skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: What frustrates you when searching for a remote job?
Wondering specifically about the search process (not applying and interviewing).
Disillusionment was a crucible for my career. I went through it and wouldn't have it any other way. On the other side of it you attain focus on what is valuable to you, which is singularly useful for evaluating subsequent jobs. However, the crucible for me consisted of: depression, burnout, tendonitis.

It sucked.

From that, I decided I'd never do webdev again, including so-called backend. The web as a medium is not where I'm supposed to be. I can't stand the culture, the churn, the faux openness, the re-invention of things that already exist. I don't care. In fact, I'd rather do another job entirely than webdev. And I considered that for a long while. I took a long, winding journey away from software and eventually back into it, through things like LLVM, Haskell, Rust. Slowly, I began to discover people with whom I shared a technical aesthetic actually existed, and were much smarter/capable than I was. This was humbling and exciting, as it started to paint a picture of what I wanted to work toward.

One priceless realization: the people with the technical career I wanted weren't the ones always featured on HN or elsewhere. HN's startup focus tends to suck all the air out of the room of other interesting domains.

Professionally, I started seriously investigating domains that weren't web/data-related. (I also decided I wouldn't tell anyone about this, because Smart People like to say things like, "but then what job would you get? Every job is a web job, Jeff Atwood even said so!!!") I'm doing quite fine now.

Focus, in both the moment-to-moment attention and long-term vision sense, is a superpower. Without disillusionment, I don't think I'd have it.
I still haven't found anything that beats markdown files in a competent text editor like VSCode
Reuters, BBC, and AP (excluding politics and fact check) are the only centrist sources out of these organizations. All of the rest are various levels of leaning left.
In your examples, you need "types" to understand the code. In the parent TCL example, there is no type, thus, way simpler. Programming is a process, not just code and result. TCL process is way simpler.
What is the reason you are not just getting page content directly with HTTP request? Is headless browser providing some benefits in your case?
I was thinking this too. This article really shouldn't be upvoted. I can't really give away any of the secret sauces though :)
Don't forget about Evelyn, who makes money by exposing people to ads, and Steve, who provides a platform to do it and gets paid by Evelyn. Together, they create the primary pressure that forces stories to be attractive to the likes of Alice and Bob, and they'll more than happily enable Mallet, as long as his poison has a side effect of getting more Alices and Bobs to view stories filled with ads.

That's the problem here. Kill the advertising dependency, and Mallet will find it much harder to spread their poison.
Thanks for the feedback! We'll always work on making our app more secure! We can only succeed at building a long lasting business if we're able to build trust with our users.
Net Neutrality is different. No one is arguing that it is ok to block NyPost at a network level. Free speech does not mean a free platform.
Twitter has a 1st Amendment right to decide what you may or may not read on Twitter.
Had a look into it due to work and I don‘t like it. Code was hard to read and badly organized. I can‘t remember if it was the languages fault.

Wanted to add a testing framework to refactor code. Didn‘t find something good though.
It's not that people are "too dumb" but rather that they aren't going to do the work needed to verify a story. How many phone calls do you make to verify something before resharing it? Most people make zero phone calls.

If you don't do the work, there's no reason to believe that you can do as good a job judging plausibility of a story as a good journalist can do. It's not about who's smarter, it's about not having the evidence.

I don't make any phone calls either, but I try to crib from people who do their homework. I also appreciate basic filtering to keep the noise down. It's not that I couldn't do my own spam filtering, but rather I don't want to.
A few months ago there was non-stop coverage of the president purportedly saying very mean things about soldiers. This was from an anonymous source. Even Bolton who is no fan of the president said that it didn't happen. It got 24/7 playtime by the media.

Now on the other day the NYPost has a narrative, with physical evidence, corrobrated by actual non-anonymous people alleging very bad things about a presidential candidate and what happens? Nothing. As usual 'the powers that be' have the media in the pocket.

how long till this comment gets disappeared? I hope I don't get fired!
Section 230 also says:

> No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of— (A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected

With that it seems reasonable to read Section 230 as "you don't have to proactively moderate, and any good faith moderation you do doesn't break that protection".

Regardless of whether or not this is the right thing for society, it seems that Facebook and Twitter are well within the bounds of section 230 to do some moderation without losing the protection of section 230.
It's a bit more nuanced than that. While we probably should improve/expand asylum infrastructure, and similar programs, we can't just open the borders. We have a lot of social programs that are already strained (mostly by legislation designed to hobble them) by our current population; until those are sorted out we don't have a strong enough foundation for faster/more immigration.
Wow, very interesting project, I hope they succeed.
Or on the side that Twitter thinks is the good side.
OK, so it's still only a VM, right? I understand why that's easier, but that does give me the impression it's not a desktop-class OS.
>Because AP’s displays of Lean Left bias are quite infrequent, AP still warrants a Center rating.

