skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> 2. No one wants to tune into a noir PI show and watch struggles to pay the bills and roommate drama. And don't be ridiculous, there are tons of shows that show people living in shitty conditions.

The articles premise is that TV drama, shows people struggling to pay rent while living in palatial apartments. They do so, not because all TV producers and writers are crazy classists, but because it's much easier to fit a film crew and studio lighting into a large apartment than your average real-sized Manhattan studio.

Writers understand this and lampshade it by giving various excuses, for example in Friends the large apartment was an inheritance from one rich-girls' grandparents, or in Jessica Jones, the building is falling apart and in a bad neighborhood so she gets a deal on rent because her presence keeps away undesirables. However, the article rightly claims this is classist. That's true in a 'fridge logic'[1] sense, but you have to suspend your disbelief if you actually want to watch the show.

[1] https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FridgeLogic
If you're bringing in those buckets, you are already in the slippery slope bringing you to the current system. Why not a bucket for people who visit the site often? A bucket for people using advanced site feature A, feature B? A bucket for people who subscribe to /r/teen?
0. The vast majority of websites are running third-party ad networks, not first-party.

1. Even first-party ad networks often track and fingerprint users without consent, and may even share the data they have with other websites. This has personally happened to me, specifically in which eBay and Amazon serve their own first-party ads, but shared data about my searches, purchases, and clicks with other platforms. Even though it may have been a part of their ToS to do that, I consider that type of cross-business sharing of user data, without a clear opt-in/opt-out option presented to the user, to be a malicious term and effectively user bullying by monopolies in e-commerce.
Show HN: The era of faceless conversations – an essay
When I was using a trial of Hey email, I received an email about trial expiration and a link to upgrade to paid plan if I want to continue using it. When clicking the link, it opened in the in-app browser and you could enter your credit card details right inside. Idk if that's permitted by Apple or not, but if not, then Hey was lucky Apple didn't notice it.

However, I don't see how that can be solved. An email provider has every right to send an email to a customer informing them about anything, including a trial expiration and if that email contains a link, it is handled like a link from any other email in the app. It would be really silly for Apple to ask the provider to censor their user's inbox and hide a particular email they received.
I like to think of this as "The Yelp Struggle Sessions"

With such Orwellian newspeak/doublespeak as "Silence is Violence," this is just a taste of the dangerous hyper-normalization to come.

I don't freedom of speech doesn't cover business entities, but libel and defamation does. I don't see how this doesn't open up Yelp to massive litigation.
Yeah I mean, it probably depends on how deep a thinker you are. Religious folks integrate religion with modernity in all sorts of ways, from "God's trick/test" to "God signalled this in my scriptures."
Those are not mutually exclusive. (One could add "foolish" and "short-sighted" to the list of potentially compatible adjectives.)
Do you think taking care of children is a low status work that people have to do and not want to do? Do you think there is something wrong with a woman preferring raising children instead of pursuing a boring career?
> Just imagine if Microsoft had taken a 30% cut from every developer who ever compiled software for windows

How does this relate to this discussion?

Just inserting "30%" into ANY financial transaction and drawing a comparison is a false equivalency.

If I could, I would downvote this.
The really awful thing from that story (Planet Money did a great recent episode on the ProPublica coverage) is that they are able to get away with this through Arbitration clauses. By way of their contracts, they strongarm their contractors into dealing with any "misclassification" issues (eg. exerting too much control over a contractor) individually, silently, and outside of court. Contractors have no ability to sue in a class action suit, and aren't even allowed to speak to fellow contractors if they go through arbitration. It's such a sneaky and frankly complicit way to enforce their business model. They know it's grey, and they put people in the corner so they can't call it grey with a loud enough voice for serious attention to be brought to the issue.

Thankfully some law firms have taken the approach to overwhelm Arise with individual arbitration claims. Arise likely calculated in to their model as a cost of business expense, so the best that can be done is to make that expense grow.
I didn't argue that. I was arguing with the "predominant" part he stated. I'm not a blind moron. I'm fully aware of bot manipulation. Who isn't?

Yet I was downvoted for simply trying to reign in the completely overblown nature of these statements. These assertions since 2016 have been repeatedly made with partial and/or zero evidence.

There is still zero evidence that the manipulation of social media by Russian assets in 2016 actually affected the votes of the American public. As far as I can tell, the blue collar whites in the Rust Belt don't exactly have a large presence on social media, let alone any record of statements saying they are changing their vote because of an advertisement. This is all just playing into the hands of the DNC, who for two successive elections have manipulated the Democratic primary to kill Bernie Sanders, and immediately resort to "the lesser of two evils" mode to bamboozle his supporters into supporting their oppressors.
Quite the contrary is the case. Whenever the brain gets stimulated, it forms more or "better" connections.

