skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> the rest would have scheduled shifts, and capped hourly earnings.

I don't really understand why this is necessary. Can't there still be flexible arrangements with drivers simply clocking their work and then getting some kind of salary derived from that? Can't they still get paid bonuses for driving in particularly unwanted hours?

Sure, this would be a complex contract, but I don't see how this is impossible. But I'm not a USA citizen so maybe there is something I'm missing.
We had this same thing happen in Austin when Uber and Lyft pulled out after having a hissy fit about fingerprinting and background checks and not parking in the bus lanes. As soon as they pulled out half a dozen alternatives sprung up that paid better (I always used Ride Austin, a not-for-profit). If you're a rider just take the bus, bike, or get any other cab service (seriously, they all have apps now and they maintain a fleet so drivers don't get stuck with repair bills). If you're a driver it's going to suck for a few weeks, you may have to find other opportunities, but more places will pop up and there will be better competition and better pay pretty quickly if the Austin example holds true.

TL;DR it's easy to flip out because Uber and Lyft are big names, but there are plenty of other good services, just use those instead.
I think that would work as long as the table names were somewhat ephemeral. Otherwise, people would eventually form identities as lupiforms and wortles and you'd end up with the same tribal conflicts.
The belief that consenting adults who voluntarily apply and work for a company as they choose are being "exploited" speaks volumes about your beliefs of the average person's intelligence and capabilities. Perhaps it is the class of individuals who internalize beliefs of another class of people being effectively brainless cattle who must be shepherded and protected -- perhaps it is they who are actually exploiting workers for their own social and political ends.
Yeah that's interesting. I think the friction "Go to the website to signup" is worth them spending the 30% to have it in-app for Spotify, catering for the lowest denominator of user.
I went to English and got a load of Downfall parodies, followed by something to do with escaping the "Luciferean state".

2/10 would not recommend (yet).
5,000 karma account established in 2017 with a reasonable comment history shares person experience

...attacked as a shill.
That OSS usually has poor usability is like the most common criticism ever. And could you explain how specifically am I dismissing users' wants? I'm just saying an extra 5 clicks is not that big of a barrier, when people in this thread are throwing phrases like "incredibly painful" around.
People freely worked under abusive conditions in factories in the Industrial Revolution before the labour rights movement. No one wants to go back to that.
Are you saying a C++ developer shouldn't use the standard library?
The Bible Isn't Primarily a History Book
If it's genuine this is part of the reason the money earned goes to the floor. Since there's always a lot of people jumping in the service to provide 'supply' that lowers earnings for those that use these services as their only income stream and/or have debt to pay back (to pay back the new vehicle to enable even being on those services).
Yes, there are more ads. I watch sometimes on mobile and have seen the increase. Seems to have synced up with restrictions placed on people during the virus outbreak. I assume there are a lot more Youtube hours watched recently.

I'll be finally setting up that Pi Hole server for my wireless network when I have a chance. It's obnoxious right now and I have no interest in giving Google money to make them go away.
Chinese companies already have amazing China only phones, like the new Xiaomi, which operate their own app stores. They don't need anything from Apple
Great idea, but in the meantime these workers need healthcare.
I'm not sure if I'm being downvoted by Republicans who don't like her, or Democrats who think I think I'm a Republican!
It is useful and efficient to defer making decisions until you have to.

But it's critical to avoid waiting too long to make decisions. Because that means the decision was to make no decision, and that has only a random chance to be the right one for you.

Planning is a big part of how you have the information you need to know when to make a decision and when to defer it.

Plenty of work be organized to fit into ~two-week, focused sprints, and can be done efficiently that way. Use your planning to figure out what should and should not be tackled that way.

There's also work where it makes no sense at all to do while looking ahead at most only two weeks.

For instance, if you have a good experienced architect, a small amount of time spent on a high-level arcitecture will pay you back on even a slightly successful project. Not to mention it will increase your agility. E.g., don't design a sophisticated privilege mechanism until you know you need it. But if there's a reasonable chance a privilege mechanism will be important in the future, know where one would fit in in a way that wouldn't require a substantial rewrite. Now you'll be able to slot in a simple privilege mechanism, if/when you need one, and later replace/evolve that with a sophisticated one, if needed, all quickly and without substantial rewrites.
Because there’s no problems with “part time jobs” classification, other than that employers are required to observe laws and protect workers?
This is something I can agree with as being more useful. Anything that can be done to reduce funding to hate groups is fantastic.

But there is a real difference between using deplatforming as a means of defunding hate groups and what happened with Reddit. Reddit itself has no means of monetization. While you could certainly argue that Reddit leads to platforms that do monetize, that is a slippery slope.
CMO. It's the result of the first decision the CMO makes (market strategy).

