skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Leasing office space in a place like NY traditionally required at least a one year lease, often longer. WeWork has at least popularized the notion of extremely flexible month-to-month contracts for fully managed facilities in historically expensive markets, which is very attractive to virtually all companies (now is that a sustainable business remains to be seen, but at least the demand is there). Not just small companies and startups, but companies of all sizes like the flexible opex that can be scaled on short notice. WeWork's S1 shows that a big chunk of the customer base and growing is in fact large companies. E.g. Microsoft in New York has their entire sales organization scattered across WeWork properties. That kind of thing is where WeWork appears to be doubling down on according to their S1, not really the freelancer hot-desk market.

Companies also generally don't like to deal with anything that is not core to their business. Already previously most functions were outsourced (cleaning, maintenance, stocking the fridge etc.) but increasingly companies don't even want to deal with the hassle of sourcing a supplier. Or getting Internet. Or insurance. WeWork makes all of that a non-issue. So does Regus Spaces product, but it has to be at least acknowledged that it's a direct reaction to WeWork.

I think the future will look something like this, and why it can be likened to AWS for physical space (WeWork doesn't go this far yet, today requiring e.g. physically visiting the space before leasing which is honestly a pain-in-the-ass speaking as someone looking to place multiple people all over the US, just let me input my credit card already):

- Startup company in the Bay Area logs in online and clicks to reserve a 1x Private Office in NYC, for the two new hires starting there next week. No tour, no calls, no interaction with anyone at WeWork. WeWork is already a "known quantity" (kind of like McDonald's), no need for any of that process.

- Microsoft manager in Redmond does absolutely nothing workplace related as his new hire just shows up at WeWork Houston, as the company already has a direct expensing agreement. His cost center is just billed X for the month automatically.
I think you might be conflating two related-but-different arguments.

There is consensus that a p-value of 0.95 is reasonable. No one is arguing against that parameter in particular.

The argument is rather against the idea of statistical significance itself, because it's relatively easy to cheat if you are dishonest. Setting p to 0.01 won't change that.

Finally, and this is my personal opinion, there is "consensus" for abolishing statistical significance the same way there's "consensus" that Python is the best programming language. Scientists are more or less in agreement that it could be better, but "mildly displeased scientists call for unclear improvement" is not as good a headline.
I first wrote this as a reply in this thread and now I'm looking at it, I think it's relevant to the article as a whole -- sugar, insulin, calorie reduction, stress, fitness in general. I believe that the "diet" mentioned in the article is in effect a calorie-restriction one.

> Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics.
> you are losing weight because you are consuming less calories.

This is only true in the first up to 6 months of a calorie-restriction diet. Then, body adjusts its metabolism (lower body temperature, making you feel more lethargic to keep you from exercising, etc) and your weight begins to slowly climb back up, sans any further calorie restriction. At this point, it's easy for a dieter to blame himself of lacking willpower: "it worked, and it stopped working now, I must've been not strict enough!".

The same thing happens if you force someone to overeat even if they're not hungry. They will gain weight -- for up to 6 months. Then, the body increases its base metabolic rate and adjusts to the new food intake level.

As Dr. Jason Fung meticulously explains in his book Obesity Code, there seems to be a weight set point. He then argues that the root cause of obesity, and the body's set weight point, is insulin resistance.

The books hails your grandma's advice: "Cut back sugars and starchy foods. No snacking."

This is from the last part (The Solution):

1. Reduce your consumption of added sugars. 2. Reduce your consumption of refined grains. 3. Moderate your protein intake. 4. Increase your consumption of natural fats. 5. Increase your consumption of fiber and vinegar.

The author also stresses the importance of fasting.

Everything the book asserts seems to be pretty well backed by science, go check for yourself.

Source: Obesity Code by Dr. Jason Fung. Read it, it's not only a brilliant weight loss book, but also a wonderful book about how the wrong incentives for companies have led to the obesity epidemic in the US.
Pigouvian taxes rarely capture the entire externality just a significant portion of it. In my example I suggested half.
Yeah, I lost 100lb from calorie restriction over the course a year. Eating the exact same things just less of it.

There is no panacea for weight loss - everyone is different.

A book is not a source. Providing a book and then cavalierly saying people should read it because it's backed by science is pretty rude.
The Three Virtues of a software developer.

1. Lazyness. The first step towards efficiency. Why do you think automatic dishwashers exist?

2. Impatience. The first step towards performance optimization.

3. Antisocial. Ability to hyper-focus.
Wikileaks does vet the information and publishes in coordination with some other media. And they have a stellar record of publishing 100% true information, unlike some other major jounralistic media.

