skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> "Abilities" is the operative word there, as in women, on average, aren't as able

Except that quote doesn't imply that women are less able. You could read it that way if you wanted to be uncharitable of course, but strictly speaking, that sentence simply says that women have different abilities, not lesser abilities. One way that sexism presents itself is an underappreciation of valuable skills, where traits that are typical of the dominant group are recognized as valuable and marked for advancement instead.

This is a standard feminist claim about work place sexism, and so a charitable reading of your quote is basically agreement with the prevailing wisdom.

> Pointing that averages don't imply individual ability doesn't make it better.

Sure it does. If you've made it, then you clearly have the skills required to be where you are.

"6 foot tall basketball players are at a serious disadvantage in the NBA". This is a clear fact. However, height doesn't determine individual ability. This too is a clear fact. Therefore, 6 foot tall players that make it into the NBA should feel reassured that they earned their place.

> he was fired because he made women felt excluded and othered

There was nothing exclusionary about the memo, and "othered" is a meaningless term. He was fired because his memo caused a PR nightmare, and through no fault of his own.

> See also Sundar's quote: "to suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK

Also not something that Damore claimed. This whole debacle has been a grand exercise in strawmanning.
> Yes, it does seem strange that they would be opposed. Are you sure they understood your main statement the way I quoted it above?

It was in the context of discussing the Trump administration, especially the impeachment process (how we got there is a long story...). They kept falling back on "there's two sides to every story..." as if that precludes us from attempting to seek truth.

I'm sure if pressed, they would agree that objective truth exists (it's hard to be an evangelical Christian and not hold this view). But they seem bewildered at the prospect of actually trying to seek it out. Gaslighting has truly taken its toll.
Most state university libraries are open to the public (some are actually required to be if they’re repositories of government documents). You’re free to browse when make use of their collections onsite.

If you need borrowing privileges, these can in many cases be purchased from the institutions for between $1-300 per year. They generally don’t include offsite electronic resource access, but every university library I’ve worked for have computers with guest access to all of these materials.

It’s a little pricey, but if you’re a regular consumer of academic or specialty literature, not at all a bad deal.
Neither, from what I've seen. Big retractions made quietly is the pattern across the board, from mainstream outlets to 'alternative media'.
That's the real tragedy - nothing he can do will fail google at this point. He could do a live stream of oral sex on Youtube, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference. He's already lied through his teeth to Congress.
I wish I knew what to do to help ameliorate the anxieties you've experienced, because as the white guy giving the interviews, I'm terrified that something about my approach or demeanor is enhancing those anxieties in my candidates (and I've seen entirely too many promising candidates wash out where I had to put as my feedback "I think they can do this, but they couldn't do it during the interview, and I suspect they got too nervous").

What can I do to do better?
He's a good businessman, but that "deterioration" that you (and me and many many others) see is because he's not driven by the same morals and beliefs that Larry and Sergey had when they were running the company. The "old Google" everyone loved was the pre-Sundar Google.

I can't really blame Larry and Sergey for wanting to do something else, and leaving the company in the hands of someone that they know will maximize profits. But that doesn't change the fact that modern Google does a lot of scummy and downright evil stuff today that likely wouldn't have happened during the "old Google" days.
Perhaps Tim Cook-ing forward is a more modern/relevant way of describing the phenomenon? (Pichai and Cook are both competent empire caretakers. Innovation is suffering though...)

Ballmer wasn't competent.
That's a bit jilted, no? It might not be the popular stance, or even one the founders philosophically/morally agree with individually. However:

- They appear to be forthright with this information. (That's certainly better than terminating users.)

- Aren't they at the mercy of the payment processor?

If the demand still stands for a "buy-me-a-coffee-for-erotic-content", then couldn't anyone else create that service? I empathize with your frustration, but I reject the sentiment that Buy Me a Coffee has intentionally done anything wrong.
There have been intermittent reports of the Amazon Prime card giving 5% back on AWS bills. I'm ashamed that I know that.
User B needs to verify their email for it to count. Otherwise you could enter a fake email and move up the list. When user B joins the list and verifies their email, A's internal score increases. The final list is sorted by score and then sign up date. So what you described is working as intended.

However, what you might be getting at is that you want a different sorting mechanism, which is a feature request. What would you expect to happen? Maybe I can consider that
> I think that's a cynical view of the situation.

