skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Let's say hypothetically that I asked someone to buy a coin on eBay, and hold it for a year. The goal of that exercise would be to pick the coin that appreciates in value the most over that year.

So given those parameters, which coin would someone pick, and why? See, that's a form of arbitrage, because you're buying something on eBay and selling it back on eBay.

The idea that "some poor third party sap" is paying more is not correct, because the second buyer of the coin is presumably paying MARKET VALUE for the coin, and presumably can sell it again at market value (no loss), and can possibly even wait some time for the coin to appreciate again.

In a free market people exchange goods for however much money they value the goods at. The prices (price = what people value something at) of some of those items are in constant flux, thus there become opportunities for arbitrage. People in the financial community already know this, although they don't apply those principles to eBay.

No single person is a sap, people just a) Value (assign price to) things differently and b) Have different abilities to pay, i.e., Bill Gates could pay a whole lot more for something than say, someone living in a third-world country...
How is that remotely fair?

The company has the expectations for you to perform as an $800+/hr consultant, and your return for that effort is $50/hr?
This is often negotiable if you're a good fit and willing to work as a contractor, at least on the senior level.
Ah ok, so we'll never get over IPv4 if we still take potshots at anything that doesn't support it.

Oh by the way, I'm sure we all agree that using IPv4 for IoT, especially new deployments, is a particularly bad idea.
Fair might not be the right word, $825 an hour covers the rest and then some. The thing is that they can get away with charging that much, and based on your skills /competition at that time, $50 was a good rate for you to pocket.
It’s just a 60 second video answering 3 fairly straightforward questions. What’s so difficult about that?
Will our future homes build themselves? [video]
somewhat unrelated:

This is YC's mission statement:
"Y Combinator provides seed funding for startups. Seed funding is the earliest stage of venture funding. It pays your expenses while you’re getting started."
It basically works like this: when a certain Y coordinate is reached - the div element (with the wall part) is cloned.
You can run the Bitwarden Rust implementation on a Raspberry Pi with resources to spare.
Take a look at this: https://github.com/tmux/tmux/issues/428
Mozilla Release of Free, High-Quality Video Compression Technology AV1 in FF65
Top Emerging Omnichannel Tactics and Strategies for 2019
I want team players with drive, who takes initiative, who are willing to learn as they go and who will speak up and tell me when I’m wrong. People with integrity and principles.
I’m looking out for warning signals. People who will say “that’s not my job”. Small things. People who are too sure of themselves or small things such if they bring their coffe cup with them out of the interview or not.
I don’t want people who pretend that they know answers to questions they do not. I’d like them to say I don’t know at least once during the interview.
On the technical side I look for people who can tell me about real problems they have faced in real projects. How they handled that situation. How they approach troubleshooting and debugging in general. I want to hear how they talk about software in general. I want them to not be fundamentalists in any direction. I want people who can see both the positive and the negative aspects of concepts like OOP, functional programming, unit testing or whatever it might be. I want them to be able to argue both for and against different ways of solving problems.

And that’s just the start of it. Hope it helps.
As a W2 employee, your bill rate is not really your problem and only a secondary factor in how much your total comp will be. Given the same set of delivery staff, a strong consultancy might generate high bill rates, and a weaker one lower rates. The work is the same; as a full-time employee, your point of reference for your own comp isn't what the company earns, but rather what full-time people like you earn elsewhere. If people with your skillset and experience and capability generally earn $170/hr, it doesn't matter that the consultancy only makes $165/hr. Similarly, if they tend to make $90/hr, it doesn't matter that their firm makes almost 2x that in bill rate.

I'd also caution that people have weird ideas of how bill rates correlate to salaries. If you strike out on your own to do a solo consultancy (strongly consider doing that sometime!), you should know that whatever your FT salary was in your previous job, your bill rate should be drastically higher. It should account for:

* Your increased cost basis w/r/t taxes, facilities, vacation and "PTO", expenses, and benefits, which you'll now be on the hook for

* Your ample downtime --- a well-managed consultancy running in steady state at reasonable scale might expect 70% utilization across its staff, and a fledgling consultancy might struggle to break 50%

* The work you'll be putting in to source and close consulting engagements

* The substantial extra risk you're taking on by being a technical delivery person that can be "fired" (you're never really fired, just released) on a whim with little notice, which risk is something you as a consultant are selling.

People sometimes use a rule of thumb of 2x your full-time salary as a target consulting rate. I think that's lowballing it.

