skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From first-hand experience, I cannot stress this enough: HR's job is to protect management. Period. Full stop.

Having going through this type of situation (high-performer until on the wrong side of someone in management), I really didn't understand things until someone pointed something out. I was asked: who hired the manager? The purpose of a manager is to handle the details of the goals of hirer.

A musician hires a manager to handle the details book gigs, vet contracts, etc. If the musician doesn't like the work being done, the manager is fired. If the manager thinks he or she can get a better result from someone else, they fire the assistants, caterers, etc. The musician doesn't care, only that results are generated.

The senior execs hire managers for the exact same purpose: deal with the details to get projects completed for them. If you play ball, you'll get the rewards. Mess with that agenda, you'll get canned.

The biggest disappointment I had was how I was treated. They make you feel like it's you letting them down. They dangle in front of you all the ways out: "we're inclusive, we want to you have a great work environment, we have these resources for you to grow". And, I was there for all of it: the manager who would tell you exactly how to handle things only to lie in a HR meeting the exact opposite.

The big hint should be the HR title: Human Resources. A resource is explored, extracted, and exhausted. HR's job is provide for management, not the employees.
ETFs, the index ones most people use anyway, just track the market and do so very closely. There's no market timing effect from buying or selling the ETFs.
Is the present alternative, where sites aren't allowed to keep existing (or, assuming they find a new host, "have to switch hosts a few times") after encouraging three ethnic massacres, really worse? Is that specific line really going too far?
This video series singlehandedly inspired me to delve into hardware (i'm a software guy). It's INCREDIBLY well done, and easy to follow.

Fast forward to now, when I've blown several hundred dollars on electronics supplies lol. Plus Ben has a great voice to listen to, so there's also that.
That's... not the reason.
That does look impressive! I'm tempted to check how well this runs in Wine (since I'm not a Windows user)
This isn't "a little".
This goes back to my original point about visibility of engineering work. Clearly, one of the biggest problems that California high speed rail has to solve is buying land for the track. But nobody sees a few land purchases as "building high speed rail". Until there is a concrete pylon with some train tracks on top, people think nothing is being done. But of course, without that pre-work, nothing can be done.
I'm guessing it's from people spending too much time at the company and having poor work/private life separation.
After my internet was cut for five days and my smart house became super dumb, I adopted that rule too.

I'd love to know what products you are using.
DC Motor Driver Using Power Mosfets [PWM Controlled, 30A Half Bridge]
I have not had fun with DTAG - they seem to adamantly refuse to peer like most other networks and demand additional cost for bandwidth requested by their users..
Picking a lock remotely seems rather pointless.
some of the individual tesla stockholders might be bought into the "changing the world" story. but i don't think it's the 'vast majority' as you claim.

plus most of tesla is owned by institutional money: pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, mutual funds. i can guarantee that money very much cares about economic outcome.

most tesla shareholders are NOT the fanboys as you claim.
I wonder, can they A/B test alternatives with that time machine ? Would they settle for a comfortable 'small' one time lottery winnings? Or try and create a dynasty for a longer lived family/institution. Also the person in the future, would they 'join' their new history ?
Wow thanks for going through my comment!

Definitely appreciate more people funding projects like this. Heck, hopefully I'll be applying with an idea like this in the future too!

My worry/question is, what steps are you taking to vet the eventual scientific feasibility of these ideas? My main thesis is that biotech ideas and projects are fundamentally different from tech in the sense that any prototype (less than a clinical trial) is not a real prototype so some method needs to exist to account for that in the evaluation.
https://cake.co has been quite good for AMA-style interviews lately (which they call "Panels"). Victoria Taylor (/u/chooter) who used to do a lot of the big AMAs on Reddit is working there now, and they're doing them in a more moderated way where people have to submit questions instead of just being a frantic free-for-all.

Here's a page listing the recent panels: https://www.cake.co/topics/GQQ9C1V/cake-panel
> What a bunch of horse crap. Being told what to think, what to buy, who to vote for, how to feel.

While much education in the US may have been reduced to this, your quote does not represent a proper education in theory or practice. A proper education teaches you how to think rather than what to think. Note that critical thinking is typically a key component in such education programs.

And yes, I think critical thinking, general literacy, and media literacy are critical for a healthy functioning democracy. The fact that many/most denizens of the US do not have access to this type of education is an incredible weak link in our democracy.
From Wikipedia:

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by a government,[5] private institutions, and corporations.

In this case as far as I can tell the server provider (not CF) was repulsed by the site content. I support that choice and the company ability to make it. Still it is censorship.

