skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Companies like Google are an exception; they pay their engineers so ridiculously much that people are willing to ignore the clause under the assumption that they'll work 2-3 years and quit. Google is also broad enough that they can basically hire passion project employees -- people like tytso who are being paid to spend upwards of 50% of their time working on a side project like the Linux kernel.

If you're a startup or a small company, you do not have enough money to do what Google is doing. You'll attract talent, but you won't attract industry veterans or people who have very wide skill sets, because what your company is doing is not interesting or broad enough to hold their entire attention -- and you're demanding their entire attention, both in and out of work. You're also not in a position to offer anyone like tytso their dream job, because you have a minimum viable product to build with specific requirements. So the industry talent you do have will leave quickly, because in order to do interesting things they'll have to.

I regularly see articles about how to hire good people and keep them, and a lot of them waste time talking about stuff like snacks in the office, or the company culture, or whatever. Very few of them acknowledge that good programmers are good because they like programming, and if you put them in an environment where they can't program without your permission, they'll leave because regardless of how many free sodas you're giving them, they'll still feel smothered. Similarly, the employees that stay will progressively have a harder and harder time keeping up with the industry, because there's no reason at all to explore new technologies when you can't do anything with them.

Take whatever position on the ethics you want, it's absurd to assume that you're going to hire someone who's genuinely passionate, and keep that person around for 10 (or even just 5) years if your company has policies like this. You have to give those people the ability to breathe, or they'll go somewhere else where they feel less strangled.

People look at Google and say, "it's fine, because it works for them." 99% of companies in the world aren't Google, and will not be able to pull this off without suppressing their hire quality and retention.
That faceplant at 1:58 looks awful.
The union has done good, but they are taking more credit than they deserve for those wins. Many would have happened anyway because labor is a limited competitive resource (at times, for some jobs) and so if you want to get good people you need to treat them well even when times are bad.

Unions have done good. They have also done bad. Most people will only acknowledge one side of that.
Gender Diversity and Securities Fraud:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2471081
HN thinks about hiring and pipeline processes which lead to signal in orgs, but little about the US justice system seems to inspire faith that they are up to the task of promoting their best to the judicial hierarchy. Instead we should expect that the best legal minds are consultants for corporations.
Those would be tangible evidence that it's possible, again, not that it happened in the Chinese supply chain as alleged in the Bloomberg story that hasn't been retracted yet.
“Many were increasingly of the opinion that they’d all made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place. And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans.”

-- Douglas Adams
Facebook details location tracking after pressure from senators – TheHill
Yes, there is no inherent problem with child labor, especially if parents are involved and the companies are committed to ethical treatment of their workers. Many children today perform chores around the house, and in more agriculture societies help on the farm or in the family shop.
The bfnightly tutorial is a very good tutorial, but I do want to warn that it's not always terribly idiomatic Rust: Herbert was using the writing of the tutorial as a way of practicing Rust, so there are places where the explanations aren't quite correct and other places where the code isn't what an experienced Rust programmer would write. An example that jumped out at me (this from Chapter 8) was the use of

&s.to_string()

which is an expression that could be shortened to just s. (Specifically, s has type &str, calling to_string() on it converts it to a String, and borrowing it allows it to be coerced back to a &str but now with unnecessary copying.) Elsewhere (this from Chapter 3) it has explanations like

> Copy and Clone allow this [type] to be used as a "value" type (that is, it just passes around the value instead of pointers)

which is also not a correct explanation, or at least is a misleading one: things can still be passed by value even without Copy and Clone and without any pointers at all. (Arguably, he meant, "You can share the value without using borrows," but that's not what the explanation said.)

That said, all this is nitpicky (and I suspect that Herbert would be receptive to feedback along these lines—I just haven't had a chance yet to provide it!) because the tutorial's explanation of roguelike-writing is still very good, and in fact I've been following it as a guide for writing a tutorial on top of a different Rust library myself! But I do want to warn about using it as a model for learning Rust specifically.
Founder here, Aito has a custom database, that has been bottom up optimized for statistical operations.

This let's Aito create models at spot to answer the predictive queries
Different unions work differently.

In Hollywood, for example, the unions are not an impediment to job-switching. In fact, they've enabled a sort of frictionless job switching that even tech is decades behind.

I have friends in Hollywood unions that have worked for multiple studios in the past month. No need to interview, or prove their chops. They just showed up for the job, worked, got paid, and moved on to the next shoot. And because of their union membership, they didn't have to worry about health insurance, or whether the checks would clear.

