skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The form vendor is JotForm (https://www.jotform.com/), and we have a BAA (business associates agreement) with them.

We have Google and Facebook pixels from when we were running ads. What are your thoughts on that? You would have to browse in incognito, because of how many sites have pixels, and not use Gmail/Messenger/Whatsapp if you didn't want to disclose the fact you're searching for a mental healthcare provider to Google or Facebook.
that's a very expensive and risky bet to make.
They also have the potato, their complaint is about having to share it with poorer people. :P
That itself is an apocryphal claim, but even if I take it at face value it doesn't really apply to curated data sets that we tend to be exposed to by media outlets with modestly competent science departments. The Economist is certainly not the best out there, but it's very far from an uncurated data set.
This isn't specific to USB-C. The older MagSafe adapters (and likely the ones before them) came in different wattage for different computers. The smaller wattage adapters are physically smaller and lighter -- often important for someone who intentionally purchased a lightweight computer.
The math equivalent of a negative result would be more like "I tried for months to prove this theorem, and it didn't work".

The difference is that in math "here is a proof" is all you need, while in sciences people are typically sharing what amounts to collections of observations. If you publish the collections that lead to interesting conclusions, but not the ones that are boring, people looking at what's been published are misled.
Agreed. For a while now my CI flow has basically been:

./script/prepare-env
./script/build
./script/test
./script/deploy

No matter the language, OS, or CI platform (minor changes are needed, ie for different environment variables).

The CI config files are then very simple, just defining the various stages and what to cache/archive.
Gene testing startup Color inks genetic analysis deal with Alphabet's Verily
(Author here) To clarify, we don't actually replace it automatically - we show a pill notification that new stories are available. You can either choose to tap it and see the new feed, or ignore it and continue with what you were doing
What Is Low Code? What Is No Code? A Primer with Low Code Examples
I work for a VC, and it's sort-of like this. Not so much because we think so highly of our ability to detect shady people, as because the checks we do are fine most of the time, and constantly being refined. But they do need to be cheap - it's not easy to place money and manage that portfolio for 5-10 years cheap enough to actually make a good return when factoring in investments that fail for reasons that are far harder to identify ahead of time than outright fraud.

The outright frauds are rare enough that checking for them needs to be very cheap for it not to be more cost-effective to spend that money improving other deal-flow filtering. That's not to say that VCs aren't trying to improve on it. It's just that fraud is just one of many risks, and managing risk is about taking a dispassionate view of which measures improve your returns the most.
Their time is not that valuable. If they don't vett they are just gamblers and that works as long as the estimated value of random choises is over 1.
Your units are off on the tesla. It uses 200 watt hours per km, not 200k wh/km. Anyway, yes, driving uses more energy than watching tv.
Or they are hoping for a higher stock price by calling themselves tech companies?
At risk of wading into a toxic swamp, I would interpret this more as "the hype around ambitious female founders makes it easier for a scam run by a woman to get media attention, prominent board members, and funding than an equivalent man"

Not that women are any more likely to run a scam than men -- they just have had an easier time of it over the past 10 years.

It's really interesting to look back at Elizabeth Holmes's media profile around 2014-2015. She was hyped as the next Steve Jobs, and not in a mocking way. The media, the tech industry, the country at large wanted a female founder to be the next tech titan, so they chose one. Unfortunately, it turned out to be vaporware.

So I don't think there's much to read into here, other than selection bias from investors and the media attention. Lots of men run ambitious but failed startups or scams, but over the past decade, the women have had a better time getting attention. That will probably change as successful female founders becomes commonplace, not exceptional.
Their outages have not affected everyone and often affect a small slice of the service.

Also, other banks have the same kinds of outages, often, but are not as transparent or communicative as Monzo.

I've been full Monzo for the last 18 months and have never had an issue.
See the axios article. The $400M was a loan to exercise stock options. You can acquire more options after founding a company as part of a bonus or additional comp...
>You think "aviation safety" means that outright criminal negligence should go unpunished? That goes against all common sense.

Ultimately, mostly. It requires you to think bigger, to expect mistakes and wrongdoing, and focus on ways to prevent the ultimate effect “plane crash” and not an intermediate cause (mistakes, negligence, fraud, laziness, stupidity, random acts of god, etc)

You have to think of humans as part of the system and failure too. Humans fail just like steel beams fail. You need to engineer for it and not blame your tools and materials when your system fails, but how the system is designed instead (and not by fixing the designers by putting them in jail but by fixing the design)

You do this by striving to understand failures when they happen (not by pointing fingers and insisting on prison) As you understand individual causes of failure you look back a step further and a step further until you are satisfied that youve fixed the immediate problem and everything that let it happen.

