skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I rarely use SMS, only with people I know to have old (not smart)phones or could be offline and must be immediately reached without a voice call.

I can type SMS on my Ubuntu laptop with GSConnect and there are apps like Airdroid that implement similar functionality. Still 99.999% of the time it's Whatsapp or Telegram which have web and desktop apps.

But to type any kind of message from a computer one must have a computer and be willing to use it. Not everyone can use a computer all day long and not every boy or girl is allowed on the family PC all the time. Furthermore they and everybody else prefer to message friends on their own phones instead of on some computer shared with other family members.
Used car salesman.
While it's true that people rarely get forcefully deported for overstaying visa, how is being in the country illegally going to be an option for a programmer? The whole 60 days "grace period" is about transferring visa without leaving the country, other laws still apply. E.g. INA 212(a)(9)(B), which makes one inadmissible for 3 and 10 years after 180 days and and 1 year of being out of status. Since H1B "transfer" is actually a new visa (that's why, in general, you'd have to leave the country, get a new visa stamped and return in a new status but USCIS kindly shortcuts it for people who are just switching jobs), you will be automatically denied it as soon as you have accumulated 180 days out of status and became inadmissible. What's next? Nobody is deporting you, sure, but how do you live? You cannot work legally. You cannot re-enter country if you leave. You probably do not have skills to work jobs usually done by illegals. What do you do?
OP said the Bolt, not the Volt.
Calm down. s/(?=using)/over/
Sure, perhaps not inherently. But do you think, looking across the world, that the median hour spent playing WoW is likely less meaningful than the median hour spent reading a textbook?
I think the problem is that it's often difficult to pinpoint the crux of the unfairness, but still feel it all the same. In my opinion, the unfairness is engendered by the realization that time and money are merely different units of the same thing. Which means the investors are getting guarantees on their invested time, but the folks who did all the work are completely unable to recoup any of the time they invested. When we cast the investments in the same units, it clarifies the nature of the inequity.

Investors convert dollars into time (like a conversion from matter to energy), and workers convert time into dollars (energy to matter). Even in physics a seemingly small amount of matter has enormous power with respect to the energy it can unleash. But it can take a lot of energy to form the tiniest lump of matter. Investors are turning their matter, their dollars, into time. A lot of money, in that respect, is essentially lots of time -- more time than you have life, if you have enough of it. So you can do more, by buying someone else's time.

For simplicity, if we ignore non-labor costs (labor is the largest expense in most software startups, e.g.), it would mean that the invested dollars purchased an EQUAL amount of invested time. That is, the investors dollars were converted, with perfect efficiency to time (unless they overpaid the workers, or the workers were underpaid), which means there was conservation of dollars/time. This implies a balance of the two sides of the equation, which means at best (again, for simplicity, only accounting labor costs) the investors could only be guaranteed a share of 50% of the purchase of the company. Or at least that is how it should work, in my opinion.
growth. growth. growth. growth.

we chant as we march to our death.

India is starting to boom now that climate crisis is getting worse.
The investor has committed to the entire amount. If something materially bad happens the day after the raise that halves the value of the company, the investor can't flee and the management team can still spend the money if any business prospects at all remain.

You raise an amount that will get you to the next capital raise, and convince other entities that you are sufficiently capitalized (banks, lessors, contract counterparties, prospective employees), and deal with a moderate amount of contingency. You don't want to excessively raise, because it's excessively dilutive when capital is expensive. You also don't want to have to raise again with nothing to show for the spent cash.

Even if we grant your statement "there is no advantage of having the entire amount upfront"-- there would be a benefit to the investor of having option value about whether to continue to invest; option value that an employee has. It's easy to model this and see that option value is quite valuable. (Investors would really like it, so we do see things like efforts at tranched investments or leaving a round open... but entrepreneurs hardly want to have to sell an investor equity at the same price if the investor decides he wants it a year from now).
The "global-warming" tag of the repo is appropriate.
Deep Smelling
Well it depends, all the UK universities have strengths and weaknesses. In some cases there are straight up practical reasons. Years ago my university's chip fab caught fire and burned to the ground, because chip fabs do that sometimes, and obviously that significantly reduced the ability to expose students to practical skills in a clean room and so on. But most UK universities don't have a chip fab at all, which means they don't have academic staff who need one, which means undergraduates are also not getting classes with people who have that knowledge at the front.

MMU has a bunch of expertise in subjects like textile making and some practical engineering disciplines, where as I wouldn't necessarily regard some of the UK's more famous universities as good on those subjects.
That was true of most of western europe a few decades ago too, and countries managed to stay democratic (and in a few cases, become democratic) while growing on all "good" metrics, I don't see why that wouldn't work in India.
> Email is all about reputation: it can take a lot of effort to build trust, but just one bad move and it's all gone.

