skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What's your schooling background?
I also grew up with language being very unnatural to me. For me my biggest strides as a writer came from the grind of working hard on long-form essays (or short stories) that I cared about doing well. For me I was driven by producing something I was proud of or communicating arguments well. Sometimes these were research for university classes, sometimes they where theological/political essays for friends/facebook-arguments.

There's nothing like spending time on a single piece to develop skills. If you start slow asking yourself questions like "How can I make this sentence/point more straightforward?" and mulling on it and revising, then your brain will start to develop those patterns quicker and you'll get better at putting thoughts directly to the page with less revision needed and you'll build confidence as you get a sense of your own style.
Regarding layoffs: "We find that the real-side effects of buyouts on target firms and their workers vary greatly by deal type and market conditions... This conclusion cast doubts on the efficacy of 'one-size-fits-all' policy prescriptions for private equity."

[0] Pro Rata https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-pro-rata-ed716a8a-37...

It really depends on the PE firm and the company. In the software space, there are large PE firms which have a tendency to cut headcount because in their view, public market CEOs focus on growing revenue at the expense of profitability. This tends to lead to excessive full time employees over and above best practises...so if the previous CEO overhired and the PE firm fired people....then it's the PE firm that's in the wrong right...end of story? I'm not saying you are saying this but this is the underlying vibe I get in these kind of discussions....
“Employees leave managers, not companies”. I think this is well understood, however, why isn’t that logic applied to hiring?

Even for startups, my experience points to early employees joining founders that they like or have worked closely with before. The actual problem they are solving usually is in the top 3, but not the #1 reason.
> The reality is that corporations shouldn't be espousing political viewpoints

But they MUST. That’s the issue. There is no such thing as remaining neutral.

What could they do? Ban the player to make China happy? Now the west is mad and boycotting.

NOT ban the player? Now China is pissed and kicking you out of the country.

They were damned by someone either way. There was no neutral political stance they could take. International politics is just setup that way. Total neutrality doesn’t exist on that stage.
I'm pretty pissed off by this, and I'll be moving my private repos (which I'm sure has zero effect on them but still) somewhere else.

Supporting concentration camps is not something I'm trying to do; especially, by directly funding their supporters and those profiting off of them. I don't get a choice with my fucking taxes, but I do get a choice with the rest of my money.
The most well-known one would be James Damore being fired from Google for criticizing the corporate diversity policies [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google%27s_Ideological_Echo_Ch...
If he was fired for sexual harassment, that is one thing. But a naughty password on its own? That was maybe not the case here but that is what I have doubts about.
Discrimination is not illegal except when it is discrimination against particular protected classes -- federally, this includes race/nationality/citizenship, religion, sex, age, disability, or veteran status. A private company is free to discriminate on the basis of political belief.

That's not to say it is right or acceptable, but it isn't illegal.
If you have a nice car, you likely have the windows shut, and the AC/heat on, set to recirculate, and the air is filtered through a HEPA filter.

Meanwhile I'm on my bike, breathing all the fumes with no protection whatsoever.
The fact that there are poor performing PE funds out there doesn't make LBOs an objectively evil device.

You're simply arguing investors are dumb for throwing their money at PEs somewhat indiscriminately rather than only investing in high-quality PE funds with investments that do not go bankrupt as often.

Moreover, one could argue that the mere existence of LBOs forces managers to be more disciplined and act on behalf of their shareholders, which marginally reduces the challenge that agency costs pose on public corporations
I agree and think China has a right to include its own account of history in the record.
>> Why should Blizzard get in the middle of what's happening between China and Hong Kong

That's the question. Why did they do it in the first place? They could have not banned the player.
It's kind of unfortunate. It's like there's free speech, but the reality is almost everyone needs to work to live, and by way of working, their freedom of speech is effectively revoked.

EEOC makes it illegal to discriminate based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin; why can't political views and speech said outside of the workplace be a part of that?
Xi Jinping Thinks China Is World's Only Sovereign State

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13497/china-sovereign-sta...
Twitter: No, we're sorry we sold your security info for a boatload
> In both evolution and human technology, the arc is long and winding but it empirically bends towards greater complexity & capacity. You basically have to cover your eyes to claim otherwise.

Does it? The cockroach is more highly evolved than the human (many more iterations) and is quite well adapted, but does it exhibit "greater complexity & capacity"?

The human hair louse can only live on humans and is a different species from the human pubic louse (which can also only live on humans): do you consider this increased complexity and capacity?

That arc bends towards increased fitness in a given ecological/economic niche, but no more than that.
Types improve productivity in large legacy projects. When I have to review a change in python I have to check absolutely everything from scratch. I have to look at the signatures of the called functions to see if the call sites are correct, where a typed and compiled language would simply fail to build. And I have to carefully check every block to see if attributes of none-typed variables are being accessed.

