skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>The twitter example seems more like those Nobel prize winners that later reconvert to crackpots.

That's the point. They were always "crackpots". You need to be a crackpot to generate ideas that people aren't generating, otherwise everyone would generate them. This means you'll generate wrong ideas, but it also means you'll generate right ideas that people think are wrong.

>I definitely agree that conspiracy theorists reject authority and are contrarian, but most don't strike me as curious except for a superficial level.

They are definitely more curious than most people, as evidenced by the fact that they were attracted to the conspiracy theory in the first place. It's also not uncommon for an intelligent conspiracy theorist to be able to outargue a conventional person on a subject they care about, i.e. the Earth being flat or not.

>As for the list of things those people may or may not enjoy, the sheer amount of things polled and the small sample size give me doubts.

I think this field is pretty well established and this paper in particular is well cited, so among peers it doesn't seem to be contentious.
Regular Mac users _used to_ care. For many years, one of the defining characteristics of Macs was the high quality native apps, all with consistent look, feel and behavior. Mac users would refuse to use apps that weren't sufficiently Mac-like. Developers of Mac apps had a similar passion and perfectionism for good UX and UI.

Somewhere along the way, this part of Apple culture got lost. I think Apple's commercial success is part of the reason. The traditional Mac user base got diluted by lots of newcomers who didn't have the same high expectations and requirements for good and consistent user interfaces. The traditional Mac developers got diluted by programmers from other platforms, who – although not being technically inferior in any way – did not have the same passion or understanding of Apple's UI philosophy, often not even bothering to study the Human Interface Guidelines.
You could argue the same things about Plato or Descartes or Locke philosophy.

But a lot of things have been built upon their wisdom and thinking.
Share your story if you ever stayed in a company because of a colleague. Why?
The very premise of this article is an oxymoron. "How to Think for Yourself" (by reading instructions on how from someone other than yourself)
Regarding the organic food, I wish it were that simple, but organic isn't better than conventional. It can still use pesticides, if they have a biological origin, and these are more aggressive than the synthetic ones. To feed the same population, more land use is required, thereby increasing deforestation and more carbon emissions to bring food along greater distances.
If that guy is anything like me, he probably treats emails as tasks. Each email is something that needs to get done. Now I may be doing something else so I need to prioritize that over your thing right now. Overall I think that's why it worked out so well for you guys.
My reaction turned out to be microthefts.
I like this project but feel like a microcontroller like the esp32 is better suited for a doorbell... for example https://community.home-assistant.io/t/diy-video-doorbell-wit...
So far the supposed deal prices are higher on many items than they were in the spring at regular price.

This is certainly true here in the UK - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55058121
I believe a Hohmann transfer is just a method of changing between two orbits of a central body. In this case it's just moving from it's intial orbit to the Moon's orbit, which are both around the Earth.

The Hohmann transfer does not include the capture burn that is required to enter a sustained orbit around the Moon.

Disclaimer, I'm just a KSP fan, so feel free to correct any of the above. Had to make an effort to use Moon, not Mun.
Interestingly, the article mentions that the protection in Australia applies to wines but not Cheese
He mentions in the next sentence: "I'm not suggesting that you impose on everyone who talks to you the burden of proving what they say"

> When you hear someone say something, stop and ask yourself "Is that true?" Don't say it out loud. I'm not suggesting that you impose on everyone who talks to you the burden of proving what they say, but rather that you take upon yourself the burden of evaluating what they say.
Very cool that HackerNews is using "their own language called Arc that is programmed in Racket."

http://arclanguage.org/

I had no idea I was using Racket already, via this website! Makes me wonder if Terraform's HCL could be re-written using Racket.
Interesting presentation on real world issues with cosmic rays: http://webhost.laas.fr/TSF/IFIPWG/Workshops&Meetings/44/W2/0...

Page 2 notes the somewhat famous set of issues in the year 2000 with some Sun Sparc models that did not have ECC on the L2 cache. It took out some pretty big players.
And there are very cold places in the US too, so Apple isn't just ignoring the Canadian market, it's ignoring a good chunk of the US too.
Possibly, but that is missing the point. A card deck should aid you in building your own model rather than forcing dumb memorization.

A good card is one that highlights what is important for you to memorize. While preparing the card, one should reflect what are these parts and how it fits into the larger whole so as to reflect this in the card. This helps go beyond mere memorization, and apply spaced repetition also to some higher-level concepts.

Example: for a recent exam I took I had to memorize extinguisher types and to which types of fires they can be applied. You can stuff it into a dumb deck ("[Class A]= [common combustibles]"), or you can put it into a hierarchy or turn it into a relationship ("[Class A] extinguishers cannot be applied to [electrical equipment]] because [...]. [Class C] should be used instead.")