Always, these specific questions are best answered by consulting the market directly, not by asking for an axiomatic derivation of what a skillset is currently worth.
Firefox has an option to uncheck Smooth Scrolling. So if you press the spacebar, the page instantly jumps down instead of showing the page quickly scroll. I don't know if this would help.
I am not sure I would focus on the money as a factor for Musk's success. There are a lot of rich, including newly rich, people who aren't Musk. The reason he isn't one of them is because he didn't want the money more than doing something real. Chances are that if he didn't end up with that money he would still have tried. As far as I know the plan wasn't really to build a company the size of SpaceX in the first place. But it was still to create a real company. Once he had literally shown up to the launch pad, opportunities presented themselves.

This is in many ways counter to current models for success. Where everyone wants a quick fix. Zero to hero. Where substance is a liability. Because if you have to accomplish something in particular, what is the angle? "Oh, a physics degree would be useful? Well, that is clearly unreasonable I want to be successful".

You want another Musk you get 'real' companies, doing 'real' work, selling 'real' technology. And where that is the main purpose. If it isn't, there is no need to work on technology that you sell. It becomes a disadvantage in an endless quest of prototypes and promises to please investors.

And yes, it is sort of ironic, but at the same time not, that one of our most celebrated entrepreneurs had a lot of backing of the US government and already existing industries. I don't think it makes much sense to critic that as such though.
It's definitely reality, fair or not.
I wavered in and out of using Linux for years, OS X, and roughly speaking have given up, and focus on Windows nowadays.

The main reason I stopped using Linux is that a lot of "small" stuff won't just work, so then I go down a google quest, and fix it in anywhere between 5 minutes, and never. OS X mostly just works, Windows mostly just works.

There are a lot of compromises to privacy, or games, or worse development environments, or worse performance for some hardware, or worse UX, or having to track down byzantine errors. I mostly reached the conclusion that no matter which OS you choose you are going to sacrifice something.

Right now, I like games, I want to be able to play effortlessly. The friction between having to restart from OS X/Linux to windows is too much for me, I like to open Dark Souls, play 15 minutes, die, rage quit, get some work done, open Dark Souls again. That's a hard flow to get working in those operating systems.

The future of Linux GPU VM dedicated pass through looks amazing, and my next computer I intend to at least give a shot of getting that to work, but I suspect that much like the author there will just be either a lot of tiny issues, or one big issue that will end up making me go back to Windows full time.

There is no lesson to be had here, I'm just sad.
It's time for mozilla to get down from their philosophical ivory tower
Back in the 90ies, I stayed in the same hotel as a pro team who were racing in the Giro d'Italia. It was interesting to see their bikes: except for the GC guy, they were 'workhorses' - good components, and steel frames that, taken together, where not exactly featherweight.

A nice bike certainly helps, but it's all about your fitness and strength.
We could make it more like NATO?
From what I've seen speed isn't usually the issue with Electron based applications (except Atom), the issue is every other performance metric; memory use, disk use, start up time, etc. How will WebAssembly help here? Will it allow Electron to cut its memory use or startup time?
Does it really matter? There are a thousand reasons why businesses fail. Also, $20,000/month can be quite impressive, if you earn this for yourself and live somewhere with low costs of living.

Seeing those numbers is just entertainment. If you hit your number, you figure that it doesn’t matter if it’s impressive for others.
Dark Messenger: Mobile XMPP Over TOR
How is it Google's fault that someone else had access to your account and (for all intents and purposes) impersonated you? If someone gets access to any of your important accounts on your behalf (which would include your primary email), you will have a lot of opportunities to get screwed over. Email access alone can be enough, in a lot of cases.
Depends on the industry. Services tend to use the rule of 1/3. 1/3 for the company, 1/3 for overhead, 1/3 for salary.
140% fully loaded also sounds a bit low.
First let me say I think this is a great idea even just the marketing and publicity angle alone. [1]

That said I always love the arbitrary numbers they assign such as '100' or similar those '30 under 30'. And so on. Heinz of course popularized 57 varieties of ketchup (not sure I have seen that duplicated).

Why not say 'roughly 100'. Give yourself the flexibility to go up or down if needed.

[1] This is what happens when money meets creative ideas.
Ah, maybe my share actions are in a nonstandard order, I have to scroll way to the right to find that one.

And in answer to your last point, I'm not optimistic about the average user's ability to add a keyboard either.
Many programming languages today have a format that is like <tree of files, each containing> <set of items, each containing> <list of expressions>. It would be nice if that <set of items> step was treated as an unordered set instead of an ordered one, with editors having a better understanding of how to bring up relevant elements of the set onto your screen at the same time. Split pane editors, "peeking" in editors at code definitions, etc. hint at how this should work, but I don't feel like they do it as well as possible.

Back in the day, in VisualWorks, with the RefactoringBrowser, you could bring up a browser for a search, say, everyone who implemented

methodNamedFoo:

Then you could rapidly narrow that down (effectively and-ing it) to those methods which also sent

thisOtherMethod:

These were lightning quick operations, just right-click and done! But what's more, you could even compose little queries (think like you would in a SQL query client, but using snippets of Smalltalk code) that would be applied to/and-ed with the contents of each browser window. Done right, this resulted in a few accurate, complete, and highly focused sets of code applied to the exact problem you were working on.