In my experience, the email blacklists and filters are somewhat forgiving. I accidentally configured my email server as an open relay (didn't know what that was at the time), and for a brief period was sending a not insignificant percentage of spam worldwide.

Once I discovered my mistake and corrected the issue, I was able to submit domain removal requests to the various blacklists, or just wait for my domain to fall off the radar. I expected it to be worse, and was pleasantly surprised to find that this kind of "forgiveness" is really an industry standard.

But then, that was just one bad move. I'm not so sure about two bad moves, and I'd rather not find out.
Structure Allows for Creativity
I bought used voting machines on eBay for $100 apiece (2018)
I have been bringing up this point in conversations about blockchain for a while now. Git is essentially a chain of commits, and the hash of a commit will change based on what you're applying it on by including the previous commit's hash in the body that gets eventually hashed into HEAD.

Also reminds me of that time back when we were using 8-char truncated git hashes as deployment tags and we eventually begun getting collisions. We also had an interesting bug when all 8 chars were numeric and Python (or the framework/library that was used) ingested what would be a string it as a number.
Although RCS (Rich Communication Services) [0] is/was supposed to be a good idea, I don’t see it being widely adopted like SMS. Many similar standards (MMS, video calls) failed to get traction due to lack of coordination, adoption and common sense between telcos, manufacturers and operators.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services
Are you really putting your money where your mouth is? Even if I have shares I think are worthless, your offer to buy them is also worthless, so why bother? Actually, your offer is worse than nothing, as I would spend hours dealing with the share purchase agreement without assurance you will follow through and it would send a clear signal to the company that pays me that I believe it's worthless.
Counter point:

- my phone is always on me

- I spend less than 20% of my time in front of a computer (and I work in tech!)

- Everyone I know has a cell phone

- I can start a group chat with anyone I know

- iMessage is very pleasant and easily allows me to share photos I have taken without compression

- Most people I know respond to texts within 5 minutes, so it is good “mostly
synchronous” communication

- If someone has my phone number then I consider them to be important.

I wouldn’t write a short story on my phone, but if I had a short story to tell I would probably just use my phone to call someone I care about and tell the story to them. SMS is the perfect lowest common denominator and I will miss it dearly when it is gone.
I've had a hard time understanding it as well. It seems like I can express so much more and operate so much faster on a computer, but these days a lot of people prefer to just stick with their phone for everything.

FWIW, if you use Google Fi as your carrier, you can send and receive SMS messages as part of Google Hangouts on web (including in gmail). That's what I do. But I certainly still prefer a phone-independent one like FB messenger or real Google Hangouts.

I think also a lot of people who might care are thoroughly in the iOS/macOS ecosystem and are ok with a messaging system (iMessage) that works across devices for most friends but degrades to phone-only (SMS) when communicating with friends using Android. I've even had one or two times where I use Messages on Mac (which doesn't work on Android and never will) to talk with an iOS friend since he didn't want to use SMS.
The rise of crypto-currency had the unintended result of getting people into investing, rather than starting a new currency people would use...
So somewhat unique experience. I'm a designer. I code. React and css mostly. I do use Vim which I guess is weird for a designer.

I love Fish. I'm likely not their target audience.

I've been using it for years. Since the early days in 1.x land for sure. The homepage has never changed and I still laugh at the tagline. I find it's auto-completion, history and niceties indispensable. I'm the person who asks you what the command is to rerun the tests. With Fish I never have to ask you again. I just remember part of it, and suddenly I've got it.

I find its scripting language much simpler to follow than bash. I don't have a lot of scripts, but the ones I do are easy to manage. The only hiccup I get into is when I have to look up something on stack exchange, and of course the example is in Bash. These days though, with Bass and fisherman and so many other tools, i have options.

Years ago I would explain to other code friendly designers, I'm weird, don't use this stuff. Go grab zsh. Lately though it's gotten very friendly. Really the only downside for a light scripter like myself is that need to convert bash examples to fish problem. Beyond that I feel it's actually a much nicer shell for new to terminal folks.

Anyways, just an anecdote to add to the pile. Thank you to the devs that have supported it over the years.
I trust your personal experience, but I suggest Stripe is now handling quite a materially large chunk of coin.

Also, I think your statement about them needed massive capitalisation is fair; they're not Google or MSFT.
Could somebody explain in plain words what happens here?
Actually, it wasn't salary negotiation because it was pre-offer. It was during an interview, and the author lamented that "She didn’t get a call-back".

