skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Thinking in terms other than people, be it states/counties/acreage is another version of putting "landowners" in charge.

Again, having 3 votes against 57 does not put whoever has 3 votes "in charge" in any sensible meaning of the word.

> Except they don't.

Because they think LAC has already made up their minds, no matter what. And judging from voting patterns, they are correct. So whose fault is that? If more LAC voters would vote diversely, politicians would pay more attention to LAC, they are not stupid. But when it's 70+% to one side, why bother? Same campaigning dollar would bring much more impact elsewhere, and campaign resources are finite.
I think you're talking about liquidation preferences: http://stockoptioncounsel.com/blog/negotiating-equity-what-i...

For founders:

There's many reasons why this happens, but one of them is the negotiating power of the founders & drivers of the company. If you're desperate for cash to stay around and nobody will give it to you, you may have to take a worse deal (award preferred shares that guarantee first portion of any future windfall to holders of the shares). To guard against this, as a founder you need to steer the company so they have the right negotiating position (so you can get future investors as close to the same liquidation preferences as you).

For potential employees:

This is trickier, since you almost never have the full picture of the cap table and financial situation of the company you're considering joining. There are probably some telltale signs to look for:

- startup has raised lots of $ quickly but hasn't scaled up revenue nearly as quickly
- startup is being very secretive about the size of the options pool ("we're excited to offer you 10,000 shares at 0.00001 price!" .. "How many total shares are there? What's the denominator?" .. "We can't tell you!")
- you could always ask the founders (if the startup is small enough) out right about their philosophy & vision for fundraising

This is just based on my limited experience, hearsay, what I've read online, etc. Take it all with a grain of salt!
Amp-Script: AMP ️ JavaScript
I think it's also important to remember that (to the best of my knowledge) the majority of farmland is not individually owned: it's run by large agricultural companies.

So the "land-owners," or at least, the owners of the companies that own the land, also live in the cities, and are themselves among the vastly wealthy.
I think this is a reasonable comment to make (perhaps unworthy of downvotes, which it seems to be accumulating), but I will note that the article defines "successful modern tech companies" as generally having five principal features:

- Low variable costs

- Low capital investments

- A lot of customer data and customer intimacy

- Network effects

- Ecosystems that boost expansion with little cost

Based on those features, of the companies that you listed here, Uber and Airbnb are definitely tech companies. So is Stripe, I think most of us would agree, although I'm not sure whether there are many network effects with their platform. SpaceX is not.

As such, the only way your point really stands is if one can make a valid argument that WeWork is doing something material and tech-focused that makes it different from a standard commercial real estate company. If it were leasing space and successfully executing on a model with low variable costs, low capital investments, lots of data, network effects and expansion-boosting ecosystems, that would be one thing. That doesn't appear to be the case.
Right I should add that those rebellions would happen when the economy is extremely bad and the living condition is intolerable.
To Kill a Martial Art
I've sort of wondered if recycling plastics is actually maybe bad from a CO2 angle.

It seems that using mined virgin oil for plastics that gets tossed in a landfill means that at least a little more of the oil we are mining ends up not getting burned and emitted as CO2. In this way, we're creating non-global warming demand for oil which competes with the energy demand in the market. I don't know if this is a reasonable way of thinking about it.

Of course, the energy required to haul a bottle of water hundreds of miles is huge, so I'm not arguing for buying more plastic waste, just not sure how recycling existing plastic waste affects global warming in particular.
> For one, it’s common that you get different versions anyway (the Zola build currently has two versions each of unicase, parking_lot, parking_lot_core, crossbeam-deque, toml, derive_more, lock_api, scopeguard, and winapi).

This seems like a specific thing that would be a measurable win and a not uncommon problem (e.g., I have a test kernel module that doesn't have many dependencies, and it still has two generic-arrays, two proc-macro2s, and two unicode-xids). Is there something that could be done here technically, such as pull requests to bump common crates to using the same version of even-more-common dependencies?
So far in my toy projects I've mostly seen this crop up from depending on a lot of 0.x crates still going through significant version churn and legitimate breaking changes, where A and B legitimately can't use the same version of C as-is due to API changes, because they haven't been keeping their dependencies up to date.

The fix is simple, when it happens: Patch A/B to use the latest major version of C, fixing the source code as necessary. You can [patch] locally until upstream accepts your Pull Request - which might include a https://deps.rs/repo/github/rust-lang/cargo badge in their README.md, to encourage them to continue to keep C up-to-date.
His statement is an overreach, but the point is: you can't just dilute a given shareholder class for the benefit of others willy-nilly.
Most of my JavaScript these days is little interactive things embedded in web pages, and I use raw JavaScript. All the stuff I used jQuery for back in the 1990's is in the language and DOM API now.

