skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: Fully remote teams, how do you like to receive updates?
I manage a company of ~10 consultants that is 100% remote and am thinking about the best way to communicate company direction, vision and general updates. Folks are spread over various time zones so getting everyone onto a zoom call is going to be tough.

Questions:
1) How do remote workers like to receive company updates like these?
2) As a remote worker, what's valuable from an update perspective?
3) What are some best practices you've all seen in this space?
4) What are some ways companies have done this the wrong way?

Challenges:
- I've found it's difficult to have dialogue over zoom with >5 people/
- Shout outs can be valuable but when someone gets called out for doing a great job it's tough to get the true feedback you'd get in a room with your peers. Normally you just hear crickets on Zoom or folks accidentally stepping on each other.
- Folks may want to view this content at a time that makes sense for them, rather than when we call a meeting.

Idea:
My thought was to do a recording on my own, walking through my presentation then share it with the team in notion or slack where we can turn it into a dialogue or Q&A.
I don't really know anything about 8chan but my limited experience watching videos on YouTube leads me to believe that there are millions of people being radicalized through technology. Young, angry, possibly under-educated people can easily fall down into a rabbit hole of hate like never before.

It's definitely an issue worldwide regardless of race, religion or gender and unfortunately no one has the answer. I don't know if 8chan going down really helps stop radicalization but I don't think it hurts. I also don't think it's an affront to free speech if a hosting provider stops doing business with them. If the US government started arresting posters on 8chan that's most definitely a concern but losing your Cloudflare service or hosting is not breaking any first amendment rights.
In Cologne, I have never seen light rail arrive on time, and I've used it daily for two years.
The US government, at least, has explicit restrictions on how it can censor speech. They're required to abide by the 1st amendment, and even have requirements for due process and such.

By contrast, none of the corporations that host the sites you use daily have any such restrictions. If Google wants to delist your website, that's too bad for you. If AWS no longer wants to host it, you have no recourse. If Comcast decides to block you, there's nothing you can do.

Do you want the corporations that control everything you see on the internet to be more neutral? That will require oversite by the government (probably the FCC specifically).

If you want to be really cynical, you could say the government is controlled by corporate money... but then what does it matter?

IMO, blind cynicism isn't helping anyone, and the government is at least ostensibly supposed to do what's in the interest of the nation, and has some limits about what it can and cannot censor. I'd rather that, than an amoral corporation motivated only by money.
Doesn't always work, look at Switzerland. They keep using this strategy to minimize the impact of the strength of the CHF versus all the other currencies, and currently Switzerland is holding more than 750 billions of $ of currency reserve (only Japan and China hold more...). Desplite this, CHF is still gaining value versus all the other currencies.
I'm not sure if you are serious, but if you are can I suggest that you don't go into the park unless you know what you are doing?
I don't accept your town-square analogy, but even if it were apt, not everyone is welcome in the town square. If you're endorsing visions of racist violence and supporting those who actually act out racist violence then you'll be removed from the public square.
For a while in Germany I was paying 30€/month for 10Mbps. Meanwhile other EU countries gave you 1Gbps for ~10€/month. Germany is definitely at the lower end of internet infrastructure.
Tis true. No one NEEDS free speech. Why don't you just state the obvious opinion? The First amendment was a mistake.
A company selling compute resources to run web servers is not even close to in a monopoly position
Pretty much. It's a problem anyone doing privacy conscious software is going to run into, if it works it will be used by people generally agreed to be morally detestable (eg: child abusers or human traffickers). In a similar vein I think people will need to in general get comfortable with the fact that some technology will be used by bad groups and it will make it harder for law enforcement to catch and stop people but the benefits for everyone else out weighs the downside.
I mean it's Audi I'm sure they can afford higher speeds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_effect
Evolution of Timekeeping in Windows
Thank you for the defense, it's exactly the kind of situation I'm arguing for.

I think it's also important to note the context of who is doing this kind of sprints. Does he have a family? Does he have other engagements? Does he have other health issues?

It's not for everyone, but I believe in my case, timing them properly, recovering properly afterwards and reaping the benefits has worked in my favor.

I might have given the impression that I am advocating for regular such sprints when in fact I have done this rarely, at pivotal moments, with years in between them.
Pretty standard. Rocket Lab:https://www.rocketlabusa.com/book-my-launch/
Facebook Closer to AR Glasses with Brain Implant That Decodes Neural Activity
> Users care about consistency of stile inside one app, not app-style vs. system-style.