And I'm not even talking about SAG or the other guilds. I'm referring to the actual unions of all the people who work behind the camera, from the camera operators to the makeup artists.
Project Ray is specifically more focused on scaling AI systems it seems. That is sort of important but also missing from the article.

https://bair.berkeley.edu/blog/2018/01/09/ray/
With the state secrets firewall, you have no idea whether or not you should change the composition of Congress.
Xbox Series X Specs: Twice as Powerful as Xbox One X
FireWire also had a few port types which required different cables and connectors, while USB at the time only had one (this was before Mini and Micro USB). Apple even included dongle converters with their iPods.

USB also had the advantage of Intel pushing it, resulting in almost every PC with an Intel CPU (large majority) having USB ports.
This is cool. You can also tool around with https://gif.com.ai to bring out creative use cases of such properties.
Well I am just selling the story my friend told me. Since it happened a while ago I assume that the batteries were fine or I would hear much bitching from the same friend of mine ;)
>Firewire was an originally open standard, but there came Apple and demanded to exact a symbolic 1$ per device payment.

What? Firewire was a project initiated by Apple in mid-1980s, which then was further developed by the IEEE P1394 Working Group. Patents and pooling was part of it from the very beginning, with the primary drivers being Apple, Panasonic, Philips, and Sony (there were also a half-dozen odd smaller contributors). I don't remember there being any sort of "originally open standard" part to it whatsoever. Yeah, Apple owned the trademarked name "Firewire" for IEEE 1394, while Sony and TI used "i.LINK" and "Lynx" respectively, and Apple initially tried charging extra for that which was really stupid (but late 90s Apple was pretty dysfunctional). But even without that wasn't there still the standard $0.25/unit manufacturer royalty?

If you've got some other sources I'd be happy for the trip down memory lane because it's been a really, really long time since that particular battle. I'm not disagreeing that Apple's charge definitely harmed momentum, just that it's not like they came out of nowhere. Though it's worth noting that Firewire was inherently more costly anyway since it required dedicated silicon rather than handing everything off to the CPU. At the time that also gave it vastly more reliable real performance and latency vs USB, and Firewire 400 would typically obliterate USB 2 despite the latter having a sticker speed of 480 Mbps. But it was more inherently costly IIRC.
Note that the book is fiction. Reality was exaggerated to make is point.

I'm not arguing it is a bad book, but it isn't real.
Share Now, formerly Car2Go, is leaving North America
BlockSurvey – Privacy Focused Surveys, Polls and Forms Tol
You may have come across many online survey tools that require your information/details to conduct or participate in Surveys or polls. The truth that you may not know is that your information may be hacked and your details will be in the hands of these hackers which can use for their personal risky businesses.

Safety and privacy on the internet can bring about confidence and truth during surveys, polls and forms. BlockSurvey focuses on privacy/animosity and security when you use their website for conducting or participating in Surveys. They secure nobody has access to your details by making use of secured encryption provided by Blockchain Technology, thanks to Blockstack.

Get started on the website and check out pricing features that suit your desires. There are many templates you can edit to suit your surveys, polls and make it attractive to users.

BlockSurvey doesn't even have access to the information or data on their website so you can be sure of privacy. You can only share answers to your surveys, polls or forms to others but not data of participants. Start here: https://blocksurvey.org and drop your feedbacks and comments about these wonderful website.
Sure it works be Google will make ff do more steps and even load the images slower on the "click till non match" ones
> Unions at least have the interest of employees as their central (espoused) tenant.

You know, if they actually lived that out, there would be a lot less union-bashing. It's not just a capitalist conspiracy to slander unions. It's also (and primarily) that, within my lifetime, unions have been better at protecting union bureaucracy than at protecting rank-and-file workers.

They still have a role to play. I just wish they actually did what they're supposed to do. The workers need someone who's trying to help them instead of to exploit them. And unions are trying to help workers not be exploited by companies... while exploiting workers themselves.
Founder here. Aito had a custom database optimized for statistical operations. It essentially creates Bayesian models real time to answer the queries.
> But, broadly, interacting with an object in superposition in a way that depends on that superposition will cause entanglement.

This doesn't explain the cause of entanglement. It just explains the circumstances under which entanglement occurs.

> I appreciate that this must sound exactly as vague as the definition of a measurement

That's because it is beyond the mathematics.

> But for those familiar with QM it really isn't.

This is not true. I'm familiar with QM and it is vague to me.

>they're very clear on which physical circumstances give rise to entanglement

But, none explain the cause of entanglement. Just as none explains the cause of collapse of a wave function which is called a measurement.

> Ok, but what would the subjective experience of that look like?

I wouldn't know, because it's not what can be experienced. Some folks argue this is exactly what makes many worlds unscientific.

> Just by looking at the wavefunction,

Interesting. What kind of microscope are you using to look at wave functions? Or do you mean at the mathematical expression of the wavefunction? I'm not arguing that decorherence theories are mathematically sound and a neat theory. I'm just challenging that they offer some physical explanations beyond Copenhagen. They just take the unexplained things and replace them with other unexplained things.