It's not helpful to compare the brain to a computer in this sense, because both simply work in vastly different ways.

The more you use your brain, the better it gets at the task and in general (at least to a certain degree). This is not the case with CPUs, which only get hotter and often slower (i.e. running at lower clock speeds) when utilised more.
UN WFP stops distributing blended food in Uganda as people fall sick (2019)
By that stat, you have a 1:66M chance per mile, so I think one in a hundred million is at least an order of magnitude too low. Nowhere close to 1:1000, though.
1. 'Misleading Information' is a targeted category, specified only by manual intervention, leaving the door wide open for selective enforcement and biased enforcement.

2. The 'context' they put in the 'Trending' section is often highly editorialized and skewed. An example from yesterday:

> Celebrities · Trending

> Mel Gibson

> People are expressing disappointment that Mel Gibson has been cast in a new film.

> 18.2K Tweets

Mountain out of a molehill, selectively chosen, click-bait editorializing ('people are expressing') - none of this is helpful, and doubling down on it as the only content to put in that pane seems quite foolish.
It is no different than millennialist numerology games like the Branch Davidians and numerous other cultists enjoy.

The scam just works better if you don't make it quite so easy to falsify.
I mean it predated Darwin by a lot, we shouldn't be surprised it has its faults.
Right, as I said. And what else would you call arson against the mayor’s residence (among other things) for political reasons? I believe CNN calls it “fiery but mostly peaceful protesting”, which, frankly, is parodying itself at this point. An objective person calls that terrorism.
Git is eating the database world.
Yes, but that only happens after the fact. Meaning, it's a story that gets interpreted in a way consistent with the science only after we knew about the science. Whereas beforehand, it might've been interpreted quite literally, or metaphorically but about something other than the science entirely.

I'm skeptical that religion ever contains a story or statement that represents modern scientific truth except as an accident or as a post-hoc interpretation to make it consistent with the science.
Bastille, tabernacle!
Yeah, I actually agree. But the article is directly citing productivity, which by definition is the average economic output per hour worked.

It's fine if you want to focus on median wages, but at the same time you need to compare against the median worker's economic output- not aggregate productivity. Otherwise you're just comparing apples to oranges.
Yeah because of the fault line bringing mantle temperature closer. I think they have drilled 3km to tap into this heat, whereas the deepest hole ever dug so far is in Russia at a depth of around 10km (small diameter). Drilling was limited at this distance because of increasing heat.

If we could figure out how to drill a large enough hole at those ~43km crust lengths, wouldn't tectonic activity shift shafts out of alignment?

Metallurgy, abrasives, and durable gearing are to conventional drills (Howard Hughes Sr) as perhaps focused optics would be to future drilling as depicted in lots of sci fi. Either way - tunneling itself is so much the challenge as would be removing the aggregate.

How hilarious would it be to have drilled so far deep vertically to access the mantle that you'd have to use rockets to remove the ore. Space elevator/launch concept also has massive material penalty.
Dangit I changed the order of "Alexander Rozhenko" and "B'Elanna's daughter" to make it clear they're not related, and forgot to switch the 3/4 and 1/4. Alexander is 1/4 human.
Relevant as it gets the Nobel Peace Prize in 2020.
I was about to mention it. Although it's a bit dated I strongly recommend any one in software to read that. It's a quick read and enjoyable. I think the title is a nod to tireless privacy advocate Daniel Brandt, too.
This is not how it works in actuality [0]. Wages are market, not productivity, driven. Even if particular work-field doesn’t increase in productivity, aggregate wage increases (due to perhaps aggregate productivity increases or change in labor relations) cause salary increase. Similarly, productivity increases don’t themselves cause salary increases.

Real life example, factory worker productivity rose dramatically with automation, and salaries did not keep up. Physician productivity did not increase much but salaries grew.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%27s_cost_disease
Ads are not just charged by click. Some campaigns pay by impression served and some pay by conversion. It depends on what the advertiser is trying to accomplish. Pepsi might pay per impression because their goal is brand awareness. Local Pizza joint might pay per click b/c they want to drive business off the web. AFKArena wants to pay by conversion because their ultimate goal is to get app installs.

Ads of all of these types generally compete for the same slot in an auction.

So yes, a user who has adblock is worth less than a user who doesn't have adblock but also doesn't click ads.
Considering I'm flying tomorrow, this is a reassuring read.

But cabins aren't the whole story. There's arguably more human interaction in the airport and terminals before the flight itself (check in, security, buy a coffee)

Quick search came up with this:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2020/07/20...
which has some more cautionary numbers.
Subqueries, named VIEWs, CTEs, etc all make SQL compostable ?
Context matters. When you say to someone, for example, that you're going to do X unless they object, and they stand silent, then their silence is, in that instance, interpreted as explicit consent for you to do X in many legal circumstances.