You don’t stop when you find out that Bob is lazy and a liar and didn’t do his job. It’s naive and dangerous to think that there won’t be another Bob next time or that whatever you do to punish Bob will eliminate all Bobs from the future forever.

You want to fix what design principles weren’t there that led to the faulty design, then the tests that didn’t catch it, then the testing requirements that didn’t make appropriate tests, then the auditing that didn’t catch the laps, then the acceptance tests, pilot reporting pipeline and prioritization, incident response lapses, missing regulation, missing enforcement audit, wrong training, missing law, missing insurance requirement, missing risk notification, change notification, process overcomplexity analysis, and on and on and on.

Flying people around is hugely complex and involves many many actors. Too many of them to say the buck stops anywhere. Every responsibility for correct action is shared over several organization and thousands of people. Finding which ones to hang is counterproductive to safety if you’re actually trying to improve because it’s a distraction and theres never one single point of failure, there are a whole series of things that have to go wrong and if they do and it is actually only a few people responsible then it is everyone’s fault for being foolish enough for letting it get that way.

Punishment can be there as an afterthought for particularly egregious acts, but if it os the main focus you are accepting and encouraging failure and ensuring that regularly you will be hanging Bobs in the village square.
Should those training processes not be blamed? After all, it wasn’t Southwest Airlines that crashed and the sketchy founder of Lion Air certainly didn’t have safety as a core value.
The form, where we collect user data, is not hosted by us, and is hosted by a HIPAA-compliant vendor. What particular data was being shared in your story?
Why should you take the companies advice to stay quiet when you believe they're the ones who were at fault?
The SandDance README says it uses Vega for chart layout.
Those stock sales weren't squeaky clean and there are numerous reports. Some have it as loans that are backed by stock, which means no stock was actually sold. Other accounts have it that he used some of the proceeds of the $700MM to actually buy even more WeWork shares which makes absolutely no sense as any financial advisor would tell you to diversify your holdings, not use borrowed money to leverage up on an investment that is 99.9999% of your net worth.

He's also bought personal and business properties and there are reports that he will have to sell some assets to close some financial holes that he is encountering.

I mean with the way WeWork was run, it's not surprising the his own personal finances are mimicing that of WeWork - a house of cards that needed to keep the merry go round working in order not to fall apart. He was definitely banking on a successful IPO, but looks like there maybe personal fallout from all of this for him as well.

Not to mention that now that they have new co-CEOs in there they will be looking through the books so if there are any financial irregularities, such as has been reported of potentially costs being booked as revenue (wtf?) - then there maybe further legal action against him.

I think this story will continue to unfold for some time.
The MKZT-79221 that is the basis for both the Yars and Topol-M TEL is rated for driving off-road, and both TELs are even considered capable of launching off-road.

About half of the Russian mobile ICBM force are based in the Volga plain, and the Siberia based half are in mixed forest-steppe zones, because the Russians know their own geography.
Nope, 400 is strictly Americans, and was released a week ago. I give up.
As they say in The Expanse, “Flip and burn!”

You accelerate toward your target at 1g. Ship is built with the floors toward the engines. Halfway there, you flip the ship around and decelerate at 1g until you reach your target.

The point being, also according to Musk; “The best part is no part. The best system is no system.”
Technically, all of San Diego County is served by SDG&E.
>Finally for gods sake, the current budget is 0.49% of the total spend. Increase that to 5%

A couple years ago I wanted to just create a proper multi-national politics-free space organization (I know, it would never happen with the way things are).

At the time if we took 1% of the GDP (presumably via a tax) of the top 5 nations you would have created a 408 billion a year budget. Staffed by academics, create a board that has heads of industry, experts in various fields (various types of engineers, test pilot, medical doctor, etc) and scientists in relevant field and set a max term they can serve with the initial ones picked in varying intervals (3 year, 5 year, 7 years) so that you are only replacing a percentage of your people at any given time so you can stay more focused on long-term goals. Also try and keep relatively equal numbers of representatives from each financially contributing country on the board.

Also allow other countries to contribute 1% of their GDP unless they are an economically disadvantaged country then allow them to contribute at a much lower scale with scaled benefits.

As far as the 'benefits' allow every country contributing 1% of their GDP to have 100% royalty free access to any technologies/discoveries/data that is a result of this agency. Countries that were sliding-scale members, pay 1/10th of the royalty/fee that non-contributing companies would and still keep the non-contributing country fee relatively low (even 1% fee on something that might result in a profit of 100 million a year globally could extend a given mission a year or more).

It's a massively unrealistic dream but it's probably the closest we could get to something like Starfleet.
What are your thoughts on having those pageviews tracked? We could turn them off if people weren't comfortable.
Nitpick: k8s has supported encryption at rest for secrets for a while.

https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/administer-cluster/encrypt-...
Having worked at half a dozen remote companies and a bunch of companies where I'm on site in the office I can tell you this from experience.

