skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You share the company's wealth by offering stock as part of compensation. This works well for the high earning tech employees, who can pay their bills with their first 100k and save the rest or invest it. It doesn't work as well for middle/lower class employees who need immediate cash instead of stocks that they can't always hold until it's worth more. Imagine working for Amazon back in the day for $30k, and come time for a raise, you're offered an extra $2k bonus or 10 shares. I'd wager most lower income folks would take the money, since that's food on the table.

I've always wondered what it would look like if were were paid in multipliers instead of salaries. The lowest would get 1x, middle folks 5x, and CEO maybe 20x. The usual "a rising tide lifts all boats" mindset.
Apologies if the point was sarcasm, but you never know. It isn't obvious to me that this behavior is in any way helpful for success or even that it's the only way for success. Sudbury can probably do just fine for itself with another approach.
The plug isn't pulled on them, the videos are still accessible. Are you saying that people who post on YT have a right to monetization?
The NVENC hardware encoder in Turing is actually comparable to x264 at fast / veryfast. This card will be quite interesting to Twitch streamers as it opens up the possibility to stream without CPU impact for those with a limited budget.
This is a prime example of a "too good to check" story.
If those darn green plants don’t wreck all my hard metabolic work.
I would agree with you if this was a subjective matter. But it's not subjective in the slightest. It's not an opinion. People who are anti-vax are spreading incredibly dangerous lies and it's already starting to cause outbreaks around the world. This is a clearcut case where people are dying because of misinformation.
I've been reasonably happy with (the free version of) Feedly. It's not perfect, but it's done the job for me as a Google Reader replacement.
Those artisan catsups weren’t around when he wrote the article 14 years ago.
The impact of HFT firms is significant, although not obvious to the average person.

Investing directly in a hedge fund requires a much higher initial investment as well as a high net worth. I would not recommend it. It is very difficult to select a portfolio of hedge funds that can outperform a simple low-cost index fund tracking the S&P 500.
the peculiar bit is how permeated language (e.g., english and other western languages) is with (women's) sexual availability--not just with gendered pronouns, but whole words, endings, titles (miss vs mrs. vs ms.), etc. i'm sure there are theories for why, but that emphasis is so heavy. many eastern languages, for example, emphasize seniority/hierarchy more.
It wasn't the specific wording, it's that claims of Jews having disproportionate wealth or influence is a common argument employed by antisemites:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard#Accusations...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard#Accusations...
It's not often that a horrible opinion can lead to a budding public health crisis, but this one has. If there wasn't a budding public health crisis, I'd agree with you.

The flip side of this is that it's terrible PR for YouTube if they _do_ let it continue, at which point it turns into a "YouTube is supporting anti-vaxxers during a budding health crisis" headline.
The problem is if you allow those comments, then by extension you do in fact support them. If HN in attempt to be more neutral started allowing think pieces from far-right authors on how bad the Jewish people are, then people would believe HN supports them (and rightfully so) by offering them a platform. This is part of the reason why HN does have banned websites (such as InfoWars) because the information from those sites tends to not only be highly disingenuous but also potentially damaging to the overall community.

Communities have to have a baseline stance of things they don't support, otherwise you can rapidly turn into the flaming heap that is Voat and other various sites. As for the actual data relating to the CW thread, the data only tells us what people self-describe as, not necessarily the frequency of their posts, the content contained within or how closely the poll reflects the actual userbase. This is before going into issues of people potentially gaming the poll and other problems with online polling.

As for the urge to censor viewpoints, that is inherently part of human nature. The internet has only made it easier because the anonymity allows for zero consequence. To fix this problem requires either destroying human nature or tearing apart the internet as you and I know it. There's always going to be a disagreement with how far it should go; some people believe Reddit should've never banned FatPeopleHate. Other people believe Reddit still fosters far too many incredibly vile subcommunities. Everyone has a line eventually. And there's always going to be people that disagree with where the line is drawn.
Uhh, given those choices, I 100% prefer corporations enforcing social norms.
> bremsstrahlung radiation

Oh that familiar rascal... Always getting the better of positive energy output.
But they haven't robbed the anti-vaxxers of their platform: they've let them keep their platform, but have decided to not give them their money. They aren't silencing the group at all. That feels like a good way to walk the line (and I'm usually the last person to compliment Google).
Escrow services exist for this purpose.
Well said. It’s definitly a tough position but that is reality. I am an immigrant and lean more to the left of center but we got have common sense.