What's more, you could write scripts to pop up such query browsers automatically. They would also be saved in the "image" and just pop up to the same state when you restarted the environment. On top of that, you could write syntactically accurate code transformations against all of the above, even writing ad-hoc code against the meta level or even runtime state from the middle of a runtime debug session.

A small amount of "visual augmentation" might benefit most programming languages

Agreed. Where various visual programming have fallen down over the past 3 decades:

1) Scaling complexity -- If diagrams get too busy, and there's no good way of managing complexity. This especially applies to multiple programmers changing the same diagram.

2) Scaling size/optimization -- Many visual programming systems in past decades could bog down and become marginally responsive or unusual when managing large systems.

If you can handle those two, you will have a huge leg up towards a viable visual programming augmentation.
1400 billable hours? That's like 72% utilization. Is that typical now in software?
Digital Product Design and Development
There is a queue of people willing to perform the job for $50/hr.

Also, there are overheads of running a company (assuming OP isn't the only employee).
I'm excited to try the RetroPlayer feature. Currently I have a hook inside Kodi to launch RetroArch so that I can play all my ROMs from the livingroom. If that can all be moved within Kodi itself, all the better!
Although there is another interpretation (especially in traditional newspapers): you aren’t just evaluating the the individual journalist, you’re evaluating the editorial staff. They are responsible for finding a physics expert to write about physics and a Palestine expert to write about Palestine.

If they do a poor job of selecting a physics expert, then it seems likely that they will do a poor job of selecting other kinds of experts as well.
right! statebox tries really hard to strike a balance between these two.

in order to make diagrams _as_ composable as functional code, you need proper theory of diagrams and a "compiler" that checks your diagrams for "type errors"
Between $41.25/hr (0.25) and $55/hr (0.33).

Lower means you might leave for somewhere that pays you better. Higher means the company won't be able to spend enough on business overhead, support staff, and benefits package.
If they're reliably billing out at $800/hr to full-time utilization and feel they're being cheated in their take-home comp, they should set up shop on their own. They're a consultant, that's what consultants do. There's no easier structure in tech in which to compete with your erstwhile employer than in consulting.

If they can't do that, whatever the reason they can't is the answer to your question.
Seconded.

Just try to run a B2B SaaS without supporting IE11. You will lose out on a ton of large-but-slow-moving customers. Like banks, insurance companies, etc. who all seem to have critical internal systems that only work on IE11 in compatibility mode.
> do I want to be in a room with 99 other people who wanted to be selected for this so much that they produced a video with answers to these questions?

No value to meeting any of these people? Even if just for future contacts that could be beneficial or ideas? I am not seeing much downside to this at all. If I had the time I'd fly out on my own dime and just hang around and 'press the flesh'.
C. I only know high level languages (JS, Ruby) but never delved into lower level ones. Not from lack of interest but rather lack of time. I'm going to change that this year.
Visual programming is also used a lot in plc programming (Siemens S7/TIA, Mitsubishi MELSEC, etc..).

Programming visually is usually called FBD or LAD. We use often FBD for simple logic. It's easy to read, even for inexperienced maintenance guys. LAD is a no go for me, but it seems a lot of guys still like it.
http://szirty.uw.hu/lang/Siemens_TIA_FBD.png

As long there is a simple and clear code structure, it is a good thing.

Today, special since Siemens made SCL (kind/like of Pascal for PLCs) usable and in there new IDE (old was Step7, new is TIA), we use it also a lot.

Today it's even possible to mix FBD/LAD and SCL. So you can make al simple logic in FBD or LAD, and then calculate things in between in a SCL network.

https://planken.org/images/screendumps/201408-tiav13-network...
(the only (not so great) ex. I found)

As user of both worlds in my job, I can say both worlds have a right to exist. It's just like is C better than C++ or is Python even the most best ... is a car better than a bike .. is a house better than a tent ..
How to Make Money from Affiliate Marketing Without a Website
https://www.androidpolice.com/2018/10/17/chrome-70-adds-av1-...

https://github.com/mozilla/aom/tree/master/av1

https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/issues/457

https://bitmovin.com/av1/

http://video.1ko.ch/codec-comparison/

https://www.texpion.com/2018/07/av1-vs-vp9-vs-avc-h264-vs-he...
That requires exposing your git repo to the internet, unless you’re on the same network.
The reasoning all starts with the supposition that people can't know what the important questions are. Whether this is true strongly depends on what field you are in.

Within a paradigm there will be agreement on what the important questions are. In any field of study with a shared paradigm, there will be rough agreement about what is important. The whole field may be wrong about that answer, but it is an answerable question.