Do you have a source for this claim? This conflicts with the results of some UX studies I've seen.
The point is recessions aren’t opportunities for everyone and can be extremely damaging. If you have to spend that 50c on the dollar, you’re doubly screwed. You don’t get to buy at a discount and your savings are depleted much faster - twice as fast actually.
Tons of benchmarks at blog.blazingdb.com

Check it out, it's fast.
Nobody is talking about your discussion forum.

Rather this is an issue for internet backbone companies like AWS or Cloudflare. If any of these groups wants to get into the censorship business, I want them to do it in a heavily regulated environment than guarantees accountability, transparency, bright line rules, right to appeal, and due process. Same for ISPs (many of us fought hard for net neutrality for this reason).

And I feel the same if the large platform monopoly companies like Google, Facebook, or Twitter, want to be in the censorship business.

Not regulating their censorship practices is incompatible with us keeping democratic government for very much longer.
> Yes, compared to a censorship coming from companies.

This is literally the exact opposite intention of the 2nd amendment.

> If you have a different position, could you explain why censorship coming from CloudFlare is better than censorchip coming from US government?

Cloudflare isn't an entity supported (e.g. paid) by the general populace. CF not hosting their site isn't censoring their content, they are just actively choosing not to do business with them. People on 8chan can certainly say the same exact thing on any other medium (pen/paper, facebook, etc) and no one is stopping them from doing so.
Just wish China government would agree to the demands on intellectual property and tech patents transfer. Getting to a deal could be really easy if China stops the intellectual property and transfer requirements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–United_States_trade_war
"The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means."
I once punished my then-seventh-grader by locking all the apps on his iPhone for a week with a passcode. A few days later he forgets he's been punished and sends a text in front of me. "Hey! I thought I locked that down!" Turns out he found the instructions online to backup his phone and change the passcode.

It took a bit of effort and technical understanding, and since I didn't even know it was possible, let alone that easy, he didn't get in trouble. (Though I told him if he did it again, he'd be in Serious Trouble, which is the top level of trouble above big and major).

I'm a geek - if you can out-tech me, you win.
Don’t forget to account for taxes when evaluating the CD rate as well! Compare apples to apples.
> So it ran as a honeypot?

I don't think so. What seems more likely to me is that one or more of the following is the case:

1) The "fast-flux" nature of imageboards makes it difficult for law enforcement to effectively respond to illegal content hosted on them.

2) Deleting content upon reports places board administrators technically within the boundaries of the law.

3) The arm's-length separation between the owners of 8ch, the users who operate boards on the site, and the users who post content on the site allows the owners to claim a lack of responsibility for that content.
> I'll be quite honest, I don't know what a "good" solution here is, but I really don't think this is it.

At the very least a good post-mortem analysis would be nice.

I guess I'll settle for watching the finger-pointing dumpster fire.
GP is correct: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/foment
You're free to bet $22M that they won't punish you for not waiting 8-14 weeks for their permission.
Google has ~100,000 employees at this point. This is the story of a single manager within the company. When you have that many people at the company, there are going to be people that make bad choices, and then the story will fall under the umbrella of "Google" and make the news.

If this was a single small 25-100 person company, it would (likely) not get any notice.
Engineers are capable of launching things into space, but the hamburger menu is only half visible on my IPhone XS running safari. What’s harder and more complex these days, rocket science or front-end development?
> It can be an end itself if you find that any limits are prone enough to corruption to not be tolerated.

I understand that some people see things that way. And I'm saying that it's an insufficient, naïve, and (in our zeitgeist) actually unethical position.
Stern was broadcasting on public airwaves where the FCC sets a low threshold for "public decency". This isn't really comparable.
They are definitely in the need of extra cash from smallsat market.
> The vast majority of killers aren't aiming to kill a lot of people.

The amount of low-level carnage that happens daily in the US from either incompetent, negligent, or malicious gun owners is quite impressive:

* https://twitter.com/Well_Regulated_/status/11575509903437127...

* https://twitter.com/Well_Regulated_/status/11578845404777594...

* https://twitter.com/Well_Regulated_/status/11581452335924346...

* https://twitter.com/Well_Regulated_/status/11582078708082647...

A total ban on firearms isn't even necessary; just a filter on the dumb asses and hot heads:

* https://www.vox.com/2018/11/13/17658028/massachusetts-gun-co...
I once got offered a job in finance that was double my Netflix salary. I didn't take it because:

1) I'd have to live in NYC

2) I'd have to use their super locked down Windows machine.

3) I would only be allowed to talk to people in my department, and would never even be allowed to associate with the people making the trading algorithms, even though the job was to build them an infrastructure for back-testing their algorithms.

4) Their company had the opposite of transparency -- everything was so locked down it would be nearly impossible to be successful at the job, which was by it's nature very cross-sectional.