Python is a bit like a high-interest credit cards for coders. You can use it to make it look like you just whipped out a huge project from scratch. But you will spend the following decade paying down the tech debt.
Oh, it can capture everything. I believe that. It's just that it relies on volunteers to actually do the work of formalizing advanced theories. It has some pretty darn advanced stuff already, like complex numbers. But there's also a huge amount of research-level mathematics which nobody's gotten around to coding in the Metamath formalism yet. This is the same issue discussed in the video: with millions of dollars and a full time team, you could get something like the proof of Fermat's last theorem in there, but its not there yet.
Apple will most likely be fine because it's unlike any other western company operating in China in that it employs a lot of people assembling their products. It's not in the CCP's interest for people to boycott Apple in a nationalist fervor only for unemployment to rise, which would be an existential threat to the CCP if they lost control of.
That's an optimistic world-view. If they put down the protesters violently, I'm not convinced it would really have an impact more than 6 months out. Maybe I'm too cynical, but honestly, there don't really seem to be any negative long-term repercussions for bad actors in today's world.
Just a note. For 1, linux has logrotate, which is a native tool to archive and then delete log files after X days/size/whatever.
> Yes, they're a big polluter, but they're also moving a LOT of people around the city, so that sort of cancels out

How does that cancel out? It seems that it is a force multiplier.
Any law that doesn't have publicly accessible text, should be unconstitutional. How can you know what the law is, if you can't actually read it? Some of us prefer to read the actual text of the law, in lieu of listening to other people explain it.
Yes, the US was funding the movements to overthrow Assad.

"helping Isis fighters relocate" and "throwing bags of cash" sounds pretty similar to me, if the cash leads them to China's border.
SquareCTF 2019
Great Streisand moves by China though, previously gamers or basketball fans might not really care about what's happening in Hong Kong/China in general, but within 2 days they (China) have raised awareness of what a shitty overlord they are.
Then I guess I hit another bug! The dang thing returned on my last big update.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_notation
5 seconds of googling.
Police Detector (speed radar) apple appstore
Interestingly, the list of team members appear to have vanished from the homepage.
I'm feeling like it is not appropriate to publicly post passwords, even when they are old.
neither part. This sounds rather bizarre to me.
Much like crop circles, and gerbil stuffing, seductive bs goes viral and becomes, in fact a thing. File under: humans being.
China is targeting individual speech, sanctions and embargos target governments and governmental policy. There's a bit of a difference there.

That said, I think that China's efforts - by using companies as their proxies - are being much more effective.
And yet, I see absolutely no talk, even from the U.S. Senators who are quoted, of the U.S. actually doing anything about it that would make a difference.
What is so weird about the NBA controversy is that it stems from a tweet. Twitter is banned in China. So how could it have “hurt the Chinese people’s feelings”?
Actually, it's a rather perfect analogy.

People have some expectations of privacy and it's not normally considered acceptable to violate this.

Sometimes this stuff is untried in court or falls into a definite legal grey area and usually the policy is to err on the side of caution and simply assume that if something is commonly expected to be private, then it's private and should be kept so.

If we were investigating a user for XYZ and came across a file named "Personal Diary 2019.txt" or whatever, I can assure you that HR would not want us to open that file. Possibly if HR found out they'd declare the investigation tainted and want to stop it right there.
GitHub contribution graph to show burnout
This isn't hard. Don't want your personal info on a work computer? Then don't put it there. Work computers, networks and other resources are not yours. They belong to your employer.
Western companies have been bending blatantly a little too low to save assets and market shares in China. With trade war, human rights abuse in Xinjiang, and Hong Kong protest, this is probably a good chance for the West to stand against China's invasion.
Some of them might, but not for necessarily the same reason others would. Doomfist, for instance, is written as someone that believes in conflict, which doesn't mesh well with authoritarianism.
Not to mention "creepy" is a charge that is often impossible to defend yourself from. It's wholly dependent on the subjectivity of the accuser and their opinion of the accused.

Walk over and say good morning every day to a coworker and she finds you attractive? Charming and sweet. Walk over and say good morning every day to a coworker and she finds you unattractive? Creepy.
...and how big an impact mining it will have on environment and water use...just saying
Okay, so it's not just me. I've never clicked on what are apparently real paypal emails, because I have legitimately always assumed they were phishing e-mails that made it past my spam filter.

They're real. They're really real paypal e-mails. Wow.
TRON by TronLink Airdrop
I was expecting an example of the west punishing another government (or companies in another country) for free speech.