For more information, see e.g. https://medschoolinsiders.com/medical-student/anki-flashcard...
Takeaway from this short experiment: A LOT of people are sending the username "root".

Hopefully they are merry pranksters hoping to have a bit of fun on my behalf.

Hopefully they are not people who are actually just running everything as root :)
The automation is inevitable. Amazon aren't keeping that a secret.

At most, they are singling out their Fulfillment Center to be the first trials but the automation is coming regardless of the strikes.

Imagine being able to run a warehouse in total darkness, with no heating or ventilation. The cost savings from things like having toilets and a canteen could be worth a bit too. You could also expand into the car park and use up most of that since you already own the land.

It's too good an opportunity to pass up I reckon (from an Amazon perspective anyway!)
Nothing goes anyone's way in the long term. In the meantime though, these people have hard jobs that in many cases don't pay enough to actually live.
This reminds me, a long time ago I saw a couple of videos of Steve Jobs at a retreat for Next Computers (in the early phase of the company); now can only find an edited version. I was surprised to see how market analysis his argumentation was driven; while they created something great, he didnt sound independent minded but more like subject to his customers.
The license is more in the sense that someone will not make a crappy cheese and slap the name just because they're located there.
PDO laws don't have standing in the United States, so you can buy domestic Parmesan and Champagne wjthout difficulty.
It's a game-changing paradigm when you put it in perspective to most other contemporary non-Western societies where kinship, long-term friendships and intergenerational family obligations are forming the fabric of society.

In the west, individuals are much more autonomous and that enables more effective social associations where people are gathering in groups based on their levels of competence, interests and views.
The blips/noise could be rays, or could be rotating reflective dust specs that happened to reflect light for just a moment.
It’s fairly amazing to me that the person being accused of being a grifting creep is the journalist who tracked down quotes in several states from witnesses to a notable event instead of people who are clearly running a game on multiple lotteries.

Norms have really changed in the last decade or so.
Wealth of Rishi Sunak's family not declared in ministerial register
I always wondered why smartphones didn’t register a click as targeting the element that was in-position ~100ms before.

That would solve a lot of infuriating mistakes.
Thank you dang! In all my years here I needed only once to get in touch with the mod team and it was one of the most pleasant chats I had with any kind of community moderation so far.

Thanks for enforcing the standards of this community through the years, I believe HN might have grown a lot in userbase but the side-effects of that have been pretty minimal so far. This is not an easy task for any online community.
I mean, your example literally assumed that independent minded person will be low status which implies low impact.

In any case, the dichotomy between A and B is beyond false dichotomy situation. The range of possible decisions and behaviors warry quite a lot.

But yes, having good relationship with manager definitely helps your career. It typically does not require being excited about absolutely everything.
Pronounce "Herb".
Correctly, this time.
They can sell it, but the PDO ensures they have to find some other way of gaining market share than piggybacking off the reputation the products they imitate have earned over the years.

(Which, in fairness, equates to being unable to sell it if other people shop like I do - nine times out of ten I pick cheeses (to stay with the original example) I already know.)
To be fair, this was nearly universally know for decades by the time he became CEO of MS.

He is just not old enough for working in a time this was new.
As far as I know, there is only one known successful approach to working through large ideas, and that is to build solutions to smaller related problems and scaling up those solutions after some kind of objective information gathering.

Generally a well-understood stable system of any kind (including a democracy) evolves from a smaller stable system.

This principle is more or less built into the scientific process, where smaller results are peer reviewed and kicked around to a while before being combined to solve large problems.
I just finished building an alarm clock for my daughter. I didn’t yet build my own PCB but maybe that be a future iteration. https://youtu.be/r2SdpJf9KkA
Personally I refused to answer "crosswalk" or "fire hydrant" questions, that's not what they are like around here.

We have pedestrian crossings, not cross walks.

Fire hydrants around here are inside the ground, or in a riser if inside a building.
> I do feel like articles like this are mostly used to cover up and excuse hostility, bad work environments and Jobs esque management styles.

I don't think so but I definitely dislike the mentioned points as well and probably this should be more unambiguous. At the same time, hostile and toxic work environments tend to encourage aggression towards regular employees with different opinions. Therefore I find the article quite encouraging.
Most ideas can be deconstructed into smaller ideas. When I started my recruiting business, I wanted to become so good that I eliminated unemployment. That was a bit lofty, so I paid attention to things smaller in scope. One thing holding back my recruiting business was was index finger hurt too much. I could review a few hundred resumes in an hour, and processing each resume took about 10 clicks of the mouse. My finger started to hate me, so I designed a recruiting application that got the number of clicks down to 1 per resume.