I think it's impossible to be cynical enough about a guy who blacklisted a company from his search engine because they used his service to show a picture of his backyard as a way of illustrating the privacy violations his company enabled.
I read that 1993 THERAC-25 article when it first came out. One factoid which stuck with me was that after the accidents, the manufacturer, AECL, retreated to their core business: "AECL's primary business is the design and installation of nuclear reactors."
You're right. One of these forces is how in a sufficiently large organization you're practically guaranteed to attract a critical mass of bad actors, people with rare but extremely harmful personality types. In an open culture, these bad actors can find each other and coordinate, creating massive problems for the whole organization. Traditional big companies are robust against these bad actors --- unfortunately at the cost of many other desirable characteristics. Smaller companies (maybe up to 10k headcount) can get without the necessary safeguards because, due to their small size, they don't attract a critical mass of rare but extremely harmful personalities.

Google tried to remain an open, high-trust place well beyond the point when it became obvious that the company had attracted exactly this sort of toxic element. Now the company is paying the price.
Community consultation is the right thing to do!
I wonder if modelling might have predicted better service times for the majority gender with non-gendered bathrooms, and that might have swung the survey result.
Do you know what they will be doing next?
I guess I just don't believe this. Google is one of the largest and most powerful companies in the world. Having both people step down like this is incredibly strange.

I mean, neither of them even tried the ol' "I'm stepping down to spend time with my family" thing.
Thanks for the response and consideration - and my apologies for wrongly assigning the blame.

Several questions:

1. Which payment providers specifically?

2. What do you mean by "hosting", and what are the rules?

3. Do I understand it correctly that adult content creators can use your service as long as their actual buymeacoffee.com page does not show "adult content"

3a. If so, it would be better if you clarified this with a <see more> link after the "no adult content" blurb.

4. Since the restrictions come from payment providers, you would be better off telling what the restrictions are and where they come from to avoid confusion.
<3

Some days I love hacker news.
The Evolution of a Terminal Programmer
I'd say there's some room for competition with:

- cheaper vehicles (not "crazy-expensive")

- easy to integrate/extend (modern software practices...)

- more varied domain applicability (not everyone looks for pipeline leaks/hunt mines for a living)

- fast reactivity, rather than moving at the speed of government

I'd wager cheaper/better hardware & other improvements means orgs will be able to get fewer, cheap underwater robots.
To be clear, Cargo doesn't actually use a SAT solver, it's depth-first search with some heuristics. Without knowing more about how Dart's solver worked, it's hard to directly compare. https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/blob/368333c2070279347723...
One thing I've found very interesting is that even though the majority of software developers in an enterprise or organization are male, with the ratio being as high as 80/20, the ratio of male to female managers directly managing software developers is closer to 50/50. I would say this is evidence of bias in favor of women.

edited for clarity
What's wrong with Patreon?
I built a few applications using Django in college (still am, actually) and it gave me the foundational skills I needed to pick up other frameworks later. I think it balances convention and configuration well for both learning and doing and provides an intuitive learning curve for web development. While most tutorials are for server-side rendered CRUD-based applications you can use DRF to build an API for a single-page app and the framework is flexible enough to build all sorts of applications.

Django set me up with the tools and skills I needed a couple years ago. The other ones probably would too. Echoing other commenters you can build anything in any of these frameworks and shouldn't spend too much time choosing stack. Despite it not mattering, my vote is for Django.
From the outside, it feels much more like the company is hitting a midlife crisis (feeling unsettled, not as agile as they used to be) than a young adult.
it's always a problem of people wanting to believe something is possible (and mandatory to pursue) banging their heads against what is true and actually possible.

I'm not sure if you realize this, but change always seems impossible until it happens. 10 years ago it seemed completely impossible that Facebook would have 1B users, let alone the ~3B it has now.

The same 10 years ago it seemed impossible to that gay people would be able to marry, and even 4 years ago the idea of a Trump presidency was considered a joke.

Change is and will remain hard. That doesn't mean it isn't desirable nor does it mean that people shouldn't bang their heads against walls to make it happen.
My advice, look at what employers are actively hiring for and work backwards. Generally speaking, many value an MVC type frameworks, specifically Rails/Django, they are well-known, easy enough to hire for since they are "standard" and have broad application use and are quick to work with. Most of the knowledge is transferable between them. Understanding database migrations, app structure, authentication, etc is common.

I'd focus on that first, then when you're comfortable, move towards front-end. Again, focus on what employers are hiring for, React being top of the list, Angular is loosing market share.

Node isn't very complicated to develop in, front-end experience like ES6/7 will help you figure out JS and you can learn the event loop model later on.

This way you'll have a solid foundation in backend, front-end and can expand out from there as needed and specialize but this is a good starting point to be a full-stack developer. Spend time looking at development workflow, learn Git, write tests, etc.
That doesn't mean it has to read like it was written by a PR person.
I love a lot of what Musk does but thought those tweets were just insane, classless, and reprehensible.