In short - CMO, CEO, COO AND CFO set the overarching strategic objectives (2 or 3 generally), then that gets turned into a framework for strategy and decision making to enable actions to be evaluated, enacted and measured.

At the highest level, the framework consists of:

1. Strategic aspirations - what are you aiming to do, and how will you judge the success or failure of those things? Goals, KPIs and success/failure criteria.

2. Where to compete (product category areas, pricing, distribution methods, experiential factors, communications and branding)

3. How to win - what will preferentially differentiate the offering, and how will it be distinctive against the market competitors.

4. Capabilities audit - what needs to be changed about what the organisation has/does in order to enable that, and how will the effects of that play out throughout the rest of the organisation?

5. Change management - how are those things going to be introduced/amended/reduced/removed and where does the responsibility lay for those changes?

Everything the organisation does should be in support of the strategic objectives, and thought about in relation to that framework.

As a result, the product-market fit comes as a result of product decisions, and how's it's positioned to the market is a result of the decisions for 2 and 3.

Note that product-market fit isn't just about what the product does, but how what it does is communicated to the market. Both of those are vitally important, bit people tend to forget the comms part.

If the org isn't big enough to have a CMO yet, then generally it devolves to the CEO.

It's why start-ups tend to have crappy product-market fit - CEOs tend not to be great at understanding marketing.
Caring about certain groups of people more than others is clearly immoral. When your resources can be used much more effectively wasting them is immoral. We all make immoral decisions everyday though, so I wouldn't say there's anything wrong with that.
> pushing people further into the fringes doesn't do that.

Citation needed.

Tautalogically, making things harder to discover literally does make them harder to discover.
Very true and interesting twist of fate. I find it amusing that any group becomes very good in science only once they’re under attack. See Galileo: They defined the scientific process when they were under bigoted criticism.

In fact, the best way to ensure that a group who’s right makes an excellent demonstration of their correctness, is to censor them and tell them they’re wrong. That is how we get incredible advances of science. And that is also how huge totems become mainstream. Think « Winnie the Poo » in China, or the « 13% » number in USA.
You could use statistics.median (in python 3.6+)
I mean, if you want to pay full price for your console, sure.

The console market only works if you sell the hardware under cost and then charge up the ass for services to the game developers ($50,000 was the price point for pushing updates on PS4)
What they really want are echo chambers where only approved opinions are allowed.
first hand means you got the info from the first or original source.
Severe alcoholics will die without booze, but you're still right.
> EDIT: I see my point of political bias proven, complete with intolerance, rationalization of said intolerance, gross assumptions, and overall it leaves me disappointed that the HN crowd allows this

I would expect such a strong statement like this to be better explained.

What has confirmed what? What is the logic behind your conclusion? Please share.
Yes, voters in the US want to give people education, healthcare, and unemployment (or basic income-ish) benefits.

Voters in the US also don’t want to pay for any of this.

Hence, the politicians that get elected are ones that give people education via student loans, and healthcare/unemployment benefits tied to employer/employment status. Those politicians get to claim they helped people, and they get to claim they kept taxes low.

The game is to try to reduce your tax burden as much as possible, and don’t slip up and end up in the bottom 3, maybe even 4 income quintiles.
Well both of the statements can be true.
Nassim Taleb didn't actually predict THE crash, he predicted A crash. His whole model was just that crashes happen with some amount of regularity.
A mix of factors, I think.

1. OSBAPI is not widely known outside of the Cloud Foundry community it came from. In turn that's because Cloud Foundry is not widely known either. Its backers never bothered to market Cloud Foundry or OSBAPI to a wider audience.

2. It imposes a relatively high barrier to entry for implementers. You need to fill in a lot of capabilities before your service can appear in a conformant marketplace. With CRDs you can have a prototype by lunchtime. It might be crappy and you will reinvent a whole bunch of wheels, but the first attempt is easy.

3. Fashion trends. The first appearance of OSBAPI in Kubernetes-land used API aggregation, which was supplanted by CRDs. Later implementations switched to CRDs but by then the ship was already sailing.

4. RDD. You get more points for writing your own freeform controller than for implementing a standard that isn't the latest, coolest, hippest thing.

It's very frustrating as an observer without any way to influence events. OSBAPI was an important attempt to save a great deal of pain. It provided a uniform model, so that improvements could be shared amongst all implementations, so that tools could work against standard interfaces in predictable ways, so that end-users had one and only one set of concepts, terms and tools to learn. It also made a crisp division between marketplaces, provisioning and binding.

What we have instead is a mess. Everyone writing their own things, their own way. No standards, no uniformity, different terms, different assumptions, different levels of functionality. No meaningful marketplace concept. Provisioning conflated with binding and vice versa.

It is a medium-sized disaster, diffuse but very real. And thanks to the marketing genius of enterprise vendors who never saw a short-term buck in broad spectrum developer awareness, it is basically an invisible disaster. What we're heading towards now is seen as normal and ordinary. And it drives me bonkers.
There are tons of people who could have replaced their car with rideshare and maybe some public transit, and still come out cheaper.