How big an agreement is there?

Across math and the hard sciences, it turns out that not only does each subfield have its dominant paradigm, but people accept the paradigms in neighboring subfields, and overall paradigms across fields. Therefore when a result like the fact that neutrinos can flip types in flight was demonstrated, it was immediately recognized as important by all physicists, even ones in fields as far away as fluid mechanics.

This shows up in journals, where each little subfield has its own constellation of journals, with the best results going into a prominent journal that is shared across several subfields. And ditto at the next level, leading to a hierarchy that culminates in the most important journal of all, Nature. Which is where the most important results in all fields are announced.

This beautiful picture completely falls apart when you get out of math and the hard sciences. The problem is not that people are not doing scientific research, it is that the field hasn't agreed on a paradigm. The question of what the right approach is and what questions are important is a subject of debate, not agreement. Which immediately renders Hamming's advice questionable. Indeed this is so much true that the picture I have described is both obvious to someone who has worked in fields where there is such consensus, and sounds impossible to someone who works in fields where there isn't.

This shows up in a variety of ways. For example in journals, each school of thought has their own ranking of journals and they don't agree. Therefore no journal can ever attain the widely acknowledged prestige of top science journals. For another example, if you talk to two random psychologists about the 10 most important research results in psychology in the last 10 years, the one's list is unlikely to contain anything recognized by the other. However if you do the same with physics, the top results will have a lot of overlap. For example right now the top 10 list for both is likely to include the verification of the Higgs Boson, and the measurement of gravitational waves.

Anyways, long story short, I understand why this researcher would question our ability to know what questions are important. However for anyone in hard science, that is surprisingly achievable.
It might be worth contacting the author of the Chrome extension and asking them if they'd be interested in porting; since Firefox's WebExtensions API is a superset of the Chrome extension API, it should hopefully not require too much effort.
Counter question for you: what can you charge when you're selling yourself? If you're unable to charge anything close to your expected salary as a consultant, then you're de facto answering your own question.

For clarification, I'm not suggesting you're a cog or that you're providing no value. Just that, it's easy as a knowledge worker to fall into the trap of thinking you're delivering more value than you actually are. I've seen this happen in each of engineering, sales, and marketing departments. I can only imagine it's true in other corporate functions. (Part of me would have wanted to make an exception for HR, but I know more than a few HR folks who deluded themselves into getting in that field to make things better for the rest of us, and as a manger I'd put forward that HR actually does come in handy as a business function.)

The truth is that, in reasonably well functioning companies, the various departments are pulling their weight (admittedly more or less well) more often than not. And a surefire way to sink a company is when a department decides they're a worth a lot more than some other guys over there. (You'll eventually get fired over this if that is your mindset. As your manager I'd give you a single strike before giving you the boot; it's that toxic.)

Point is, your company is providing value by selling your skills -- by finding relevant clients and closing them, neither of which are easy. And they've spent money to recruit you, are continuing to spend money to manage you and invoice for you and pay you and pay taxes on your behalf if applicable and extend vacation time and what have you.

If you believe the added value is not high enough and wish to get paid more, then it's fair game -- ask for one, if only because you never get anything without asking. But keep in mind that the surefire way to get a raise isn't to ask for one; it is to resign and sell yourself to the same types of companies. It's not easy, but quite doable; just think it through, thoroughly, before giving it a go.
> This is what insurance is for. Where liability falls just determines who buys the insurance. If the electric company is liable, they'll buy the insurance.

I disagree, completely. In fact, part of my main point is that when, say, a single sparking transformer can result in $50+ billion in liability, no sane insurance company (or even reinsurance company) would take that risk, and that is what happened.
> This is quite the assumption!

Correct, it was an exaggeration. Bottom-up programmers are supposed to have the tooling not to end up with convoluted code, but they somehow manage to do it anyway.

> Bottom-up text-based programming leads to much greater complexity because most programmers don't properly model their software (e.g., with state machines, statecharts, Petri nets, activity diagrams, etc.).

I'd argue that these text-based programming languages and computation models don't correspond to human intuition when they solve a problem and that is the main problem.

> But it's not entirely their fault -- code is inherently linear. Mental models are not - they're graph-based (i.e., directed graphs, potentially hierarchical). Text-based code is merely trying to shoehorn graph-based mental models of what the code should do into a linear format, which makes it less intuitive to understand than a visual approach.

This is one of the limitations of bottom-up code. It is easy to represent linear program flow. It is not sufficient though, as you point out, problems in real world are graph based in general.

On the other hand not all code is linear. Eg. looping is a typical cycle in a computational graph, or petri net when you represent a data flow graph.

init --> loop body --> end
| |
\_________<_____________/