They just rate it center. There is no single media source that will never have any bias at all. So that would mean there would never be an center.
I think you haven't used it enough to appreciate its true value.
You don't have to believe the description of the session--there are screenshots in the article.
Argument mapping is a good technique. I was expecting to hate it but it was very helpful when reading the Institute of world politics's summary of the cases for and against Roger Hollis.
Your link supports GP's assertion. There is no rubicon to be crossed. Both the letter and the intent of Section 230 is to allow Twitter and Facebook to moderate however they wish. (Although the fact checks are authored by them, and therefore don't fall under Section 230; Twitter would be liable if they were shown to be defamatory).
Thank goodness you didn't step out of your filter bubble. A close one!
Yes I'm aware, but usually when I voice my gripes with integrating rsync somebody unfamiliar with the matter quickly googles 'rsync library', finds librsync, and assumes it must be the answer to my problem. Then I have to explain to them that it's not. I thought to head that off this time by mentioning upfront that librsync is not the answer.
in many places it is, but at the same time the government controls the price
I may have got lucky but I found a psychiatrist who was life changing with Zocdoc. I recommend finding a private practice psychiatrist first since they can refer you to a specialist for therapy—doing the reverse is much harder. My sister is a clinical psychologist in the Navy who works with many PTSD patients, so finding a therapist with military experience would make sense in your case; she’s a proponent of exposure therapy. What I discovered was that the most helpful doctors are always in the most affluent part of town, so keep that in mind, it’s worth the drive.
You're suggesting that the message you just typed out has the same weight as printing a few thousand copies of a manifesto for someone and shipping that book across the country to be put in bookstores and eat the cost if it doesn't sell. In no reasonable way does the "book publisher model" resemble the "social media model".

The "social media model" is far closer to discussions you would have in a coffee shop or at a dinner party. Starbucks doesn't need to listen in on your conversations and kick you out if they're not disturbing anyone else.
Makes sense :) Not the direction we want to take for now as I mentioned. Thanks for sharing!
Rather, I think he's looking for the shipboard computer in Star Trek. Which is actually an excellent example of the untapped potential that voice-based computing holds.
That makes zero sense; 230 wasn't written to be exclusive to utilities or common infrastructure. It has always applied to private publishing of third party content, so long as the content isn't editorialized by thr publisher.
Sounds interesting.

What are the use-cases?
Isn't this for self-learners?

> The course starts now and never ends! It is a completely self-paced online course - you decide when you start and when you finish.
I think you overinterpret that rule:

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

I read it as referring to unfinished products that doesn't yet exist. What if you're making a Google Calendar extension? Wouldn't that be allowed as a Show HN?
Your executable will only be about 8MB plus the size of your source code. You definitely can't do that with Java; probably can't do it with Python either.
[Commander] Data
The market-based solution depends on assumptions about people acting "rationally," which isn't possible with such asymmetry of information between the parties involved (media companies and individuals wanting information), and so much inertia to keep using services like Facebook long after the user even likes the service. Some kind of regulatory pressure will be absolutely necessary.
Java is extremely old and stable. The obsession with Rust as open-source savior is overwrought. Rust may be good but Java has been around 25 years, give Rust another 10 years and 3 major language revisions before I will trust it.
Well, if we're going to play the X is really just modified Y game, we might as well go back to the original.

One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever. The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.

- Ecclesiastes, 300 B.C.E.
My money was on Cloudflare to have hired them wholesale. Regardless, congratulations to everyone involved!

This deal has got me thinking... whether a right way to "lay-off" a supremely talented bunch is to actually see if other companies are willing to offer them jobs? Kind of how player transfers happen in Football (soccer).

Either the team goes to the newer company wholesale or you help find your engineers suitable roles elsewhere.

One might argue there's no advantage to the company laying-off people, but they could save on the severance package, and frankly, two companies entering an understanding like this bodes well on other levels where someone could probably explore a "cross-company" job change with blessings of the employers on both sides of the table.

Of course, things like salary negotiations take a hit for the candidate especially, but internal transfers to different teams / location in bigger companies already work this way. May be year-end reviews and code can be shared on a need-to-know basis between the companies with employee consent.

In particular, such arrangements between smaller / crash-strapped companies and bigger / well-funded companies might work out for the good. Then again, you never want the bigger company to start poaching wholesale from the smaller one. May be there's a balance in here somewhere that can be worked out given enough time and data.
The issue isn't how much of the music videos were downloaded during testing. That may or may not fair use.