People in general suck at communication.

Those teams that are the most productive and produce the most - those that produce 10, 20 or 100 times more value than average teams do one thing really well that all the others suck at. Communication. They gel together well and produce a lot because they communicate well.

I've had a handful of experiences of working on teams that have 10X-100X productivity and I've loved working on every single one of them. They all had flawless and free flowing communication, whether you were in the office or remote, you were always kept in the loop. Their infrastructure was designed to facilitate ease of communication whether you were at your desk, in a meeting room, at home or on a beach 1,000 miles away.

Every single one of them, without exception designed their businesses to facilitate communication before they thought about anything else and every single one of them didn't skip a beat if everyone was in the office or the whole team was working from home, or even in the same time zone... and they don't need telepresence robots to assist with that.

Those that don't communicate well don't produce even when everyone's together in the office. Telepresence robots aren't going to help them communicate. We tried a device that was like an iPad on a Segway when I was at Kobo. It was a hilarious gimmick for a couple of weeks before we all decided it was stupid and went back to Bluejeans/Slack which was more than sufficient to communicate effectively.
This would make sense except that the job isn't interviewing for jobs. You shouldn't hold people to the expectation that they're going to approach communicating with recruiters in the same way they would approach actual work they were actually getting paid for. This is a great way to filter good candidates out based on something that has nothing to do with the work you are hiring for.
Whatever happened to Kurds in the past in Iraq, Iran etc is not Turkeys problem.
Put yourself in the situation. You have a terrorist group that is killing your citizens for 35 fucking years. You are hosting 5 million Syrian refugees in your country. What do you do? What would the US do? I know what is happening right now is not the ideal solution but it is very hard to blame Erdogan.

Also, I can assure you that Kurds in Turkey is treated much much much better that African Americans and Native Americans in the US. So what does this say about the US?
Monument to Missing Tourists Taken by Wolves Appears in Battery Park
> The bit where a secret gets pasted into the Very Secure system is a clear problem. Because before it was pasted, and while it was being pasted, it's not in that secure system it's on some dev's laptop.

Yep, so we have a different system for securely generated random keys. If its a Twilio API key, it realistically has to pass through a dev laptop, and its not that much of a big deal. If its eg an RSA key, we will generate it on an airgapped laptop, encrypt to a public key, and then we have a Vault plugin that decrypts, and writes it into Vault. So the unencrypted data is never anywhere but the airgapped laptop or Vault.

We also try to generate keys inside of Vault where possible, and we generate a lot of certificates this way.
Slightly related, but what’s a good practice for storing secrets that need to be recovered as plain text?

I’m thinking of a system where the user can register her/his API keys to other third-party systems.
I don’t think it’s fair to jump to the conclusion that management at the GP’s see their employees as malicious. It’s far more plausible that they just don’t want emails automatically downloaded and stored on everyone’s computers.

Many companies have strict regulations on data retention and they’re regularly audited to ensure compliance. By keeping the data off employee computers, compliance is simplified.
Shadow IT will always be created when the existing system or IT group can't or won't support the users' needs (imagined or not).
Often comes down to the preference of the engineers in a given team and evaluating pros and cons with engineers outside their team (aka review their plans before they start building)
I've implemented geohashes before. The algorithm is not difficult, and pretty straight-forward to understand… and not the sort of thing I'd call out to a separate service over the network for. It's a pure computation that will take nanoseconds; is that worth involving the Internet and a third-party API?

Edit: well, some of http://geohash.world/about.html makes it sound like a pet project for learning purposes. In which case, anything goes, I guess? But I'm still not sure if it's only a pet project?
> We run about 1,100 microservices written in Go

Asking as a university student: is this a common number of microservices to have running in production? It looks like monzo has about 1,351 total employees [0]. If all of them were software engineers, this would be a little less than one microservice per engineer. How do you handle code reuse and reliability among thousands of microservices? It seems like the number of possible failure states would be unthinkable.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monzo_(bank)
This exact link is mentioned in the article! We use it!
It's a nice idea, but it doesn't match my experience.

I find that almost every new embedded project comes with yet another vendor architecture, vendor-specific toolchain, documentation that's wrong, totally different peripherals and drivers, weird limitations, undocumented pipeline glitches, and so on. Even the CPU architectures and instruction sets are often different, if it's a DSP, or an SoC with DSP coprocessors glued on.