A good example recently from current events was the US president being asked in a press conference to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, "win, lose, or draw". He responded with "we'll have to see what happens". In the context of the question being posed, that's a clear and explicit failure to commit, given that context.

Context can entirely invert the meaning of two identical statements, and, in the right context, a failure to do a certain thing, or even remaining silent, can indeed be an explicit statement.

Another case comes from 2013, Salinas v Texas, when the police were questioning a murder suspect who suddenly became quiet during questioning when the topic turned to the murder. They were able to use this sudden silence as incriminating circumstantial evidence, given that specific context. This resulted in silence in the face of questioning by the government having to be explicitly invoked as such to not be potentially incriminating, which is an odd state of affairs and probably not the best outcome, but you can however tell that those judges weren't completely insane. Silence after saying "I affirmatively invoke my right to remain silent" is very different than silence after you were just answering police questions voluntarily, until they asked you about a murder they thought you committed.

Silence can speak volumes, explicitly, given the circumstances preceding and surrounding that silence.

Desmond Tutu, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, once said:

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse, and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.”
True, though the substitution then is more likely automation or self-service, to the limit of non-automatable work.
It is obvious to me that pushing a broom has not gotten more complex over the last hundred years. It is significantly less obvious that being a CEO has not gotten more complex over the last hundred years.
I find it so weird because retail seems to be a huge race towards the lowest quality due to demand for the lowest prices. If you put 2 identical products in the retail world and charged +42% for one of them no one would buy it. My impression is that it’s tough to sell a much better product at higher prices.

The only way I can make it work in my mind is that from the users’ perspective there are no alternatives. IE: They don’t know it’s 30% off at the store down the road.
> It used to be footage or images were verified or were from a photo or video journalist on the ground. Now they use recycled footage and images either through laziness, incompetence or maliciousness to drive a narrative.

The use of undisclosed recycled footage to accompany news coverage is older than television. Its not a new phenomenon.

(What's recent is the degree to which media critics have the ability to detect, identify the source of, and, through alternatives to the media that are doing it in the first place, publicize findings about such misleading use of imagery. You are experiencing it being harder to get away with, and mistaking that for it being a new thing that it is happening.)
By growing as large as they have, and by building automated systems to amplify content to mass audiences, they have acquired that role. It is unfortunate that their control over their responsibility is unilateral and undemocratic. But at their scale, if they chose not to try and assess the accuracy of information, but instead to blindly amplify it based on engagement metrics, that is also a political choice.
The problem is all that extra value that workers have been generating the past 50 years is going into the pockets of the rich.
I don't see how they can be sure based on their criteria that those are fraudulent clicks. They could be web crawlers, users with various ad blocking tech, and so on. Going straight to fraud is premature.
A nice complement to this would be tooling that treats file revisions as time series data, e.g. plot the fire contained percentage over time.

Any existing tools out there?
Hyperbolic much? "Criminal negligence"? There are no laws requiring 2FA. Half the world thinks 2FA means SMS.
Collapsing Levels of Trust Are Devastating America
Sideloading amounts to downloading a .apk file and clicking yes on the prompt to install it. It's no more difficult than installing applications on Windows. I know firsthand that elementary school children are capable of sideloading apps.

IIRC Google offered Epic more favorable rates after it released Fortnite through side loading. Presumably this indicates that sideloading was a success and Google didn't want Epic to set a precedence that bypassing the Play store is feasible.
I do not consider this to be a major achievement on my part, but I have successfully managed to navigate my way through life without using Facebook or Twitter to facilitate my worldview. There seems to be this assumption that we are compelled to use these services to engage with the world around us. Heartbreaking to see this...
So you know what's in that "actual fact-based reporting"? Editorial decision of coverage. "What you choose to talk about" is editorial. That "fact-based reporting" is no less subject to lies of omission. And, beyond that? Contextualization of those "facts". What are these facts? What do they mean? Why are they worth reporting on? Why are they worth reading about? Are they even "facts"?

I don't blame you personally for propagating this misunderstanding of journalism as there is a lot of power and money behind not having actual journalism, but "actual fact-based reporting" is a canard designed to keep the populace dumb. Reportage--journalism--has always contextualized information and explained why you should care. That cannot, repeat cannot, be divorced from the act of reporting. A stock ticker is not journalism. You can get it if you want. But it doesn't mean squat to the overwhelming majority of people, nor is it expected to, and the dull ignorance of a wave of decontextualized "facts-only" reportage is an idea designed to create a dumber and less civically capable society.