So maybe try to start big, and zoom in to focus in on one piece of the puzzle. There's a good chance that whatever you choose can be used in other ways if the primary idea doesn't work out.
I take the question seriously but the answer that came to mind was- have kids with a partner. Caring for and supporting them- and a partner- will in the near term put to concrete use the spare cycles your brain is devoting to these abstractions, and in the long term they will ask of you these abstract questions and you will by then have arrived at answers to help them.

Ok. More specifically- some other poster suggested recording assumptions around these questions, and I will go further. Behind every complex large scale optimization question- what is the best way to X...- when X is fundamentally about humans- are a set of assumptions- here, around the definition of "best."

Rather than chew on the question as framed, perhaps work to understand the assumptions your own brain is baking into the question in whatever value is being optimized. Understand further those assumptions as choices in a landscape and identify other choices that did not originally arise in the framing.

With an understanding of the larger variety of choices that were originally hidden, visit in conversation with your fellow humans and ask of them how they see that landscape and set of choices.

This discovery process through engagement may yield more insight than the self-centered utilization of your brain's optimization machinery. This process makes yourself available for teaching moments that are usually more impactful both for teacher and learner than any specific optimization insight and may help in further writing/sharing those moments.

Best wishes.
I once reached out to dang to have a comment deleted and he suggested I keep it because it was constructive and contributed to the community. I was so surprised to suddenly be engaged with a thoughtful and positive person. Thanks dang, that kind of interaction matters. I still appreciate that.
Alternatively, maybe if it were legally available people who took it wouldn't have the stress of "what if the cops show up while we're tripping" hanging over them while they embarked on a drug experience that can magnify that sort of thing into a panic attack, and the rate of negative experiences would be lower.
I think you're mistreading the parent comment. And oddly too, because you do the same thing. You don't mean "these people are forfeiting their right to privacy" literally, do you? it's the opposite. Neither does the parent, it's a question, implied that the answer is "of course not!"

You made that even clearer with "Sorry, what?" but parent comment only make sense if that addendum is assumed.
This is why metrics should all be taken with a grain of salt and be subject to the opinion of ones manager. Nepotism at level certainly exists, but a good manager will always come to bat for you. Even if it sticks their neck out. That is why upper level bourgeoisie management that has no f'ing clue about the bottom rungs shouldnt touch what their not ready to unravel.
Yes, hence "elevated" and not "root". It is still higher than default, right?
Are not those run by voulanteers? My company has an orchestra but it is not like they are paid for it. The only commitment is using the auditorium for concerts two times a year and practice.
> "Meanwhile, Amazon warehouse workers risked their lives as essential workers, and only briefly received an increase in pay."

This concerns me but I still haven't seen any evidence that Amazon warehouse workers are treated differently to any other unskilled manual labor. Is Amazon different because its super successful right now? Or because it uses tech to make people work harder.
That's true in principle, but beyond a certain degree it would leave the realm of practicality, eg. You can pre-render something complex in 3D or do some complex calculations to populate a precomputed table on any computer no matter how slow, and it might be clunky and inconvenient yet still possible if it's merely 2x or 3x slow. But if it's something like 10000x slow doing it would pretty much be out of the question, as real-world projects (even hobbyist ones) are bound by limitations of time and budget.
> They don't publish unsubstantiated trash

Ever heard of the 1619 Project?
It seems that union politics is swinging back. If we choose 1980 as a nominal endpoint for the union pendulum, it feels like 2020-ish may be the other one.

Honestly, I don't know if that's a good or bad thing... 40 years is a long time, considering the "pendulum" took a long time getting to 1980. I'm not sure what from past experience transposes to the present and how. The world is very different.

What does an amazon union even look like? How do unions operate legally/practically in global firms? What "package" would they want to negotiate for. One union? Many unions? Structure. Strategy. Tactics. Etc.

I feel like most discussions fall into generic "for" and "against" union points. Realistically, unionisations is a wide space. Sports league unions. Newspaper Guilds. Germany's DGB. America's Teamsters. Teachers unions... all very different, and different in different eras.

What, besides achieving a union and negotiating power, would an amazon union want to be?
You could pay for 365 yourself
Was Jobs really that smart? Not sure that's the niche he filled successfully. More like Kinski, talented in some domain... but smart?! Jobs died pretty much by Dunning-Kruger effect, no?
You could have said the same for the UAW, but I suspect the lifetime earnings and working conditions for those auto workers were much better than they would have been without the union.
I took this article to advocate for explicitly considering the emotions of your users as they work through your interface. The underlying idea would be that interfaces, like words, communicate at two levels, with both denotative (explicit) meaning, and connotative (associative, emotional, implicit) meaning. So, the argument here is that UI language should serve the user experience at both levels. I thought the Slack example was a good illustration of the point, though personally I avoid using interfaces like that. I took the bits about listening to be really about finding ways to understand your user's emotions in relation to the tasks your interface supports. It's for me easier to think about connotative language in ad copy and in rewards for completing actions than in other parts of interaction, but that's why I found the article worthwhile. I have no idea what a "ghost note" might be in an interaction, but it's an interesting question.
For clicking convenience: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kmcrane/Projects/DDG/ (the link above is broken since HN includes the ]; in the URL).
> how people come to conclusions like this

Conclusions like what? That the then-latest linux did not support the then-latest HW is not a conclusion, but a _fact_.

