skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So this is only for projects with paying or willing to pay customers, right?

Say, I have a small, permissively licensed personal project (bittorrent implementation), that has some userbase, including for-profit companies.

There is a lot of shit code in there, and many features are missing. Let us assume for the sake of the argument that given sufficient time I would be able to turn it into a state-of-the-art reference library. But given the current state of my financials I'm finding it hard to justify putting any effort into it for free at the moment and end up purchasing other opportunities not related to OSS.

I'm pretty sure it is not a unique situation and wonder if there are any solutions for this (e.g. angels, incubators, something like that?)
Notepad next...
Can you clarify why you think that makes the article deserve to be flagged?

I see it as not spam; it’s a timely post about why a senior member of the open source community is not suitable for a leadership position that they have just taken up.
You can’t reject his argument in full because you’re already biting back at the wrong argument. OP isn’t saying that free, open-source software is untarnished by and incapable of crimes against consumer privacy, but the fact that it is FOSS allows concerned members of the public to inspect it so, whereas proprietary software does not. How do you reckon you are able to know of the very example that you cited, for instance?
TL;DR the author of this article still thinks Stallman needs to resign, and that the FSF made the wrong decision in re-appointing him.
>This increase is in large part due to the disgusting financialization of the housing market.

Greed, period. Owning an investment property is seen as easy money. When I was a kid it was essentially unheard of to own a second property for rent. Now a substantial number of people I work around own one (or more) rental properties. I know "just a guy" that owns 5 AirBNB condos he rents for $250-300 per night in the summer season, that sit vacant the rest of the year.

I have no idea why we allowed this to happen.
> Why isn't Deliveroo innovating so much on the technical side that the gas/delivery time savings aren't making everyone satisfied?

I'm sure they are. But why would their share these gains with anyone, when they could pocket them?
I find amusing that the circles that are verbally more open to neuro-diversity are also the ones that stigmatize Stallman more, considering him, "poor choice for a leadership".

Yes, strange people say socially uncomfortable stuff and behave weirdly. Often they say stuff that is not socially acceptable. We can manage this, I hope. Especially considering his real contribution to changing computing as we know it.
I think this is kind of backwards. Japanese just has a restrictive phonetic system that makes it awkward to borrow English words. It’s unlikely that if it were written differently they’d pronounce the words more like English.
But we already have a culture of ignoring head injuries in sports.

Rugby, and American Football are only just coming to terms with how dangerous repeated concussions can be. I can't speak for American Football, but for rugby at least, they're trying to take concussion seriously.

I say trying, because there's still a large impetus in rugby culture to minimise/deny concussion, even more so since the rules changed to try to prevent repeated concussions - if you have a concussion, you can't play for at least 20 days since symptoms abated (in my country), which can make a real difference in a team's performance in a given season if you're their star fly-half[1]/winger[2] (for Americans, kinda like the quarterback in that those positions often define the plays made).

Where I can see this being valuable is in detecting concussions that are either a) subtle enough in symptom to slip past the referee's / team doctor's notice, so picking them up via easy testing can prevent further damage (as a concussion on top of concussion is the worst case scenario) and b) pick up concussions that people are trying to deny because it may harm or hinder the team if they're benched.

I can see easy testing for this bringing benefits to both groups a) and b) even if the b's might not be super happy about it.

[1]: Highlights of Dan Carter, probably the second best fly-half in rugby history: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3UsOzJuq5M
[2]: Highlights of Jonah Lomu (RIP), arguably the best winger in rugby history, and an absolute machine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsXTa7UCGlk
I was thinking more about something targeting the valve, not the acidity.
BTW https://pomod.one doesn't work correctly in Safari (when the tab is inactive for a long time) - count down stops.
Apache and nginx are C

As is stunnel, which is what the canonical fossil website uses to handle HTTPS
I like Kevin Kelly's point of view, which he talked about recently on David Perell's podcast:

"When the first humanoid picked up a rock and turned it into a hammer, either to make a shelter or to kill his brother, he suddenly had a new choice he never had before. That choice is good. You see what I’m saying? Even the choice to do evil is itself a good. Which means that if there’s a 50/50 wash between good and evil, the fact that there’s another choice gives it a 1% edge.

So there’s 51% versus 49%. So that’s why I say that given everything, even the choices to do evil are a good, that we have 51% good and 49% bad. That 1 or 2% Delta, the tiny, tiny little bit better, the incremental creep of goodness and betterment compounded yearly is civilization. All we need is to have 1% better. What we need to do is create 1% more than we destroy. Then we have civilization. And by the way, 1% it’s almost invisible. Look around the world and say, half of it’s crap. Yes, it’s true. There’s only a 1% tiny bit, but that 1% difference, that little tiny bit, is all that we need. And that little tiny bit comes from, even the evil choices are choices and those choices are good. It’s good to have a choice."

