skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Without trying to be inflammatory in any manner, I will say that it takes a certain level of privilege to say one shouldn’t discuss politics at work.

If you disagree I’m happy to discuss this viewpoint rather than being downvoted to oblivion.

Lots of issues are deemed “political”, but imagine you fall into one of the marginalized groups:

— lgbt: Don’t discuss the possibility about being fired for your sexuality because it’s too political.

— Women in tech: Nope, let’s not go there, too political.

— Underrepresented minorities in tech: Sorry it’s a pipeline problem, don’t bring politics into this.

— Education: Too political to discuss the fact that schools are trying to balance their admissions in the face of very uneven opportunities amongst their applicants. Never mind the fact that school admissions were never fair to begin with.

We can’t improve without discussion, and it’s unfortunate that these type of issues are so divisive.

Again, If you disagree I’d love to understand your viewpoint as to why.
The spectra we receive will include the absorption lines from passing through the stuff around the other sun and surrounding matter. I don't know how strong the effect will be, but it should be observable.
I work at an oil company in Houston and if I expressed a shred of progressive thought I would be run out of town. Maybe this place is more your speed?
Also wetlands the biome targeted for infill in the example are an especially important type of biome and are also comparatively rare.
Introducing Google Think. Are you tired of going through life questioning everything and forming your own opinions? With our suite of brain filtering equipment we can remove all the offensive noise from your life.
Tired of that racist coworker always making homophobic sexist jokes? Now you don't need to even know when they offend you! Try replacing them with one of our friendly SFW LGBTPYQT personalised artificial reinforcement filters and never face adversity again!
Preorder now and gain a 20 year's supply worth of credits you already agreed to in this servitude contract with the Google Unilateral Learning and Analytics Library or GULAG for short.
Whoever said being a slave in our data-crunching zoo had to be bound to a physical location when all your friends help us harvest data on you too.
> The only reason why people are obsessed with bentos is because they are pretty.

I beg to differ. Don't give two shits about presentation myself, but unagi bento from Japanese stations is simply excellent fast food.
I see the symmetry you're referring to, but I don't think that's a useful way to think about what's a political act. In the 2008 election, there was a political controversy about whether it's snooty to eat fancy mustard; it wouldn't make sense to generalize from that and say condiment choices are always and forever political.
they're not outside the scope of US law.

Governments set laws based upon land areas. This is why we have things like county lines, state lines, city lines, etc.

But these local governments have no jurisdiction over federal land. This is why you can have a federal building in the middle of a city, and that city's laws do not apply to the building, or the land around the building (that's held by the US government).

Native land is technically federal land that's held on behalf of the tribes. And THIS is why local laws don't apply to native land.

It's a common misconception that native american tribes are sovereign. They're considered 'domestic dependent nations', but not sovereign. This is why, for example, the US can limit their ability to issue drivers licenses and travel VISA's.
Excellent policy, but they could stand to realize how political their offices have already become. Maybe the culture of the company blinds them to this, but GitLab's overtly involved in politics.
>This [merge request] demonstrates that you don't have any values except 'we want to make money, and it doesn't matter who gets hurt.'

Well, considering gitlab is a publicly traded company and as they state clearly on their website

https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/stock-options/#stock-optio...

>We are in business to create value for our shareholders

I personally appreciate their blunt honesty. Watching corporations pretend they have morals and obligations other than providing profit to their shareholders, while continually doing the opposite of said stated morals gets tiring.
There are many places and times that people do not want to discuss the politics of the outside world. Examples could include while giving birth, while shopping alone at the grocery store, while sitting alone on a city bus, while performing surgery, while discussing your raise with your boss.

Just because someone does not want to discuss something here and now, doesn't invalidate that they have original opinions. Not everything is a dichotomy all the time. Plenty of people who are not fine with the status quo don't want to discuss it at work.
Something I don’t really understand about bitcoin: why isn’t bitcoin tied to the cost of electricity?

If a bitcoin costs $8000 to buy on an exchange but I can mine one using a $300 graphics card and $4200 of electricity, why doesn’t 1BTC cost something closer to $4500? Does that 2x delta account for miner salaries / rackspace rent / AC bills?
> Being held to a political moral standard is tricky if you are not in the mainline political stance. That would make me quite uncomfortable. I go to work to support myself and my family. Don’t make that hard for me to do due to politics.

This cuts both ways: If your employer is known to take millions from ICE to support what ICE does, and your opinion is that ICE is an evil organization, that can also make you "quite uncomfortable". It might also make you want to leave that employer, which would make it harder to "support yourself and your family".
I'm not sure if more women, minorities, LGBT, group x, group y, group z in tech .. matters as much. Sure it's good to have diversity of people and ideas, it can help people in workplaces come up with more varied ideas, and there's nothing wrong with it ... but I think we're missing something.

