skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, Two Noble Kinsmen is adapted from The Knight's Tale, which is itself adapted from Bocaccio (Theseid, rather than Decameron), so it covers all the bases ;-)

Our play selection starts with directors, who submit a project that interests them (groomed into a season by the artistic director). I will sometimes nudge people towards certain projects: for some time I tried to get somebody to direct Love's Labors Lost (the next-to-last play we hadn't done) and Cymbelline. At some point I'd like to see if somebody will do Hamlet; it's been a long time. (We have a fondness for the obscurer Shakespeare plays; they give us a lot of opportunities for insight. Our Monty Python-inspired King John was a hoot -- and literally Shakespeare's own text.)

We don't generally write plays ourselves, though our artistic director did her own translation of Lysistrata. If a director adapted Bocaccio or Chaucer, we'd definitely give it a look.
There are two sides to every story...
If said forum was the only one available and posting on this forum was the only way to get a loan or a train ticket then maybe you'd have an analogy.
No backlighting at all on the Freestyle Pro.
I am deeply sorry that the sentiment you express has been your experience. That is not the way it is or must be everywhere, and I hope you are treated better in the future.

Even so, I want to say explicitly that the idea that we should allow geniuses to abuse us and harass us because they are geniuses is dangerous and misguided nonsense. Being smart is not an excuse to behave poorly. With rare exception, producing something great for the world, or believing you are working on something great, is not justification for hurting others or not taking into consideration their needs or feelings, especially when they are working for you to try to help you.

I also think that your reduction of 100-hour-minimum work weeks, no free time, emotional manipulation to prevent reporting, and frequent unnecessary cruelty disguised as "advice" or "help" to "unkind comments" is absurd. If people chose this lifestyle, knowing what they were getting into, that's one thing (and even then, it would still be dubious to demand it in the first place) - but clearly the author and their peers were mislead and manipulated into it.

Finally, what is illegal and what is immoral are not the same thing, and we can and should hold people, as a society, to a higher standard than "guess they didn't break the law" when we put them in positions of power over other people.

Edited to add: I had the pleasure of working as an undergrad with several professors and PHD students in a research capacity. Some of these people, I would absolutely consider "geniuses" in terms of both intellect and achievements. I still speak with many of them, and consider some of them good friends. I never, not once, observed or heard of people being treated in the ways described in this article (nor was I myself), despite the relatively prestigious people I worked with and their relatively prestigious work. It is not that way everywhere.
Exactly my experience too
GraalVM/Sulong and CLR devirtualization.
Fair warning: you _never_ get the full picture if you only hear one side of it. It is possible that the advisor is a manipulative asshole (though it's unlikely that they are to such an extent), or it is possible that the author grew up always getting participation trophies and now isn't getting any (far more likely, IMO). So before you render your judgment, wait for at least some semblance of corroboration.
Gell-Mann seemed to insinuate that Feynman just made up most of his stories [1]. And even if they were true, he lived in a different era. Social norms have evolved considerably since then.

Still, IME it's clear that gender dynamics are clearly in play today. Men tend to take the lead most of the time in heterosexual relationships. I feel most of it is still nurture and not nature; I heard in Europe gender roles are less prominent in dating vs. the US.

By "red pill" or "seduction" advice, I meant snake oil silver bullet advice. There aren't any shortcuts.

[1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunctio...
Maybe he failed to breach the manager effort thermocline

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2015/02/22/theres-a-payof...
The list of grievances is quasi-compelling - some of it reads like, eh, this sounds like a potentially legitimate disagreement, and hard pass on firing people for not being hip to our brand new linguistic norms - but if nothing else, pissing people off so much that literally your entire staff resign is a pretty damning indictment of your conflict management skills.
Hacker Releases Info on Las Vegas Students After Officials Don’t Pay Ransom
As someone who's 40, had to go through cancer treatment and is lacking in energy, not all 40 is equal.
No, the two markets are selling things and making things. If Amazon is the sole gatekeeper of getting something from a factory to a customer, it will naturally do everything in its power to boost its own factories and drive all others out of business.
No one "expects" to go through life without hearing insults, but that does not mean they should be tolerated. I fully expect to continue to hear racist, homophobic statements from US politicians. I do not want to, and I want to work to change that.

Sure, the real world sucks. I don't see that as a reason to prevent colleges from improving.
Considering how poorly and inaccurately tech is portrayed in most other shows, I'm inclined to believe it's Mike Judge and the people that he chooses to listen to.
That's a thousandth of an inch. Lots of things are machined to a thousandth of an inch tolerance, and some things are machined to a significantly finer tolerance. And if you're drilling bolt holes on a diameter that's greater than an inch, you'll need to use a lot more than 3.14.
What is the lifestyle, though?
I was under the impression that all FAANG companies are pretty different from each other.
Every little bit helps... these margins are tiny.
Note sure if you read the article the same way I did -- but I saw it as something that people do -- not something the author was necessarily recommending. He's saying that is how people get ahead.