The issue is that they were testing the ability to download music videos in the first place, meaning that the tool was intended at least in part to download music videos subject to copyright.
Nothing about section 230 says that platforms have to publish what people say, or that they are unable to moderate or editorialize the content:

>This legal protection can still hold even if a blogger is aware of the objectionable content or makes editorial judgments.
A Request to Security Researchers from Illumos
If they were just a thermostat company, then yeah. They could say “we don’t provide climate control services to the GOP”, or whatever. (Contact law covers how to handle refunds for devices already purchased, etc. I’m talking about the core issue of companies being able to choose their customers)

But, because they have a monopoly in search, they can abuse it to dictate terms in other sectors. That’s what I have a problem with.

It’s also a story we’ve seen recently, where some poor user gets their Google Cloud acct locked, and loses their YouTube videos as a result. Those stories are what convinced me that Google needs to be chopped up.
SwordCSS – A Powerful CSS Preprocessor
>>Twitter is like Fedex refusing to deliver your packages (...)

In case you don't know, FedEx or pretty much any delivery company are free to refuse shipping your parcels.

A cursory googling is enough to allow you to discover fedex's shipping guidelines.
Apparently unverified and unreleased tax returns are important for the public interest, but direct evidence of high-ranking US politician’s family member receiving a highly paid position without prior credentials is not of concern to the American public.

There has been plenty of widely reported, direct evidence of the latter, it's not even a matter of dispute. The NYP piece was not 'direct evidence' of that. This is a pretty unserious piece of analysis, if you can call it that.
Contextual keywords are a growing thing in modern languages. Modern compilers don't tend to have strictly separated lexers and parsers, but instead use a combined lexer/parser model that feeds information back and forth between them. If your language is designed such that you aren't often in multiple potential parse states, then it's easy to feed into the lexer "get me the next token, and by the way, expect function attributes to be keywords right now."

Note that the requirement to not be in multiple potential parse states also tends to boil down to "build a language that's usually LL(1) or LALR(1)."
A large difference is that Lua source is not in the form of Lua tables — and that makes all the difference! Having full access to your complete language at read, compile and run times is what makes Lisp Lisp, and that can only sanely be done with a homoiconic language.
When you have finite resources and an economy that is not driven by unskilled labor you cannot have unlimited immigration unless your stance is that new migrants will be ineligible for public assistance. You risk bankrupting social programs otherwise.

Mass migration also hinders assimilation. When you have a steady stream of migrants, those migrants can integrate into the local culture. When you have a massive burst as you would if you suddenly deregulated immigration, those individuals have enough non-native support as to never come under pressure to assimilate. This is not a good thing and is precisely what leads to massive nationalist backlash.

All that being said, I do support generally increasing quotas while also largely uncapping skilled immigration.
What they advertise as "Full Self Driving" is very far from it.
I find it hilarious that an article about handling objections was posted by a username of "neinasaservice".
> Yet I haven't heard of a single doctor who quit his practice and moved to Colorado to run a ski lodge.

I don't know if that's true. Eurostat has these "proof of concept" statistics that try to look at how many people with a particular kind of degree are or are not working in a relevant field, and while I do seem to remember that STEM was a bit worse than other fields, the overall message is that there are an enormous amount of people who do work that is unrelated to their degree, whether that's an art degree or a teaching degree or computer engineering.

(https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/experimental-statistics/sk... if you're curious.)

Anecdotally, too, I've definitely heard of teachers who pursue other careers even though they love working with kids, architects who became brewers, physicists who became writers, lawyers who became journalists, farmers who became coders, and so on.

Perhaps tech is worse, but I think there's something universal about throwing everything you have into your passion (which is also your career) and burning out when it turns out to be a total slog with zero impact on the world, then pursuing a second career in which you are much happier because you got a fresh start but more importantly because you acquired a more relaxed attitude to work and life that comes with age.
How was these achieved before Epsilon? http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/318

Also ZGC / Shenandoah can help a lot otherwise
Im failing to grasp your view. If you care to elaborate on what you mean by

> Data "privacy protection" is carte blanche for a data holder to blackhole knowledge, against the user's will if desired.

And

> Disruptive Language

I would love to continue the discussion.

Im just not up on these terms
We are on the right side of history - progress always is. People like me are much more trustworthy because we're not motivated by greed, but for the desire for a better world.
High uncertainty doesn't mean predictions are useless.
But you led with people like me as example of extremism in modern discourse. What makes me not an extremist but my peers extremists?

