that material onto social networks so five people would read it) wasn't that fun or rewarding.

These decentralized fantasies based on personal grievances with Facebook fail when they run into the real world and how most people actually behave.
Agree. And those who do post about their lives (on FB, Insta, Twitter etc.) Do it for the dopamine fix one gets when others react and respond to their posts.
What Are You Looking At? How Attention Affects Decision Making
> that doesn't mean RSS readers can replace Facebook because that technology is missing a "real names" reverse directory lookup database

But that's the point, isn't it? Personal websites isn't what will "solve the customer's problem", persé, but it is what will allow Facebook to no longer be irreplaceable, which is the real reason why people stay on the platform. The question isn't whether personal websites can replace Facebook, but whether personal websites will allow room for a real Facebook competitor (which improves the passive consumption experience) to grow.
Swallowing your pride and asking your parent (or someone else) for help is a pretty adult thing to do.
The way I grew my feed was to look around any time an article in my feed linked to another site.

The thing is though we want to talk about the stories and ask questions. I mean, that’s why we’re all here, right? Comment forums on a million sites don’t work.

In the early days of the web someone had the idea that you should be able to run your own group commentary without the site aurhor’s permission. You’d register for the service and your browser would tell you or show you that there’s a conversation going about this page.

I still feel like we need this.
Parallels is great. I like it so much that I bought the subscription, and I don't even use my Windows VM all that much.

However, sadly, third-party software that spins up VMs tends to avoid supporting Parallels. I recall Vagrant having a sub-par Parallels provider (compared to the paid VMware Fusion support), and even minikube went with VMware Fusion instead. https://github.com/kubernetes/minikube/issues/220
>Modern data science tutorials assume the source data is a nice and tidy CSV

For what it's worth, I don't really see this as a problem in and of itself. Of course, if you want to do data science in the real world, you need to learn about data cleaning, manipulation, and warehousing in addition to the "pure" data science process that begins with tidy data. But it's good that tutorials segment these out, since not everyone needs to learn both at the same time. Anecdotally, I had plenty of real-world experience dealing with messy data by the time I started learning data science.

As an aside, my impression is that technical assessments for data science positions tend to underemphasize data cleaning and manipulation. Granted, they're still really time-consuming as it is, but there's probably some room for optimization there.
I would agree with that assessment but for the fact that while alive the parent's medical debt can't be forced upon family members. It's a weird debt and I agree it isn't quite the same as inheriting it but I also think it isn't the same a jointly assumed liability while the parent is alive. The family members presumably have no say in whether or not the parent assumes the medical debt.
A pretty meaningless article. It seems that they want to generate random numbers (to use as keys) with biological processes (instead of physical ones, like noise generators). It would be cheaper to have minimum-wage workers throw dice and record the results...
It's actually not quite as bad as that. My personal preference is for things with copays instead of coinsurance, but beyond that if you look at the maximum out of pocket for most of the plans there's not that much difference between Bronze, Silver and Gold. The big difference between a lot of them is whether it's frontloaded (high premium, lower deductible, higher percentage coverage, lower copay) or backloaded (lower premium, lower percentage coverage, higher deductible, higher copay). There are also big differences in the size of the provider network, so it makes sense to check your preferred physicians (if any) and hospitals.

The thing I'd be very wary of is things like "50% coinsurance after deductible" which I think translates to "this is catastrophic coverage, you're responsible for all 'regular' medical expenses and we'll cover things like hospitalization."

None of the selection is easy, even for professionals (https://armandalegshow.com/4-why-you-and-i-will-likely-pick-... but all of the shows are interesting). Still, if you're in one of the states that allows a little longer to get on an Exchange plan and you need one, do so.

Edit: another worthwhile read about the decision tree for selecting a plan if you're in a state that runs its own Exchange (like California where you have until mid-January): https://www.balloon-juice.com/2018/10/18/going-through-my-ch...
As a guy who (used to) dual boot, I think I can offer some insight.

When I had Windows 10 dual booted with Linux, Windows had this extremely annoying habit of changing my UEFI boot order when it updated so that Windows was the first to boot, rather than Linux (where I can use GRUB to load Windows). I then had to manually revert the change at the bootloader.

With this exposed, it would not surprise me if their "default" implementation is to make sure Windows boots first, and revert the UEFI boot up that upon every boot up. An average user will likely not be aware of that, or the heavy Linux user who only boots into Windows occasionally.
"The way most people use Facebook is more of an RSS feed rather than a 1999 Geocities personal website."

Very true and Twitter is better for this in general. I keep a Twitter feed running at all times on 2nd monitor.
Why is that a no-brainer? In Seattle, first you have to get to the airport. Sea-Tac isn't exactly in Seattle. Depending on where you're coming from, King Street may be easier to reach.

Then there's the bit about arriving at the airport 2 hours before, in order to pass through security. Yeah, you can probably cheat on the two hours, depending on how long security lines tend to be at Sea-Tac. Still, it's a chunk of time you don't have to spend when you take the train.

Roll all that together, and I'm not sure that the train is much slower. And it costs less, and the scenery is better. So from where I sit, it doesn't look like a no-brainer at all.

Have I missed something?