I agree that during salary negotiations it is less important to tiptoe around things. Perhaps it was a bit premature to have even inquired about the cap table in any way during an interview, unless the interviewer had just mentioned how many options would be offered to a selected candidate (which would be oddly specific, pre-offer).
I feel it's a bit disingenuous on the part of advertisers to claim that any commercial information source is an ad. This basically makes any discussion impossible because if everything is an ad then nothing is. It's a dirty trick of the ad industry.

did the creator of the X pay a third party to present X? is X an essential part of its context? is the recipient of X seeking X itself or something else?
But any number of non State actors would. The IRA or ISIS or Hezzbollah for example. They probably don't have the tech capabilities to RE their own GPS firmware, but non-orbiting rocket science isn't that hard. Iron Dome does okay against simple rockets, but a big guided rocket (V2 size) would be a different problem entirely.

Obviously drone attacks make use of GPS, and it's a worry to many -- for example, there is frequently GPS jamming when Putin is visiting somewhere.
"three finger un-pinch" is a shortcut for advanced users. It's not the standard, discoverable way to paste.
The Vanishing Library
The Wonders of the Suffix Tree Through the Lens of Ukkonen’s Algorithm
'The shame in this story belongs to him'
Personal attacks aren't allowed here, no matter how wrong or annoying another comment is. Would you please review the site guidelines and follow them?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Since last year getting a Canadian visa doesn't require any tickets being booked. You get them for a good ten years as well.

Source : Parents, siblings and I went to Canada for a trip. They applied in India and I applied abroad.
If you're downloading and installing a custom font, why do you need it to be locale-aware? Just down the variant that uses whatever your locale needs. (Or if there isn't one, fork it and change the commas to periods and the install that.)

It seems like the only reason you'd need a locale-aware one is on a multi-user system where you'd expect users to have different locales and you're installing the font globally.

But that doesn't really seem like a likely use-case for this pretty niche font that is almost exclusively going to installed on single-user machines by the end-user.
> It will ensure that the BEST from around the world are given a chance in the US

There's already a visa for that - it's called the O visa.[1] The H-1B is for specialty occupations.[2]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O_visa

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-1B_visa
average number of days before you find a given prefix ~= ((86,400 seconds in a day)(hashes per second))/(1/singlecharbit^num_prefix_chars)
The founder of Superhuman was just on This Week in Startups and discussed their process for driving product/market fit - https://overcast.fm/+JyGzBXWg/3:25
More Fallout from the Hong Kong Protests Hitting ESports
Tonight, the clocks are changing for one of the last times ever
So people who work for a start up aren't taking risk?

Employment is more than just the paycheck. It's security. It's a career trajectory. Otherwise, why do consultants get paid more than employees?

You can see it that employees take no risk. That's fine. But then I wonder why start ups tout the stocks they give? And why is it acceptable to tout something that they know has no value?

The SEC has a function. To avoid dishonest actions that would otherwise be legal under standard criminal law from eroding trust in security markets. The employee of the article we are discussing here received 1% for losing out on opportunities of growth in a larger company. Obviously he was worth something to the company, and more than they were willing to pay him in cash. He was betting on the future value of the offerings he was receiving. By being able to trust that, start ups could/would/should obtain labor at discounted rates. This is good for the market. Trust in securities.

You can call him naive. But I will remind you that in the late 19th and early 20th century the stock market was not well capitalized. People presumed they were getting screwed. And anybody who placed trust in the system was called naive. "they shouldn't trust" is an easy argument. It's the old 'it's just the way it is' argument.

It's arguable, but I'd say creating trust within the exchange of securities via systems like the SEC was a great advance in the allocation of resources. It's why we have well capitalized markets. Without trust, friction comes along.

That is why I feel what was described in the article is deeply unfair and given that the entire structure of joint stock companies is a legislative creation, surely it could be changed.

So basically, your view that "the big money goes to the people who risk" seems idiosyncratic and reflexive rather than based on any substantial analysis of the article or the situation.

I'm hardly advocating for any revolutionary ideas. Overall, having read The Wealth of Nations, I'm a big supporter of Adam Smith's ideas. Which is why I can see how the system can be structured differently within the capitalist context.
In many cases the patients are hospitalized, without access to alcohol, and the doctors still presume they sneaked in some booze.

That attitude, while somewhat justified, contributes to the stated underdiagnosis...
Git is a merkle tree. Blockchain also is a merkle tree. They are the same data structure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree

The difference between blockhain and git is the hashing function. Git’s is designed for speed and constant difficulty, blockhain is designed for slowness and increasing difficulty. The logical meaning of each block is different also.
> But I'd actually use Amazon.

Amazon book recommendations and keyword search are garbage. Sometimes even a direct search for title and author name will put the result halfway down the list. The two good things Amazon has going for it are the huge catalog (great for finding the right ISBN), and reviews dating back to the 1990s. Makes it easier to decide whether or not to purchase the book from a more ethical retailer.

Out of all the online bookstores, Thriftbooks has the best recommendations in my experience.