Kevin Kelly
> Oakland Resilient Families takes the guaranteed income model to new heights, with 600 families targeted for payments. The project, funded solely from philanthropic donations, has raised $6.75 million to date, of which it says at least 80% will be distributed.

Cool! I'm kind of only in favor of programs like these if they're privately funded.
That Linux doesn’t itself contain any spyware doesn’t tell me how, in a world where everyone runs Linux, magically spyware would disappear.

Android is built on Linux. Android-based TVs and phones are sold to consumers every day with spyware preinstalled.

So we have broad adoption of GPL software. Spyware is still happening. What’s the next step?
Why are the examples and learning resources crossed-out?
"helping others". Is that whats happening here?
Between this, BNDES (Development Bank) and Bacen (Central Bank, its "Fed"), it seems like Brazil's public service is a Julia hotspot.
Caddy, though I have used NGINX and HAProxy in the past. I get your point, but those projects have corporate backing and a lot of scrutiny. A niche C project seems less likely to have that.
In the context of fossil-scm, it does make sense. The idea of fossil is that it's 1 embedded database (sqlite) that contains the entirety of your development activities.

scm, wiki, defect tracking, a little bit of project management, and now chat room.

The entire idea of fossil is that you shouldn't need to use another website or another tool for anything related to tracking your development. It's the "I am stranded on a tropical island, what do I use for hacking on a project if I can't have github or irc or slack or any other tools out there."

In the context of fossil, chat is just a couple messages being passed around with no account taken at all for any other concerns. It's not a "chat" tool, it's a chat tool for the fossil-scm. Especially if you look at the Ephemeral feature - they delete chat messages after a certain configurable time - so they don't even have to worry about keeping messages.
> what is the diversity and inclusion sitatuon like in your department?

Complex.

The company is so large and hiring managers are so dependent on recruiters that actually having a diverse pipeline is difficult. There are processes that can help ensure that you hire from a diverse pool if it exists, but they can only do so much.

People from less represented groups consistently self-report lower scores on things like feeling included at the company or feeling like their voices are being heard. The scores aren't awful, but there is clearly a statistically noticeable effect. There are examples of people being treated badly that are heartbreaking.

Still, I see managers consistently taking bias and inclusion extremely seriously, especially regarding performance management. And not just for the obvious big categories (race, gender) but also for all sorts of other ways that a person might not fit the common mold. I've seen high level leaders take dramatic action to rescue people from bad situations.

I'm also somebody with a very typical background for a Googler, so I don't think I have a clear view of how everybody feels. My conclusion is that things definitely are not squeaky clean but I suspect that Google is a better place than many for people who don't fit the typical silicon valley mold.
Here We Go Again
> Luckily, the backlash against this has been significant, including an An open letter to remove Richard M. Stallman from all leadership positions.

"Arrest this man, he talks in maths"

If you think someone needs to be cancelled because you think they're 'creepy and obnoxious': grow the fuck up.
I think Linus Torvald said something like: "he don't want to waste time with licences"

Something I can very much agree with.

However, I very much not agree on the article, nor its headline. But I also do not fully agree on the FSF definition of Free Software, either.

I think it is very important, to keep terms simple. So that also a nonexpert - and non-native english speaker can understand what it means. Because I am also a non native speaker, but so is most of the world. And most of the world conflates free with gratis. But I am pretty sure, many english native speakers do so, too. Definitely most websites use the term "wrong", too, with "join for free" etc.
Trying to insist on those nunaces, I would consider a uphill battle on a muddy ground and not worth my energy. I would just go with the commonly accepted term.

So free as in not having to pay for it.

Now, that definition alone, would include all the spyware infected freeware from the appstores and co - and this is what people actually expect for free. They get more ads and other limitations instead. They don't know or care, that the source is usually closed. So including the Open-Source in the definition is important.

So Free Open Source Software - FOSS. Sounds good and simple and is pretty much the established term and I would normally use that acronym. FOSS is also easy to spell and to remember.

But .... there is the copyleft. And I am not a great fan on copyleft.
So I should use Free Libre Open Source Software? - FLOSS

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html

Well, sorry, but that term sounds clumsy.
But the FSF named it before me. So I am not trying to change their definition here. I am just saying - I think at its current stage it just helps maintaining the confusion. The discussion here is a good example of it.

Now, but as a programmer, I have to say, the highest degree of freedom with another piece of software I would have with no licence at all - when the code is in the public domain.
Because then I can really do what I want with it.
Running it as long and where I want it. Change, modify and yes - if I decide to - even not share my changes with others and just charge for the binary I created.

