skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A previous paper by the same author said that those drafted in Vietnam earned less throughout the rest of their careers, and proposed that the difference was due to a loss of work experience.

http://economics.mit.edu/files/14352

"This paper also proposes a simple explanation for the loss of earnings to white veterans: they earn less because their military experience is only a partial substitute for the civilian labor market experience lost while in the armed forces. Goodness-of-fit tests suggest that for whites, the time-series of veteran status coefficients is consistent with this hypothesis. Experience-earnings profiles estimated using Social Security data imply that
white veterans suffered an earnings reduction equivalent to the loss of two years civilian labor market experience."

The more recent paper you linked to an article about, proposes that the decline in sons earnings are due to an increase in their likelihood of joining the military, less parental time during their formative years, and reduced starting economic positions. The paper's author seems to see it as essentially being the opposite of genetic.
I think you might have the math wrong there.

7.25 x 40 x 20 = $5800

we pay $10,000

Second, virtually all the work is not for any gain (it's purely instructional)
> If I'd like to verify the result, is there a tamper-proof electronic paper trail that I can use to verify the result?

This kills the secret ballot. If you can verify how you voted, I can verify how someone else voted. That lets anyone pay for votes and punish people who voted "wrong".
Apparently one of the problems with this device is that much of the energy is lost when the ions strike the inner electrodes and that got me thinking. What if there were a way to construct a sort of thin inert buffer on the electrodes with say a noble gas, to facilitate ion collisions over ion conduction?
> Because of the inherent defensive bias of the technology (stationary is easier than mobile, defending a known area is easier than entering an new area and figuring out what to shoot) robotic weapons are a bigger problem for those seeking to do or enable evil.

This is a crucial point.

Another point is that most potential adversaries don't value the lives of their fighters as much as we value the lives of our military personnel. If half a dozen American troops die, it's national news. If a hundred die, it's a political scandal. People wonder why the US spends so much more on defense than other countries. That's partially because we're willing to spend lots and lots of dollars to save just a few lives.

And, for that reason, I think the US in particular will eventually be willing to replace even its offensive military capacity with robots. And if it works, that means the US or any other technologically advanced state can, at great expense, continue a counterinsurgency campaign indefinitely.

But, as you point out, any defender who can scrap a robot together will have an advantage in countering that ability. Hell, they might even be able to use open-source software to run them. And that's the good news. Orwell wrote, "...tanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon--so long as there is no answer to it--gives claws to the weak."
For a time Intel had PCs on a stick – it was like a large flash thumb drive, with a Celeron or something. (Maybe they still offer these.)

Are there any thumb drive ARM computers? (Preferably with 64-bit ARMv8 processors to match emerging server platforms.) With pluggable ARM mini-computers it might be easy to develop for ARM.

Raspberry Pi would be interesting, but they have old 32-bit processors and I'm not sure how well they interface with a normal computer. Servers are using 64-bit ARMv8.

Maybe smartphones would work as pluggable mini-computers? I heard that OnePlus devices were explicitly root-friendly, but I've never tried it.
I rented a car that had no physical buttons. It was frustrating to change stations or adjust the volume because there was no tactile indication that I pressed anything correctly. I'm accustomed to hearing a click, or feeling a press and release. It left me wondering if younger generations will have that issue: is it just bad design, or is it too unfamiliar to me.
Roads/oil/education/internet/mining/etc can be and used for military purposes.

Where do you want to draw the line?
> Are you under the impression that the major powers don't have biological warfare capabilities?

No, but that they are extremely careful with using them since it’s considered an extreme escalation to do so even on a small scale.

> China uses autonomous killbots in Tibet...

Replace “autonomous killbot” with “small tactical nuke” and you see what I’m getting at. They could. But they won’t - because they can accomplish any military goal with conventional means. So why risk the backlash? That’s the kind of threshold I’d like for the deployment of autonomous weapons of this type. And it’s difficult given how easily deniable they are, compared to e.g bioweapons.

> ...autonomous cruise missiles...

This is an interesting gray area. No one thinks a fuse that ensures a weapon doesn’t blow up a friendly is a bad thing. But we still think of these weapons as being “launched” by a human, even though they can make terminal decisions on their own. I’d draw the line for what’s ethically acceptable at the point where you no longer have a human launch weapons “at” a target but instead launch a weapon to roam. The cruise missiles are still just clever fuses, they don’t linger waiting to autonomously attack ships. The reason this is a gray area and a slippery slope is of course only down to the short flight time of the missiles. If they could fly for a year (like the Russian nuclear experimental missile) then it’s useless against predesignated targets - so effectively a roaming killbot. With current cruise missiles, a human still makes a decision to attack even if it’s only a rough area thought to contain the target. They know what they are trying to attack and there is a human to take the blame if the weapon subsequently makes a mistake and hits a tanker.