The fact that some journalists are so vehement against Assange imho proves that he s a journalist. People always shoot the messenger
If we're solely talking about underpaid, then the absolute peak value of a college football player at the top of the game is probably under 10 million. IMO, the value of Saban is probably closer to 60 or 70 million[0], so he is more underpaid. Of course, the situation for players is a much more egregious underpayment.

[0] Really hard to quantify, but comparing the revenue effects and higher order revenue generation of programs with elite head coaches to mediocre head coaches leads to this value.
There have been some recent proposals to lower it getting lots of traction. Sure if you want to decide whether to publish based on p-value alone you have to draw a line somewhere, but 0.05 isn't necessarily the right place. And you don't make publishing decisions based on p-values alone.
This was early
June
Their troubles with an IPO suggests that they have not successfully marketed themselves to the broader investor class.
See http://www.calnewport.com/books/deep-work/
Open source is the absolute worst business model you could've suggested. Any business that benefits from journalism would keep it as secret as possible so only they can reap the rewards.
While Go has a lot of clear influence from Plan 9, I don't see the "conspiracy theory" here at all.

As far as I'm aware, one major reason why Go reinvented so much was to save time and effort. They did whatever they could in order to bootstrap fast and efficiently, and they did so by cannibalizing Plan 9's toolchain, including the compiler and assembly language. The original "gc" toolchain (with inscrutable binary names like "6g" and "6a"), was written in C and came directly from Inferno. You can browse the original commit here [2]. That stuff has all been rewritten in Go.

A key attribute I and others have noticed about highly productive developers is that they tend to build an effective toolchain around themselves and bring it with them for new projects. Sometimes that stuff can become legacy baggage, but there's no denying that it's a good strategy.

Perhaps LLVM or GCC would also have been a good strategy. There are some arguments to the contrary. 11 years ago, when Go was started, LLVM wasn't nearly as mature as today. But look at the hurdles other projects like Rust have had to get over with LLVM. And a large part of Rust's compilation speed is apparently due to LLVM. So LLVM is not a magic bullet. Migrating Go today to LLVM would of course be a big, time-consuming zero-velocity project; you'd want to be really certain that the payoff would be worth the effort.

GCC is not an easy project to deal with, either. For decades, its internal intermediate representation was undocumented and intentionally obfuscated [2] to ensure FSF/GNU control over backends.

I do agree that Go has a certain bias towards a particular, idiosynchratic way of doing things, which is not always a positive.

[1] https://github.com/golang/go/commit/0cafb9ea3d

[2] http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/715
There's NFL coaches making twice as much as him while producing significantly worse results. And he's certainly bringing in more than $5 million of revenue and free marketing to the university
The FDA approves generics based on bioequivalence, not just chemical composition. In order to be an "AB" rated generic (and used as a substitute for the branded product), the generic has to fall between 80-125% bioequivalence of the brand, which measure dissolution and absorption.

The fillers in the generic don't have to be the same as the branded product, but the drug does have to behave the same as the branded product.
One can only lose two parents, but one can lose a lot of children!

If we have a stable population, then a higher child mortality means a higher absolute death rate. If the population is growing, the situation is even more pronounced!
TypeScript's type system is actually much more expressive than Java or C#'s. You can't express OR types (sum types) like `string | number` nicely in those languages. It's the main thing that made me hate statically typed languages until I tried Rust (which also lets you express this).
I think that is incredibly optimistic for a production vehicle. I think it is likely that production vehicles with setups like this will have one 350 Watt panel on the roof. A typical house roofmount of the same would produce ~1.5 KWh per day.

Car environments tend to be worse than that due to the angle and likely regular proximity of even mild shading. Its certainly enough to eliminate vampire drain, which is helpful at times, but I don't see how it will add an appreciable amount of mileage otherwise.
> The extra immersion is cool, but I don't being slightly more immersed in the way VR provides will lead to any sort of technological revolution.

Well, having access to as many monitors of any size you want without taking up any space in your home or office is a good enough reason for many.
Hunger (at least to a small intensity) is prodromal. If I'm already tilting hypomanic, skipping lunch is a huge trigger.
Not that I've heard. They have ARKit which is getting decent updates but it seems to be limited to the Pokemon GO / AR measurement tool that ships with iOS -type phone use-cases. Not one of their top priority afaik.
Sure, and that's pretty much what this guy was saying. How much does theory help you properly weld? Same way learning when to use bubblesort vs. quicksort helps me figure out why my css is working in firefox but not ie11.
One of my favorite parts of HN is getting to laugh at folks in the Silicon Bubble. The real world is out here, and no, UBI is going to be spent on weed. All of it.
And some will endlessly argue against “simple physics” because magical thinking about metabolism avoids any hint of personal agency.

