skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If that’s true, that’s one of the most cynical-inducing facts. If the abuse of children by priests is within expected ranges, and dwarfs other professions, then wow that’s depressing.

Also I recall this story, so hoping your statistics are off-

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/20/cathol...
Spreading a view that being trans isn't "a thing" takes away the rights and agency of people, denies their experience, and arrogantly espouses the experience of the speaker as the be-all, end-all of how life is. This is something I consider a "negative view", not because the view itself is "bad" (though IMO it is), but because it's a view that pushes or causes negative consequences upon the group it is about.

Spreading a view that trans people should be supported acknowledges that everyone is different, and even if the speaker is not comfortable with the concept of people being trans, recognizes that someone else's gender orientation has nothing to do with them, and that people deserve to live in a way that makes them feel whole. This is a "positive view": it acknowledges the experience of others, even if that experience is incomprehensible to the speaker, and advocates support, not ostracism. (A simple test can also be: "does supporting X cause actual harm to anyone", and if the answer is "no", then one ought to support it, or at least not oppose it.)

So yes, I certainly take a dim view toward people who have the first kind of view (regardless of what the topic is about). I would feel uncomfortable working with someone like that. But if we didn't talk politics, and I didn't know -- is ignorance bliss? Perhaps? I'm not sure. I mean, it's certainly possible that I work with people right now who have views that I would find gross, and maybe we get along (professionally) just fine? Is being in the matrix better?

But what about the larger implications? I would refuse to work for a company with leadership that was actively anti-trans. Take Chik-fil-a for example. They've come out against LGBTQ rights, and have donated to anti-LGBTQ groups. I'm very glad I know this about them, because I would never take a job with them if offered, and I boycott their restaurants. On the flip side, I'm pleased that I work for a company whose CEO speaks out publicly in favor of diversity and inclusion, and I respect him for using his position of (relative) power to promote good.

I think it's important to recognize that companies are made up of people, and people have political opinions. It's hard to say that political opinions are always unrelated to work; sometimes those opinions do actually intersect with what the company works on. For example, if I were at Google, I would definitely have pushed the company to cut ties with China; I don't think it's worth supporting a repressive, authoritarian government in exchange for profits. Should I have been prohibited to talk about politics at work and let that go? Should my only recourse be to quit in protest?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Cube
Interestingly, the rates of women in tech were higher 50 years ago than they are today. Reduction in inequality between men and women has an inverse relationship with rates of women in engineering. The countries with large inequality between men and women like Indonesia and India have some of the highest rates of women on tech. Egalitarian countries like those in Scandinavia have the lowest rates. The idea that low rates of women in tech is a product of inequality and discrimination is hard to justify in practice.

My response to bluntfang, HN is rate limiting my office IP:

> Who's to say there's a reduction?

Anyone who studied gender relations over the last half century will say so, unambiguously, Trump notwithstanding. Women didn't have the right to abortion 50 years ago. They earned college degrees at half the rate of men (today, 3 women earn a degree for every 2 men). Workforce participation was much lower. Many states did not allow women to initiate divorces except under specific circumstances. Explicit denial of employment on the basis of sex was socially acceptable.

I'm willing to claim that women are better off today than they were in 1969 is a fact. I suppose "equality" is fundamentally subjective, and there might be people who genuinely believe that women getting the right to abortion, divorce, protection from discrimination, etc. somehow harmed them. But I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that most women see such changes as beneficial.
Has anyone else noticed the massive increase in pedophile arrests since 2017. Like him or not; Trump is hunting these pedophiles and making the world a safer place for kids.
>I don’t understand why it’s encouraged (in some companies) to discuss politics at work in a way that leads to internal issues. Purely from a commercial stance, team cohesion has a positive impact on people and product. Why do anything to disturb that?

Fail early. You can achieve cohesion by letting go of everybody who cannot discuss politics in a civilized manner. Then you can be sure that the remaining team can discuss anything without any problems.

On the other hand, is it cohesion when the team is held together by outer influences?
I addressed that in my comment: it's never been easier to get caught, since certificate issuance is now cryptographically logged.
Isn't suicide inherently violent due to the intent to cause permanent harm to oneself?

>its ableist to claim otherwise
I don't understand what you mean by this, can you explain?
Did anyone read the article and get a feeling it was mostly just a fluff piece describing how we're refining our ability to tell the ages of stars?
Sounds like a nice place to work.