They generally have the form:

document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function() {
var m = {
...model fields...
_observers: new Set(),
notify: function() {
this._observers.forEach(function(observer) {
observer();
}
}
};

var elem1 = document.getElementById('...');
elem1.addEventListener('...', function() {
...update fields on m...
m.notify();
});
m._observers.add(function() {
...update elem1 from m...
});

m.notify();
});
I link to one specific class of examples here in this comment -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20763618

This happens well before a company is acquired though (it happens when investors put in money into a company and negotiate their way into getting paid out first).
Ask HN: Is it ok to quit without notice?
Hey HN, I'm looking for an opinion. I'm in a terrible company...the environment has become incredibly toxic, almost my entire department has quit, the company is hiring a new CEO but the "interim" CEO has acted purely out of self-interest and in his maneuvering, has gutted half the company, ruined some relationships and destroyed the project I've been working on for a year. I have an offer for a much better job coming in, and I don't feel like I can manage another day in this environment. How bad is it for me to just walk away? I've already documented all of my code and processes and handed most of my responsibilities to the overseas contractors that are apparently intended to replace me. Thoughts?
It seems to me that excludes all software from "tech". The computers are tech, but how they are configured isn't "making" anything.
Being able to see what a spam filter is filtering for makes it easier to avoid the rules.

It's not security through obscurity.
reduce and reuse are much easier than doing taxes, but they're not in speculative shareholder corporate interest
Lets Make a Phone-Sized Recording Studio
I like Go's standard library. It's well designed. The number of pitfalls is pretty small.

I have more thoughts, but they are very hand wavy and ill-formed, so please take them with a grain of salt. One of my theories for why the Go standard library has had as much success as it has, is that it doesn't necessarily provide implementations that go as fast as reasonably possible, and that tends to give more flexibility for exposing simpler APIs. A good microcosm of this idea is JSON (de)serialization. Without even blinking, I can think of three reasonably popular third party JSON (de)serialization libraries in the Go ecosystem. The one provided by the standard library is pretty slow compared to some of them. It's not clear to me that it can be fixed without changing the API. But it's a good example where the standard library has provided something, but it isn't good enough in a lot of cases, so folks wind up bringing in a third party dependency for it anyway.

But even that alone isn't necessarily a bad thing. encoding/json is likely good enough for a really large number of use cases. On top of that, it's very convenient to use. (I'd still take serde in Rust over Go's system any day, but that's a different conversation.) And this kind of fits within Go norms pretty well. Go was never built to be the fastest, so the fact that some of its standard library has perhaps sacrificed performance for some API simplicity is totally consistent with that norm. And I don't think that norm is a bad thing.

There are some other examples where Go's standard library is slower than what it could be, for example, CSV parsing and walking a directory hierarchy.

Overall, I think the balance struck by Go's standard library was very nicely done. However, I'm not convinced it could have been replicated by Rust. The reasons for that are just guesses, and wander too far into musings about how the language is itself developed. But even putting that aside, Rust is going to have stricter requirements, because people tend to gravitate toward Rust when performance is important. So if std doesn't provide the fastest possible thing, then it's going to be a bigger deal than if Go does the same thing.

Again, above is super hand wavy and just a bunch of opinions from my own personal perspective.
The article actually gave you hints as to how to evaluate

Marginal Cost of Servicing an Extra Uber Driver is $0
Marginal Cost of Servicing an Extra Uber Passenger is $0

Uber is a Tech Company.
We should expand the number of reps to 1 per 100k. Would help much of the problems.
That’s the free market, not government. Companies choose to make vehicles CA compliant. Any other examples?
I'm looking at the safari 3 screenshot and I don't see tabs in the title bar. I'm pretty sure it wasn't till safari 4 beta.

The safari 5 screenshot you have is EDGE with a safari installer in front of it.
I'd be curious how this holds up to court challenges because it seems like a deliberate circumvention of the constitution.

Not that the current system is completely equitable.
Lawsuits are partially prevented by not disclosing the cap table. The majority of startups I've seen will just say "here are 150k options; trust us, they're worth $1 at the close of our last round".

why join a startup that doesn't disclose the cap table based on options when you can join a public company that will typically give you a larger and liquid grant?
The cost to get that many matches isn't high although, unlike offline dating. It takes a minute or two for a potential match, so if you do it casually as a 30 minute a day hobby, you'll quickly start getting more dates than you know what to deal with.

With 1 date = one evening consumed, assuming you probably don't want to go on a first date every night and do something else.
> Do states currently trust that other states hold fair elections to determine how their electors vote? I don't see any change here.

Currently the effects of any illegal voting are contained to the state that the illegal voting happened in; North Dakota's electors aren't going to vote differently even if there are 6 million illegal votes in California. With an NPV that isn't the case.
When I was still in that 'I should write a programming language' stage of career development, I worked on a pretty sophisticated (for the era) mobile app. PyPy was getting quite a bit of press around that time and my brain connected some dots.