> emergent property

Another empty word.

> Finding yourself in one specific branch is somewhat mysterious

Yes. And if you think about it, this is the same mystery which makes Copenhagen so unsatisfactory, just put into a different framework.
Lear to play chords and scale modes based off of C major. Raise and lower notes and see what happens. Read any book or website on music theory. It's not rocket science. I meanmajor/minor scales have 7 notes. And there are only 12 notes in different octaves to choose from and combine in pleasing ways. Don't limit yourself by theory but study it to grow.

I recommend studying the basics in any book and also watch Barry Harris on YouTube when you understand the basics to get some cool a-ha moments. https://youtu.be/F8JJncSUdUU
Surprised that Buck hasn’t yet been canceled from woke HN...
That's either incredibly stupid, or propaganda. My money is on propaganda.

It seems every single article on that entire site (wallstreetonparade.com) is one part relevant fact, then one part unrelated fact with plenty of innuendo to invite you to draw spurious linkages between those.

There's a fantastic amount of noise that various large banks are major shareholders of the NY Fed, for example.

This despite the fact that being a shareholder of one of the Federal Reserve Banks gives no control over it; or that being a shareholder is effectively required by law. The overwhelmingly vast majority of Fed 'profits' are required by law to be returned to the Treasury rather than distributed as dividends.

Similarly there's a lot of hullaballoo that James Gorman (CEO Morgan Stanley) is on the board of directors, despite the fact his bank is overseen by the NY Fed. OK, sure, but Class A directors (elected by the banks, and required to be bank representatives!) are only a third of the board and cannot participate in regulatory decisions.
https://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/slavery/washin...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_slavery
Thanks for the context. Seems like the latest incarnation of scripting 3270/mainframe terminals, telnet/expect sessions or web/selenium/headless browsers.

Copy&paste is the enterprise API/data integrator of last resort. Image/video is another integration point. iOS can screen capture full-page images of web pages, with tools for human annotation. Soon the local ML/bionic processor and AR toolkit can perform text recognition on those images, which means they can be live edited, re-composed and fed into another system.

> fancy service desk platform the suits want may not have a connector to your 15 year old heavily-customized SAP instance (which is run by another team you have no influence with)

This intersects with DRM and the title of the OP story. When OrgA and OrgB fail to partner/cooperate (e.g. no formal integration) or are actively hostile (implement DRM to prevent data movement between OrgA and OrgB products), it creates pain for customers and new business opportunity for OrgC and OrgD.

Which is why scraping and reverse engineering are never going away, they are society's last line of defense against vendor org dysfunction.
Which of them depend on GC?
I do enjoy "Professor Frisby's Mostly Adequate Guide to Functional Programming", which uses JS examples extensively. Despite the fact my last job was mostly JS, I had to look up functions all the time and stretch my brain muscles. Modern JS is different than "keep it the same" JS. But... converting a book to a different programming language rubs me the wrong way. I miss an opportunity to see another language, too. It's not even some very arcane language. If it really was a knee-jerk reaction, I'd have said:

"Learn less edition", or
"2D remake"

So please stop with that strawman.
You can't really A/B test humans. Best thing that could be done is twin studies and even those have flaws.

By the way your line of questioning implies an agenda. I don't have an issue with that, but thought I'd highlight that for you.
The legal system needs to catch up with the laundering effects of global and fungible markets. There are "know your customer" rules for other things. Eventually we need to get serious about goods' provenance.
They were the big gorilla at the time and he'd come from there (they'd acquired his previous company, Blogger). In hindsight, it probably didn't matter at all. The only people I can think that it would have been worth hiding from was press because Twitter rightfully made us look unfocused and we weren't willing to say publicly that Odeo was dead and Twitter was now the thing.

Also, nobody actually thought Twitter was definitely a hit. We just thought Odeo was not working and that Twitter was worth continuing to explore.
More apt illustration:

Your friend is a reckless speculator. He lends $10 with you as an underwriter and your wife says it's fine, but I'm going to check every evening he has at least $1 so we at least know he hasn't lost it all.

So every night just before your wife goes to check, you run ahead and lend him quickly the difference between what he still has and the $1 he needs. Your wife checks, he shows her the $1 in his wallet, she leaves and he pays you back the loan you made him a minute before.
But this behavior makes no sense at all.

An accidental copy/paste means you cannot return the permissions to their default state without disabling SIP. Presumably the default permission is a good one, otherwise, if it’s so terrible that it’s a good idea to make it so difficult to go back to it, then why is it the default?
"Seattle and Cupertino, Mountain View and Davis, California" is a really weird dateline.
Check 1kprojects.com
It's the "discoverability".