I would rather have America be dominant than any other nation. With all our faults, we excercise incredible restraint with our immense powers. This of course could change if we end up electing more leaders like Trump. We need to stay strong militarily but also need good and intelligent leaders which unfortunately we don’t currently have.
> There is absolutely no situation where safety-critical code will be pushed to production builds without extensive testing, analysis, and verification, if the org standing behind it wants to live.

One would hope so, but I'm not quite as confident as you are…
Allowing free speach is more important than any one side of the debate. You can't defuse in a closed society.
> you are aware that game developers are actively talking about unionizing

Not as much as you’d think. PolyTaku and r/games want the games industry to unionize. People actually in the industry not so much.
YouTube has a tendency to demonetize videos with a conservative viewpoint too. Is that subjective enough?
Virgin Galactic SpacePlane
> Unfortunately, it doesn't generalize to BTC / USD (or other fiat currency)

The fact that it's impossible to implement trustless atomic swaps in USD is a USD problem, not a Bitcoin problem.

You asked how Bitcoin avoids litigation, you were given an example, and you dismissed it because it doesn't work on fiat. The reason Bitcoin had to be invented is precisely because these things aren't possible in fiat.
Reminds me of the discussion of Schelling fences in this: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Kbm6QnJv9dgWsPHQP/schelling-...

Given that holocaust denial is illegal in some European countries and there are already some legal restrictions on speech (yelling fire in a crowded theater) it's possible for reasonable exceptions to exist without the entire thing collapsing.

This is probably even more true when the organization making the decision is a company and not a government.
The $3k doesn't have to be spent on salaries. In fact, unless Blizzard is having a retention problem (they may be... but I'd guess it's not due to salaries), there's better places to spend that money.

Some estimates say their failed game, Titan, cost about $50mil to develop. If their CEO dropped his salary to a modest $1mil/yr, he could essentially fund a new game every 2 years.

This is of course an over-simplification of the value of money... dollars don't magically turn into hit video games. But they do help.
It comes down to intent.

I once had a neighbor who worked at Boeing, programming the guidance systems on smart bombs. The only reason I even remember him to this day is because immediately after introducing what he did for a living, he followed with, "I don't actually pull the trigger. I make the smart bombs smarter so they don't hurt innocent people."

I only remember this exchange because it can be interpreted several different ways.
Hi Suri, since we're here and talking about this I too would like to let you know that I'm actively considering alternatives to gitlab for this reason.

I originally started using gitlab because it provided a VCS with a really nice built-in CI system. Really, I wanted github + travis-ci, but selfhosted.

My experience with gitlab has been and still is really great, but I'm losing my grasp on what's going on on my own server. Every time I install a patch, I discover my gitlab instance has grown kuberentes support or serverless features or whatever auto-devops is.

I don't want, use or need all that, I'm the only person who logs into my gitlab instance. I'm pretty sure I've got it all turned off, but only pretty sure. If gitlab grows any more features I'll be moving away simply to ensure confidence that I understand my own infrastructure in the limited time I have to maintain it.

It's the weirdest kind of success problem to have, but the truth is if it wasn't such a pain to make the move, I'd have transitioned away from gitlab 6 months ago.
In the conclusion of a recent Spectre paper published by a number of Google security researchers they write:

"The community has assumed for decades that programming language security enforced with static and dynamic checks could guarantee confidentiality between computations in the same address space. Our work has discovered there are numerous vulnerabilities in today’s languages that when run on today’s CPUs allow construction of the universal read gadget, which completely destroys language-enforced confidentiality"

CloudFlare believes this doesn't apply to them and that they have created defences which allow them to run multiple customers' code in the same address space without leaking memory. I think the burden of proof is on CloudFlare, and I'm yet to see them actually publish any information about this.
I wholeheartedly agree. The concept of 'nature' in contrast to 'the human' seems to me something leftover from when we determined ourselves divine and separate from the rest. It's a word with arrogance deeply embedded in it.

The most useful meaning of this word is simply, "Not Human". But the human belongs to the natural.
uBlock Origin comes with anti-adblock lists; they're just disabled by default. I also use element picker mode.

Element picker mode is right at the edge of my patience, so I usually give up if it doesn't work. If I still really want something from the site I view source.
This line of reasoning appears frequently, but it misses the concept people are referring to when they say nature. Words are defined through their use, and no person would describe a parking lot or the inside of a building as a natural environment.

I think most people picture a place without human activity at all when they imagine a fully "natural" environment, like an island thats never had people on it. In this interpretation, people living naturally would cause their environment to deviate minimally from how it would be in their absence.