One of the ideas I wanted very much to explore is scaling the API, both up and down. For building something akin to PyPy, you might want a 'kernel', a small set of libraries that were available everywhere, and several other levels that include more or different things.

Mobile takes the base and adds a few things suitable for mobile (storage, UI, broader networking). Desktop has a real UI, and then there's the kitchen sink like .Net and Java have.

But you have the same problems you always have with decomposition - if you didn't guess the right boundaries when you built the thing then removing or rearranging bits is a serious PITA. Sometimes I think the best we can hope for is to leave clear messages for the next language so that it doesn't organize things the way we did.
This nonsense needs to stop.
Truckers Want to Ban Self-Driving Trucks in Missouri
> Marketing people will complain if they can't differentiate on packaging

Cigarette companies have already fought and lost legal battles forcing them to use standard plain packaging, so complaining is about all they can do.
All you are saying is very much correct, but it is not what I'm talking about. In the situation I'm referring to, the terms were always clean, in other words:

- 1x liquidation preferences for all rounds

- Non-participating preferred stocks

- The company sold at a valuation significantly higher than its last valuation and they still had a boatload of cash in the bank, so they strictly sold from a position of power

Another HN user just commented down below adding more info to the shady practices I'm talking about, giving them the proper names: recapitalization and carve-out.
Isn't franchising the essence of cheap scaling?

I don't see the distinction you're making.
Right, I see your point here. There are non-trivial issues that need to be worked out, which I'm sure is one reason it's not in the library yet. Another (mentioned elsewhere) is that it takes time to converge on what a good API might look like.
> problem here is men basing their view of feminism on their own emotional intuition,

Fair enough, but no man or woman is an island we all must be cognizant of others' perceptions.
If California was 6 different states,do they deserve more power?
Go study guides for mastering coding interview challenges
More that anything creates reciprocity. It’s why I am very wary of taking things from vendors.
Plastic bottles are pretty much all included according to this site. There's no reason not to include them too.
Hmm, I think part of that has already been implemented by certificate transparency. But the reason it didn't block this attack is that CT is only enforced against public CAs, not custom installed CAs. The reason it's not enforced against custom CAs is that for people who do development and need to debug their own traffic, it's not feasible to have them submit to CT logs.

It sounds like you want all domains to be divided into 2 categories: testing/internal domains, and real domains. Where in real domains only public CAs with valid CT entries would be trusted, but in testing domains custom CAs are allowed. Maybe we could go even a step further in the division and disallow public CAs from testing domains. There's of course the question of how to distinguish a real donation from a testing domain; maybe this could be done by saying all testing domains must be in a special TLD such as .local or .testing .

This might work, but it it's still restricting developers, because if they need to debug some problem they have less options on how to do it. There might be a problem with cookies on the real domain that won't reproduce on the testing domain. And they need to maintain 2 server configs instead of 1, 1 for each domain.
Thanks for this. What you described is another practice that was described to me by a few execs who I happen to know quite well: they explicitly said it's a way to not only screw employees (especially the ex), but also investors, and basically redistribute the wealth just to a very small subset of very very key employees.
> All the stuff I used jQuery for back in the 1990's is in the language and DOM API now.

Huh? Wrong decade I think. jQuery wasn't released until 2006.
This link at the bottom of the article about Puerto Rico is also an interesting read: https://www.history.com/news/puerto-ricos-complicated-histor... .
Visual Code & Tasks+ plugin for the same.
The Wikipedia entry cites "Bad Romance" as an example of this whoop, which is one of the lowest-sung female performances I can recall off the top of my head.
I wasn't trying to be obtuse. I'm not sure what's confusing.

Is it in the best interests of all the people to have proportionate power? I believe so.

I don't believe they (rural vs metropolitan citizens) should have some sort of relative power difference, despite their relative wealth and land-ownership differences. That's not important to me, philosophically.

Best I can do to clarify.
I said it's like star wars in that they are both heavily deravitive pastiches, collages of past pop culture remixed. I defined their category as: hero journey, pastiche, over the top world building. I didn't say the matrix was derived from star wars. They are akin to each other, in that they exhibit the same properties.
The United States bases way too much of its identity on who is its president.
Overreach with respect to legal conclusions is par for the course at HN, it seems...
I could understand what was going on before transpilation. There was just Javascript, and while some functions might not exist in different browsers, the core was the same.

Now I have to figure out the difference between: ‘umd’, ‘commonjs’, ‘esnext’, ‘es2015’, ‘es2018’, and a whole bunch more.