At some point the money just doesn't matter that much anymore. Once you have enough to cover all your needs and few wants a year, more money has a quickly diminishing return.

Other than the vast amounts of money, I didn't see anything interesting about working finance.
Genius, if they are using it to buy gold or bitcoin.
What does L-12 and L-6 from the pricing section refer to?
Sure, it's a tragedy of the commons. As a company I want to drive my labor costs down (all input costs, actually). But I want to be able to sell into a market where enough people have income (up to now typically from selling their labor) to buy my goods.

The pool of consumers with disposable income is the commons that no one maintains.
I went to exactly one company because of the pay. For me it was a horrible choice, when my only motivation for working somewhere is the paycheck, I don't do my best work. Since that experience I've turned down big offers from companies where I knew from talking to them that they would not score well on my evaluation.

In the long term its better for me and for them that we don't have to go through the dance of 'why aren't you giving us more?' and the ultimate resolution will always be us parting ways.
From the article:

"In the United States, Activision Blizzard has recently settled a transfer pricing dispute with tax authorities for $345m"

It looks like Blizzard was guilty enough of tax evasion that they had to settle the case for 345m$.

If you have to settle a case for 345m$, then you are guilty enough for me to condemn you.
> What irked me is that CloudFlare was the one who makes the decision to do censorship.

It's their property, and they have an absolute right to decide how their property is to be used. The right to freedom of association is the most fundamental human right there is.
I keep thinking about how subsistence farming was the de facto for most people for most of history.

I wonder how many people would choose that option over living on the streets if access to farmland were easier.
Depends upon their involvement with the government that allows them their market position. In the particular case of CloudFlare I don't actually know what the involvement is, and would default to agreeing with you. But I do know some private companies often mentioned in relation to First Amendment that there is some level of involvement, but I think the courts have largely not taken a critical look at what is going on and is still quite inconsistent on the matter (which should surprise no one who compares the pace of law and the pace of technology).
Launch date minus 12 or 6 months.
This wild speculation of yours is based on how the "agent's" pants matched their "snickers" ?
Life Sciences VCs that incubate and spin-out their own companies put serious muscle behind the startups, in two main areas: money and leadership. The article notes the first, going on to suggest large upfront financing is no longer necessary, but glosses over the second. In biotech it is still very much the status quo to have seasoned execs leading startups. Not because younger founders are incapable, but rather this is what pharma execs want to see, and have connections with. It's hard enough for a startup to get pilots and deals with pharmacos, exponentially so if the founders just took CS 270 with the CEO's grandkid.
> In the long run it's only dividends that matter.

Strong disagree. I put my money into other companies because those companies create more money with that money than I can.

I don't give money to companies for them to give it back to me. I give money to companies because their investment decisions are superior than my investment decisions.

Amazon can spend $5000 on new computers (and make more than $5000 back) in the long term. Better than anything I put $5000 in on. All shares are created from either the Initial Public Offering (which raised money for the company), or secondary offerings (an additional raising round after the IPO).
> People are doing the "yada yada not entitled to a platform" thing

cloudfront is not really a platform. It's more like a CDN, or WAF. I think your point is worth discussing, just seems to link less to the context of 8chan.

> We need to allow people on the edges of the spectrum to say what they want even if it is without merit. Extreme speech is what prevents normal speech from being censored.

I wonder if the anonymous portion of these boards is what makes them so toxic?

Plenty of fringe forums for example have account names. Frequent posters are known and have reputations, if a known person says something controversial, they can be challenged by others, known or not. I think it really just allows for discussions to happen in good faith. Half the time I think some of the most toxic discussions are not even between any two people but are actually between tens of different unique trolls who may not even be following the thread at all. Maybe bots, who knows.
Why Antora Is the Leading Technical Writing Platform
You're conflating things that shouldn't be conflated.

1) Your goal in investing

2) Heuristics to achieve that goal

The goal is to maximize your investments over a time, as I stated. Yes, you're absolutely right that holding is a phenomenal heuristic. But that doesn't mean it's always the correct thing to do.
Let me tell you about slow internet.

In Ilorin, Nigeria, I can get 500kbps on good days. Most times, the speeds hover around 100kbps. I can hardly watch YouTube at anything more than 360p. Even that resolution buffers too much sometimes.
All of this said: money isn't everything. Actually for us it's not a top priority. Our kids, having a healthy work/life balance, doing work which is positive to society.

That's way more important.

So we do leave a lot of money on the table: my wife priorities quality of care to the bottom line for her patients. I have chosen to bill way less the last two years so I can help with community work, help with my father-in-law who had a stroke (and cancer) and to invest in building my own products.

