skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We got rid of standups on my current team and it’s definitely very nice.

I think you could probably massage that answer though “well standups aren’t my favorite thing really, it’s sort of a lot of context switching and a lot of times the conversation isn’t relevant to me. But I understand it’s generally more for the managers than it is for me.”

And for the latter one

“I like a very professional, cordial, and relaxed relationship with my coworkers. I tend to do my own things on weekends which leaves me refreshed and happy to see everyone on Monday.”

It’s just a bit smoother than “the last thing I’m going to want to do is spend _more_ time with you”.

Instead of emphasizing the drain it’d be to spend more time with your coworkers, emphasize the benefits of coming back refreshed on Monday :-). They’re the same answer but one’s more positive.
That's not how evolution works... random variation, sometimes detrimental, will sometimes lead to advantage
What does that select for, people who can more effectively be sycophants and kiss ass?
I agree: one's goal has to be to create a fulfilling life (whatever that means to one) with the nervous system you actually have. Wishing things away rarely works with mental/emotional realities. There's many ways to manage the reality of your specific self; e.g., I'm pretty anxious, so I start every day I can with a nice relaxing bath, during which I am free of anxiety. However, I don't try to make myself be free of anxiety when I have to speak up in some tense situation; then I use mindfulness techniques to just be aware and persist despite it all. Sometimes I do things to change my internal self, sometimes I just treat it like a person that needs certain random things to be at top performance. It depends.
The point isn't that those choices are older and therefore worse, it's that there are now more choices. They should be able to say why they went with PHP over something else that was available at the time they started.
As a tech co person on the business side, let me tell you it is consistently amazing to me how much resistance I witness to the idea of a company making money. There's a huge confusion going on right now about how business works, the utility of profit, what capitalism is (and why it isn't [gasp clutch your pearls now!] evil... Especially in the Bay Area, the companies I have worked with and in are chock full of people who are opposed to the systems they rely on and have a vague idea that Something Like Communism is the "right way" to operate.
This is a joke right? Evolution doesn't choose anything.

In this case, the family had a hemoglobin variation, that resulted in a different kind of non-functional hemoglobin being produced. This hemoglobin has a blue tint. This, combined with their pale coloration, meant they had a blue tint.

This is not too dissimilar to how other hemoglobinopathies come about in nature. For example, the thallassemias and sickle cell anemia are two common hemoglobinopathies. Unlike the Fugate family's hemoglobinopathy, which likely did not provide any benefit, these two do provide some benefit to heterozygotes, and thus end up existing at a steady state in the population. The Fugate family's would likely disappear if it caused any issue in reproductive fitness (even a minor one), and the family reproduced among a sufficiently large population. However inbreeding combined with genetic drift means that there simply does not end up being a large enough population for the law of large numbers to take effect.

On the other hand, if the condition causes no reproductive fitness deficiency or increased reproductive ability, then the gene could potentially continue to exist in some very small number of the population. It could die out due to the simple fact of not having many affected people able to reproduce enough to make statistics matter.
The law should seek, more than just protect workers (the catchy part) to regulate their work.
Note to my own comment: Take a look at the "What they do tab" for both titles. You'll think that you've been transported back to 1969 in the punch card room where yes - the lowly Computer Programmers simply write code while the Software Developers talk to the business people and figure out what needs to be done. While hardly writing any code themselves. It's hilarious.
Your right of course and apologies that I'm just getting that aspect - thank you.

Yes, I suppose from what I'm saying, I'd be effectively violating the choice of relative. A fair and valid point and does raise many avenues of individuals opting in exposing others thru their choices. I guess shopping loyalty cards - the person who does the family shopping is revealing what the entire household likes in many ways.

But equally a tough choice, with many aspects - pro and con to weigh in. With that, I'll concede as without all the options fully outlines, the forced opt-out approach as this is the case, does make much more sense.

Thank you for a wonderful debate and I certainly learned something from it.
There is no consistency of political philosophy.

If you want to limit access to abortions at the state level you are a nutty republican.

If you want to limit access to firearms at the state level you are a nutty democrat.

Or replace nutty with heroic depending what single issue you support.
I can't think of many reasons my company couldn't keep trotting along if the CEO left and we went months without. The only thing I can think of is someone needs to appoint the people directly below him were they to leave.