> ...stockpile millions...

Yes. Comparing again to nukes that’s very similar. So would I prefer a world without nukes to one with? Sure. But the best we could do was superpowers stockpiling to ensure mutual destruction. I think that’s the best we can hope for here. I don’t think these weapons won’t be built by the millions, I just hope they will be used reluctantly.
The key here is "government may silence your speech" (or should it be "judiciary"). It is very different when it is a private company that decides this.

The correct course of action here is for our leaders to grow a spine and publicly acknowledge this is a problem.

Of course speech should be free until court rules otherwise. How otherwise you expect minority opinion to be safe from majority? It is not free speech if anybody with more power than you may shut you up.
This is pretty inspirational. Im curious how much a setup like this must cost though? Cursory investigations into vaccuum costs seem pretty prohibitively high for a 12 year old, even most middle class parents. Very cool though.
Don't you mean Mitch Taylor? Perhaps this kid will get a scholarship to Pacific Tech.
Is the hardware encoder the same in every Turing based card or should we expect different performance when comparing ultra high end to mid range? (2080TI vs 1660TI)
This is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis at work.

The way common language defines "nature" doesn't map well to reality and we end up developing contorted thoughts rather than re-evaluating the tools we use to think.

I like to contrast wild/raw stuff to artificial stuff, both of which are part of nature. Many things that are commonly considered "natural" are actually far from wild. Fields in the countryside? Artificial. Vegetables and farm animals? Artificial, even before GMO. Etc...

That being said, the way we've shaped the planet these last 200 years is radical, and possibly too radical for our own survival. Fossil fuel gave us an immense power and we probably didn't use it wisely. We'll see.
Far be it from me to fall into the "everything I don't like is a Russian/Chinese covert action" conspiracy theorizing that is increasingly common these days -- but if I were an adversarial state actor, I would definitely look into ways of encouraging these sorts of anti-US-military "employee rebellions" in the tech industry. Geopolitics never rests, and an important asset of any nation is its tech industry, both during wartime itself and also in any long-term leadup to conflict. I wonder if the US government has internally analyzed the question of whether, in an increasingly globalized and politically agitating environment, its companies can be counted on to be supportive and/or loyal in the event of conflict.
Oh! My bad =) I should have looked it up first. I always thought it was take the unstable uranium isotope and surround it with a horrible amount of explosive material which was set at a controlled time to pressure the uranium into a cascading reaction. Turns out, I'm running on the 1940's Popeye cartoon explanation =[
I think any connection to "royalty" or anointed status is secondary and completely tied to individual executives and their performance (or at least reputation).

What is true is the myth of individual efficacy. That a good CEO will have a successful company, and that a successful company is a sign of a great CEO. The reality is obviously that there are countless factors that affect company performance.

It's not that people think they are special, it's that we are very bad at correctly apportioning responsibility, especially when there is also a power imbalance that extends to determining that apportionment itself. We don't instinctively seek royalty (as in we assume leaders are special as a rule, though obviously in some contexts/positions we do), we seek simplicity (and pinning everything on a single leader is about as simple as it gets).
ITT: people dismissing neutrality concerns and are using the specifics of the non-neutral actions to derail from the general point about objectivity.
"If I don't make X metric by Y date..."

I've found this to be the most dangerous type of thinking. It's always going to take longer, go worse and be harder than any of your best estimates. When you don't meet your dates or metrics, that's when you'll lose your motivation.

The key to keep grinding away relentlessly on a project is to improve habits and systems for making progress. The creator of Dilbert wrote a great book about it:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/scott-adams8217-secret-of-succe...

Personally I don't consider myself successful, but because of the advice to stop making goals I'm failing faster, staying motivated and getting stuff done. So hopefully eventually it will pay off.
We make sure they do the work (code reviews) and we want them to spend a reasonable amount of time actually coding (we log how much time they spend on items). But there's no "class" per se, other than check-ins with us
Your bias is showing... but it’s actually both.
Agreed, and props anyway, but it does blow the bourgeoisie horn. I mean, how many kids even have the opportunity to entertain such an endeavor?
"A demo fusor can and has been made in a bell jar with crude vacuum gear and kluded-up power supply. Most such systems are assembled by younger school age children (mostly boys save for one pair of girls). The demo fusor often serves as a science fair project in the 10th to 12th grades of high school. The better examples have won regional science fairs and a couple of national events!
"[0]

[0] http://www.fusor.net/board/viewtopic.php?t=2674
> Notice that antivax side doesn't have a "product" to sell

That's simply not true; the channels they demonetized like iHealthTube and LarryCook333 do sell products (both their own and others') - usually "naturopathic" books, treatments, etc. Some of these can be quite expensive.
That's precisely what gives this any force at all: the people saying it are in a position to harm the project by removing themselves from it.
The Real Charles Bukowski
Thing is, there will be no mass exodus of employees over this issue.