We are currently the direct cause of an ongoing mass extinction. We have yanked the surface of the planet so far from equilibrium that it may never return to its previous state. We are from being a part of nature.
“They were hesitant, uneasy, yet also somehow disinterested and bored. Finally it didn’t matter what they did. They just had to do something — anything — because to do nothing would be unprofessional.”
- “Ham On Rye.”

This always stuck with me, and reminded me of a recent comment from How to Make Other Developers Hate to Work with You, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19227371.

It's oddly refreshing to think this signaling problem Bukowski describes is so broadly applicable - in this context specifically about nurses and doctors - and not just a technical problem.
I think you're confusing skeumorphism with decoration. Decoration is adding elements to design for the sake of aesthetic ornamentation. For example, Geocities websites had all kinds of blink tags and fireworks going on inside a webpage. That is decoration.

A save button icon that looks like a floppy disk is not decoration. It is a use of skeumorphic semiotics that takes advantage of historic familiarity - which is what you're referring to. I agree with you that it has its place in design. The original discussion of this thread is whether we should decorate websites with architectural motifs whether it is art-deco or brutalism.
It seems to me that public health concerns are a pretty reasonable line to draw. Flat earthers are weird, but they affect no one outside of themselves (how can anyone act on living on a flat earth?).

More generally, effects that have the ability to meaningfully and physically compound among both children and adults seem pretty obvious targets. Ideas that can compound in adults are ok, because they're rational actors under the law, but for example teaching kids to teach other kids pro-anorexia propaganda is not, because it compounds to a public health problem that they never could have consented to deal with.
If I had to choose... corporations. If you dont like what Youtube does you can use another service. It's hard to go to another government though.
I agree with you, but they demonetized them, they didn't ban them. If they disallowed the videos, it'd be different.
Or maybe openness to experience causes both high creativity and openness to experimenting with substances. Correlation/causation and all that.
The Case for Being Skeptical of Moral Outrage – Facts So Romantic
Why's a Big Red Tanker Drifting Near Boston?
Every single company has an agenda. Every single company in America at least has enormous political power. Ultimately if we were to argue purely from a free market standpoint, this is an ideal scenario of users using their leverage to change how a company behaves, functioning as the free market is supposed to.

If you disagree with the government stepping in to control things, then the logical conclusion is the users stepping in to control things.
Hey zqn, this is an awesome deck and post. In fact, I wrote this up on my blog as a case study in using content to attract talent: https://mattharney.com/2019/02/22/talent-magnet-in-action/
I'd rather they stopped paying everyone. That would at least not show any bias.
Aerial photograph of London in 1986 looks so beautiful .. I imagine, how can I be there .. I want to see real phenomenon and making coversation with citizen ..

You know, I am English learner. I write what I learn in English on my own site https://www.tolongtangtugas.web.id ..
They're not pulling the plug, you can still watch the videos, they will still be recommended as related videos if you're going down that rabbit-hole, etc.

But, YouTube has a huge problem with thoughtless monetization, there's the grotesque "for kids" videos that seem to be algorithmically generated, unscrupulous people make videos about whatever, not really caring about the content, as long as it gets views and makes them a buck.

By removing the monetization, a lot of actors will disappear, and the only people left will be the true believers who want to spread their misguided word, and that's fine. If they can't make money off of their shit, that's a good thing. They're not being censored in any way shape or form.
> This is pure speculation, but I suspect the opponents wouldn't have altered their tone.

There’s literally no evidence of this. Dozens of companies, including evil empires like Google and Goldman Sachs, have taken advantage of Empire State grants and EDC programs and whatever else without all that much drama.

Amazon literally shot themselves in the face with their arrogant, entitled attitude here. Consider placing the blame where it belongs.
Should have just blocked these accounts on sight.
I don’t see anything complex about it. In my eyes, the case is pretty clear-cut: anti-vaxxers cause demonstrable harm not just to their own children, but also to those of others. Therefore, the censorship is justified.

Is there a risk that someday in the future these tech giants will censor a “good” thing? Maybe. But those types of slippery slope arguments aren’t very convincing, in my opinion. It’s way more pragmatic to take the “we will cross that bridge when we get there” stance, rather than getting paralyzed by over-analyzing.
The worry is why a service that is designed to show people-created content should wield unlimited unilateral power to selectively decide what is going to be shown and what is not. Why a company and not a judge can decide what is not covered by freedom of speech? Can a large company just decide this because, well, it is large?

I understand anti-vac people are seriously misguided and are posing threat to others but has there been any ruling on this or Youtube just decided it doesn't like it?