Google wasn’t censored by a government. That was a decision they decided to make (whatever you think of it, I don’t want to start a relitigation of that mess).
IRS: If a hard fork is followed by an airdrop, you will have taxable income
There are some states, like CA, where discrimination based on political views is illegal, but it’s practically-speaking not too hard for an employer to find a more traditional performance reason that may be related to political views. Caveat: IANAL

Source: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-employers-discri...
booking.com has always worked very well for me in terms of service, but the user interface is extremely hostile to me with its nagging pop-ups and stressful text in general.

I know they're trying to get me to book by showing me an imagined or real shortage, but it stresses me out to the point I try to avoid them.
If the government offers special interest groups special laws to impose economic penalties on others for saying certain things, then free speech has been restricted, just by different mechanisms. I understand this says “libel” laws but does not mean they are fair or only preventative of actual fraud. In many cases they’re used against claims which are actually true or said without the intent to deceive.

This is a better source than the Wikipedia I provided.

https://cldc.org/aeta-veggie-libel/
Hi all, we work with a lot with companies and brands on analyzing their partnerships and built a version of this search tool internally and thought thought it'd be really useful for other people to use.

So what does this do? Well, you can find and request information on company partnerships as well as other data such as competitors and customer demographics.

The front end is built using NextJs, the search is backed by Elasticsearch (ELK stack) and we manage our containers using Kubernetes and all of this runs off GCP.
Happy to answer any questions about the tech stack in this thread.

This is an early v1 that's free to use and we’d love some feedback.

I’ve also added the product hunt link below.
[1]: https://www.producthunt.com/posts/partneroid
> What it comes down to is that I expect Blizzard to have a system of values guiding their decision on this, and I want those values to line up with mine - everyone gets human rights, democracy is preferable to authoritarianism, freedom to protest a corrupt government is an essential right, etc.

What this whole thing is showing is that big corporations don't give a shit about any of those things, not really. They care about money. Think about sports - in the NFL, players were protesting racial injustice; some members of the public said "shut up and play ball"; and the league and elite media mostly said "no, players have the right to speak about these things". That's because in the US, wokeness is the third rail - ultimately there is more money in being pro-inclusion, pro-diversity, etc. You can't be a big company in the US without supporting those things, so big companies support them.

Now we have some NBA people protesting injustice in Hong Kong, and the league and elite media say "shut up and play ball". And that's because Hong Kong / Taiwan independence is the third rail for China. If you don't have the "correct" opinion, you're not going to do any business there.
Ditto South Park. By telling people they cannot watch South Park, they have guaranteed everyone will want to watch that episode.

That's the lesson Dolores Umbridge inadvertently taught us in Harry Potter # 5.
I'm not dead but PayPal blocked my ability to transfer my account balance to my bank account. Ultimately I only got my money out by transferring money to another PayPal account and pulling it out via bank transfer -- after which that account was suspended. I've stopped using PayPal and am switching over to Stripe for all online merchant activity.
Right now the leadership in China is terrified! They've been able to get away with a lot, basically using their economic power to get other countries to look the other way with regards to their behavior (suppressing their people, stealing IP, bullying smaller nations). but the moment they got called on it and people started moving their operations to other countries (previously considered "impossible"), they saw the economic impact. And they realized that they can't get away with what they're doing if they aren't providing their citizens with a constantly growing economy, their citizens are going to start getting angry again.

It's clear now much of the Chinese leadership were a paper tiger and now that the heat is on, they don't really have a strategy. They just never expect enough people to call them out publicly and embarass them. Maybe they'll keep hold of their own country by suppressing information flow, countrywide surveillance, but whatever power they had over the global economy: severely diminished.
Do the censors actually have any interest in what he rest of the world thinks? Presumably this is mainly for internal consumption.
Corporations are citizens too! Alongside plenty of other benefits, I’d expect them to support American values.
And people wonder why tech has a massive issue with sexism...
Yes. The issue is what that means though—what are the effects of higher temps going to be? My post which you replied to was about simulations in the report as to what will happen as a result of higher temperatures. Coastal inundation, droughts, crop failures, etc.
What is really interesting about this is how completely and utterly horrible a job Blizzard did in anticipating and preparing this very obvious possibility, and thus is so poorly handling every single aspect of this.This so obviously was likely to happen that it easily could have been anticipated and planned for to be dealt with in a much, much more professional way, and yet clearly they didn't, and it's beyond inexcusable for any major company to drop the ball like this. And they just continue to prove their incompetence in how they're (not) responding now -- they should be in crisis PR mode, yet they're just sitting there, paralyzed.

How they've (mis)handled this will be studied by business and PR students for years to come.
Nope, they can do whatever they want. The contract allows them to.