In the future I might either stop or do software development/consultancy for charities/community stuff. I don't need a big car or lots of environment destroying vacations to be fulfilled in life.
A big military isn't profitable for most businesses, who have to pay for it with corporate taxes.
Does an individual have an inalienable right to run a web forum?
I really, really, think this needs to be discussed.
Look at perl6 grammars.
And the reason we had free speech absolutism was that no one should be able to dictate what the proper "just and ethical outcomes" should be. Is today's morality the end of all things? By locking down speech, what developments will we prevent?
The arguments are generally over how private entities with relatively control of communications are regulated, not that the entities are private.

You can only pull the "They're a private entity - just choose not to do business with them" card until they're large enough to the point were you don't have an option (free market forces stop working), at which point regulators generally step in.
There’s a reason it’s called wilderness. One should have basic orienteering skills if they venture away from the popular, touristy locations. If things really do go awry, bring (and use) an EPIRB.

I would never rely on a cellular phone for safety in the wilderness. Cellular service and geolocation was never be 100% reliable, and batteries die. A paper map, a compass, basic skills, and knowledge of one’s limits go a long way.
Ask HN: Interested in learning k8s and willing to beta test our platform?
We're building a new hands-on kubernetes learning platform and it'd be great if somebody interested in learning k8s would like to try us out.

Maybe some of you remember us, we had a Show HN months ago as Magic Sandbox and since then we've been building on the concept. We're still rough around the edges, but we're happy with how things are shaping up and we'd really apprecate some feedback.

If you're interested, have a look at the short tech demo video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMUY_cAmw and let me know to get a signup link (or sign up at msb.com)
These were just:

`<a href="our_twitter_page"><img src="/img/locally_hosted_image.png"></a>`
I'm always amazed Google management tolerates things like internal message boards aimed at letting employees create Memes on company time.

On the "evil point haired boss" level it seems these types of things like their internal message boards cause a lot of trouble for the company.

On the less evil side it seems like employees waste a lot of time on these internal sites and all the internal social justice stuff.

Maybe Google just seems to get it's dirty laundry aired out. I've been working in this field for 20 years not including my internships in college and I've never worked any company that seemed to have as much of this weirdness as Google seems to.

Maybe it's an artifact of them having a money printing machine and then a ton of employees who seem to work on items other than the money printing machine which don't really matter to the company's bottom line.

From the outside it just seems like a never ending series of stories about ultra-toxic management.. all of which greatly exceed anything I've seen in my career.
I think it is ridiculous to hold the position that you aren't allowed to block ANY content if you don't want to be held liable for things people say on your platform.

We can't hold a platform liable for content because it is technically impossible to perfectly block infringing content, so we realize it is unfair to hold platforms accountable.

However, this doesn't mean a platform can't make ANY effort to control what content is on their system without losing this protection. YouTube doesn't lose safe harbor protection just because they have contentid...
That's true when you're looking at a statistic like guns per capita [0]. When you're talking about number of registered guns, however, the only state with more guns than California is Texas, which falls at number 3 on the list of states with the most mass shootings [1].

I do still believe that having more guns around does tend to lead to more mass shootings, along with other forms of gun related homicide.

[0] - https://www.thoughtco.com/gun-owners-percentage-of-state-pop...
[1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/811541/mass-shootings-in...
So the campaigns against free speech show results. The wheels are in motion, the dominoes are falling. Funny how here on HN the use of the term "free speech absolutists"/"free speech absolutism" has absolutely skyrocketed for example. So are these the last days of the internet? 4chan is still there, voat too (although barely) - but I don't know how much longer. 100% legal sites are taken offline for absolutely no reason at all besides being on the "wrong side". And the internet is cheering. What a sad time
Gannett and GateHouse combine to become largest news publisher in U.S.
We agree. But note that this is in the context of the following exchange:

>> they don't have the right to print money the way a central bank does.
> Yes, they do.

Where the response ignores that that limit exists (may not be relevant in practice but it is in theory: a commercial bank can only give the loans that it can support with its existing reserves or those it may have access to, while for a central bank sky is the limit).
The one exception some people have to dollar-cost averaging (investing a fixed amount regularly) is "I have a giant pile of savings and I want to buy into the market". Some people advocate still putting it all in right away and investing for the long term; others advocate gradually moving into investments, such as investing 20% a year for five years.

Either way, though, you should start investing that 10% of your income; the only question is what to do with what you've already saved. You could, for instance, match that 10% every month from your existing savings. That way, you're not dumping a pile of money into stocks all at once.

(Also, in case you don't already have a specific plan for investing: index funds with very low overhead, such as Vanguard's VTSAX.)