Basically, new things have to be learned often in that domain, at least with the jobs that come my way. For a while I got a bit anxious on new projects because I couldn't understand how to make seemingly broken tools do things the client wanted. Things like getting signal data into a DSP simulator when all the (GUI only!) buttons didn't do anything at all for example; but eventually I learned that it takes about 2 weeks on every new project of restraining the urge to swear, and than all the undocumented stuff, tools working differently than documentation says, secret header files and options, libraries that no client of the vendor has ever used and are full of empty function bodies or just broken, but sold to my client as if they are actually in mainstream use, weird memory models etc. starts to make sense and I'll be productive. So I just expect that on any new architecture project now, and it works out ok. Just budget 2 weeks of swearing-restraint at the beginning.

On front end webdev, there is infamously a huge amount of churn too. E.g. every time a new Webpack comes out I have to spend quite a while figuring out how to rewrite the config files for the new version for best results. WASM differs from asm.js; grid and flexbox are a new way to achieve what we used to do with floats, and there's an interesting new browser API each week.

But React hasn't change much in half a decade, and continues to be one of the main front-end frameworks. You could have learned React 4 years ago, and keep on using the same skills today and continue to be well paid if you're good at it. That pay is, indeed, at least 50% more than the pay offerred for low-level embedded, even though React work is way, way easier.

But remember, you can negotiate... Just taking a software dev position as an individual is not the route to the best pay in embedded hw/sw projects. If you can instead sell product development, where the client wants something built for them, and you build it, complete with project management, architecture, technology selection, supply chain, and subcontracting or setting up a project-specific company, then the scarcity of relevant skills works in your favour and the pricing is quite different - better. Those projects are great if you can get them, and sometimes a lot of fun.
Later versions of Research Unix I believe reserved another standard file descriptor for /dev/tty so it wouldn't have to have magic knowledge.
I'd guess it's usually up to the developers/owning team, but also to some extent depending on the ecosystem it's interacting with (e.g. Hadoop would tend to prefer Java)
Thanks for posting this, wonderful read. I didn’t really get the example with chromosomes (I would expect some references proving that X chromosome really does contain genes linked to the intelligence), but it was an enjoyable piece of writing.
They've probably been done. Let us know if you find any good ones on Google Scholar or elsewhere.
It maybe by sunk cost. But it's still lost value, at least based on design life and planned/committed-to experiments/ missions, which I believe are booked up through 2024.

And I'm not sure sunk cost fallacy applies, especially in the context of SpaceX / Dragon. Although it could definitely apply to SLS.

If you wanted to argue that extending the life beyond 2024 or whatever it is, then I would agree with you, sunk cost is irrelevant.

I tend to only apply the term to something incomplete with run-away costs to finish. Or if something changes (demand-side) that renders said product to become obsolete before completion. I'd argue neither applies to the space station. Political whimsy shouldn't be a factor.
Do you mind mentioning the services you've used? I've heard of https://zencare.co/

We aren't a directory - we will call/email therapists for you to ensure anyone we recommend to you is available and a fit. We have called 50+ therapists for some users.

The problem with the directory model is you still have to reach out to each therapist individually.

And ya, a lot of therapists have CBT thrown in as a buzzword - we screen for that when we talk to therapists if a user wants a CBT therapist.
I have definitely had the "the thing I was looking at right after the app opened disappeared after a few seconds and I can't find it again" experience /u/mfontani describes.
The beginning of the end for Texas energy, economy?
I don't think its particularly common for a company of our size. They are mostly very small and handle very specific things. It's one approach, with some benefits, although it makes projects that affect all services quite tricky!
> Add focused breathing.

5 minutes of box breathing (4 seconds inhale, 4 hold, 4 exhale, 4 hold) has been very helpful at calming my mind and feeling more ready to fall asleep.
“If it’s a core business function — do it yourself, no matter what.”

— Joel Spolsky, In Defense of Not-Invented-Here Syndrome, 2001: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/10/14/in-defense-of-not-...
I really enjoy the static typing TypeScript brings to JS, and it always annoys me that I can't have the same in CSS. When Tailwind makes utilities-first CSS great again, I see that's when I can fill the missing piece and finally bring types to CSS!

The core functionality is not really hard, thank to PostCSS. The most challenging problem is to decide whether to go with run time or compile time implementation. I chose run time first because I think:

- It's easier to prove the idea to others (can even make a website to do so: typed.tw)
- It's easier to try (you can throw it into most existing build system)

But at the end of the day compile time is still better so I'm actually working on a webpack loader right now.
Yup, we agree user feedback and monitoring are really helpful - hopefully the profession gets to that point.
> based in San Jose, available anywhere in California*

Hopefully you will expand this service to other states, especially ones on the east coast...
Yeah, without constant focus on perf, things regress extremely quickly. We're building tight integration with perf budgets into our infra & dev workflows across both Instagram and Facebook, so that any perf regressions will be intentional tradeoffs with product experience rather than unfortunate accidents :)
"There is no private property, " looks like very American to me.
Or very small amounts of mass and a whole lot of time.