I agree with you that it is a game. It isnt a game that I play, but it is a popular game. Denying that many people do this seems like wishful thinking or denial of reality.

The easiest way to see this is the typical corporate track -- you're told that if you work hard, every 2 or 3 yrs you get promoted. You do the math internally in your head and realize you'd get to -- say SVP at age 50. Then you look around and there are a bunch of 35yo SVPs. Once can see that and realize there are shortcuts/cheats in the game, or one can ignore it and hope for advancement (only to get to age 50 and realize it was all for nothing.)

I think what the author provides is of great value -- they are trying to show you a reality you may not see. The value is not to encourage you to do it, but perhaps

- to get you to step off some hamster wheel of death

- to get you to realize you need to be an entrepreneur and your own boss

- to get you to weed out these types of players if you are already an entrepreneur and your own boss

- to get you to find companies where these things are not the case (hint: check out the executive team on Linked In -- are they under qualified? run away from this company. Are they hired from outside rather going up the ranks? be careful)
I was an undergraduate work-study student working in my university lab. I got to talking with a Ph.D student helping set up his equipment,

"how long you been working on this?"

"Almost 10 years."

"Seems really long."

"Yes, normally it's 5 years but I can't enough time to finish it. I'm always working on Prof. Engineer's research projects."

"I mean can't you just leave?"

"No, not at all. You are completely beholden to your advisor. Can't get money, lab time, assistants without them. I'd have to walk away from all my research."

I was gobsmacked. Professor Engineer was teaching a course I was taking, though he wouldn't recognize me in my shop bunny suit. His attitude towards students was nothing like his attitude towards his graduate researchers. This was not the first story I heard and I assumed that's how grad school worked.
A Complete Introduction to WebAssembly and It’s JavaScript API
Unsolicited advice for any potential PhD students choosing between schools/advisors: you should try very hard to talk to current PhD students, preferably in person or at least over the phone or video call (at any rate, not in writing). Try to talk to as many as possible.

Good advisors will probably have a few students who will speak up for them, and great advisors almost certainly will. In contrast, bad advisors will probably have a few students who give middling recommendations, cryptic comments, or outright warnings. Good departments typically have meet-the-current-students-without-faculty-present events to facilitate exactly this discussion. If the potential advisor does not happily put you in contact with current or recent students, that alone is a red flag.

This is not foolproof. Even a great advisor may have one bitter student, and a generally terrible advisor might still have some good student relationships. But having a bad advisor will make grad school so much harder. This is a situation where doing a bit of due diligence can have a huge impact.

I was lucky; I had a great advisor, and I was always happy to talk to potential students, since I wanted my advisor to have more good students. Talk to students!
> likely exists many times over and is not unique to Earth.

And that is supposed to make it less significant to us?
Maybe useful: for Amazon and Wikipedia at least (probably others), you can get country/language specific versions by appending the 2-letter ISO code:

!wde - German wikipedia

!wes - Spanish wikipedia

!ade - search on amazon.de

!auk - search on amazon.co.uk

etc.
> It's not like this is being advertised when you are subscribing to some service. "Subscribe now and if you ever want to cancel, we'll make you pay! PS. We know where you live."

They could at least ask. But I understand your point.

> What could the consumer do apart from relying on word of mouth to avoid such services?

I'm not sure I understand you. Are you implying you can't follow the news without using these services? Only through word of mouth? If that's what you mean, there are ways to follow the news while avoiding paywalls. I do.
Indeed and I don't know if it's just me but I genuinely feel like London has gotten a lot worse for fraudsters in recent years...
I've never managed to produce a useful function using GP but have found that in some instances, GAs can outperform both simulated annealing and the great deluge algorithm. Adding random mutations to the process can be especially useful when there are local minima/maxima that would stop an e.g. GDA instead of finding the global minima/maxima.
For perspective, 2nm is approximately how much your fingernail grows in the time it took to read this sentence.

(3.47mm per month)/(30 * 24 * 60 * 60 seconds) = 1.33nm/second
I wish there were more details about the historical context in this.

I recently went down a rabbit hole of trying to implement a cosine function from scratch and found that for most applications where I use cosine (low-resolution graphs or 2d games), I need a shockingly low level of precision. Even four decimals was overkill!