Insurance, parking, fuel, depreciation, maintenance, and random events add up. If you don't need it for commuting, most of the recurring rideshare costs vanish.

If you need to make an extra long occasional trip, car rental for a day or two outweighs ownership.

Edit: To be clear, anything other than a car is cheaper for many (not all) people. (e)Bike, shared scooter, walking, trolley, Uber/Lyft, taxi, carpooling, etc. Cities are expensive and small towns are small.

On average, ~50% of car trips are under 2 miles. A car is not required for most of those in most locations.
> People freely working is not exploitation.

Just because someone freely accepts work, doesn't mean its automatically free of exploitation. Exploitation just means one party is taking advantage of another parties weakness.

Rideshare specifically - I don't think this exploitation is unilateral, but it does exist.

Example - UAE commercial builders freely attracting Pakistan/India laborers and then holding their passports hostage when they realize it's not worth it. https://www.rt.com/news/353432-uae-migrant-workers-slavery/

EDIT: I should clarify - there are degrees of exploitation, the UAE example is an extreme (but used as an example because its so clear cut). My overall point has more to do with people "freely choosing to work" as an idea that people can't be exploited as a result.
I do that same 20 minute routine. I use an app on my phone to keep track of time spent on projects/automate the timing.[0] Without it, I get so little work done.

[0] https://productivitychallengetimer.com/
Including parking and insurance deductibles for all the times their car will be broken into in SF?
Removed but still enforced aka we have written and unwritten rules

>While the rule on hate protects such groups, it does not protect all groups or all forms of identity. For example, the rule does not protect groups of people who are in the majority or who promote such attacks of hate.
Oh fair, I always thought a distaste for Oracle was confined to tech.
>“The spread of computers and the internet will put jobs in two categories: people who tell computers what to do, and people who are told by computers what to do.”

Do any world leaders do either of those things? I guess tweeting is technically telling a computer what to do. Seems like his prediction ignores the higher end power structures. It's right for a lot of jobs, but not the ones that actually inherit the earth and run things. You might inherit some of it as a geek, but you won't be a landlord.
AB5 left that flexibility in place. It allows for flexible hours and the ability to pick and choose the rides they accept.

Nothing about this legislation or the court case before it took that flexibility away. Nothing about it requires people to be "full time" either.
I’m on an internal team building internal tools and I think the advice this article gives is absolutely terrible.
Yes. While you can be employed by multiple companies, it's unlikely you'll have the flexibility to do so because they will implement shift schedules to maximize employee driving time and coverage.
Great idea. They could just shadow ban everyone and then have /r/SubSimulatorGPT2 bots fill in the comments.
Relationship between shots and scenes when filming a video Production
My close friend drove for Uber and Lyft in Los Angeles. He was constantly abused and berated by drunk and rude passengers (which he couldn't refuse), drove more just to have Uber slash his take-home rate by 60%, and even invested in a larger van so he could drove pool (or whatever the name is for large groups) which never materialized. He's extremely happy to see them go.
And when Uber and Lyft shut down they get neither healthcare nor this income.

Unless they find another job. Which they were free to do anyway. But that's not always so simple...

So what problem did we just solve?
Pathetic... why not take the ~20% of drivers who put in 35h+ a week and make them employees to keep their service running and help their customers? ... Oh right because they can instead inflict pain 75 days before the carveout ballot measure they wrote.

They aren't the innocent victims of gov't overreach for us to venerate. They stonewalled participation in writing a better AB5, because they want no rules but their own.

IMHO This would be a great time for TESLA to spin up a 100% employee based human driving service in California and gobble up the demand.
Customer here (comment not solicited!). We've been trying out Hubble for a month or so and it's looking really promising.

I love the idea of being able to outsource the creativity/problem solving of predicting things that could go wrong with our data to a service that specialises in just that, and I can totally see how they can automate this in a big way as they grow.
What's stopping someone from running a Lyft-like service "dry" (without payment processing) and just matching riders with drivers, with the expectation of paying cash or Zelle

I mean other than the fact that it would make no money.

What could California do to the developers of such an app?
The reason I use iPhones is both, hardware and software. It's the whole package, services too. Why can't you just leave us alone?
Everything I look up says AB5 makes rideshare drivers wholesale employees with the obligations and benefits that carries. Can you explain what you mean?
This. It's basically a hostage situation. With the exception of not enforcing non-competes, I can't think of a single thing that makes California great that is the result of government.

Hollywood is there because of the weather. The central valley is there because of the weather and the soil. The tech industry is there because of the defense industry in WWII and the importance of the west coast to the war effort in the Pacific. There almost 1000 miles of beautiful coast and some of the best National Parks and National Forests in the country are in California.