What about more men as secondary school teachers, or in art, or as nurses/medical techs? There's an equal and opposite side to the women in tech debate: why not create a world where men feel like they can and should take jobs that pay less, but that can be potentially more fulfilling.

Why is there also not a push to get women into other high-income lines of male work, that are more hazardous like construction, oil rigs, truck driving?

I think that's really ignored today. Just as there are family pressures for women to take the paths they do, men similar (but different) pressures to take carers they may not want at all, in order to "provide for a family" or whatever.
I'm kind of glad the Slashdot/Fark/Register era of Internet headlines seems to be over. Headlines trying to be funny rarely ever are.
I agree with casiotone; why pretend you have an important, guiding set of enshrined morals and ethics at all when there’s a clause that nullifies everything by saying ”some people might be fundamentally against our values but if they’re loaded, and they want to do evil stuff more efficiently, we’re the company for them!”?
I would happily switch my internet provider for it.

I would switch my internet provider for literally anything.

The problem is I live in the country's main technological hub (the bay area), and I fucking can't. It's infuriating.
And the cities within it are much more highly populated still, with population centers at the East and west ends. The center is relatively less populated.
I don't want to hear your political opinions at work. I want to work and make money for myself. Just because I have to be at work to make money for myself shouldn't mean I now have to listen to your views on politics. That is my view on it.
I was born under a dictatorship (that fortunately became again a democracy while I was still a child) and I can tell you human rights don't exist unless you have enough people willing and able to stand up for them.

More broadly, laws aren't worth the paper they're written on if you don't have a police and armed forces willing and able to uphold them.

I understand what your point is; I've talked to several people who voice the same opinion when discussing my country's dark past, but trust me, when the bullies get to power, you can't shout "it's a human right!" back at them. You either have to fight back, hide, or run away.
gitlab has offices?
The company isn't run by robots. Someone is still making judgement calls.

This policy just says if you're the wrong somebody, you can be fired for taking about it.
> 2. If your classes have so many members that it isn't clear whether a variable is a member or not, that's a class design problem.

Now tell me why every OOP codebase I look at has this problem. ;-)

The reason is the second "O" in OOP. Trying to switch on the type of a thing, where every thing has only one type (ignoring inheritance which is another problem, not a solution), means that people will put all sorts of unrelated things in one place.
> You can use Bitcoin anonymously, but it's like using the web anonymously i.e. it takes a lot of effort and a single mistake screws it up.

I don't really get it, but you have a "money out" problem like any fraud.

Even if you buy bitcoin in untraceable in cash, you transfer it to wallets, you have two eventual issues. You'll either buy something and ship it to yourself, or you'll need to get real cash out. The former leaves a vendor ready to give you up, and the latter only works with exchanges that have your ID.

Am I missing something?
Political opposition? Well, no, not visibly, but that's because "people should only get jobs if they're qualified" is already the default mainstream position. Women In Tech style initiatives claim to be about encouragement but invariably devolve into discrimination against men (in my experience at least) and that's illegal. One political faction turning a blind eye to violations of the law doesn't change the fact that it's still the default position.
How is it a useful democratic exercise to inundate non political employees, or employees who don’t share the majority’s moral political views?

The types of moral politics I am thinking about is discussing the tweet-du-jour, basically celebrity gossip about politicians, etc. Worse still would be people taking strong, loud and uninformed positions on foreign policy, like Syria. I actually happen to find that triggering, given my background. I would rather that people keep their opinions outside of my cubicle so that I can focus on producing the best work I can - instead of constantly being reminded of the shithole I left behind.
This seems like a big use-case for JIRA. It can do all sorts of reporting, and if you're engaged and looking at it every day you can see work as it gets done (as long as people use it in a way you've all agreed, which is a separate and simpler problem). Even a simple Trello board would go a long way (my personal preference).

Ironically, many places will use JIRA/Trello/etc, and then still have the sync meetings where you repeat all the actions you've performed on the board!
Personally I'd greatly prefer something like "Hey Amina, I think you ate my lunch!" (or "did you eat my lunch?" as someone else suggested above) which clarifies the situation at hand and leaves the response open without demanding a specific remedy immediately.

You could also ask "hey, do you know what happened to the brown bag that was in the fridge this morning? That was my lunch but now I can't find it." That feels a bit parental maybe, but it also explains what happened and leaves it open-ended "oh, it probably got thrown out when we cleaned the fridge" or, "oh I totally thought that was a leftover sandwich from the meeting so I ate it" or whatever.
We don't (and shouldn't), but I don't know of very many people who go on vacation with $16k of it. Like what the hell were they gonna spend that on? A pallet of novelty keychains?
That is just patently incorrect and not remotely helpful.