In a sense, the body isn’t “simple” because so many things can affect your total energy burn. But all of that really doesn’t matter much. If you continually decrease your caloric intake, eventually it will fall below your calorie burn and you will lose weight. Conversely if you continually increase your caloric intake, you will eventually gain weight (assuming you aren’t literally shitting out undigested food).
This article was horrible. Describing the costs/benefits of forgoing college for a trade would be the kind of discussion that I think Hacker News is made for, but not with this poor quality article.

First, it cherry picks a single example of someone who obviously had a ton of other shit going on (got fired for missing too much work) and then seems to draw from that the conclusion that "Welding won't make you rich". Then it complains that the 150k salaries for welders bandied about are rare, but so what? Did anyone think a welder right out of the gate would make that much money? I think most of us understand that your average developer isn't making 400k a year at Google, either, but that doesn't mean that's an invalid data point.

The reason people should be interested about the trades are:

1. They are immune from offshoring, which has had a huge impact on other blue collar jobs like manufacturing.
2. If they are a viable, and secure, path to the middle class, they should be supported.

There are lots of valid issues to discuss (the toll it takes on your body is a big one), but would be better to see it from an article with better data and less out-of-the-gate bias.
> they'll tell you they can probably get anyone to the top.

You answered your own question.

Alex is not "anyone."
Let's not forget such basics as "showing up on-time".
This appears to be limited to well-known musicians. IMO those musicians don't need the help-- people are already finding their shows just fine.

There's a ton of great musicians out there that want to be discovered by wider audiences, but are regularly ignored by various music directories like this. Seems like a lost opportunity, considering that they're probably more willing to pay for inclusion than already well-known artists.
I have to say the amount of hate against assange in here is staggeringly more than i expected.
I'm definitely not your target audience here so please take this with a grain of salt (as I might misunderstand what people value about privacy), but isn't "using tools to understand our users better" exactly what privacy-first people _don't_ want? Gathering that kind of metadata about what users on the platform are doing, instead of making it end-to-end encrypted so you (as the provider) can't see into what people are doing?
It's more about how light the body is than how efficient it is. Consider: the Tesla Model 3 has a range of 350 km, and a battery capacity of 50 kWh. That's a little more than seven km per kWh. So, less efficient than the human body, right?

Well don't forget that its curb weight is 1,611 kg. If we assume that the marathoning human weighs 100 kg, then the Tesla weighs 16x as much. So to compare the performance pound for pound, we need to imagine the energy use of sixteen human runners (36kWh for 42km, or just a little more than 1kWh per km). Also, it would be travelling that range at a much higher velocity. Of course, its coefficient of drag is probably lower than that of sixteen human runners, but considering the humans are running at 15 km/h or so, and the Tesla would be travelling at closer to 100kmh, the velocity factor of the drag calculation would be 40x higher for the Tesla than the humans. So, even if you factor in the unfairness of having skin and hair and clothes, the humans are actually a good deal less energy efficient than the car.

I just found this analysis interesting. Our machines are after all quite a bit more efficient than our bodies (for certain tasks, of course). But that doesn't detract from your point that the body is definitely more efficient than you want it to be when it comes to losing weight!
You're arguing with people who have never been on a real job site. Here, they think job site means monster.com or indeed.com.

I spent about a week at a natural gas power plant in Oregon being built to work on some telecom. Welders there ranged from 80k-120k that I knew. To be fair, I don't know of any welder above water that could make 150k. I only know the 150 range to be for deep sea oil guys. But that's just my experience. Either way, it's not like you get out of the gate being that class of welder. It's getting cert'd in difference environments, tolerances and types of welding, along with experience that get you to that level. And I don't know a single career blue-collar that thinks otherwise. Unless they're really stupid and anything above 30k a year is unbelievable to them.

"You mean you have to develop extra skills that separate you from the herd to get paid more? No! Really?" Same goes for programming too if we're all being honest.
If everyone rode the bus 20 times a year, we'd need much more buses, and the cost would rise correspondingly. Today, with fare at $2.75, and farebox recovery of 27%, the cost averages out to $10/ride. That means that for only 20 times a year, you'd need to raise taxes by $200, not $75. Fortunately, most people don't ever ride a bus, so us Seattle taxpayers who subsidize 73% of the cost of the bus system, have much smaller system to support. If more people used it, the cost would be correspondingly higher.

The whole problem here is that it is simply very expensive to run buses, per actual ride. Operational costs of a King County Metro buses is ~$150 an hour. With $2.75 fare, you'd practically need to run them crammed full at all times to break even. In reality, buses only get ever fully packed on a handful of routes, and even then only twice a day.

And, ST3 passed, but only barely. I don't think it would have passed today if we got to vote on it again.
> at least a job that won't leave me broken and in pain after I do it for twenty years.