> But characterizing the story above as "linux has driver problems" strikes me as something between superficial and disengenious.

It's disingenious to push back the problem onto the end-user. The "linux community" wants people to use Linux, so it's THEIR responsibility to make it work for the end-user. I don't care about the underlying reasons WHY it doesn't work, it doesn't work.

> But yeah, you can't always blindly throw the newest Linux at the newest hardware and expect it to work.

Well, the CPU + motherboard combo was straight recommended by Intel, and, at that time, I don't think there were any chipsets "supported" by Linux AND the CPU anyway. Should I have bought older-gen HW just to run Linux? Forget it.

> Free Software requires a a certain amount of taking responsibility for your own computing.

Indeed. Free Software is free only if your time is worth nothing. Thanks but no thanks.
No - Plato, Descartes, and Locke all referenced actual history when formulating their ideas about politics - PG doesn't even mention an example of an "independent-minded" person! - and at least Descartes and Locke heavily cited the past generations of political philosophers that came before them.

It is also worth noting that at least Plato/Descartes/Locke were investigating deep questions of political philosophy with little precedent and which is almost impossible to observe empirically. By contrast, PG has an entire century's worth of psychology theory and experiments that he is ignoring out of pure arrogance.
Maybe? But unlikely. Hydrogen energy density is pretty poor considering the alternatives [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
I believe some higher end residential automation automation software support it?
I share your enthusiasm for how amazing our technology has gotten, but I'm also experienced enough to know that the technology will always be "rough around the edges" as you put it, because maximising profit doesn't require stable end-user experiences that are as good as they can be - they'll constantly be just barely good enough to make it into the shops, and then let the marketing take care of getting enough wallets to open up to make a profit on them.

Capitalism continuously fails to deliver on its promise of "may the best win, and may all be incentivised to be the best" because companies have found several loopholes in its assumptions - constantly introducing flashy new features so the basic faults don't get the airtime they should, advertising with the best psychological manipulation money can buy, and flooding the market with enough barely distinguishable models
that simple decision fatigue gets enough people giving up on research and buying the crappy models unwittingly.
Reaction of Twitter people on point #2 in notes?
Will this do?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixNUpUnwZpY
> If it's to be a bridge job to something better, the argument usually made for why retail/fast food pays poorly, they should make enough to actually do that

The reason retail/fast food pay poorly is because there’s a lot of supply for people willing to do retail/fast food compared to the demand. And also because people aren’t going to pay $50 for some French fries, at that point they would start making food themselves, but that’s the same as “insufficient demand to pay someone enough that it would cause $50 French fries”.

I don’t see the purpose of a moral argument when it’s a fact retail businesses earn low single digit profit margins. Walmart can’t pay more even if it wanted to, they would have to raise their prices and then people shop at Target. It looks like it makes a lot of money, but to doesn’t split over all of its employees, and same with every other large retail operation. There’s a couple large ones serving the upper middle class market like Costco and Apple and Nordstrom and Trader Joe’s that might pay a little more, but they are unique and it wouldn’t scale for the whole population.

Here’s another example. Two people buy some land, and build two different hotels. Person A pays labor near to as low as people are willing to accept, and Person B pays more. Let’s say person A pays $15 per hour and person B pays $25 per hour. 10 years later, it’s renovation time. Person A has saved more money for renovations so they can make their hotel nicer than person B. Now, customers will prefer to pay person A more than person B, and they will be able to earn more revenue.

Now person A has more capital to purchase land. They can get bigger loans because their operating income is higher, afford to pay for more land in a more prime location, and build a new hotel. They can expand and take more market share from person B. You can see where the is is going.

Therefore, I don’t see the purpose of discussing the moral imperative for a single business to pay a material amount above market price. Consumers will, by and large, not reward the morally correct businesses. They might pay a $60 premium to Costco, but that’s about it.
It's the business that's owned by the world's richest person. It's going to get a lot of focus.
Several Swiss cantons have minimum wage (Geneva starting from this month for instance). Also collective bargaining is pretty common as well (e,g, in the watch industry).