Fortunately, he's seemed to have calmed down his social media game since 2018 (thank God), but he should still absolutely have to settle with this guy for a lot of money.
I dunno... I think it's easily explained by the market, that there are a ton of people who like hops.

I personally love super-hoppy beers. In a weird way, it feels kind of similar to the way I love super-spicy food, or 90% dark chocolate, or black coffee. It's just a big "kick" that's fun in and of itself.

With all these things, the flavor balances are certainly important, but obviously an aspect of it is out of balance and that's the whole point, what I like about it.

So just, to each their own. I know plenty of people who despise hoppy beer. I'm just glad there's a proper full range of flavors at my local average supermarket. There wasn't before.
I’m not talking about zoning. I’m talking about regulations on housing quality. Tenement style housing wasn’t pleasant, but it was better than having no housing or only having housing far away from jobs.
I judge them pretty negatively. People like Bezos, Jobs, or even Gates never really spent so much time building this PR image of being for the greater good, holier-than-though, "making the world a better place." Everyone knows "don't be evil", but how about their recruiting catch phrase "do cool things that matter." Even the "not a conventional company" tag line is relevant here.

Hypocrites just irk me more than people open about their intentions and motivation, and to me Larry and Sergey belong in the hypocrite category. They ultimately were billionares with total control over Google, this idea that somehow things just got out of their control is absurd. It didn't get out of their control, what happened is that whenever push came to shove on difficult issues, they always went with the decision that they felt would lead to the higher stock price. After years of telling everyone who would listen they were non-conventional leaders interested in more than just money, they always purely pursued the lucre. And why? They are literally amongst the world's richest people already.

I was at the TGIF where Sergey tried to sell the company on Maven, and then what happened was, internal google groups are a bit like public URLs, in that they were basically visible to all full time employees if you knew the link. So Sergey would say one thing on stage and then someone would stumble up on the link about the real strategy, and that what they said on stage was "messaging" to appease dissenters. It was total dishonesty, and it was all for big fat contracts, that's it. They did not care one bit about the dangers of weaponized AI or the dangers of being an international company building military technology for one company, or the general growth of the military industrial complex and how the biggest tech company becoming part of it it could snowball its size and dangerous impact on society. And Maven is just one example, but censorship in China is another, and there's many more. I do get that they struggle with some truly difficult decisions that are ethically ambiguous and they can't please everybody, but there are plenty of spots where it was abundantly clear that the only thing Larry and Sergey cared about was filling their already overfilling coffers with more gold. And when Bezos does that, at least he never pretended otherwise, but when Larry and Sergey do it, they are totally backtracking on a public image they spent years selling to people.
React Native UI Component Libraries You Should Know
I agree with your proposed step forward.

Myself, recently I've been more often producing fresh code than working on someone else's, so I ended up aggressively documenting design decisions in code - most of them in top-level file comments, and the more local/tactical decisions within the scope they affect. I try to do that simultaneously with writing the code, because unless I write things down immediately, there's a good chance I'll never go back to put them in.
It's worth keeping in mind that this isn't a linear progression

An additional small detail that makes it somewhat more confusing than it should be is that some challenge numbers (like this one, RSA-240) have the decimal, rather than binary size in their name.
I can't even pass as white, and I'm still excluded from most diversity programs because my race (South Asian) is overrepresented in tech.

However, overrepresentation in tech in Silicon Valley does not necessary translate into societal privilege, or even extend to all places in the US. Like sure, Google's CEO is Indian, but the entire upper layer of management at the company I work at (and a lot of other companies in Middle America) is 100% golf-playing white males with no way to break in. So I'm kinda SOL both in the diversity programs in Silicon Valley / more progressive tech places as well as the golf-and-whisky club at work.

Would like to hear solutions or experiences from other brown South Asians working outside Silicon Valley.
Orthogonal concepts.

Modern languages can be bloated.
"Listeria per cubic centimeter" might be a bit overly edgy.

Occasionally, I'm rather fond of Vacherin Mont d'Or, which in its original, raw milk based, recipe, is kind of the equivalent of Fugu for the landlocked.
+1 on the sync and async discussions.

This is super important, not just at work but every day life. I find that sometimes I don't want to text someone when I'm having a passionate discussion, I'd rather video call or call them. If I can't do that, then I'll go for async messages (like voice clips).

Really awesome newsletter, and amazing collection of tips.

This stuff is crucial to any distributed team.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21592828
There are some ongoing theory-crafting in this thread, but the real reason seems pretty simple; Larry and Sergey obviously don't want to deal with all the management and operational stuffs, but only "moonshots" like autonomous vehicles or quantum computing. Yeah, this was the whole purpose of establishing a holding company, but Alphabet has grown by 2 times (both in employee count and revenue) and probably they're now facing the similar amount of bureaucratic workload again.