You know all their work emails, so messaging all potential union members is easier. Basically, an opt-in model will have lower reach.
What happens if banks systematically are unable to pay these loans back?
Who pays if those assets are fraudulently overvalued rubbish?
HackEEG: Arduino Shield for Reading Brainwaves
Repo loans are secured with US Treasuries and Agency Debt, which are priced by market participants as “risk-free” assets due to the creditworthiness of the US Government. Treasuries are the most highly liquid securities in the world.

There are no toxic assets involved in the repo market.
This is FUD, and runs counter to what players' unions in professional sports have actually done...every single time they've negotiated in the past decade.
Chinese government to replace foreign hardware and software within three years
I would bet on the carry trade caused by negative interest rates in the EU.

With rates negative there, it makes sense for savvy traders to borrow in Euros (and get paid for it), convert those Euros to Dollars at a U.S. bank (which requires that the bank have dollars available), and then lend in Dollars (and get paid for it). With everybody doing this, the banks quickly run out of dollars and accumulate large euro reserves. The accelerated lending at the discount window is needed so that banks can service all the traders looking to exchange euros for dollars.

The natural economic response to the carry trade would be for the euro to weaken and the dollar to strengthen until interest rates equilibrate, but this'd have political implications that are unacceptable: notably, it'd make American goods even more expensive overseas and deepen the trade imbalance, which would cause job losses in manufacturing and other competitive domestic industries, which would sell out Trump's base for Wall Street's interests again. So the respective central banks get locked in a competitive race to the bottom, where the ultra-loose monetary policy in Europe has to carry over to the U.S. because otherwise either exchange rates or interest rates has to move opposite stated government policy.
This isn't really user hostile. The opposite really, stuff just works.

It's possibly security hostile though, and admin hostile, especially since these out of band permissions are apparently very difficult to revoke. As an admin nothing gives me heartburn more than when the system does some sort of magic to make something just work, because I know whatever that process is will be poorly documented and difficult to manage.
Not exactly what you’re describing, but the story of the two Draculas of 1931 is fun:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr%C3%A1cula_(film)
It used to be you could trust your software—even most closed source—because only bad guys wanted to exfiltrate data from your system. The simple advice of “never run an unknown executable” was an effective security practice.

Now, the incentives of software vendors—even open source—have changed to include data exhilaration en masse. Off the top of my head:

* Games that scan and upload the file hierarchy of your system.

* Software sync packages that casually provide third parties for research (Dropbox).

* Keyloggers embedded in the default operating system (web search in windows start; Ubuntu web search; Siri web search.

* Pervasive practice of running untrusted code with JavaScript and the seemingly inexorable march of granting web pages greater system access. Copy something to your clipboard, open a web page, and it can grab it, along with so much more.

* The push toward ever greater “telemetry”.

* Automatic background file uploads, like Microsoft defender sample submission.

* Pervasive ingestion of our data by governments.

The greatest threat to our security has become the vendors and government—the very entities whose job it is to protect us.
Show HN: Open-Source WordPress Infrastructure on Kubernetes
The main point here seems to be that the failure to build a SaaS product is blamed in part on the compounding technical debt incurred due to a fast-moving software ecosystem and the effort involved in keeping up.

The point I think most people should consider instead, is that building an app is not the same thing as building a business. Building the app is comparably easy, once you've proven that you understand the market, your target buyer, and have a unique insight/tool/solution to offer that you can deliver via software.

If you want to learn a technology, by all means build an app. But if you want to build a SaaS business, keep focused on building the _business_. The app, it turns out, is the easy part.
From the linked article

> Heavy marijuana use in adolescence or early adulthood has been associated with a dismal set of life outcomes including poor school performance, higher dropout rates, increased welfare dependence, greater unemployment and lower life satisfaction.
this is the reason why online/electronic voting is not allowed in several countries
id argue one cannot change the composition of congress. political propaganda is regulated through the big 3 media outlets, and is a one-way monologue reinforcing certain values and priorities. Congressional candidates respond only to the cash that is required to secure their elections, and thus their real constituency is comprised almost entirely of corporate interests.
There are commercial license key libraries that solve this for you. It’s been years since I used them so I’m not qualified to make suggestions
Yes, and we're reaping the rewards. I mean that in both the sincere and the cynical sense.
Most of the democratic party is conservative.
State secrets should not exist.
I am personally really against my IoT devices being able to "speak" TCP/IP, I want them to use dumb radios (Z-wave or if I must, Zigbee) that cannot talk to the internet. I get the draw of Wifi/IP devices but I avoid them at all costs. I don't want 10's or 100's of devices on my network that all are talking to servers in China.

I bought a few cheap POE Chinese cameras that I use with Zoneminder but they are all blocked from any internet access except talking to Zoneminder (local).