Also, I'd like to see the historical examples you mentioned.
Palantir is not in the market of augmented reality headsets.
This is why Nikola Tesla was celibate.
Some people seem hellbent on self-destruction. As an Asian person I find it completely impossible to comprehend. I can’t even understand where these people are coming from. Obviously you need the best weapons. Your enemies have weapons, and if they thought they could get away with it, they’d totally use them to dominate you. The only reason they don’t is because for the moment your weapons are bigger than theirs.

U.S. prosperity is built on the U.S. military. From our acension to the world stage after WWII, to the spawning of the Internet through military R&D. The pointy end of America is an essential part of what makes your life so fat and comfortable. It’s what allows you to consume a vastly disproportionate share of global resources. To live a life where you can worry about finding dates in Tindr and finding the best avacodo toast place, instead of surviving in a hostile world.
It is leaving a bad taste in your mouth (IMO) because youtube and facebook have shifted positions in our society and are approaching being forms to express speech in. They should start being considered communication carriers and subjected to laws that effect other communication carriers.

That said, though, it shouldn't leave a bad taste in your mouth. A lot of us were raised to be very sensitive to the restriction of free speech but not all speech is protected. A news caster that intentionally misinforms with mal-intent in an effort to cause harm (i.e. advising people to take a highway that they are aware is dangerous to traverse while dissuading them from taking a safe route) is unprotected speech. I believe anti-vaxxers are either at, or approaching, presenting the same sort of danger to society and action is required to protect individuals.
So they can move to a different platform, if they can find somebody else willing to pay them for it. If they can't, then, so what? I doubt I could find somebody willing to pay me for expressing my opinions either.

If the line for free speech has moved from "you must be allowed to speak" to "somebody must pay you for your speech", I just don't know what to say.
How exactly are you going to stop the spread of knowledge? Has there ever been an example of that which worked?
You've avoided my question, probably because you know I'm right. The line between 'car' and 'gun' is fuzzy when you consider a car that's specifically been designed to carry guns.

A military with guns but no transportation is like a clock with an escapement but no gears. Gears are used by lots of things, not just clocks, and clocks need an escapement, but without gears that clock doesn't function. The gears don't define the clock in quite the same way as an escapement, but they're nevertheless necessary.

My point here is that making cars for the military but refusing to make guns for them is quite silly. If you really want to opt-out of the military industrial complex, you'll need to make more sacrifices.
I would make sure to do your dd on the founders, especially if it is pre-funding, and make sure they can walk the talk. Do this on your own not over the phone. Also any amateurish moves like asking for NDAs. Or asking you to build their app for them as a work sample. (Literally have had this happen.)
That's barely a promo listicle.
How many has he ended?
Wherever they want to. It's their platform. If you don't like it, stop using it. This is really easy.
Thanks, I hate it. If you go to school for CS and have to work with people that go through boot camp programs like this, it is a pain. They are elevated script kiddies that don't understand what they are doing. You are going to create a bunch of people that have such limited skill sets that they can be readily outsourced. What happens when technology changes? Will they have the perspective and skills to adapt? This is actually a nightmare. People in a tight spot will inevitably be lured in by the pay, then find themselves beholden for two years? Honestly, screw you scheming silicon valley wraiths. You don't care about the well being of people and just look to manipulate people into building your fortune.
>> there are some personality types or people

Yes, assholes in particular are bad at being managers.

On a more serious / less sarcastic note, you seem to have a preconceived notion of what autism should look like and/or what range of behaviors it entails. There _are_ types of it that would cause one to be an exceptionally bad manager, but there is also a strong possibility (that I think you need to consider) that your manager's flaws weren't caused by autism at all. People with severe autism typically don't make it into management positions in the first place.

I consider myself to be on the spectrum. I'm never the "heart of the party" (nor do I ever feel any desire to go to parties), I find it somewhat anxiety inducing to approach people I don't know well, stuff like that, pretty mild. If it I didn't feel like it impacts my life in a negative way, I'd call this "strong introversion" or the like.

Yet I'm basically the polar opposite of what you've described in your original post (other than being hard-ass on code quality), and I've received glowing praise from my former reports. I give people guidance and autonomy, and let them be adults. And if they aren't, I give them more guidance and perhaps very slightly less autonomy. If they can't function in this set-up, we part ways. This, by the way, happened only once. The person just didn't want the job I think.
"please jump through these assorted hoops while I move the goalpost and ignore your points"
or husband
I've been using [Wire](https://wire.com/en/) very happily for some time now. Great interface, top quality audio/video, good chat, persistent, very secure, open source. I'm surprised it hasn't received more mentions.
Bad choice of phrasing on my part as diameter is ambiguous. Also I could only find a reference for the circumference and was too lazy to derive the diameter from the circumference to avoid the ambiguity by making it clear which diameter I was referring to. (EDIT: Diameter is ~8.6km: `echo "pi=4*a(1);27/pi" | bc -l`.)