It is true that we probably have somewhat different values. I don't personally value TJ having some high rating as decided by magazines and would happily sacrifice scores if I believed it was possible to better provide education to gifted students across Fairfax County. And I do believe that the test makes it harder for FCPS to do this well, though it certainly allows TJ to select for specific kinds of students that make it score well in magazine ratings.

I also believe that it is not good to separate students into many strata earlier in life and believe that the lottery limits the effect of wealth and other inequities on young kids. You may believe that we should reward students who studied their brains out in school, did test prep on weekends, and joined clubs so they could round out a resume. Those are different values and that's okay.

It is also very likely that we have different opinions about the expected outcome of ending the test. I believe that it will make it easier, not harder for students to access high quality education and recognizing that there are so many students that could succeed at TJ will encourage FCPS to allocate more resources to magnet programs so there can be more slots for these students. I also hope that this will demonstrate the need for a humanities-focused alternative, which currently does not exist (the humanities education offered at TJ is atrocious, IMO). I also believe that moving away from strict testing as the primary mechanism for excellence will help TJ recover some of its creative side that is so valuable for young learners. The creativity available during 8th period has been slowly crushed under the weight of standardized learning processes over the last several decades. A lot of the skills I learned during 8th period are no longer made available to students in order to serve the almighty test score. I hope that admitting smart students who aren't bound to testing will help this.

It is also very likely that we have different opinions about the ability of the test to separate students into strata.

I do not support destroying TJ. I believe that this makes FCPS education better and encourages more TJs.

We disagree. That's fine. But you list my peers among extremists and you claim that I intend to sabotage quality education. Why is your position not extreme?
What happened to freedom of press? This is clearly censorship. Period.
Yeah! We saw that! But as you said, we're looking forward to it as a way to bullet-proof our security.

It's a valid concern and getting vetted by a security company will be a huge plus!

Especially given the privacy concerns raised by other comments.

Just to clarify for readers, to use our note taking app, you only need to sync your calendar. Syncing gmail is only requires to use our paying personal CRM app as we use this data to find out who you're losing touch with (but we only access metadata, we can't read your emails).
ChAd to the rescue!
I stopped using CSS preprocessors awhile ago. I find my css is much more managable.
Not in the rest of the world, but it still looks similar. I guess it is just incompetent politicians and bureaucrats being overwhelmed by things.
> Separately I view Twitter as breaking section 230 free speech regulatory agreements in meddling with what they 'publish'

Section 230 isn't an agreement, it's a section of the Communication Decency Act.[1] There is no prohibition on the publisher "meddling", or moderating. Section 230 was specifically carved out to encourage voluntary content moderation on the nascent internet.

It states that hosting or republishing someone else's speech does not make you the speaker, even if you moderate. Which is to say that just because Twitter locks down accounts or stops a link from being shared, they still are not the Speaker (legally) of anything their users post. That's it, that basically the whole thing.

[1]https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
I think the pro-establishment lean of media back in the day (and advocacy for the Iraq war is a great example) is really the heart of the problems we've got today. Society and media is reacting to the overly heavy censorship of established platforms - but what we're seeing today with widely embraced conspiracy theories is pretty dangerous to society.

Was the Iraq war a one-off event where media held far too much trust and abused it? Is it just the continuation of a pattern of media being used as a tool of the state (either wittingly or unwittingly)? I'm leaning toward the second option but I still don't know if the inherent pro-establishment bias you get with large media conglomerates outweighs the benefits of vetted news.

The only thing I can say for sure is that public media funding (like PBS and the like) to subsidize the cost of media companies ends up having rather little effect on those outlets' biases, while forcing media to depend on corporate sponsorship absolutely does corrupt the messaging delivered to the populace at large. So I'm not certain what our media landscape should look like, but I'm definitely against people who decry any government sponsorship of news as being political mouthpieces - public radio and tv should form part of our news digest, their funding is diverse enough to allow them to freely criticize both national and local governments and while it probably won't yield the really valuable investigative journalism we need to fight corruption it's definitely part of the solution.
Not everything that isn't a common carrier is a traditional publisher. Bars, for example.
Acting on the Truth
To the first order this is correct, but don't forget that people are much more productive when the work is engaging. As a contrived example, suppose you waste a third of your time on some wacky things to make your work life more fun and become 5x more productive as a result. From the economic perspective it is a bargain! OTOH, if a lot of capable people are leaving the industry or operating at 0.2x capacity as a result of burnout, it is a massive economic inefficiency.

Agreed on the goofy gimmicks part though. They get old very fast.