You're assuming companies need to keep growing and need some flashy face of a CEO as a marketing gimmick. A steady business is fine.
Like anything, there are good executives and bad ones. The good ones have worked in the domain for a long time, they have built a-lot of experience, and have good leadership qualities. The bad ones are professional "management" material, they seem to rely more on politicking than actually generating value. The latter make me think i could easily do their job, and it makes me resent the fact that i'm doing all the work and they are making much more money than me.
Hmm, I've always used 100W as a reference. Maybe I got that from server estimates?
Too late. Javascript would have made it far easier to hire talent, and develop a much better user experience without multiple page refreshes. In some cases it would even be easier to develop a cross platform mobile application if you use Javascript as well.
I've always kinda suspected this just because so many execs seem to have time to be on multiple boards, CEO of whatever, head of some charity, advisor to some startup they have a stake in, et c., all at once, and "they work a lot" can't explain all of that.
I don't know how well that will work out for some of Apple's proprietary chips. Lots of off the shelf parts, yes, but not everything; maybe not some of the crucial components needed to boot properly.
Toxic 'forever chemical' found in drinking water for 7.5mm California residents
> Another way to think of it is, who benefits from this

I don't know about the Fugate's condition, but hemoglobinopathies are among the most common genetic diseases, and several are known to cause very severe symptoms when inherited in a dual-recessive fashion (like thalassemia and sickle cell anemia). It's unethical to conduct reproductive research on entire family lines, but when there is a pre-existing case study, one wonders what one could possibly learn about hemoglobin and why it seems to be a relatively dynamic protein. Just a thought as someone who does have a mild form of multiple thalassemias.
I'm not sure how @Too's example is any worse than named parameters - surely the point is that it's just as likely to transpose source/destination either way.
Why not have a general checklist with a minimum set of requirements for scientific papers that are relevant across all branches of science? The people putting their names on the paper would have to show that they followed everything or give reasons for skipping a step. The receiving journals would have their editors re-check the checklist. As part of reporting the results of the paper, the level of completeness of the checklist would also be in the report.

Yes, the checklist would not be all-encompassing or foolproof, and there would likely be revisions to the checklist, and maybe even domain-specific variants, but it would be an extra level caution that the media could report or choose to ignore at their will. Over time, the apparent level of scientific rigour would improve. No, it’s not bulletproof and there will be people who will try to meet the checklist and still present erroneous conclusions as reliable science, but it would be an improvement in the status quo for a layperson who is aware and values said checklist.
Your argument seems to be purely emotional disdain.

> Yet it seems to happen far less often

Citation needed. And if so, that is a reason to draw a line where on one side is "not-science"? That is just absurd. Does a car A stops being a means of transport when it subjectively breaks down more often than car B?

> very least, in less publicly impacting ways

Excuse me?

* A literal century ago someone failed to translate a German study so know about every child in the western civilization gets a good dose of distrust in science when they get indoctrinated that the tongue has separated regions for taste which is ridiculously easy to refute for yourself in about 15 seconds.

* The coup of the cereal industry to fund some studies telling everyone that breakfast is the most important meal of the day still misguiding health guides today.

* Schrödinger telling the world how stupid it would be to assume quantum principles in the visible world, still happily recited with the complete opposite meaning by about 500 media entities per day.

* Scientific entities failing to have any impact on people about the dangers of X-rays until people got impotent from having their shoes measured via X-rays in the local shopping mall

To be clear, this is not intended as some sort of smear campaign to science itself. I want to illustrate that all science is vulnerable to even dumb mistakes and that this dumb social sciences ain't real meme is only slowing down much overdue conversation!
I don't follow him regularly unless something he's saying comes up somehow, at which point I kinda look into him again.

He's famous for lambasting psychology, some of which is deserved, but some of which is just ignorant. Earlier this year he started complaining about psychologists ignoring long-tailed/skewed distributions, which is so absurd and widely written about I don't even know where to start, as it's a basic corollary of a lot of modern models. He also selectively miscites literature; god forbid he should do a systematic meta-analysis.

More of my concern is reinventing the wheel. I think he deserves a lot of credit for drawing attention to wrong models and assumptions in economics but model misspecification has been a topic that's been written about for decades in the statistics literature (e.g., "all models are wrong but some are useful", sandwich error estimators, pseudolikelihood ratio, model averaging, the work of Dawes, etc.). I agree with the general point he's making with these types of things, but his discussions would be a lot more interesting if he gave credit where it's due, expanding on others' past work rather than burying it.