- I'd sooner host the website on Github, which does allow free org plans for state-recognized nonprofits, and would not require my own server, nor a basement, which we don't typically have here in Florida.

- A rep from Migadu has commented and offered to sponsor us for email and several other services.

- On another commenter's suggestion I've been looking into Zoho and it does provide Docs and collaboration with modification tracking. I'm not done vetting the service, but it would prove your assertion false.
> I'm assuming you mean The United States, but a 'Cherokee nation' exists/existed too.

So I actually mean the Cherokee nation. Their platform of excluding non-Cherokee from the nation is akin to the white supremacists of America not wanting non-whites to live in America. If the nation ends up getting its freedom (as I think they should), that sovereign state ought to be accepting of migrants, as the current government of the United States ought to be as well.

> Leave for where, also Re: my paragraph above, didn't the sea-bound settlers arrive and take over the park they were living in?

As espoused elsewhere, I am proposing that the currently defined indian reservations (with their boundaries set by treaty with the United States) be given the opportunity to leave the Union, and form independent sovereign states. I am not asking anyone to physically 'move', by ship, or car, or plane. I am referring to a figurative leaving -- letting the land leave the sovereignty of the United States and its member states.
Evervault raises $3.2M for an API to build apps with privacy baked in
>We literally have no practice handling differences regarding the very items people are passionate about.

Looking at it from the employer side, that passion is precisely why these policies are being enacted.

Were I employing someone, I'm required to not have a hostile work environment, which includes certain jokes (because people may be offended), and now includes politics (because people may be offended), and people being offended means I can get sued.

The safest thing I can do, that any company can do, is say "check your politics at the door" and then fire anyone who does it anyways.

It's a garbage solution for the reasons you bring up, but unless we change how those regulations are set up, it's the option that many will take.
And it's one other people and companies will factor in while doing business with them. To their good fortune and their bad.
Inter-frame compression might explain the 'Déjà Vu'
Substitute "underlying causes" for "root cause" and be on your way. Yes, precision in language can be important, but letting it get in the way of being useful is throwing baby out with the bathwater. You can see the same thing happen when people get hung up on precise definitions of agile implementations or pedantically quibbling over terms like "serverless". I personally get annoyed when people misuse the phrase "steep learning curve" when referring to something that's difficult to learn. But you know what? I still know what they mean, and that's the point. I set my annoyance aside, move past it, and decide to focus on getting something done.
"SpaceX said yesterday that it plans to deploy satellite broadband in the Northern United States and Canada as soon as next year. SpaceX recently asked the FCC for permission to adjust the orbital spacing of its satellites, a change that would let the company also cover the Southern US by the end of next year.

Global coverage could follow shortly after that if SpaceX's predictions prove accurate. The company said yesterday that it can provide full coverage of the populated world after 24 launches and had previously said it could make 24 Starlink launches in 2020."

I'd be happy to see cox, comcast, verizon and any other Bell go to hell.
That same logic would suggest that no company should be able to ban any topics, content, speech, or people from their platform, no? What is free speech and expression, and what is censorship?

I think society and corporations are wrestling with these concepts right now, and I'm not sure anyone has it right yet.
Sure, Trump is especially incompetent. But the same exact idea applied to Obama's reign and policy in Syria as well. You can forget about "saving the children of Aleppo", etc.
Makes sense: Being a law enforcement officer makes it easier to earn the trust of strange child while also threatening them into silence. If you get caught you can just blame it Black Lives Matter or something and have your union provide a vigorous defense free of charge.
> You can not be fine with the status quo but still have a multitude of reasons to ban political speech in your workspace

You left out a reason: that the workplace is for getting work done, not for arguing about politics.
When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested
Plenty of people who rent even have that expectation, which I find completely unreasonable.
Won't they have to prove in court that the payment was indeed for the purchase of weed and not payment for something legal?

If you purchase from someone who's only job was selling weed, and deposited your money into his account labeled "weed sales," then they probably have a good case.
Thank you, that timeline was VERY helpful and I think now have a better grasp. It makes sense why I was so confused as a number of the actors (SE-staff mainly) in this acted in a way that defies logic (for me).
So they want the app store but as soon as it gets comlex or difficult to manage they kick up their heels and ban apps rather than stepping up to the plate and owning thier problem.
Your examples aren’t very convincing for biology and medicine. The counter examples seem way more numerous.