For those that are interested, you can read about my adventures with precision and cosine: https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~azh/blog/cosine.html
And sometimes never, and you will be even eulogized post-mortem by clueless crowds
The Flavors of Object-Oriented Programming (In JavaScript)
Let's be honest. This is just plain racket!
When regulator will finally act on this?
Just because you get an app through their store does not mean they own the apps and the users!
> "All of these arguments apply to dividends as well as share buybacks."

no, adverse incentives (like here, where buybacks preferentially benefit executives) create moral hazards, which economic research has shown time and again. there's even a specific name for this particular issue: the principal-agent problem[0].

in the idealized case, you don't return money to investors if you have positive npv projects on the table (meaning more capital and less risk directed toward common employees as a side effect), but you will if you can enrich yourself regardless of those projects. dividends don't create these perverse incentives but buybacks in the current environment do.

[0]: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_problem
Cool idea, honestly. I've often wondered if this were possible.
> I think the Stoics would argue it’s better to just focus on what’s the right thing to do regardless of how it “appears” externally

But Stoics also do not pursue "fame and fortune." The advice is fundamentally not directed at Stoics.
I literally closed the article after reading the first blurb, because it wasn't explained. Just started googling.
I went to a SUNY school. My advisor kept me waiting 20 minutes after outside of his office for an appointment made a week earlier, only to walk out with coat on, announcing that he was going to happy hour. He suggested that i set up another the following week through the department secretary.

I walked over to do that, discovering that he was actually going to happy hour at the airport, and from there India, and wouldn't be back for a month. Ended up getting locked out of classes as I couldn't register.
Oh, it's just as bad at higher levels, despite the people there generally having even FEWER of the qualifications. I'm top level IT management with a tremendous amount of actual technical knowledge, and just getting to an interview is the hardest part. I've never taken an interview that didn't result in an offer, but getting to the interview with all the demands is insanely difficult. Usually the spots get filled through unofficial channels and the person they hire for the job is unfit, technically. Incredibly frustrating when you're good at what you do.
Friends told me that a former advisor started a side business counseling couples, and made some of his students pretend to be married participants during larger group sessions.

One kicked a PhD student out of her lab after he spoke to a local news reporter about his line of research without her approval. Not even a scientific article, just a personal interview. He started over in a new line of research.
>it's up to each person to choose whether they want to chase the promotion and higher pay or whether they want to focus on just doing meaningful work

There's also something in between: Work as a means to other ends, not seeking personal fulfilment in one's day job.

All these discussions and articles I read here about career advancement and what not seem so incredibly foreign to me.
I'm of the camp that focusing on the acronym stuff is missing the point: that was a thoughtful, well-written piece.

I, for one, am grateful that you took the time to write it.
But also, three cheers to people organizing to improve their working environment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fall_and_Rise_of_Reginal... ?
I think the problem here is credentialism. People have been incentivized too strongly to need a degree from the most prestigious institution and so put up with things they wouldn't have before. Great work is being done all over the world now, there is no reason people should still see one of a few schools as a requirement for a serious resume.
Indeed it was a massive messaging error. For maybe 20% more short term work we’d be in a new zealand/east asia situation. Summer was the time to do it.

Now we just have hard choices.
I was confused by "for systems that are not in a state of thermal equilibrium". If it's not in equilibrium, does it even really have a temperature? What kind of configuration is it, and is that realistically a model of what could be the state of affairs in a glass of hot water?
> I read that post as asking exactly what distinction creates a problem, not a denial that there are many of them.

That question was being asked in a roundabout way, but if you're not so generous, do you not pick up a bit of a whiff of incredulity?

>> http://english.www.gov.cn/ is another platform that's controlled exclusively by the Chinese government. But no one's proposing a book-burning, that the US firewall all information controlled by the CCP or those with ideological differences. Twitter is a popular information-sharing social platform, and there are Chinese actors on it, but this argument isn't extended to suggest that it be banned, either. But somehow, a platform that does both must not be allowed to exist? I don't get it.

"But somehow, a platform that does both must not be allowed to exist?" seems either disingenuous, or that the person is unable to realize that an application that has ~100M users (and significant usage/day), most in a young impressionable demographic, that consists of ~60 second viral videos, just might have distinct and noteworthy differences from a national security point than Twitter, or http://english.www.gov.cn.

To be clear: the onus is not on this person to disprove their counterpart's assertion, far from it. I am referring to the apparent inability to notice that a valid difference might exist, and all of this in a world where we've been constantly told by the media that Russian hackers have been undermining our democracy, and occurring on HN, a site frequented by some of the brightest minds on the planet when it comes to software.

And this is just one example. Reading through the rest of the discussions in this thread, is there not something that seems "a little off" in the way people describe reality? Are so many people simultaneously faking that they are literally unable to see any valid concerns here, or in the arguments put forth in their counterpart in each discussion (and this goes both ways), or are they literally unable to see?