Mostly I wish he'd tone himself down a bit, to get his signal:noise ratio in a better place. But then maybe he wouldn't draw attention to some of these issues.
Frankly I'm surprised this isn't augmented with some sort of hyperlocal lat/long or zip-code based targeting to, for example, influence all the workers at a specific office building. It wouldn't take much for a company to bombard it's competitor's staff members with wacky conspiracy theories and/or other things to make them less effective.
> The federal government passed a law in 1984 stripping states of their highway funding if they didn't put a floor under the drinking age at 21.

That doesn't actually change the fact that states have every right to change the drinking age. Obviously states do not have a right to federal government funds. However, if a state doesn't care for government funds, they are free to make their laws as they please. The feds have not made it illegal for states to do so (and they couldn't even if they tried).

I would really suggest responding to my comment as stated. I said:

> the states have always had the authority to do what people nowadays want the feds to do

Nothing about the contingency of federal highway funding takes away from the fact that states still retain the authority to set drinking ages as they see fit. The feds have the authority to spend their money how they see fit. That's how this whole thing works, believe it or not.
That's both adorably cute and remarkably accurate.

I don't know how or why, San Pel's bubbles are less "fizzy" micro-bubbles, but a softer, and what feels like a larger bubble, so "fuzzy"!
This highlights the 'the emperor has no clothes' syndrome where people will just ignore the bad behavior of a person because of their position or stature. Many times people will comment in confidence to close friends, because of the fear they will be vilified with a public response of the issue.

It seems to me that this is more modern day anomaly driven by too much hypersensitivity in our social interaction where we self censor to avoid the most minor appearance of being critical or aggressive.
Both sides actually select for looks more than any other characteristic.
Interesting, makes me want to put some microplastics in our DNA sequencer / robotic fluorescent microscope and have a scan.

https://reseq.hackteria.org
There's a lot of glass bottled water too, at least in Germany.
Plastic bottled water is not bought because it is higher quality. People buy it because it comes in a disposable container.
A large part of this vision fund is basically Saudi oil money. These folks realize that oil doesn't have that much future if you think in terms of hundreds of years, so they are looking to diversify. Vision fund is not a tool to be on the cutting edge, its just a means to not be left behind. Hence they let VC market decide which horse is worth backing and then they swing their dollars around to see what happens.
Maybe the kernel implementation of TCP could have been more lightweight like UDP.

Handle socket and port allocation, and then forward all packets to the relevant process unchanged.

The application software is then responsible for reconstructing packets into a reliable stream.
Granted, however the flights I listed are all non-stop.
One of the theories is that putting the caps and other mechanic actions cause friction and create the particles.

Many water pipes in houses are plastic. Would be interesting to see studies on tap water.
Like any technology it can be used for good or evil ... but it has to be said ... anger is a helluva drug.
Unless you are in Flint...
Seems like an ugly hack compared to all the "cool" tech mentioned here. But well done, I'll be the first one to star it!
There are a lot of reasons why choosing a mature tech stack is a better idea than the stack-du-jour. Better support, less bugs, and you know you won't be rewriting to the next stack when this one gets abandoned in a year.
I think it only makes it worse by adding a fear of not making it perfect on the first time.
Right, so it's malware? Good old malware which once upon a time was frowned upon. Keep on top of that really special person who has a restraining order on you.
bet you it is still not enough to convince those water bottle people to stop using it and move back to tapwater.

bottled water - one of the biggest scams of the decade.
Sometimes both. Sickle cell anemia gives you slightly better odds of surviving malaria for instance.
I think a good rule of thumb should be that a kernel should be responsible making hardware devices safe to use among multiple processes, and little else.
The world is made up of ONLY chemicals, now and forever
If you want to be more opaque, I guess you could do:

```c#
var file = File("source");
file.CopyTo("target");
```

(apologies if this is formatted badly; no clue what HN supports here, and I'm on mobile)
Design-led vs. experience-led and why it matters
Pear juice doesn't taste like much but sugar water, so it's often used as a sweetener in things that already contain fruit.
There is this phenomena with UFO's, I don't remember the name of it, but it goes like this, even if they landed at the White House and CNN covered it, there would still be people who were doubtful, just because it would be the most significant event in human history, so given that these are not that case, but just strong evidence, there will be a lot of people who are essentially morons.
He did say that he thinks the idea that bottled water is a human right is “extreme”, and that he doesn’t believe it should be.

Full quote:

> “Water is, of course, the most important raw material we have today in the world. It’s a question of whether we should privatize the normal water supply for the population. And there are two different opinions on the matter. The one opinion, which I think is extreme, is represented by the NGOs, who bang on about declaring water a public right. That means that as a human being you should have a right to water. That’s an extreme solution. The other view says that water is a foodstuff like any other, and like any other foodstuff it should have a market value. Personally, I believe it’s better to give a foodstuff a value so that we’re all aware it has its price, and then that one should take specific measures for the part of the population that has no access to this water, and there are many different possibilities there.”