Believing that the teaching you how to be a good ally is racist and sexist (against white men, I assume) is probably why you didn't fit in great there. I read that whole slideset and there's nothing racist in there - unless you're counting the scenarios of "what not to do."
We're talking politics at work. Not politics in general. You can still discuss politics outside of work.
OneSignal (YC S11) raised a Series B, is hiring full-stack, back-end, iOS devs
Thanks, that was a genuine question.
You can buy goods and services that don’t need physical shipping, as in this case: CP images and videos.

You can earn bitcoin anonymously by mining it - at least this was more feasible a couple of years ago than it is now - but in 2011-2017 if you were to buy $4,000 worth of graphics cards you could mine $4,000 worth of cryptocurrency on Nicehash in a few months (and keep going to make a profit too). No ID required (though they probably track your IP address somewhere...)
However, if your organization has any lobbyists under their pay, your organization is inherently political.

I can accept that ideological divisions within a team sows disorder and that businesses want to avoid that.

I would also suggest that in an age where we are again facing the threat of totalitarianism, the threat of treasonous acts, human rights violations that evoke memories of the holocaust, we, the adults, citizens, and guardians of civil society have to cast aside our professionality for moral duty.

It would be preferable of course if we were able to take our moral convictions and take to the streets instead of arriving at work each day, but many of us do not have the luxury to take time off.

Politics is often the practical pursuit of our moral convictions. It's kind of surreal to me that our pattern of livelihood forces us to stop considering and dismiss the moral consequences of our daily actions.

The frank truth is that work is 1/2 of our waking lives. Acting without prior moral deliberation for half our lives seems immoral.

I do not want to be calculating the moral value of everything I do, but having become aware of the impact of my decisions in so many different areas, the individual contribution I make to what is acceptable in our society, I cannot help but be motivated to be more morally conscious - even if I fall short all the time. At least, I am aware of it and disgust myself at times.
So far no one ever managed to come up with a plan that is backward compatible and does enough. (Aka the fundamental problem is that if you change v4 semantics you have to deploy new software/firmware/hardware, and if you are doing that anyway, a clean slate seemed like the easier option.) And don't forget v6 has well defined semantics with regards to v4 interoperability for a lot of things (::ffff:, NAT64, DNS64), so you can be on v6 and reach all of v4 via a gateway.)
Not inept, just malicious and corrupt.
And 100 people just joined a criminal conspiracy...
Why are you arguing one or the other? Why not both being a problem?
Show HN: Prime Time (Game)
the personality change is touted here constantly as a benefit of using it, and its promoted as a source for personal enlightenment. People here are talking about undergoing personal epiphanies and transformations.

i don't think it's smart even granting their argument to have a drug with powerful effects being used to solve problems. And this is assuming it wouldn't also amplify and mental issues a person has or cause psychotic breaks, etc.
Site of a Japanese Balloon Bomb Explosion
> You only see the tweets of the people you personally choose to follow

That's not at all true by default; you also see tweets from people that have paid for involuntary reach for the tweet (promoted tweets), tweets that people you follow have interacted with, tweets that respond to or mention people you follow, and probably others that I'm forgetting.
Oh yeah, I see what you mean. I think the models in the article are deliberately simplified. At least some of those plots demonstrate a constant force, rather than a gravitational-type force. And the well-known weights-on-a-rubber-sheet analogy is notoriously unhelpful. I guess the real equations work for real curved spacetime.
It was mentioned more as long-term baggage because of the association. I honestly have no idea if relationships, like IBM's, were frowned upon at the time. I believe most of those close relationships were clandestine at the time and only publicized later. The others, being German companies, even if they weren't founded by Nazis probably would no longer exist if they hadn't cooperated.
This is cool. I'm trying to learn how to do multiplayer networking from scratch, and it is a challenge. I have a C++ game project in my to do projects, might try it out.

It says that all the logic is coded on the server side... would it also be client side too to do the interpolation? I'm coming from the perspective of this article, which I'm following for my networking experiments: https://www.gabrielgambetta.com/client-server-game-architect...
The article says they acquire most of their merchandise through local, physical clearance sales. I don't think they're ordering much from China.
> If you disagree I’d love to understand your viewpoint as to why.

I don't disagree, but I'm "privileged" and want to keep it that way for me and my posterity. Not ashamed in the least because its not bad to be privileged.
Yes. What would really "demonstrate an understanding of statistics and mathematics" would be recognizing that death by mass school shooting and death by meteor are both extremely rare causes of death, and that spending school time on either is likely not a productive use of that time.