I am not doing the last part, though.
But I am really considering publishing my long year pet project directly into the public domain, to avoid most of this.
How is the title baity simply because you assumed it meant the author agreed with you? There is tons of room between "great" and "the devil", so I had no clue going in which side of the "should he be on the FSF board" line the author was on. Further, how is this "part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign"? It just seems like multiple people, again, have an opinion you don't agree with. That doesn't make it "concerted", with its nefarious undertones.
I am guessing that the author picked the title, "I have come to bury Ayn Rand," and an editor added the subtitle.
I too was about to ask the same question
> scramble to get out info about the shooter, with pictures, names and background-stories

They are looking for someone who says it was nice guy and how shocking it all was. Usually some neighbour whose "hello" was answered by "hi". If he is young, he was definitely bullied.

Then, few months later if you follow it, it turns out the killed was causing issues last multiple years,
had history of domestic violence and abuse, restraining order against him, beaten up few people and his own friends actually say "he was rough around the edges". Oh yeah, and what was called bullying was actually kids in school avoiding him, cause he was insulting them, stealing their stuff and beating them.
Also, these days the complexity of our creations is such that almost never could one person really personally succeed without the contribution of others.

A common complaint among some groups is that they worked really hard and built successful businesses, and they shouldn’t be taxed to pay for services that do not benefit them. But they neglect to account for the infrastructure, relative availability of educated workforce, and even regional economic stability which allows others to reliably consume their products.
The notes to some book or another say that Eratosthenes wrote one of his scientific works in verse.
So you're saying that you first need to found your startup as a dystopian venture with a secure facility that needs vandelising, then rebrand your company around the art created?
Read their first sentence again.
https://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100 Where’s the rock band.
I think the point of the person to whom you're replying is that it being solved doesn't mean it was as easy as it now looks. When we see it done and we see the methods are not all that novel, we are biased to think that. But the fact that it was not more complete until then and was a subject of fascination for many actually implies the opposite. We're looking at an incredibly rare event and asking why a few specific investigators couldn't have achieved that decades ago.

The "decades ago" caveat is especially key, because they used a computer system with raw performance well within an order of magnitude of today's Top500 supercomputers. I like to point out government incompetence too, but spending that kind of resources banging away at a message from a killer we don't believe has been active for several decades isn't exactly a prudent move.
but the vast majority of those "lo" would be the male article not the neuter.
Stallman is a weird-ass creepy autistic motherfucker who has, despite all that, has managed to create the Free Software movement, which is a massive achievement. Indeed, it's unlikely that FLOSS would exist at all without Stallman and his unique brand of intransigent principled autism.

Not to mention, everytime some crazy shit happens in the world of software, we all look back at his past writings and go, "Oh, Stallman was right. Again."

Is he weird, creepy, offputting, totally socially clueless, and massively unattractive? Yes.

Is he exactly the man to lead the Free Software Foundation? Also yes.
While I haven't experienced it, I have seen examples of people being hired as a result of HN. I think this is because HN kind of serves as a water cooler chat forum for people that are interested in tech + science (in the broadest possible sense). Sometimes job offers are a result of that.

Note: I did get some help with prepping my resume among other things.
There is one basic thing about open source and market economy:

1. People open source for free. They already do that. So, there is no real need to pay them as they are willing to do so for free. Greatest minds work for open-sourced projects.

2. If you want to pay/fund/support open source. Great, but these numbers we're talking about (like $1k/mo) are nowhere near what devs make at corporations.

I think Funds for Open Source is a great initiative! I just do not think it can be a real alternative to a career path.

I think the best open source support is done by big companies who open source their work. For example, Airflow by AirBnb.
This is a good policy. I recently watched "The Investigation" (Efterforskningen), a Danish TV dramatisation of the investigation into the murder of Kim Wall in 2017. Something I realised after a while is that the accused is never named nor shown or heard in the show, at all.

There's no detail lost, it's an in-depth retelling, it has all the information you need to get an understanding of the case. It also doesn't feel forced – it took me a while to notice it.

I believe the show does justice to the victim without giving anything to the perpetrator, and it's refreshing.
> the population of people who would be fooled by phishing

That population includes me. I'm in danger of being phished by 3rd party apps.

> People are awful at recognizing phishing. Straight up.

Yes - which is why password managers are a key part of the solution. They match on URLs and require an extra step to bypass.
All that was granted to RMS, even to a degree most others don't.

The problem with RMS (and way too many other public figures) is the inability to just keep their mouths shut every once in a while.

Everyone - especially in the age of social media - would be much better off not sharing every personal opinion on every subject with the entire planet; lest they're willing and able to deal with the inevitable backlash.
Wow, that's just outright false advertising (assuming they are actually charging for egress)... Here is everything the pricing page, signup page, and TOS (which reference the first) have to say about paying for egress... I especially like the part where they are calling this hot storage, which certainly implies that it might be accessed more than once a month.