I am of the opinion that this needs a transparent process so that YOUR rights are not stomped on when you are in minority. Say you we are transported back 200 years and you express an unpopular belief that black people should be made free and allowed to vote (and women too!) Who is to decide you are not allowed to even express your opinion because majority of the society thinks what you say is complete bullshit (why, who's going to do all this work?)
There is no closing pandoras box when it comes to military tech.
To which the answer must always be "Ok, you're fired."
Cool, now we need to work on Facebook. A couple of days ago I got a paid ad from an antivax group, a particularly evil one because they pretend to be medical experts: Physicians for Informed Consent. Their idea of "informed consent" is a ton of misinformation that grossly exaggerate the risks and understate the benefits of vaccines. They paid Facebook to show me the add. I reported it; Facebook says they "understand" why I didn't like it but it doesn't violate their guidelines.
You mean the military that has helped ensure the affluence and security of the Western world? The military isn't bad just because it's the military. It serves important and necessary functions, ones that don't go away just because you want it to.
If your kids are upto date then there will be no health crisis. The concern is everyone will start following this advice and then everyone will get sick. In the worst case evolution will wipe out this population.
I think that depends heavily on why you chose X over Y.
Sure, and I'm in favour of constitutional bills of rights (in Australia we have no strong protections of that kind, it's mostly ad-hoc and common law with the only really significant protection being the "on just terms" concept of compulsory acquisition).

The problem is that if there is no way to effectively "petition a redress of grievances" (to borrow a phrase) about some constitutional violations, what is the point of that clause of the constitution? If you have legal protections of your rights, you must also have a court system that is willing to actually hold the government to account over violations of your rights -- and my impression of the US (as an outsider) is that this is not the case for 4th amendment violations.
>I believe YouTube is a private company who can do what they want with their company.

This is what it always comes down to with me. It is a free service that can change anything they want at anytime.

If there is concern they will stifle someone trying to do good or have an unpopular opinion, there are other options. They might not be as easy. They might not offer the eyeballs.

As the laws are written today, services like Youtube are free to do whatever they want in terms of what is on their site.

I understand the bad taste in your mouth, but I have learned services I do not pay for owe me nothing. It used to upset me, but I get it now.
Hey znq, this is an awesome deck. In fact, I wrote up how you've used HN as a case study in using content to attract talent: https://mattharney.com/2019/02/22/talent-magnet-in-action/
reply
Computer, internet, CPU, and pretty much a lot of modern tech was created/refined out of funding by and for armed forces.

I find this news to be incredibly ironic.

And I disagree with the demands, just in my personal opinion.

We have real, powerful enemies that would love to dethrone US as the dominant nation. Those who demand this restriction for working on military contracts have to seriously consider this.
The problem with this trend now is that people have realized the truth they want can be the truth we all have if they're willing to yell loud enough about it.
Yeah, interesting point about us being reliant on memory. And I agree, it's useful to think about the circular argument.

I wonder if "asking questions" is just a small progressive part of evolution? For instance, on a time scale of species evolution, I wonder if things might look like this:

...Sensing...Simple reasoning...Complex questioning...X...Y...Z...
This type of cost/benefit calculation was the justification for using the nuclear fission bomb on Japan in WW2.

The estimated cost of deaths of pushing the Pacific invasion without the bomb was higher than the cost of deaths using the bomb to force a surrender. Keep in mind this was in an era when total war existed, and civilians of warring nations were considered unarmed combatants.
I don't see the issue with demonetizing them. They are still free to post, show up in search, free to trend, etc... All YouTube is saying is that it will no longer pay them to spread dangerous misinformation.
"Reasonable" here means "roughly market rate". But salary survey sites always have such a wide range as to be useless.

I mostly evaluate similarity in terms of responsibility (both tech-wise and human-wise), which yes, is very difficult to compare across jobs. Especially considering that jobs often morph pretty quickly after day one.

In the end, I go for the jobs that sound interesting and do my best to negotiate.
Barber: you don't need a two year degree to learn how to use scissors on someone's hair without cutting into their scalp. This is something anyone with basic motor skills can do. And if you're malicious, you can just as easily run out into the street with scissors and start stabbing people. You don't need to get a job as a barber to give yourself that opportunity.

>>In these fields, things can go very wrong very fast, and all these professions are right to same some form of certification.

Licensing is not the same as certification. Licensing means you are forbidden from doing something until you meet certain conditions. In any occupation where the parties subjected to risk are consenting to that risk, there's no possible justification for such a restriction that doesn't involve a paternalistic argument that people should have their liberty curtailed by the state for their own good.