I mean, some schools spend more time on that stuff than they do on earthquake, tornado, or fire drills. On top of that, and as you seem to suggest, the "training" is almost uniformly very, very bad.
Can you please explain how exactly am I having worse of both worlds here? Not trying to prove you wrong, genuinely curious: if I have a generic NodeJS app with PotgreSQL hosted in RDS and, say, use AWS-specific services like S3 and Cloudwatch, am I doing something wrong?
Answering my own question after some research — I think the main answer is that the probabilities are so sparse that there’s no point mining unless:

(a) you have a large amount of hardware, which will incur a large capital cost that puts up such a large barrier to entry only a few orgs can realistically participate; or

(b) you join a mining pool, whereby your rewards for mining are diluted such that it’s more cost effective to obtain BTC by spending dollars, than it is to mine your own.

https://www.coindesk.com/information/get-started-mining-pool...

The premium charged for buying BTC on an exchange (vs the theoretical hardware-plus-kWh costs of mining your own) reflects the market power of the large mining operations’ ability to deploy the capital needed to do any kind of fruitful mining.
Interesting to read this one, as just last night I was having dinner with a friend and discussed the topic of car-free cities, driverless cars, etc, for about 2 hours.

It is such an interesting topic, and there's so much assumptions that we always take for granted that prevent us from having a smart conversation about it. And then, of course, there's regulation, which essentially kills any idea almost instantly.

An example? In the US you need to have a rear mirror in a car. A driverless car doesn't need one... But without the mirror, it can't pass the test to make it compliant and allow it to be on the road.
I didn't find the slides so bad. But..

> Ally is a verb, not an identity

That's... that's a noun.
Well the USG can always sanction China and make it illegal to do business with them. Feel free to lobby your congressman if it bothers you so much. Or just quit. Or get raised to a level where you can make a call whether to do business or not with someone.

There are a lot of ways to influence someone. Leaving general politics at the door is good idea. You are getting paid to work - so unless you have standing of being harmed directly by company action - just do your job or quit.
React Component Lifecycle
> Opportunity cost of gun control is negligible (as showcased by the rest of the world).

I don't call 100 million people murdered by their own governments within living memory "negligible".
There should be a newline between "otherwise" and "I", but I don't have enough points to edit.
So give up Germany (lost: billions in revenue) or give up Nazi propaganda (lost:thousands in revenue).

Companies are trying to make money. That's the purpose of a company.
All the evidence suggests that Big Bang did not happen at one identifiable point. Instead it happened everywhere simultaneously. So there is no place in our universe "very far away from the Big Bang".
Sample size of 1, but yes, I also tend to have better results using `query site:news.ycombinator.com` than using the built-in Algolia search.
There have been reported sightings my whole life ever since I can remember, and I was born here in Australia in the 1980s.

While I don't think it's impossible, I'm not sure what's new here except the fact that almost everyone now carries a camera yet we're still to get clear images ;)
Hardly. It does almost nothing and this has been studied and has been continually ignored because the hysteria machine needs something to grind against.
I think you're confusing "being a profession" with "having the trappings of a profession".
On the opposite side, there is some questionable gun math as well. Much of the current political discussion is centered around mass shootings and white supremacist shootings, with the claimed remedy being "lets ban assault weapons". In 9 of 10 gun deaths, the gun involved was a pistol, not a rifle. "Assault" distinction means that fraction of deaths an assault rifle ban would prevent is somewhere less than 10% of all gun deaths - assuming every death was perfectly prevented by this ban.

You are 4x more likely to be shot by the police than a mass shooter, and 40x more likely to be shot by police than a white supremacist.

https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2019/08/06/40978688/inslees...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/police...

The vast majority of gun deaths are suicides. ~4% of gun murders involve rifles.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081

I think gun control is being used by the left much like abortion is used by the right: it is an emotionally charged topic that can rile up the base even though legislative solutions will largely be ineffective.
My neighbor is a wealthy white male and I'm willing to bet he's less like you than your female friends of color are.

The problem with this kind of identity framing is that politics is central to it. One wrong step and your enemies of color (for instance) may play their victimhood against your prosperity and it'll become brutally obvious how political you are by merely existing within a demographic.
US having a first place looks strange given how car-centric it's culture is.
How would you differentiate yourself from Microsoft Flow?
While I largely agree, history has shown this wont fair well for humanity either. Look at IBM and the Holocaust [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
The article makes it sounds all positive, but I'd love to hear from a local that's been through the transition. Surely the local businesses cannot be all positive about this.

I mean, a car comes with a trunk, where you can put your shopping in. Having to walk 1300m or 15' worth of shopping can't be good for the local businesses.
It can be either, depending on context.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ally
The only device I regularly use that still charges through micro-b is my Bluetooth headset and it's a gigantic pain looking for the micro b cable I might have somewhere to charge it, while I have type C cables anywhere I go.