The Snopes article only disputes that he didn’t specifically say the words “Water is NOT a human right”, but backs up what the GP said (that he doesn’t believe it should be a human right).
In Bali, Indonesia (and many developing countries) you have no choice. Drinking tap water is also health hazard in some countries.
How the hell are they loosing money they take a big cut from a service that they invest 0 money into outside of marketing. If the app worked half decently their cs expenses would be low.
That's how I buy it, but I've encountered plenty of people who think it's of higher quality and prefer it.
And isn't this sort of to be expected after globalization? Wages balance out across the (globalized) market, for the most part. It also strikes me as kind of a good thing. Is that wrong of me to think?
Antimatter bombs emit mostly gamma radiation and so are unlikely to efficiently couple it to air. You would need a tungsten or lead (or even uranium) coupler to absorb the gamma radiation and heat up to drive the explosion.
> "Remember all those times we sat around high and had sex? yeah, that was great"

My wife and I have great high sex memories that we reference somewhat frequently. Don’t knock it til you try it!
An Octupus Changing Colors While Dreaming
I’m not sure this is only western society. Is there an indigenous culture that values male emotions without stigma?

As I think about Asia and Africa, I’m drawing a blank on this. But I’d be happy to be shown wrong.
UBI mostly removes the need for laws to protect workers from exploitation. This includes sex workers.
To be fair, most Software Engineers are able to secure multiple offers and even more interviews. Or at least that’s my impression which may be the result of survivorship bias.

And it only gets easier after your first gig.

In that instance, where an engineer can easily leave your company, it makes sense to want to ensure they really want the position since interviewing and onboarding are very expensive for a company as well as having someone leave with a bunch of institutional knowledge built up over the years.

It’s also probably the easiest question in the world to totally bullshit with just a vague grasp of what the company does.

“One of the things that really excited me about <company X> is the problems you must face dealing with <such large amounts of data, securing your system, supporting N users on the app at once, syncing data across data zones>” etc etc. or “I think it’d be really neat to work at a company in the <healthcare, finance, whatever> industry because I’ve always wanted to <improve lives, learn about high frequency trading>”

And even if it’s an easy enough thing to BS it should also be genuinely easy to find an exciting reason to want to work somewhere in our field.
Why are y’all downvoting someone for asking a genuine question they didn’t know the answer to?
"Something like a 70% failure rate, with 20% being moderately successful, and 10% being very successful is considered very good for the VC industry."

While that's true overall, I don't think those expectations are the same for the kind of very-late-stage, pour rocket fuel on the fire investments that the Vision Fund is making.

For seed-stage investing, definitely.

The problem for late-stage investors is that it's really hard to get the same "grand slam" economics on your winners that early-stage investors can, so it's harder to make up for a bunch of washouts.
> The Fugates he treated ingested this dye and within a few minutes, the blue coloration of their skin disappeared, and their skin turned pink.

Really? Within a few minutes??

Nitpick aside, such an interesting article! The world is such a big and interesting place!
Does anybody knows how emulators cope with such games? Can you find them as ROM files?
https://historycollection.co/the-fugate-family-of-kentucky-h...
It is a legitimate question. I feel that way, because as a society we are in a state of transformation right now.

By pure rational thought many young men have accepted to treat women like equal human beeings, just as many women have understood that the traditional division of gender roles might not fit all social encounters.

The issue is, that understanding and doing are two seperate things and switching between the old and the new paradigma when it fits us seems to be common place.

So many men end up getting the worst of both worlds: they are not the strong leader of the family any more, but they were still raised in a way to hide their feelings, just like many women are expected to be strong while they might not always have been raised in that way.

The thing we aim for as a society here is defintly worth it (I could experience for myself how amazing a relationship of equals between man and woman can be), but there are many people who struggle with this and it leads to all kind of societal side effects like depression, suicide, drug abuse and violence.

To be fair in times when the man had to be strong this was also a problem, because there are always people who simply don’t fit the role society wants them to take and if you force them into it bad things happen.

Communicating your own feelings is important for mental health. Anyone who struggles with this: get help. Write letters to a person that you never send — writing will help you to think and reflect.
Well, on the flipside, it should certainly seek, more than just regulate their work (the politically correct part) to protect them. How could the law succeed at either without input from the workers?