It's not the diameter of the tube but the diameter of the circular path the particles follow through the ring. The greater the circumference the less the relative angular acceleration (i.e. shallower curvature). To accelerate particles even faster without giving up most of the extra input energy to bremsstrahlung radiation you must increase the circumference to maintain the same relative angular acceleration.

It's Friday and math[1] and physics is not something I can do off the top of my head so at this point it's better if someone else step in. I won't be able to describe it correctly without relearning half of this stuff myself.

[1] I mean... the algebra and geometry is rather trivial but it'll take some effort for me to correct and make more precise the terminology and formulas.
Complicated deals (hell even simple deals) require complicated concise language. If you use simple language. You will still have to go to court to argue about what 'what' means in the context of your deal.

Legal documents are complicated because we live in a complicated world. And, humans are terrible communicators who have no idea what they want but they somehow "know" what the otherside meant when they agreed to the deal. Even though there are unforeseen circumstances, mistakes, course of conduct that is inconsistent with the contract, and so on.

If it was easy to do, it would be easy to do. Note, legalese is a bad thing, and modern American lawyering is trying to get away from it, but it still doesn't make things simple to understand, just less gobblygook filler language.
This is awesome. Let us see how the economy of districts that offer environments favorable to patent trolls fare.
You can't argue with incredibly irrational fear. Believe me, I've tried. Have you frequently argued with the anti-vaxx or conspiracy crowd, or are you just shouting platitudes for the sake of it?

Because in the end, no evidence you have will be enough.
While this is true, also remember how powerful the US supreme court is. Due to a combination of common law (binding precedent) and an old, difficult to change, ambiguous constitution, the US Supreme Court is arguably even more powerful than the president.
Agreed! I think it's bad design, especially when it comes to other controls. I want to be able to adjust the temperature by a known amount without ever taking my eyes off the road. Knobs with positive clicks do this, screens don't.
I think it's just a bad way to do it, just have your legal team summarize the information and submit it as an Op-Ed to the local newspapers.

Anyways, I'm sure the reason for their closure will become pretty obvious if other business follow suit.
"...aaand now we've fired the people who knew how any of this stuff works, so we don't have a functioning project any more. Oops."
The issue here is that these are parents making decisions for their minor children, not themselves. For example it has been ruled child abuse and illegal for Christian Scientists to deny their minor children life-saving medical treatment.
The other issue here is that herd immunity or lack thereof can put other people's children at risk, not everyone is a responder to vaccination.
it wasn't surveillance software, and couldn't have been repurposed to that end. it was for recording people being interviewed in connection with military police investigations. it even did its best to prevent the investigators from tampering with the recordings. concerning, or not?
If not one of those three things are indepdently attainable on a six figure salary, then yes, the Bay Area is massively unaffordable.
(wearing my project management hat)

Fix the easy problems first, then fix the hard ones.
I can't believe I am reading this tripe on hackernews.
No, it won't. DFW is getting bought out, too.
Good work on Redis. Ruby, however, strikes me as pretty fragile. They can't get it running on Windows, officially, and the third-party Windows installer is hit or miss. Ruby also seems to depend on a specific compiler, gcc. I wouldn't be surprised if it has trouble on ARM.
Technically, there is no pure fusion bomb so I guess in a way you could say everything is fission powered, but that's like saying your gasoline car is battery powered because that's what started the engine.
> He didn't get it, which makes sense since it isn't really a "place" and there are no visible "people" here.

Looks to me like the two-year-old is the one explaining it to you.
WordPress Before 4.9.9 and 5.x Before 5.0.1 Allows Remote Code Execution
It’s the new 1080p card since the 2060 can handle 1440p
I saw a documentary of Bukowski (sorry, I don't remember the title) and it was clear that his life was a spectacular train wreck.

But I also think, if we look into our hearts, all of us, every one of us is winging it.

"We're all going to die, all of us. What a circus! That alone should make us love each another, but it doesn't. We are terrorized and flattened by life's trivialities. We are eaten up by nothing." - Bukowski
I meant it could be reasonable to be concerned.
While I agree with many of those points,
what goes on in the poorer minority-housing
areas of the USA is not conveyable except

by sharing that same housing- and job-
induced distress, if even for a short
while, thus I deem some statements
too broadly applied, amendable perhaps
with further research and thought.
I don't understand, it wasn't surveillance, but it was for recording people?