skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not always, when I got out of school I just went to work.

It helped that my wife was doing similar work (she was a computer programmer) and we compared notes about our jobs. Now I personally think getting married was a good choice in my life but for this conversation it was extremely valuable to have someone at a different company with whom I could be completely honest and exchange thoughts and ideas with. When my wife left Xerox for Tandem one of the books she got was called "Divorcing a Company." We both read it. I would say that book was when I stopped looking at companies being a "one way" kind of thing, either they want me or they don't.

The book's thesis was that you are in a relationship with the company you work for, it can be a good relationship, and it can be an abusive relationship. Looking at your choice to leave, and the things that keep you from leaving, as you might a divorce from a spouse, can put into perspective who is more "at fault."

I started thinking about why I was working at a company more critically at that point and then as time progressed developed a set of things that were the key factors in my job satisfaction.

To this point, "They're much happier to lose ICs than change." I agree completely. And that is why for me it was important to accept that people who won't see a reasonable request for what it is, are not worth wasting your time with. I doubt I will die thinking "I wish I had worked for an abusive boss longer" :-)
How did you find out they're laying down fiber? I'm wondering if there's a resource to check, and if there is any way to indicate interest other than the "give us your email and we'll notify you" form most providers have. I live less than a mile from a large apartment building that has fiber, yet my single family home development doesn't have it.
Actions like these unite communities under a common threat. Voices of moderation and internal division is reduced as they fight for their common space. The people who are saying "it's us v.s. society at large" are lionized and the people who want to criticize violent or hateful acts are ignored.

The community will find a way around this, there's no doubt. But now they're more radical and more threatened than they used to be. The harder it is to get to the community the more insulated and radical it becomes as fewer outside voices come in. Only the most dedicated continue on, and those are the people you want to deradicalize more than anyone.

These boards have been open to everyone, if others wanted to talk to these people and provide counter arguments they're free to do so. It's the only thing that's going to go a long way in dissolving toxicity in these communities.
There's a lot of research into anti-Plasmodium drugs in general (because they can be used in treating infected humans), but none have come close to being usable for general environmental dispersal that would try to eliminate the wild reservoir. Mixture of cost, resistance developing too quickly, and effects on other wildlife, so doing something like dropping quinine into forests from planes has never been a real option. This is in general very unlikely to work for diseases that have a significant non-human reservoir. Smallpox was able to be eliminated because it exclusively infects humans, so you only need to eradicate it from human hosts, not also from another extremely populous host like wild mosquitoes.

Another approach is to try to genetically engineer mosquitoes resistant to infection and have them replace the unmodified carrier versions, but that's essentially just a variant of the idea to eradicate the carrier-type mosquitoes: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/enginee...
What, credit card companies sell customers' purchase history?
> Really, what, but the amusement of edgy people, does humanity gain from entertaining these dark conversations

I write short stories, some are EXTREMELY dark. None deal with murder but I have done a rape story... well the two were lovers and he thought she wanted to be raped, so he did it. But still very dark no?
So Cloudflare went from hosting everything that's not illegal, to kicking people out who claim that Cloudflare supports their ideology, to kicking people out with less than a day's notice on a Sunday if a forum attracts user-generated content that Cloudflare doesn't like - and the rules for content that they don't tolerate may change on similarly short notice with no warning before they decide to terminate your account (most likely based on "has enough media outrage happened").

Also, they stated that they were "cooperating around monitoring potential hate sites on our network", which makes me wonder what kind of monitoring we're talking about here, and whether and where else they share traffic that they're proxying.

Regardless of what you think about 8chan (I'm not familiar with the site but there seems to be consensus that it's a cesspool), these points are interesting to note.
"Studies have shown that journal editors prefer reviewers of the same gender, that women are underrepresented in the peer review process, and that reviewers tend to be influenced by demographic factors like the author’s gender or institutional affiliation. "

Most venues are double blind, so reviewers wouldn't know about the latter things. Having fewer women in the reviewer pool is unfortunate, but it's hard to see how it would effect the mean review quality in a direct way assuming that men and women are equally good at reviewing (maybe in an indirect way it could harm reviews by increasing the load per-reviewer).
"Nah", no?
OK, so what is the "0.00001%" speech that justifies prison sentence ?