The best ways to find good books are still bibliographies and large public and university libraries - browse the shelves, ask the librarians. Online library catalogues usually beat online retailer catalogs for keyword searches.
Want to travel around the world and not work? THEN BECOME A BLOGGER
So H-1B workers are simultaneously:

a) are underpaid indentured labor

b) singlehandedly responsible for high Bay Area rents (presumably because they make so much money)

I'm sorry, I really don't follow any of this logic.

How does falling real estate demand and cheaper rent force H-1B folks to live 4 to a room? Isn't it cheaper for everyone in that case?
This caught my eye so I went to the Play Store and read the reviews. From the sounds of it, this used to be a very good app, but with after latest update it's 90%+ bad reviews.
> CISC always decoded to simple more or less single cycle ops internally, that's how microcode works. The RISC shtick was to get rid of that decoding into simple ops in the first place

Having written microcode myself as a wee lad I would call that a gross oversimplification. And the micro machines inside a modern CPU are themselves fiendishly complex; my point is that microcode is no longer completely hand-crafted which is the only level to which the “RISC survived” argument might (IMHO) hold.

For the reasons above I also don’t agree with your final point.

I have to say I am not familiar with the microarchitechture of any of the early large-scale single-chip CISC CPUs (my microcode forays were for much larger machines) so we may be speaking to some degree at cross purposes. But again I think you mischaraterize the 801 and it’s descendants.
Well, I know it's Robert.

But this new art doesn't really look like a Banksy
I think, post HK protests, it's going to be harder to order precursor parts from China. All sorts of jamming and drone tech is being used there by both sides. Hopefully we see restraint and mutual de-escalation and we don't see any use of energetics.
You were surely downvoted for posting unsubstantive and bilious comments, which don't belong here.

Please make your substantive points more thoughtfully.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
While I do see this as inspiring in a sense, I do think this page was really made to jab San Francisco at it's nonsense construction.
The Unfolding Mystery of the Missing Cryptoqueen Podcast
Silly games bruteforcing content until a "special" SHA1 output value is achieved.
She didn't say it was 'fair' she sad not 'inherently unfair' and that's reasonable: multipliers, loans etc. - this is all just financing.

The company performed poorly, the 'buy out' was a kind of 'neutral sale', the VCs got a 2x return and the founders got something.

To be clear: a '2x return' for the VCs is a loser - given the amount of risk they took on, they didn't get nearly the return they'd need to cover it. Imagine if you bet $1 on a long-shot that has 1/10 odds of winning, but if you win, you only 2x your money. Was that a good bet? No - terrible bet. That money could have been employed elsewhere.

The deal that the founders got might be somewhat similar - out of $100M they probably didn't get that much at all. Maybe $1-2 Million? That's again a very small bonus for several years risk. Many founders of such companies are forgoing major salaries to found companies - forgoing years of income really before it starts, and then limited income during. My hunch is that it was a 'net loss' for them: they should have just stayed on developing, consulting, lawerying, or banking or whatever.

Another way of saying this is that even at $100M valuation - there wasn't enough value created overall for it to be a real winner all around if you include risk, opportunity cost etc. etc..

At least employees got salaries, risk free - and money in the bank is worth a lot more than 'maybe future payoffs'.

It would have been nice if staffers got 'something' but even if they did allocate several million in the transaction (for example, if the founders 'took nothing') it would have still amounted to very little.
With the example of Firefox, you wouldn't use Firefox, you would use Gecko which is going to have much lower requirements. There are usually ports for embedded systems that have even less requirements as well (WPE for Webkit for example)
> "All HR systems are long term efficient, short term inefficient."

That’s an amazingly stupid comment from an obviously very smart person (Nadella). I’m quite sure it’s not true for women who do not ask for raises, but in my experience it’s not true in general either. Most HR systems tend to produce, promote and reward a certain kind of behavior - and that behavior is seldom very value creating.

Paraphrasing Nadella I’d rather say “All HR systems are short term inefficient, and most are long-term inefficient. Some are even outright ruinous, at least for the company and it’s shareholders, who (unlike employees) have no escape.”
They got paid for it in the form of money and stock.

If the stock is worthless, why offer it? The answer to me is obvious, they are being deceitful (the start up and its investors). As stated, the SECs' mission is so that people who deal with securities don't engage in deceitful behavior, since deceitful behavior removes trust which creates friction.

The argument that people's rewards, one who put in $50 in cash and another who and accepted a lower payment/higher risk which resulted in a decreased earnings potential of say $50 should be treated differently is anti-meritocratic. Both are risking $50.

BTW, if the company offered no stock to employees, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But the comments are, or should be, based on the FA of which this is a thread.
It’s embarrassing that something as vital as the military is running on Windows. Boggles the mind
Pretty much the same mechanism as gmail beta hype, but this costs $30 a month.