There is bad censorship and good censorship.
> that isolation allows managers to take emotions out of a situation to make the most rational decisions for the business

I know you're playing devil's advocate, but to be on the side of angels: that isolation doesn't promote more rational decisions, only decisions absent a perspective of the company. To the extent that low-level employees don't have valuable information for the business' success, the isolation does promote more rational thinking (where that extent is most often 0).

I've never seen a situation where low-level employee wisdom was rightly quashed by boardroom decisions.
I remember reading about an anti-trust case against Microsoft in the 90s since they included Microsoft Explorer with the OS. They were forced to separate the two, but Chromebook does the same thing without consequences. The rules for Antitrust keep changing and companies are integrating vertically and horizontally quickly before the law catches up.
> This time around...there's actually NOT a lot of exuberance.

It's always in the best interest of the people who benefit from a bubble to make such driving factors less visible, so the bubble can continue longer - and hindsight is, as they say, 20/20.

Which is to say... just because you can't see the causes yet, doesn't mean that they're not there. The Fed is happily handing out cash and people are borrowing large amounts of it to shuffle around while they can. There are lots of areas where people are making what normally would be considered risky bets which keep paying off because the economy is strong, and they just leverage themselves in the extreme to take advantage of that.

So whether it's another real estate collapse or another SV-funded startup collapse or some other kind of collapse that isn't yet apparent, after the other shoe does finally drop we'll be kicking ourselves for not noticing how bad things had gotten on the way there.
> beliefs or behaviors that exclude

Exclude, as in a company that excludes a website from their platform? Simple huh.
Facebook is building tech to read your mind
That's my question. Can photons actually "hit" electrons?

I remember Feynman diagrams with electrons and photons, but that was about photons <-> electron, positron pairs.

Free electrons accelerated laterally by magnetic fields emit ynchrotron radiation. But does that work in reverse? I've never heard of that. But again, IANAP.
For the people down voting this post, please see https://xkcd.com/1053/

The formula is like that because there are 3 bits of information in the Severity Level field: it has 8 values (0->7), and 2^3 = 8.

Multiplying the Facility Number by 8 (or, equivalently, by 2^3 or by left shifting the number by 3), frees up the bottom 3 bits.

This is the same operation as you are suggesting to do in base-10: multiply by 10^3 to free up the bottom 3 digits, but for base-2 (i.e. in binary).

When the Facility Number has been moved out of the bottom 3 bits you can add in the Severity Level and get a combined value for both.

It's true that it's not very intuitive when they then render the resulting number in base-10 / decimal, however, it does get you the most compact encoding given the size of the two fields.

As another poster says, if the number had been rendered in octal (base-8) then the Severity Level would be the right-most number in the series.
The problem I ran into using Pis was that 3D hardware didn't seem to want to play well with Qt. Unfortunately since using 3D acceleration for UIs is all the rage almost nothing worked without a lot of tinkering (and even then).

I'm pretty sure this has changed since the last major Raspbian update, but the Pi still isn't quite at parity with more mainstream desktop hardware.
Shares of individual companies also frequently crash for reasons totally unrelated to economic pullbacks, and thus none of those things are guaranteed to happen simply because a share now costs less.
They all do this. If it’s not stats it’s how they report a story or the story they decide to run of the issues they decide are what people want, etc.

Only now it’s more blatant and they don’t care. In the old days these things happened in back room deals, so it’s not new. What’s new is the acceptance and willful glossing over of this behavior.
How is your CDN abandoning you not deplatforming you? Can they get another CDN? When they do I'll give the site a look-see.
Ubiquiti Networks have a product which allows you to set up your own controller and storage. Cloud features are optional.

https://www.ui.com/unifi-video/unifi-video-camera-g3/
>Allocating resources to an industry for which there is infinite demand for - staying alive - will be difficult.

Will it? The NHS does an ok job. Not perfect by any means, but much better than the US.

I don't demand perfection, just something significantly better than a situation where 15% of the population are uninsured. Do you think that is so terribly difficult?
Did I just get downvoted for asking for source? Really? I know political subjects are always controversial on HN but I expected better from here.
How legal is it to give false information to a bank?
Issues similar to this have been brought up in the courts many times, and they almost invariably (sexual obscenity is one exception) yield lopsided results in favor of the 'offender.' One random recent case is Elonis vs the United States [1]. Elonis made statements online suggesting a desire to kill his estranged wife, later on kindergarten children, and then after that an FBI agent that had visited him in relation to the threat against children.

He claimed it was art and he was only expressing himself and not attempting to threaten or intimidate the individuals/groups in question, even though he was aware they would likely interpret it as threats. This is really a million times more threatening that some vague expression against an ethnicity. The supreme court ruled 8-1 in his favor. The US Supreme Court is extremely supportive of free speech, including the most detestable.