I don’t want to keep up with JS politics just to be able to develop with the latest version.
That page you linked (http://memory.loc.gov/ll/llfr/002/0000/00610057.tif) contains that argument from Madison followed by a non-slavery based argument made by someone else.

To say that the electoral college exists "because of slavery" is an oversimplification. It ignores the misgivings about a popular vote that are mentioned in the page you linked, and it also ignores the desire of the state governments to exert control over their representation in the Federal government -- senators were not directly elected for the same reason.

If you want to point to part of the Constitution that exists purely because of slavery, the 3/5 compromise is a better example. The decision to adopt an electoral college was certainly influenced by complications introduced by slavery, but there were a lot of other arguments in favor of an electoral college that were persuasive at the time.
I think it's considered old hat by now for JITs in languages with polymorphism to inline a little bit of dynamic dispatch code into the call sites. The branch predictor gets to work its magic and removes the call overhead in a high number of cases.

I think I read somewhere that Javascript engines do something similar, with some extra code to de-optimize when you fiddle with the object prototype.
One of our dogs acquired a CTVT tumour in the nasal tract, which is rarer. It resulted in a bloody discharge via one nostril which thankfully led to an early diagnosis (although it remains curable up to quite a late stage as the vet told us).

Our boy has had his chemo and seems fully recovered: swelling is gone, bleeding and reverse-sneezing have stopped, appetite is back to normal, all signs of lethargy and malaise are gone. Hopefully he will remain tumour-free.
Any time you have an error/exception/abort path, you always never want to inline it (LLVM prob has attributes to prevent that, but I'm not sure if they are used by rust). Also, LLVM does get a little too aggressive with things like unrolling so I wouldn't be surprised if it inlined too aggressively too.
By your logic there can never be a suitable time for democratic reform. The current political situation can only get worse until the united states becomes more democratic or more authoritarian.
> "all the polls are too positive for you, you don't have a safety margin" they'd have known

On my memory, this is not the first time polls tilt left. Politicians should have already learned that this is possible, especially with such an unorthodox candidate as Trump.

My point also was that not many states are really "safe", yet less - forever. Relatively yes, some are further from the middle than others, but it's not a static picture and it's not a product of some permanent law but only current configuration which should never be taken for granted.
> generic-array

This is up to 0.13.2... plenty of supposedly breaking API churn, no wonder you have two copies.

Yes, your dependencies probably rely on different 0.x versions, and a pull request could fix that. You can inspect your Cargo.lock file to figure out which ones are to blame.

> Is there something that could be done here technically, such as pull requests to bump common crates to using the same version of even-more-common dependencies?

Yep, that's the fix.

README.md badges like https://deps.rs/repo/github/rust-lang/cargo can alert people to out-of-date dependencies.

You can even automate some of the pull requests with something like https://github.com/marketplace/dependabot-preview if you control the repositories.
> "If you're a good upstanding person who is doing things lawfully, nobody has concerns," the officer told GovTech

And this is the slippery slope of, "oh so you're asserting your rights? You must have done something wrong." Where asserting your rights is cause for suspicion, and therefore probable cause.
Believe me I went through that explanation, and a few others in deep conversation with my Portuguese and Macanese friends as well as with a Matteo Ricci scholar. It seems there was an old Portuguese spelling Macao, and there is Macáu with the accent also from eighteenth or nineteenth century Portuguese. In Cantonese it is called Àomén
Phase transition is a natural outcome of all-or-nothing elector pledging.
This works for eBooks too:

k2pdfopt $* -dev kpw -mode fw -wrap -hy -ws 0.375 -ls-
The A-10 Warthog Is Sticking Around for at Least Another Decade
All of this can be addressed with best practices

The problem is that "best practices" changes every day, and from one employer or team to another.
OK, I rest my case here.

I'll just note that on HN, a 16 year old girl having sex with a rich 55 year old man for money is a morally ambiguous situation, whose morality depends on "a lot of other factors" (presumably, ones not including age, wealth, and power of the 55 year old in question).
I asked and either because of fear of prosecution or modesty or hyperbole he said its just a bar story...
It's not complicated because you're not doing anything complicated with it.
It's what you make and how you make money. If you make hardware or software and that's your primary source of revenue, you're tech.
I don't understand the premise of the question. Why would Louisiana expect to be able to dictate federal policies against the wishes of other states?
We deprecated Adaptive Chunking because we weren't thrilled with the way it was working. But yes we are looking into an improved way of solving this problem.
I don’t have any inside information but according to Crunchbase SignalFX took in 178mm in investor money. This sale was approximately 6X that amount, so the investors cleared any liquidation hurdles and the common stock employees should be made whole. At that point it’s just a matter of how generous the founders were, and how diluted the stock got over time. If some owned a tenth of a percent at the start and got diluted halfway in subsequent findings, they walk away with 500K.