There are no guarantees. There's ample opportunity in this field for atrophy or strain to take its toll. Take care of yourself, pay attention to the complaints and do something about them.
You should able to sue the pharmacy and your insurer for sourcing and requiring tainted products that are not quality controlled. I would expect some class action lawsuits to appear shortly.
The article talks about a pharmacy that does just that - tests all the products before dispensing them and rejecting those that don't pass.
Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained
Is AR this generations VR? Full of promises and fantasy, but all of which is far from being usable or practical at any mainstream level.
For me (Firefox + noscript + ublock in private browsing mode):

- cnn

- cnn

- cbsnews

- NY Times

- NPR

- AP News

- Wikipedia

All neutral sources except for the NY Times and CNN on a bad day.

Of your list there: Nation Review, Reason, and Forbes are not journalism outlets. RT doesn't have editorial independence like other state backed media. Without getting into debate, maybe Fox News should be on my page before wikipedia and a second CNN link. But I don't see a reason for those others.
But consumers now have the power to block ads, that's something we never really had before (other than fast forwarding through them on TV). This massively evens the power imbalance - if websites keep abusing their customers, bye bye revenue.

We're slowly seeing that happen today.
> Authoritative seeming sources are not always a good thing.

Yeah, but what if stupid people search for the wrong thing, find the wrong website and get infected with Wrongthink? Have you thought about that? Crushing amateur content creators and betraying all the ideals of the early Web is small price to pay for preventing that intolerable scenario.
For players, there's some transfers but I certainly wouldn't say "many"
Will a baseband firewall protect me from this?
White collar people LOVE recommending blue collar jobs. It's very similar to the FB execs who cash out and then suddenly say talk about how bad FB is.

"Don't do what I did to get rich, it's not a good idea."
There is not consensus that the current threshold is reasonable. There are many big names arguing against that parameter in particular.

See e.g. Redefine statistical significance. The authors list is practically a who's who https://psyarxiv.com/mky9j

>One Sentence Summary: We propose to change the default P-value threshold for statistical significance for claims of new discoveries from 0.05 to 0.005.
So exactly how do you explain mass just coming out of nowhere?
> how you can make it easier for yourself to cope with the feeling of hunger, so that you don't give in and eat more than you need.

It took me about 6 months to learn the portion of food that will fill me up, so that I can stop eating well before my stomach takes it's sweet-ass time telling my brain it's full. Best thing I ever did for myself.
Of course the end result was that the game series was discontinued.
Extensive discussion, currently on front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20962720
Yet another good reason to not buy fish
Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims as 'Entirely Willing'
About a year ago I attended a talk he gave at the CATO institute (long story, but with Bitcoin) regarding this TZero project and something called Medici which I now forget the purpose of, in part because his wooden mannerisms and appearance were bizarre and distracting.

He dressed not at all like Bond, but exactly like a Bond villain. His tall gangly frame was compressed into this drab grey and nearly seamless tailored pantsuit sort of thing. Picture something Kim Jong Un would wear minus any pockets or visible buttons, topped by a stiff looking mandarin collar. His delivery, while emphatic, was monotonous and repetitive. It was like watching an animatronic version of himself.
Between inflation, lack of jobs, jobs that pay a decent wage and the 4% interest rate Congress sets does not help the borrower. Why is America making a profit off student loans? The dems want to pay back student loan debt, but who's pays for that? It's not fair for others to pay for my loan when I got it. I'm still paying for a degree that never helped me for a college that no longer exists. How is that fair? I'm not eligible to get my loans discharged either as I went to college too long ago.
I interpret the effect you mention differently, that there is simply not enough democracy.

If the government takes more input from associations than from voting, I think it's a reasonable conclusion. (See also my comment about tripartism above.)

But what seems to me closer to the truth is that people simply heavily underestimate the power of their vote.
> Eulers fornula e^ix = cos x + i sin x was discovered in 1748

Discovered by Roger Cotes in 1714, in IMO its most natural form, ix = log(cos x + i sin x)

> actual important identity you care about is that you can add angles by multiplying

Personally I think the multiplicative concept of rotations is the natural one, with rotations associated to points on a circle embedded in the plane, rather than associated to arclengths. The amazing thing is that we can compose rotations (naturally multiplicative) by first taking the logarithm of the rotations (a.k.a. angle measure) adding them, and then taking the inverse logarithm. The logarithm is a tool which turns multiplication into addition.

The protractor and the slide rule turn out to be more or less the same concept, which is why we can substitute the former for the latter in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosthaphaeresis
You can object to sports feeding corporate. But university feed corporations in every area.

I object to tuition going up 8% a year for the last 3 decades That's a much bigger problem even though it's sort of topic to the original article.
> it complains that the 150k salaries for welders bandied about are rare, but so what? Did anyone think a welder right out of the gate would make that much money?

If you read it, they say the 90th percentile welder gets paid $60k a year. That is, the average 15+ year experience welder gets paid way less than 50% of the original $150k claim.