As an aside the links on the scotusblog are extremely high quality and provide lots of plain language analysis of the technical points. A phenomenal resource for any case or issue you're ever interested in learning about the legal nuances behind. For instance this [2] is their coverage of the 'gay cake' case.

[1] - https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/elonis-v-united-...

[2] - https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/masterpiece-cake...
I literally see no reason to compare them. Not one.

To answer: 1. true 2. agree.

So What?

The only thing you are doing is painting a romantic ideal of antifa as freedom fighters, robin hoods of the people. Stop. They answer violence with violence.
> I pay <$2 a month for about 1.5GB 4G every DAY! Speeds generally vary from crap to 11 Mbps

Of course. But, you have to take into account the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) to get the true picture. According to OECD data, Germany's PPP is 0.76 while India's is 18.128 (2019). On an average, there's a factor of 23.85 until prices reach a parity between them. Therefore, just because you pay ~ 2$ a month doesn't make it cheap for India.

https://data.oecd.org/conversion/purchasing-power-parities-p...
Your reply is a straw man.

The original statement was building consensus that "reasonable people" agree killing {some group} is intolerant.
I have a friend who is both blind and deaf: audio is also out. It is possible to use a braille terminal to access the web, so while I don't know if he uses the internet, it is possible.

Okay, he isn't really a friend, I only met him once. We have a friend in common who speaks sign language and was able to translate. Seeing him read sign language with his hand was interesting.
I should've been more explicit - I haven't experienced any toxicity at Google. However, due to its internal communication culture Google is far more prone to blowups of well-publicized scandals than other companies of similar size. I'll edit my post to make it clearer.
It's easy to talk in broad generalities, but let's be specific.

What, exactly, do you think people should have a platform to say, but are denied by YouTube and Patreon?
Well we know the reason why Light says he can't do that is that "the person wouldn't know the name". But you're right in actuality that would allow for "person guesses the name, and is correct". And I think that is a loophole.

Let me put this another way. I think the following would be considered a valid Death Note command.

"Person flips a coin 100 times in a row, and gets heads every time".

Now how is that different from

"Person runs an RNG digit generator 100 times in a row, and gets 9s every time".

Then

"Person runs an RNG digit generator 100 times in a row, the 100 digit number is exactly divisible by 123456".

Then

"Person runs an RNG digit generator 100 times in a row, 2^x-1 of that number is prime".

And if this is all iffy, let me propose an alternative. Let's assume (I'm not 100% sure of this) that we can verify large prime within 23 days. Heck, build a data center to do this if we have to.

"Person runs RNG to generate x such that 2^x-1 is prime. Uses machine and verifies that it is indeed prime. Dies of joy."

You can similarly use this to crack hashes, etc.
The fact that this all seems to be getting worse as more and more people are deplatformed from more mainstream carriers like Facebook and Twitter (where rational voices can chime in from time to time) bolster your suspicion that they're just driven to the more and more extreme places that let them in.
I'm not sure how you drew that conclusion from what I wrote, when I said almost the exact opposite!

My argument was that bureaucracy, thoughtlessly imposed, was damaging for projects, and that it should be kept to the bare minimum...
If you know how to do this you should be making bundles of money trading other people's money. If it's your own money and you don't have any particular reason you think you have a deep insight don't fall into the trap of thinking you see patterns where they don't exist. Our brains pattern match way too much. Retail investors with actual insight into markets have to be one in a million or less.
Reason #1: Burning bridges.

Reason #2: You are helping a company for free, essentially after they have stopped paying you. A company with whom you no longer want a relationship.
There are people living in 3rd world tropical countries who commonly experience 40C who might disagree with your "dead from heat exposure".
I think the key mitigation is:

> "I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument"

But I understand your point. To that end, attacking illegal immigrants would be "intolerant". But what about advocating their arrest and deportation?
Can't believe you're not allowed to threaten to murder people these days. Everyone's so sensitive!
> Abortionist? Intolerant of life, or of religion.

Forcing people to abort would be intolerant of life or religion, but that is not what abortionists do or are.

> Pro-life? Intolerant of women's rights.

The pro-life position of forcing women to not have abortions is indeed intolerant of their rights. Whatever their own reasons (religion or otherwise), they are their own and not of their targets.

Thank you for providing such clear examples; it is clear one of these is actually intolerant.
I'd expect they'll be AIs in 2040 that'll be able to figure out who he is by writing samples, at least. And the rest of us here on Hacker News, too.
Like I said before, I'm critical of censorship. I used to be a free speech absolutist. I think I'm not quite an absolutist any more (using 8chan for years disillusioned me a little), but I still think censorship is rarely justified. China is of course terrible.