Ordering someone to shoot you? Aka "clear and imminent threat" ?
The FCC just ruled that Internet service is not a Title II service.
Definitely a bit of a shock to me. I really like Cloudflare. But I'm not sure I really like this move.
Does Silicon Valley and the left in this country realize elite hackers aren't on their side?
They should thread carefully and slow down the censorship.
You know when you cherry pick countries with 1 attack and a small population, then stack Norway with 1, finland with 2 etc and proclaim "look these small places should be compared per capita with the US, 1 attack surely is enough data points", then don't look at the combined EU and state that gun legislation is fine? Maybe you even misrepresent (frequency, literally noone claims that mass killings cannot physically happen elsewhere, what the actual f) what the person you are 'fact checking' said and change nothing when it's pointed out to you?

Yeah, that is what you just posted.
A few key decision makers in key roles in IT infrastructure do not represent the entire internet.
Sure, and people may be driven to check out extremist ideology because of IRL emotional injuries or problems, but that doesn't mean the internet aspect is overblown. I've probably met more people through the internet than via casual socialization.
Seconding your assertion that the AWB was ineffective. It barred certain cosmetic features--some malarkey about muzzle brakes and folding stocks or foregrips or whatnot. While doing nothing to diminish the availability of equally potent weapons. 100% toothless, feel-good legislation.
Generally, utilities have a regional pseudo-monopoly. It’s unlikely more than one entity runs electric or phone lines to your house, say. CDNs aren’t really utilities, and most of them have long been pretty picky (most won’t deal in porn, say).
This wasn't run of the mill homicide.
I also feel that there is no absolute way to determine what is good speech and what is bad speech, yet I also realize that the distinction exists.

Sometimes, there are clear markers. Supporting or promoting acts of violence is a poor fit for civil societies. The same can be said for other forms of harm. Yet I also view the use of speech to suppress speech as being a danger to civil societies since the intent is to discourage discourse.

Other cases are more ambiguous, mostly because I would like to live in a fairy tale world where facts and reason will win the day. This is land where others can say things that I find reprehensible and vice versa so that we can eventually arrive upon the truth. The freedom of speech is necessary in this case because we all have our preconceived notions, some of which will ultimately prove to be wrong. If the preconceived notions of individuals and societies are not challenged, it will be nearly impossible to arrive upon the truth.

The thing is that we don't live in that fairy tale world. The words of some people have more weight. That may be due to social status, connections, wealth, or other factors. Other people intentionally convey falsehoods in order to manipulate outcomes to reflect their motivations. People are also more likely to be swayed by emotion than reason, or to manipulate emotions to override reason.

Where does that leave us? I really don't know. Perhaps the freedom of speech should be regarded as an aspiration rather than as an absolute.
Seems like you're assuming your conclusion as your premise.
That was the premise.

But the conditions omit the all-important consequence. "What are your priors?" Suppose 99% of choices have hardly any consequence, and Bob is wrong on 95%. But Bob is right on the most expensive places to fail. Then, choosing the opposite could be disastrous, even though you get 95% of the choices right.
You don't seem to understand. You can refuse to do business with someone because you don't like the color of their tie.

In many countries, there are specific protected classes and you can't refuse their business just because they are a member of that class. Confusing these concepts does not help the argument.
There were a couple issues with the Sokal Squared hoax. The biggest one was that they relied a lot on their own definition of "obviously absurd" rather than using some form of empirical or unbiased "made stuff up" generator.

In the process, they wrote some papers that, especially if you weren't assuming the person made up the data underlying them, were...middling compelling.

I read one of the papers - the dog park one - and my conclusion was much the same as one of the peer reviewers. That it was an interesting concept, presented slightly too stridently (a common thing with papers written by say...students), and interesting enough as a frame to jump off from.
The "do it for my 5 minutes of fame" narrative is mostly wrong. It is meant to denigrade the shooters.

If you read tarrant's manifesto, for example, his motivation is entirely racial/political. He thinks white people is being destroyed, and he lashes out against his enemies.

If people's grievances, real or not, are not addressed. They will lash out. Calling them racist, stupid, xenophobes, losers, mentally ill or whatever else will not stop the tide of blood.
Especially when it's done this way for privacy considerations.
If the HK citizens were all armed, China would roll in the tanks. Good luck shooting at a tank. We live in the 21st century not the 19th.
We think via dialogue, We arrive at the truth via dialogue, and to arrive at the truth necessarily means pruning out the untrue.

Thus, limiting a speech when it first comes out is never good. Any point of view should be discussed, debated, and its truthiness assessed. However, if something has been deemed untrue over and over, it would be pointless to keep bringing it up and trying to assert it as truth. At that point, it deserves to be censored out as to not interfere with the other ongoing legitimate pruning processes.
>Certain speech that are known to cause violent result/response from its audience should be dealt with carefully.