If this was to happen in every thread on HN, one might just write it off to "people being people", but it doesn't happen in every thread, it only seems to happen in certain types of threads. Is this a coincidence? Am I seeing things? Or might something interesting actually be going on here? Is this odd behavior restricted only to HN, or do we see similar behavior elsewhere?
> !gm - google maps

!m will save you over 33% of typing... :-)
Sure, it's only okay for Google to scrape all websites, but not you scraping it. Got it.
The author is painting a picture of behaviour that a large number of people engage in.

Separately, when I read this paragraph, it prompted me to check my “DND while driving” settings, which for some reason were no longer enabled.

Authors can write about controversial / bad things.
"As for the Uighur & Tibetan situation, this is starting to look like it's going to be just one of those very unfortunate facts of life...

Ethnic cleansing with helping of re-education camps and forced labor are just "unfortunate facts of life." Just give them 20-100 years and nobody will remember anyway...

Well, that's certainly a take on how things are going there.

Rising tides can't life boats filled with dead and forgotten people, but sure, citizens who follow the strict and draconian credit system are stacking bank, amirite?
There is a paradox that with increasing gender equality, fewer women get into STEM. That indicates that women are in general not so interested in STEM if they have a choice.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/02/the-more...
This is only relevant if you need a lot of money to play other games outside of work. Most people don't.
I'm not sure what's your point here is; but the idea is that with big B&M stores, it's still the manufacturer that is ultimately liable for the product; so, if the product doesn't sell, it's probably up to the manufacturer whether they want it back or may be interested in putting it into clearance and/or straight to the rubbish or recycling bins.
In this case there are at least 44 sides, and the 43 sides seem to line up pretty perfectly.
> It doesn't work this way. Companies aren't valued based on how much cash they have on hand.

Uh, yea they are. A company’s valuation is based on both the cash they have on hand AND future discounted cash flows.

Once you correct your understanding of this, you will see that GP is explaining things correctly.
If we assume that life readily emerges, that's evidence that the life that predominates on Earth is robust as presumably it has overcome many spontaneously emergent forms of alternative Earth life, and possibly even extraterrestrial life.

But if life doesn't readily emerge, then we don't have any evidence one way or another. However, the likelihood of encountering extraterrestrial life is also diminished.
It has many terrible flaws, but one of the saddest things about it is there are so many people who work with and within it every day who very much care about patients and providing good care, and it seems like the system is just too large, complex, and established to significantly change despite peoples' best intentions and efforts. I've heard people describe valiant efforts like OpenEMR as "terrible" and "a nightmare". It's depressing, and I wish there were some place to hear good news about ways in which things are changing for the better, because despite having worked within a large hospital system myself, I just don't see much positive news around modern EMR alternatives, simplification of medical billing, paperwork reduction, etc. It's like a bureaucracy gone unstoppably wild.
Awesome, thanks for this link. I remember finding this years ago when I was first rolling my own but had forgotten. This is a great resource.
I'm saying the lack of a popcount isn't a deficiency, considering that it's competitors don't have it either. And given the huge amount of work ARM put into the Helium ISA, I wouldn't be surprised if the instruction simply didn't make sense at that gate count anyway. For cores that go down to 12K gates like a CortexM0 or the smaller RV32E cores, popcount in the ALU is a distinct non zero cost.

And yeah, you for sure need to be better to compete. Zero fees is a large chunk of what'll get you there for these tiny cores. When you're being compared on borderline ascetic area efficiency, adding features works against you.
Are you selling those fine leather jackets?
Corporate snitches are using screen monitoring to find and fire slackers
The AA twelve-step program isn't Gospel, and it wasn't handed down on tablets at Sinai.

But it does encapsulate a lot of wisdom, and the first step is to admit powerlessness over the addiction.

That's what you're missing here, is that by definition addicts feel out of control of their own behavior. Without that loss of control, it's not an addiction, it's just a habit you spend a lot of time on.

Look, it's obvious this isn't a subject you know anything about, and congratulations on that. But maybe stop making confident pronouncements which don't work.
I think I’ve done maybe 30 interviews? Only three of them were the full blown whiteboard for 5 hours process. The first two I failed at the beginning of my career and in hindsight I was properly rejected. The most recent one just made me feel like I’d earned it. The leetcode grinding helped, but my years of experience helped more.

IMO if a company messes around with soft skills, take homes, techno chit chat, long lunches, brutal arcane automated domain knowledge screenings, shibboleths, “day in the life”, present your solution to the group, heuristics, or some other creative way to justify their own biases, I can be fairly confident that I’ll have at least a few co-workers that really just can’t code very well.

I have not met an engineer at my current company who didn’t impress me when I dig into their code a little. There are low performers, but even they produce excellent code when they feel like it.

Nothing is more frustrating than taking a day to interview and getting maybe 30 minutes of watery technical challenge.