It also happens to make the comfortable and the comparatively powerful, a class to whom I belong, feel less challenged about things. Convenient, that. But bad for us, no matter how convenient it is.
Another really great illustration of exactly this subject was this article comparing janitors at Kodak in the 1980s with janitors at Apple (but not employed by Apple) today: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/economy/tale-of-two-ja...

> Yet the biggest difference between their two experiences is in the opportunities they created. A manager learned that Evans was taking computer classes while she was working as a janitor and asked her to teach some other employees how to use spreadsheet software to track inventory. When she eventually finished her college degree in 1987, she was promoted to a professional-track job in information technology.

> Less than a decade later, Evans was chief technology officer of the whole company, and she has had a long career since as a senior executive at other top companies. Ramos sees the only advancement possibility as becoming a team leader keeping tabs on a few other janitors, which pays an extra 50 cents an hour.
I used to use git for backing up configs for network gear, most of which involved some sort of scraping because they didn't have APIs. It never really caught on with the rest of the network team, but I thought it was a great idea.
I agree with you 100%.

Julia is a language that is half baked for engineering use. Any one who has ever built anything beyond examples and tutorials, something production worthy and used by hundreds of people - they will attest to how immature Julia is.

That's not the fault of the programming language per se... just that it takes 10+ years to get up to speed in terms of tooling and engineering worthiness.

In addition, there are a lot of problems with the language itself some of which are highlighted in the top comment of this thread.
I do low-level operating-system C programming. There is some C++, and lots of scripting in Bash, some in Python. Also lots of Math is involved in what I specifically do.

I kinda daydream in laterally switching to working on Security and cryptography, maybe one day I'll pull some strings and try that. Or do some programming that helps Physics people better understand the universe. But I don't want a salary downgrade.
You too are talking out of your bottom. HCQ is given in prevention to millions on people every year, used as cure for many sicknesses, here in the US and all over the world. In 60 years, it's been given to more than a billion people.

Please, stick to what you know and leave medicine to specialists.

Wikipedia doesn't make you a doctor.
Fascinating

I will look it up

Thanks
CEOs are broadly speaking benchmarked on return on equity for investors. They receive high salaries in anticipation of their doing a good job, and if they don't they're removed. Further, a disproportionate amount of their compensation is equity based to align their incentives. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that they are expected to justify their pay too.
I don't think this is cut and dry whatsosever, and in fact I strongly disagree. This is a hotly debated subject. What you suggest aligns with what classical economics predicts, but real world evidence doesn't necessarily back that up.

Personally I don't think it would cause any significant unemployment as long as you don't do it all at once. Based on my own research, the evidence doesn't support minimum wage hikes increasing unemployment, except possibly in the very short term. The logic is basically that because the marginal propensity to consume is so high for low income workers any increase in the minimum wage creates large spikes in demand. No one wants to fire their workforce in the face of increasing demand. Prices go up some then stabilize. Companies bring in more absolute $s, and employ a similar (or even possibly a larger) workforce. It ends up being a redistribution without meaningful negative consequences. The obvious question becomes "why not keep raising it even more then?" and then answer is basically that at some point the MPC drops too low and you stop getting the positive effects, at which point you'd presumably start driving unemployment.

That's obviously an oversimplification, but so is the simple logic that large changes in minimum wage spike unemployment.
> up to some amount

I think that's a pretty important detail. With my bank they could only get up to $1000 without further verification.
I'm sorry it's behind a paywall, but it's worth reading the following article that polls various CEOs across the usual industries/companies about their views on remote work. I think it's a good moderator to some of the news around MSFT as a lot of these are huge tech employers.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-ceos-really-think-about-re...
It's really more like knocking on people's doors and noting the clothing colors of anyone who answers.
Alpharay: the best 8-bit home computer shoot'em up
Does this actually matter? If you are doing online advertising, you should be able to attribute a particular visit to a specific ad campaign, so you can calculate your conversion rate. If Reddit has lots of bots, it just means your conversion rate for those ads will be lower, and you can adjust your spending accordingly. There are a lot of things that can significantly affect clicks other than fraudulent clicks (popups people click on by accident, small "close" buttons, mobile vs desktop, etc.), so I think evaluating your success based on just clicks is going to be pretty useless regardless.

I'm not in advertising though so I have no idea.
Not that I've seen. I've written code to do that using the GitPython library in the past, but I had to write it custom for each project - e.g. https://simonwillison.net/2019/Oct/10/pge-outages/
Absolute 0% of those lawyers jobs is to tell Apple to not pursue litigation. Do you understand what the point of litigation is for a company this size? They have over $100 billion in cash, even the most expensive lawyers salaries is a drop in the bucket. They can afford to drag a company like Protonmail through the mud for decades if they want to.