Which speech is that, exactly? Do you have a list of all the problem topics we need to ban?
It's not Internet service that's essential: it's phone service - the ability to make emergency phone calls.
> "resistance to commodified last mile delivery seems to be large chains, like KFC/McDonalds"

In many US markets, those national brands are all on Uber Eats.
Drug markets and terrorist groups are against US law while racist speech and broadly advocating the necessity of violence are not. Cloudflare had previously drawn the line at providing services for any US-legal content, then they suddenly changed it after a lot of bad press in a pretty poorly written blog post.
The thing is that Moot (and probably Hiro too) actively intercepts and forwards mass-shooty type stuff it to the cops instead of waiting for a warrant to avoid this exact situation. Emphasis on intercept, you can't have a media shitstorm decrying you as the axis of evil if the only thing they can find on your site is mass speculation because a mod autosaged the shooter's manifesto 3 minutes after it was posted
You’d have to establish that they are copycats, definitively.
What not part of this article are the inventions that he made to the camera to reduce the sound that it produced while filming, further enabling simultaneous audio.

I very much like his Dylan piece. He also did one (title forgotten) about pastry chef competition.
It certainly is plausible that different cultures have different tendencies but this seems like it must be exaggerated somewhat for entertainment purposes because it almost paints French people as a bit of a caricature.

The specific example sounds like it could be a combination of a very small amount of language boundary and a slightly unhelpful or not particularly brilliant airline agent.

Anyway I'm interested to hear what French people think of this.
I agree with you.

"I can run your code/experiment/etc. in your population and get your results" isn't the gold standard either. "We approached it from a different way, and with a different population, and we get a consistent answer" is both harder and more compelling.
A subset of HTML + CSS (+ ECMAScript?) could replace PDF for this purpose. However, is there a standard subset and familiar, understandable tools for working with it? In general, using the 'save as' function in a web browser won't produce a document that looks the same 10 years later. Rewriting the source document using a tool like wget can achieve this, but it doesn't always work (eg. what if the content was pulled in asynchronously?), and you need a computer expert to create and explain how the archived format relates to the live content. 'Save as PDF,' despite its technical inferiority, is easy and widely understood.
Brotox: The new job security for men?
Hmm...other cultures just have different ways of in effect saying no. Example: in US airline travel if you ask at check-in to change your seat they well invariably say "oh the gate agent will be happy to help you with that". When you get to the gate they'll say "we have no open seats". The check-in agent knew that and if they were French would probably have said so.
I am really suspicious that this English speaker found out other English-speaking and Germanic countries to be low-context.

I suspect there is a strong bias in what you assume to be the baseline among humans and that you will integrate a huge chunk of your own culture into it.

I am curious of his methodology when it comes to sort cultures like that.
To be fair, the only time I saw a complete reversal of state in a short period of time was during the dot com implosion. The CEO at the company just lost it (he was under a lot of stress), and the working conditions went from meets to needs improvement remarkably quickly.

And its possible to have one aspect being wonderful to compensate for another aspect which is not so great. For example the company mission might suck but you really like your manager and your co-workers.
I've badly soured on open peer review, having had some experiences with it. I think you'll have very differential levels of review, and very differential values of how free people feel to go after authors.

I'd much prefer double-blind peer review.
I wish I could remove this "share" button. It's unintuitive and a waste of space.
Double-blind peer review fixes "reluctance to anger colleagues or currying favor" and is widely used by journals in my field.
The idea that the problem will go away if we talk as little as possible about it isn't borne out by experience. Why wouldn't you just expect independent media outlets to fill the information vacuum? I hear this argument a lot after every terrorist incident but in ~30 years nobody has ever provided any solid evidence to back it up.
Agreed it is just filler. It's closer to "But" or "Um" or "You know" than a "Yeah" or "Nah".

This song will clarify it from an Aussie perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyadntqXjn4
There's a big difference between using drugs discreetly and using drugs and talking about it in an inappropriate situation.
I doesn't physically cost any practical amount of money to read an article, a tiny amount of processing power and data transfer. A physical meal costs orders of magnitude more.

I understand why we should pay for articles but if you enforce payment then you'll see a flood of poorly written click bait and a race to the bottom.
This. I have definitely dug my heels in on some peer reviewed papers where I'm rather glad I was "gatekeeping".
I would not be surprised if there are many applications where removing 90% of the weight and bulk of the lens, or adding this much flexibility in the lens' functionality, would more than make up for having to double the sensor size or light intensity.
I believe this article is taking about small objects allocation (which presumably happens quite frequently in a language like python).