That said, I don't buy the slippery slope argument. My country bans holocaust denial, and though I think that ideally it shouldn't, it hasn't actually slipped down the slope and the situation seems stable. 8chan currently bans certain content that it didn't in the past (it's now much stricter against photographs of children) and it's still incredibly permissive.

If 8chan stopped allowing posts that promote shootings it wouldn't end up becoming like China. I don't think it would lead to other more draconian restrictions.

The harm of censorship usually outweighs the benefit (if any), but not in this case, I think. It's probably ok for 8chan to change its policies a little - and I do mean just a little.
I have been thinking about solutions for a few months now. However, there doesn’t seem to be a solution that does not also create other problems (e.g. a system capable of detecting violent crime—or predicting it—is likely to encroach on privacy).

Another thought is that, systems that are/can be designed to recognize intent and predict events are (or would be) used to increase capital/revenue/market-share/etc.

I understand that people want to be both “free” and “safe.” But the conversation and/or conception of the relationship between freedom and security seems to be a zero-sum game.

I’m interested in what others think about this. Is it necessary that we exchange one for the other?
Ask HN: Early stage employees, how much was your equity worth?
Please shed some light with numbers about equity, employee number, exit & timeline
That's impossible to tell and the US is the richest nation on Earth, the Federal government provides financial assistance to states.
I think we should call it hypercompetitive instead of anticompetitive.
> Right, which is why I'm baffled someone worried about free speech would be happy with giving them that power.

Ok, I'll try again. Corporations can actively censor you. The government is more restricted in what speech it can stomp on.

> Sure there is - you go elsewhere.

How do you "go elsewhere" when Comcast refuses to allow customers to see your website?

How do you "go elsewhere" when google delists you?

If 8ch gets hosted in a foreign country after being delisted from google and refused by US hosts, that's censorship. That's an infringement on freedom of speech.

If you're ok with that freedom of speech, then you are saying that it's ok for corporations to censor. That's a coherent stance... but one with which I vehemently disagree. I don't want ANYONE to have the power to censor, but with multinational mega-corps controlling the vast majority of the internet, that's simply not possible.

Considering the fact that internet providers and online services control the vast majority of the content I consume, I'd much rather have some regulation that limits what these companies can do.
Who's talking about North Korea? We're talking about South Korea, Japan, and the entire western Europe.

> If you trade all of your freedoms for securities, you too can have a totalitarian regime that keeps you safe.

Totalitarian regime usually have worse security because nobody can criticize the supreme leader and they can simply make an inconvenient news item (like an unsolved murder) go away. Your slippery slope isn't even in the correct direction.

No society is perfect, but it's quite possible to have a safe and free society. But you should be willing to make reasonable compromises instead of arguing from centuries-old aphorisms.
I watch my political debates on public service. In my last election I never saw a political ad in social media (nor on TV). Are you saying newspapers and TV can't choose whose messages they peddle? I can't relate to the problem. Perhaps your argument is an argument for a stronger public service? Or some laws actually requiring politicians in certain races to be represented? I can't say I like the latter.

To answer your question more specifically: if Facebook is like a TV-channel, then they should be regulated like one: channels can broadcast what they want. If facebook is more like the TV medium then it's a different story. Then you can't have it arbitrarily cut access to certain interests. BUT in that case it's also probably "too big to have that responsibility in private hands" and something should perhaps be done about that (just like some banks may be "too big to fail" and as such can't be responsible for the economic damage they cause).
Cameron's World (2015)
By what measure is Germany's growth in population large? I get that 1 year is too short. Give us an example where it looks like it's growing fast. We'll wait.
This is a strange take. Monopolies are decidedly anti-capitalist, stifling growth and competition. I'd recommend reading up on antitrust law origins as consumer abuse is common as well.
Yeah, seriously. People are so sensitive about murder threats these days, I mean come on.

Back in my day, when you threatened to send a bomb to a tv station, they put you in a prime time slot!
And to add, the courts may overturn based on speech it deems are not true threats, and thus protected.
What better venue than among the thoughtful problem-solvers to work through the feelings that are engulfing everyone else in blindness?
Who are those hypothetical people that would do those horrible things given the opportunity. I hate hypotheticals.
> Once you have enough to cover all your needs and few wants a year, more money starts to get interesting, because then it goes directly into building financial independence.

I agree with you in theory, but even if you made $200,000 more a year than you need, how many years will you have to work at a crappy high paying job to save up enough to do any of those things?

The only way to build that kind of wealth is either getting lucky on some stock options, being rich to start, or being young enough where $100,000 will carry you for a couple of years.
Europe is edging towards making post-car cities a reality