The geography and the weather is the root of why California is successful. That has attracted and kept talent and created a positive feedback loop between talent and natural resources.

The California government has the luxury of being able to be the most mismanaged because they don't even have to try. Tax money is abundant from all the economic activity and they have captive industries that would have a hard time relocating elsewhere.
there is still plenty of hate content there, mostly addressed against Trump supporters and anyone who disagrees with BLM agenda and violence. it's a radical left site.
I mainly used Uber/Lyft for "last mile" transportation. I replaced "all driving" with largely public transportation. I probably spent an average of ~$300/mo on Uber/Lyft which would account of my parking premium + insurance.

That said, I will concede I'm in a unique position. This legislation isn't completely onerous on me.
> And even if they 'win' it's very hard for them to admit it and dissolve their organizations.

But doesn't that mean that the suggested filter is indeed a good one?

Given an activist organization, how should I assess whether 1) they are genuinely raising awareness for and/or acting to set right something they believe to be a problem, and which indeed is a problem, or 2) it failed to perform apoptosis after fulfilling its original purpose, and now clings to survival by trying to find or even create new problems.

Since the latter will be more likely to be observed, being sceptical of an activist organization seems a good idea a priori. Especially if it has existed for a while already, or if it has considerable funds and/or is well known (which may increase resistance to a dissolution; "We have all this financial support and awareness, we can use it to do more good! Quick, what else is wrong in the world that we totally have the expertise to fix?").
But this is what I don't get. Why is OCaml (or some other language of ML lineage) not a more accessible platform for web development? Or perhaps it is, and I'm not seeing it? Prove me wrong here – I'd be delighted!

I'm not sure that Rust is there yet either mind you, but give it time, perhaps it will...
They should blame store/app provider. E-commerce over the web is pretty well established, don't think people blame Windows/Chrome when some shady site frauds them.
Ask HN: What do you have to do at your company to get promoted as an IC?
My company has "IC levels" 3 through 8.
5 = Senior Engineer, 6 = Staff, 7 = Principal. Not sure what title 8 gets.

There is a "rubric" that defines the things an engineer must demonstrate in order to qualify for each of these levels.

There is a similar system for engineering managers.

What I find is that the managers' rubric expects them to do their day to day job well and promotes them for it.

But the engineers' one expects them to do something out of the box after level 5. They ought to create something that will cause people to sit up and take notice. It does not matter if you wrote high quality code, raised the engineering quality bar for a team, led a team to ship and deliver on time consistently etc. Excelling at their actual work does not seem to matter.

The salaries for managers and ICs are the same at each level. This makes me think that the easiest way to rise up the echelons of a typical tech company and make money is to become an engineering manager. It feels like the role also allows you to have better work life balance. Instead of burning the midnight oil for the company, you can use your spare time to continue to code but on your own ideas. Plus no on-call rotation.

It also appears that interviewing as a manager must be easier. I feel they mostly have to pass behavioral type of interviews and let their experience mostly represent their qualifications. An IC on the other hand must really put in the work before getting on the interview beat - read something like cracking-the-coding-interview, refresh their knowledge of algorithms they would never use in their job etc.

I wonder if the system's been rigged by and for the engineering managers?

What is your opinion on this?
Does this reply have any coherence at all or is it just me?

It reads very similar to a response I received from the owners of a fishing website that I used to frequent when I questioned them about BLM.
Kicking someone off your platform for calling everyone a "leftist cuck" or some other bigoted "ironic" comment is not hypocrisy.

It is basic human decency.

Do you have an example of someone who was "censored" inappropriately?
a 3rd classification isn't enough. employment is a spectrum just like gender and policies need to reflect that. politicians are so stuck in the old binary way of thinking
Alternatively: https://typicalprogrammer.com/why-dont-software-development-... and the referenced article, https://archive.is/Rjqh0

TLDR: methodology won't fix your project.
TLDR: Buy a copy of the Lean Startup, read it, action it.
'Are you high?' 'No. I'm High-DPI', Outlook said
Solving Outlook High-DPI Scaling Issues
How do you know “Danny” identifies as a “he”?
AB5 explicitly allowed for flexible hours- it did not require "shifts" like you're talking about. It made allowances to give drivers the flexibility they want, but Uber and Lyft are upset that it also requires them to provide the option for insurance and that they'd have to pay into the unemployment pool.
This is not true for everyone. I track my ride share spending and it’s significantly lower than owning a car. I spend less that $200 a month on average (2019 avg was $196).

I’m in a unique position to do this, because i put myself in that position. i moved near my work and live in an urban area.

even if it cost $400 a month, i would still do it this way. i read when i’m in the car, i wouldn’t trade that for staring at the road.
Numpy has `np.clip`.

In pure Python `statistics.median([min, max, num])` also works.