Biologists enabled chemical warfare. Same harm has been done with mathematics. Physics.

I think we largely let researches do research, and don’t hold researchers accountable for harm enabled with that research.

In other words, self policing of customers seems like a newer and uncommon phenomenon.
Whoever is not with me is against me?

I may disagree passionately with what my employer is doing, but I also understand I may be wrong and they may be right. Or they may be wrong in some things, but still better than 90% of other employers. Or I may disagree with what they say, but wholeheartedly agree with what they do. And so on so forth.
I see; does this also apply to the LGBTQ posts by GitLab blog?
How to Become a Data Scientist for Free: Learning Resources
Disclosure, I work at MSFT and I have a special place in my heart for PowerShell.

PowerShell provides incredibly flexible syntax, enough that it can satisfy most styles of script writing.

The practice you describe (short names in CLI and long names in scripts) can be achieved. A couple of things to note about how PS binds arguments to function calls:
1. If you omit names, the parameters are bound positionally.
1. If you use names, you do not have to type the full name. It is sufficient to type an unambiguous prefix of the parameter name and the most appropriate parameter will be selected.

So for example in the CLI you can just to `ls -r -fi .csproj` whereas in a script you can use the fully self-documenting `ls -Recurse -Filter .csproj`.

Hope this helps!
People disagree on what exactly qualifies as "human rights" though, and perhaps that's where it becomes political.
How to Build a Stripe Billing Onboarding Flow Using Node.js and React
If it really is because of public scrutiny, IMHO we shouldn't actually treat it as if it happened at all - a corporation that only responds to public pressure like this should be shamed and avoided.

(slightly expanded version at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20829422)
Meta, what actually upsets me is how we seem to be avoiding the need to use human judgment.

By definition, every time some process or code is adopted, it takes the human element out a little bit. You have to look case-by-case whether that's a good thing. In some cases, where speed, consistency, precision, or efficiency are valuable, that's a good idea. Leaving humans in the loop is probably better in situations involving most kinds of moral judgment, situations that vary a lot, or things involving a heavy emotional/social component.

Sidenote, I work in self-driving, so this is actually a big question that comes up in my work: what's best to automate vs. what will humans do long-term? It's an interesting question.

It's germane here because, I don't think anyone is really going to suggest, oh, let's sell tools to people who are committing genocide, or pedophilia, or rape, or a variety of other things considered harmful in most cultures. But that's a very hard thing to put into a "code", or a statement of what you will and won't do, precisely because (a) it involves moral judgment, and (b) situations vary a lot.

So we get statements of policy that are black-and-white, perhaps enforceable, but totally absurd. There is no way any reasonable person can take "don't discuss politics at work", at face value. As a straight man, am I supposed to not mention that I'm married? Is that "political"? Of course it is. But I can make the human judgment that that's not likely to offend someone if I mention that I'm married.

There are good and bad effects to a lot of this. Codifying things probably does reduce bias, such as in hiring, or university admissions. But I think we also need to be cognizant of the cost: forcing unnecessarily rigid decision-making into things that are better left a bit fluid.

The best outcomes are probably in the middle, but I don't think we should be as scared as we are of human judgment, whether in university admissions, work promotions, who companies do business with, etc. And yes, there is a thing called "bad judgment" - not all judgments are the right ones, or good, but not all are bad, either.
This is happening more and more as mitigation banks are running out of same-kind habitat.

It's also being used as a way to clean city runoff and post-treatment wastewater effluent.

It's not really rare. Just not usually newsworthy.
I think you're getting voted down because "holding your arm in an upright position and swatting to the side a few hundred times" seems like an exaggeration of what's required to "move to the next track".

I would imagine to move to the next track in a song you'd be using an action from the "Active" demos at the bottom, which may require some kind of initial motion to enter the "active" state, but also seem like they'd work with your arms resting at their sides, and be literally almost no energy whatsoever to e.g. swipe your thumb along your index finger once.
Vatican launches $110 'click to pray' wearable rosary
He says his statements made in 1977 were qualified, and the best he had with the scholarship available. Since then he’s criticized the Cambodian Khmer Rouge as genocidal. It’s a forgivable mistake considering his political & historical output, which is very significant.
The Register has somewhat clickbaity editorial standards, to be sure.

(Edit: media name correction. Egg on my face!)
You make very good points and I'd have to agree with you if this was anything other than "modern art".

Modern art is not art in the sense it's not a highly crafted work. It's minimum effort.

The time frame was given to acknowledge the fact that we think this is "art". In the future we will know this is junk and not art.

I really dislike most pop art, but at least it's art. A big yellow square canvas in no way should constitute artwork.