But it's not a matter of whether or not this was a legal move or not, it's the intent and what it has shed light onto that is the actual real problem.

China is controlling our media and it is becoming harder and harder to ignore. Companies have to watch their step when saying anything because if China, for god knows what reason, decides that something that comes from you does not fall in line with their ideology, be it a line of dialogue in your movie, or a flag in a videogame, or a winning player's speech in this case... Well, good luck without that chinese market.

It could mean death for some companies, so everyone does their best to try to avoid the issue altogether. Now it's fairly easy to do so, but what about the future? Is this not alarming?

Sure, keep politics out of games. Let's keep it out of movies as well. And books. Let's not talk about politics altogheter, not even on social media, or China might decide that the company you're working for does not get to work with them until they fire you.

It might sound exaggerated and reeks of slippery-slope fallacy. Is it? Personally, I think not.

This has to stop.
I've never done anything malicious with the knowledge, but I've totally learned people's passwords just by watching their fingers type. I make an effort to have passwords that would be difficult for a human to nail down while watching them typed quickly in real time. The ubiquity of cameras has me reconsidering input and/or authentication mechanisms, though.
>he was fired for the sexual harassment of a coworker

OP is vague on what this guy actually did. Note that they only went to the girl after cracking the password, and she said he was "creepy" towards her.

"Creepy" in this context might just mean FWU (flirting while ugly).
A successful or even interesting lawsuit does in fact depend on the law.

If you try to sue someone for violating a law that doesn't exist, they will make a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, and the judge will throw out the lawsuit.
> Those who run small businesses find it nearly impossible to walk away from Facebook, Instagram, Yelp, Etsy, even Amazon. Employers often mandate that their workers use certain apps or systems like Zoom, Slack, and Google Docs. “It is only the hyper-privileged who are now saying, ‘I’m not going to give my kids this,’ or, ‘I’m not on social media,’” says Rumman Chowdhury, a data scientist at Accenture. “You actually have to be so comfortable in your privilege that you can opt out of things.”

What an absolutely absurd thing to say.

In the context of small business owners, your Facebook/Instagram/Yelp presence is no different than that of a "hyper-privileged" company, sans the advertising budget and amount of staffers who work on it.

In the context of your employer, enterprise software like Google Docs and Slack are (ostensibly) different than their consumer counterparts, in terms of analytics, data collection, and advertising. Further, the "hyper-privileged" middle- and upper-managers at tech companies are far more likely to use these forms of enterprise software than the under-privileged classes in America.

In the context of personal life, you are under absolutely no obligation, regardless of social caste, to join Instagram or Facebook and it's disingenuous to claim otherwise.

There is a certain class of media, of which I count Vox as a preeminent example, which constantly use hyperbole and socially-charged arguments in contexts where it doesn't fit or make sense.
>are being much more effective

Absolutely. They’re beating us at our own game and revealing that American values were never freedom and democracy - those are just ways we think are good to make money. If a better system comes along we’re the first to jump on it.
Ah, so they just subscribe to profit ethics. It all makes sense now.
Any action with a foreign power is inherently political. I am sure they want to be able to declare themselves above the fray, but even if they didn't go looking for "brownie points", people would still criticize them for business in China and the Chinese government would still push them to censor their products and employee messaging. It's the same with the NFL and the kneeling players getting pressure from the President, except scarier to most Americans because it's a foreign power with no recourse in our court system.
I too remember when a member of congress and a cabinet member both urged Google to fire someone because their comments had hurt the feelings of the American people.

No, actually I don't think that's a comparable situation.
I think long-term it's maybe okay. All of this is a sign that the CCP is losing control of things. Of course their reaction is to tighten up and things are going to get worse before they get better.

Unfortunately I do think this means we're going to see some action in the South China Sea region. China has problems to deal with in Hong Kong, Taiwan, North Korea, Xinjiang, Tibet, etc. Eventually one of its neighbors is going to get aspirations and will poke the bear. Hopefully China is spread too-thin to deal with it, although that will mean conflict. Violence will be necessary here.
Most grows is not exponential, rather it is shaped like an S curve. A novel phenotype/technology flourishes by taking advantage of some free energy, but after the low hanging fruits have been picket the multitude of offspring has to compete for smaller returns.
Formally Modeling Database Migrations
Half of that stuff is just incremental progress from Maxwell's equations.
So true. So many designers try to be too clever, and bad UI is the end-result. Non-obvious design is excusable proportional to how-often I'm going to use something AND how many steps it takes away from me. Non-obvious design is really only good when it saves people time, but people will only put up with time-saving UI when they are going to be using a UI often. For example, Spotify's UI is a little counter-intuitive at first, but I use it so frequently that it's okay and I know how it works now.