I wish there was a small adapter I could just take with me everywhere on my key chain, but all adapters I could find go the other way around :(
You are the kind of guy who would see a murder, would says "Not my problem." Not great. Everyone should be the moral compass of everyone else. The society nowadays seems fucking terrible.
There was recently a large trove of google documents leaked, comments linking to them get vanished on most sites (including HN).

They were a mishmash of various things but included e.g. descriptions of various programs and employee activities such as influencing search results to inaccurately reflect the world in the interest of 'justice', e.g. if you search for CEO a neutral search engine mostly men in the results because there are more male CEOs, but a 'fair' search engine would return more women or at least equal numbers. The documents also described google's use of demographically targeting election notices for the benefit of particular candidates (and great consternation with significant number of the targeted demographic voted for the other candidate)... stuff like that. The documents also included lists of penalized news sites which unsurprisingly was largely conservative sites, but wasn't just the more extreme alex jones type stuff.

A lot of it was culled off these internal political lists that the earlier poster was mentioning... so it's probably pretty dubious that many of the things in it actually reflected google company positions. (That said, the 'fairness' and news penalties appear to be active programs and not just smack talk by internal political activists).

More smoke than fire overall, but the more extreme right wing has been promoting it as a pretty substantial bit of evidence of unethical (and in some cases unlawful) conduct by google. Thoughtful discussion of it hasn't been aided by the widespread suppression of the subject.
I'm Italian, and I can tell you us Italians have waited for this for at least two thousand years!

We can finally stop pretending our sounds are the language, and get back to using only gestures :)
Mathematical writing by Knuth et al. (1987) [pdf]
Pretty much what happened with Google in China ?
The slides didn't have the explicitly racist and sexist bits. Basically if you were a white guy, you weren't allowed to interrupt anyone and anyone was allowed to interrupt you. There were also implications that one should discriminate against white men when choosing who to hire, who to promote, and who to have speak at conferences.
Its ableist to say that someone's choice to exercise free will is somehow coerced or violent because they suffer from depression and/or pain.

I certainly don't like suicide but I don't get to make that choice for other people.
In this instance no not at all. I can compare the sun to a box of Cheerios based on that fact that both are yellow and bringing the moon or Fruit Loops into the conversation because you missed the context is “yellow things” is not appropriate. Democracy has no place in what I am discussing.

Monarchy and capitalism are both drivers of aggregating individuals labor into a small number of goals. Socialism and Democracy are both sources of driving individual labor into individual pursuits.

Only the eye of the beholder can determine what is good or bad. A socialist democracy is most likely incapable of putting a man on the moon. A capitalistic monarchy is most likely capable of solving poverty within its borders (be careful what you wish for as you may be determined to be part of the cause of poverty and excised for the good oc The many).
This reminds me of Iain Bank’s Excession. Great book, strongly recommend it.
As of October 16, 2019, the page has been changed to show a note from Meetup's CEO: https://www.meetup.com/lp/paymentchanges
How good of an educator you are may not even be in the top 5 most important things to get tenure, unfortunately.
So are tumblers not a thing any more? I thought in general tumblers made it pretty impossible to trace things unless you are moving a volume of money that is much bigger than what the tumbler typically processes in a day.
Date and time pickers are harder. All the platforms have a native control, and all major browsers except Safari on MacOS expose it.

That one omission means the control is basically unusable without some sort of polyfill, at which point you might as well just use the same JS implementation everywhere because why not. :/

The the drop down on select not being customizable is also famously irritating.
Who gets to determine who is a "literal Nazi"? Is Jordan Peterson a "literal Nazi"? His films are currently being canceled.
It reminds of how EU can order facebook to delete its posts for the entire world, because EU wants to control what other people outside of EU are allowed to see.

https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/10/...
Can't give you enough upvotes, but at least I gave you all I have.
> the fact that you aren't currently using the land for anything doesn't mean someone else couldn't use it for something extremely valuable

That (speculative) value is based on how they propose to use the land. In other words, their improvements. That acre of dirt in the middle of the financial district might as well not exist, in economic terms, until someone actually builds something on it or otherwise starts using it to satisfy human needs or wants.

Put another way, say that acre of land is on the other side of an impassable barrier. It's exactly the same land, but no one can get to it to make use of it. What is its value now? The value comes from how the land is used, not the land itself.

If you're proposing to base the tax on what others would be willing to pay for the land (the market value) then this is no longer a land value tax but rather a property tax.
I'm very much not proposing building single-family units. See the discussion about density starting at "Wait, how many people are you saying would live there?"
Evidence-based strategies may turn the tide on domestic violence