Pricing page [1]

> We have no hidden fees and the monthly calculator to prove it.

> Egress $0.00

> No charge for egress, ops, or retrieval.

> With Polycloud from CrowdStorage, you only pay for the storage you need. And we never penalize you with fees for accessing your data.

> No egress charges

> We keep it simple—access your data when you want it, without being nickel-and-dimed with hidden fees.

> Hot storage for cold storage prices.

> Don’t overpay to get the speed you need. Polycloud delivers quick access you data whenever you need it.

> Egress $0.00

Signup page [2]

> Everything you need to store your data for only $4 per TB/mo and no hidden fees.

Terms of service [3]

> 6.1 Device Backup. In the event that you subscribe to a paid version of the Device Backup Services, we will put you on a recurring payment plan that charges you for the fees set forth at https://app.crowdstorage.com/pricing in advance for each billing cycle. We will charge the payment method you specify at the time of purchase and, if you do not cancel the Services prior to the end of the current billing cycle in accordance with Section 7, you will automatically be charged the then-current fee for the Services at the start of the following billing cycle.

> 6.2 Polycloud. With the Polycloud Services, you pay only for what you use. There are no set-up fees or commitments to begin using the Polycloud Services. At the end of each month, you will be charged for that month’s usage of the Polycloud Services as further set forth at https://polycloud.crowdstorage.com/pricing.

[1] Pricing: https://archive.is/K3Dyf
[2] Signup: https://archive.is/c3fAf
[3] Tos: https://archive.is/xBKJL
It seems to me like you’d want it to be obviously way superior for some reason to go so far away from the herd.
How to create PDF reports with Python
Is that the only reason? Is being creepy and obnoxious enough to reasonably be fired from certain kinds of positions? Is being fired from any position an act of cancellation? You're telling people to "grow the fuck up", but you're not being very mature in your exploration of the question.
Discovery Phase: Answers to the Most Frequently Asked Questions
> It sounds like your community's affordable-housing problem is fighting the ravages of nature and entropy to build and maintain habitable structures.

Welcome to Detroit[0]. $20,000 can get you a huge old house in an unsafe neighborhood with an outstanding liability to the water department. The area I live costs about $225,000 for 1,500 sq. ft. in a nice, zero-crime, residential neighborhood.

Back when I was doing this frequently, the work was mostly centered around making homes livable/saleable that had problems the home-owners couldn't deal with (many, many cancer patients with weakened immune systems who couldn't live at home due to environmental toxins). We never touched the dangerous stuff, but after the folks in HAZMAT suits clear out, you're going to be hanging a lot of drywall, at a minimum. Often houses with these kinds of problems had several others that weren't found until the obvious problems were removed.

Reading over my responses, I'm a little disappointed at how frustrated some of them sound. While I am frustrated at folks who choose to complain rather than doing something. There's this thinking that "If I complain, then I'm putting myself outside of the group that's 'causing' the problem"...meanwhile the sentence often ends with "...in America!", where the person complaining is often located.

And, frankly, where I live -- charity, and government dollars would be better spent elsewhere.

[0] Like most who are "from Detroit", I live outside the city limits.
So I actually received one of these notices from Google.

A few years ago detective in Massachusetts had subpoenaed all information having to do with my GMail address.

Not having done anything wrong it was very stressful time for me trying to figure out what the police were after.

Turns out some scammer had put down my email address (a common first name/ last name combo) on a form at a UPS store.

UPS being the terrible company it is didn't bother to verify said address. (And BTW refused to remove my address even after I repeatedly called their help line).

In the end I had to hire a lawyer a thousand miles away in order to contact the detective to try and clear up the situation.

Five things stick out in my memories of this incident:

1. If I was so inclined it would have been really easy to destroy all of my computers given the advance warning.

2. They attack surface was bigger than I could imagine. Given that I payed for Google Drive and used Google DNS Google knows everything about my online life including all the illegal things (copyright related) that the fuzz might find despite looking for something completely unrelated.

3. It is super easy to find oneself in a kafkaesque type situation where one if forced to try and prove a negative. "Yes that is my email address but I swear I never scammed someone out of their iPhone. Yes I know that's what actual scammers would say."

4. It would have been super easy to dismiss the warning email as spam.

5. They don't tell you why you where subpoenaed. I get Google doesn't know but it does leave (innocent) people to spin out into a paranoid frenzy.
I only got part way through the article because it makes grand claims, yet misunderstands Rand. Rand believed in individualist politics, and created these hero archetypes in her stories, but she also advocated for cooperation by free individuals. There's even a section in Atlas Shrugged where the protagonist tries to go it alone and finds it unfulfilling. Instead, the utopia in the book is one in which people voluntarily associate to form a society. The click-bait title doesn't help matters.
Do you know the author of Fossil is the same person who wrote sqlite?