Personally, I think Sundar has been a pretty good CEO and probably a better businessman for this size of organization but I'm still not sure whether this leadership change will work better for Google though. Due to Alphabet's structure, Larry and Sergey will keep majority voting stocks but they will be away from most of the details in the company. Can they still make good business decisions without such details?
> Even if you do have a "fast" track and a "slow" track, the only ways I can think of to get travelers on either of these paths to the same place at the same time

They don't have to get to the same place at the same time, they just all have to cross a finish line. The finish line is the same for everyone, even if the fast track students get to take a more fun route and play doing other things they enjoy along the way.

Certainly the fast track students will still have a competitive advantage since they will probably have worked on more challenging problems, but it fixes the graduation stats. Who knows if it will have positive downstream effects.
I assume you mean something like care professions? They don't pay less because it's mainly female workers, they pay less because they can't easily scale the generated profits.
Another one I can think of:

rails new blog

Think about how many frameworks over the years have copied or looked to Rails for inspiration. Rails pretty much changed what people expected from frameworks.
Hey, this is an ~old thread. But I'd like to contact the author, Derek Johnson. And, having no Facebook or Google account, I can't even create a Medium account to post a comment.

So do any y'all perchance know his address? If so, please email me at the address in my profile.
How McKinsey helped the Trump administration carry out its immigration policies
I used GCP before and liked it better than AWS. The current startup I work for has a prior business relationship with AWS, and every month, it gets harder to move off to GCP. AWS gave a generous credit to the type of startup we have, and with the relationship-building from the solutions architect and account manager, this probably won't go away.

There are a lot of technical refinements in GCP that makes life a lot easier than AWS, but nothing strategically compelling enough for the cost (in cash, developer time, and burning relationships) to jump ship. So I make-do with the not-as-great technology. They are pain-points but not deal-breakers.

I think if our startup were doing AI/ML, or even heavy data processing as our core technology, there's probably enough compelling reasons to invest in a move to GCP. But it isn't.

If I were greenfielding a new launch at a new startup, I'd push for GCP.

I have never worked for Google or Amazon.
There exist tertiary jobs that employ the same skillsets without the danger of pervasive incentives. No one minds if a EPA regulator that does agriculture cases his whole career then take a lawyer job in the fishing or mining industry. It's when that person drops immediately into a legal career at Monsanto that people start seeing a conflict of interests.
I don’t think there’s much scheduled pax service in helicopters to start with. Lots of sight-seeing, air ambulance, and on-demand charter ops (part 135) and of course private (part 91) flying. I think there’s a market for a small, VMC-only helo. (I’m not convinced that it’s going to be electric anytime soon.) I think most of the R22 and a significant fraction of the R44s sold today are not IFR-equipped. AFAIK, none of them are certified for IMC operation (even if IFR equipped) and Robinson has a healthy business going, obviously.
Understanding the AWS bill is far harder than it should be. That being said, there are some resources that weren't mentioned in this blog post. The ultimate source of truth is the AWS Cost & Usage Report [1] which can be delivered in Parquet and queried with SQL via Athena.

Although the Cost & Usage Report alone can solve many billing mysteries, in some cases it's also necessary to go to CloudTrail logs to determine exactly which user or application incurred charges.

[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/awsaccountbilling/latest/aboutv2...
Right, so government cannot be trusted to enforce consumer protections and it needs to be privatized.
That is more of a challenge :). This is why I think pre-recorded lectures are a superior form of teaching. They can be tweaked and revisioned to convey information in the most lucid way possible. Meatspace should be reserved for interactive QA sessions. Schools that accomplish this have a pedagogical advantage over everyone else.

Bar that, I recommend what you do is record the lecture audio while jotting down the major points (note taking apps like Notability work great for this). After the lecture re-review the audio, make sure you understand everything thoroughly, adding any additional notes that are required. This requires having to go through the lecture twice. If you are comfortable in the subject you can probably take sufficient notes during the lecture without having to listen to it again. Then before the exam, go through your notes and make sure you understand it.
> He took the reigns when he needed to

I strongly disagree. Alphabet is an unfocused company which seems to treat product releases as experiments that can be killed at any time without warning. There's a culture that incentivizes more experiments rather than better products.

The aimlessness is obvious in the frequent and baffling product renaming, reorganizations (like Nest joining Google), duplicated/overlapping products, and killing of acquired products.

A smart CEO knows how to focus, build on early success (rather than abandon), and tell a coherent brand story.
I am out of the loop. What does this mean?

> It is clear that Sergey and Larry (and Eric) have been asleep at the switch in shaping Google's culture, which now looks like the campus of Evergreen State College.
As are all government programs -- agreed, that is the issue.