> To reduce overhead for small objects (less than 512 bytes) Python sub-allocates big blocks of memory. Larger objects are routed to standard C allocator. Small object allocator uses three levels of abstraction — arena, pool, and block.
> The underlying problem with Nature is that they pick the flashy stuff AND present it in a very very condensed

I don't object to the condensed part so much. When I was a physicist, people had a similarly dim view of Nature. But Physical Review Letters also published four-page papers. And PRL was definitely a bigger prize than the long form PR(xyz) papers.

Now if you happened to want to drill in and do work based on someone else's, then you would no doubt prefer the long-form. But if you are keeping up with the field, then the 4-pager is much preferred.

You should be able to lay down what the actual science is in a small space. And if it's a theory paper, that space is enough to have a few equations that the reader could then puzzle out justifications for herself.
Ask HN: What project management tool does your team use?
I'm evaluating project management tools (asana, airtable, clickup, monday, etc.) for a startup of 10 people, across engineering and business teams. Would like to know what teams are using.

* What tool and what kind of team? Pros and cons of the tool?

* Is it easy to learn for non tech-savvy users?

* Does the tool let you see dependencies between tasks? Something like a gantt chart.
> I'm of the mindset that DDT should have remained legal as a residential application to the house (screens, nets, walls).

The international anti-DDT treaty allows countries to take this route, and as a result DDT is still legal for residential use in some countries where malaria is endemic. The US opted for a total ban, though.
The First Car to Bear the Porsche Name
I recently rejected a paper as "This is fine, and really interesting, but no one who reads this journal is going to get it".
PDFs don't solve link rot. But in HTML, it's conventional to rely on links for stylesheets and sometimes even content (images, asynchronous DOM elements), so link rot is a bigger problem.
I’d recommend xi-editor, vi/vim/neovim or emacs for that
>Why is it legal for me to own an elephant gun but illegal to strap it to a drone?

It's not federally illegal to attach firearms to drones, so long as you do so within FAA guidelines for flying self-built vehicles low to the ground on your own property.
Big Brains, Big Ideas: Out of Our Minds’ Review
> This means that Anglophones are more likely to have the exact word to say what they want, whereas Francophones must often string together a series of words to communicate their message

Have you ever lived in the US ? The hardest part for a French immigrant in the US is that when people invite you to do something it doesn’t mean anything and it’s never happening.
There was a great quote from some WWII officer who said about war crimes (paraphrasing & I can’t remember his name) “We observe the rules of war not for the sake of our enemies, but for the sake of ourselves.”
Here's one solution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive

The costs are so low that even a developing country could afford to do it, at a cost way lower than mosquito control by other methods.

Sure there are unknown consequences, but that probably won't stop them if their fellow countrymen are dying.
Silicon Valley and the left in this country should take it a little easier and slow down the censorship.
overblown, as in, it is very hard to believe emotional injuries sustained over the internet are as bad as social defeat IRL.
Have you read the comment fully? 8chan is not just /pol/, it's an amalgation of hundreds of boards with different content and moderation rules.
Matthew Prince could have just said "per our terms of service we don't provide services for websites that violate US law and 8chan allows posts that in our opinion incite imminent lawless action, therefore we're terminating their account". Instead he posted this confused essay that clearly shows he understands neither 8chan nor the relevant law, instead making up weird terms and making it entirely vague what their policy will be for terminating accounts in the future.
I assume the cause of such behavior is something that's known properly as "social defeat".
i generally oppose silencing (online) speech, even the ugliest of it, because not only does it not quell the violence we wish to avoid, but it can enrage the already marginalized among us who tend to carry the most insult.

as such, even taking down the offending material, while possibly legal, will only escalate the situation, requiring ever more force to control. sure, you may successfully thwart this attempt, but what about the next one? rising stakes eventually lead to a police state undergirded by pervasive surveillance.

this is multi-rooted social problem that's certainly bigger than one company, especially a tech company. it's not even certain that online outlets like 8chan don't lessen real violence by allowing members to find consolation among like-minded people rather than stewing in their anger.
Except they seem to be fanning the fire instead of supressing.

It's all about eyeballs.
Other countries with stricter gun laws have lower murder rates. So it doesn’t follow that people will necessarily just move on to other weapons.

Also, knife crime in the UK is not higher than the US.

Yes the deaths were avoidable. We know they were because every other first world country doesn’t have this problem in anywhere the same degree.