skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It could be from a lot of the comments here around percentage of engineers not wanting any part of pairing. Cutting off parts of your job pool or even your current workforce is a tough request.

There's also incentives for individual success that soloing goes along with. Whereas pairing might lead to a greater product solution and with the lack of clarity around individual contributions. From what I've seen that's why pairing is implemented at smaller places or on separate products that are run as more of a smaller company.

Background: I was at a company that was forced into pairing and xp and said the same things about me not wanting to do it and leaving if I had to. I then tried pairing out and absolutely loved it. I moved to a larger company, for unrelated reasons, where we didn't pair and did not enjoy it. So I came back to a company that does pairing every day and I can't imagine working in an environment that doesn't pair consistently again.
>>Hmm? A statement saying that a large government (and likely high taxes) inherently causes a bad outcome doesn't need a long-term graph to be falsified. Scandinavia is sufficient, even much of western Europe on top of that.

The bad outcome is a country doing worse than they otherwise would have. You can never prove that happened, because you can't run the experiment twice, so you try to find evidence to make a reasonable case for/against it, as the next best thing.

One way to do that is to look at large datasets, to see what the general effect of the policy seems to be when the experiment is run multiple times on varying countries. The size of the dataset helps to minimize the impact of other factors, given that those factors should average out as the dataset gets larger, thus hopefully exposing the impact of the factor under study.

In any case, Scandinavian countries saw stagnation in their rate of wage/economic growth after adopting social democracy, so they are not a counter-example.

The reason Scandinavia and more generally, Western Europe, are prosperous today is because they were the most free-market-based economies in the world for the longest period of time. Their lead over the rest of the world has shrunk since the 1960s, when they started to massively deviate from their adherence to the free-market rule set.

>>Just saying that The Free Market believers aren't famous for their concern for the poor

That characterization is nothing more than an effective smear job by rent-seeking insiders that depend on the state's suppression of people's private property and contracting rights for their privileges - like unionized workers - and left-wing populists.

>>The latter is the most obvious example of not caring for the outcomes of the Free Market on the poor.

You assume that because you assume profit-motivated activity, free markets, contract rights, and opposition to the Democratic Party, are all harmful to the poor. This assumption is deeply mistaken.

EDIT:

Responding to below:

I throw that advice back at you.

Sweden is typical of Scandinavia. Sweden had the third highest per capita GDP in the world in 1968. By 1991, after two decades of rapidly expanding social welfare programs, it had fallen to 17th in the rankings:

http://iea.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/files/San...

Until the 1960s, Sweden had both been one of the most free market economies in the world, and most rapidly growing economies in the world, for around a century.
I don't see how that's inconsistent. Slice is used to describe things that are cut from a larger whole, particularly for food, while paper is manufactured as sheets.
In this case it indeed seems like a Ponzi scheme, but in a lot of cases where businesses suddenly decide to (re)do a solved problem with blockchain, it's more in an attempt to raise VC funding or buy-in from large clueless companies rather than from crypto people.
I think the point is that the government makes money. They can spend whatever they want, they can literally name any number and spend it in dollars. They have been limited in spending by the rule that they have to loan money, not just spend made up money (after screwing up pretty badly this rule was introduced). But that still gives them trillions per year to spend.

Therefore incoming dollars do not matter, taxes do not really matter. Which I think is the point that we were trying to make.

So there is no justification in taxing "the rich" in any need for increased spending.

This is further complicated that "the 1%" is an annual income of 500k, or an individual income of 250k. A lot of people on this site who don't see themselves as rich (but are) will be included, and will point out that this does not give a "rich" lifestyle in San Francisco. Taxing them so their income drops to, say 160k (down 30% or so) will cost them very directly in comforts, apartments, ... they will fight this tooth and nail.

If you then look at the income that can be generated for the government you quickly realize that you need to tax at least the top 30%. You'll see that this will mean increased taxes (and think 70-80%) for any income over, say 90k per person, if you indeed want to increase taxes. I don't think many people will find this acceptable, because they cannot possibly maintain their lifestyles with such taxes. This will effectively mean anyone not in the 1% is limited to ~120k per year, down 30-40% from what they have now, 100 million voters. More than enough to massively swing towards whichever party opposes this.

So the question becomes if this fight is really worth it, since it will not actually allow for increased spending ... Much easier for any party to force interest rates to zero and spend infinite.
While a bit old this might explain why it wasn't popular back then.

Why Ada isn't Popular (1998):
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7824570
Someone's already gotten wine working on the pinephone: https://www.reddit.com/r/PinePhoneOfficial/comments/m4bvti/w...
This is an excellent take on why the Grossman's idea is plainly idiotic [0]. You don't get more bitcoin for more electricity, you just get more security. The system itself can reach a state when you need 51% of whole planet electricity and computation devices locked into it to be perfectly secure. Thats frankly scary.
[0] https://elad-verbin.medium.com/bitcoin-is-not-a-battery-it-i...
Amazon = eBay + house brands + ad network

It's a marvel that any third parties remain on Amazon.
In Photos: 5k pack into Spain arena for concert after Covid screen
Why is everyone so eager to blame this on China? Of course there are some Chinese buyers here in Canada but if you’ve actually been in the market or know any builders you know that explanation doesn’t add up.
Doesn't that already exist in the form of Patreon, YouTube Premium or even OnlyFans, and works very well without being attached to some kind of useless blockchain/cryptocurrency?
I'm not impressed so much as dismayed. My theory is that it is warfare by decentralized means, worked through witting and unwitting subjects.

In other words, there are a bunch of people whose job it is to keep the enemies of their country in mask denialism and maximum COVID infection as deeply as possible, and it's primarily done through social media.

And while it's useful in a sense to put forth such intentions while knowingly coordinating bot networks and the like, it's social engineering that does the heavy lifting: the real effectiveness comes in ways you can't directly control, when people soak up the information around them and begin propagating your message (or weird mutations of it) on their own initiative, thinking they've invented it.

And that's how they getcha. So I'm not the slightest bit impressed or surprised to see spring 2020 memes persisting: they're being fed, on purpose, singlemindedly. I confess to being surprised when the same memes turned up in English in various EU countries, but when the job is to propagate the message, I guess English signs in foreign countries is all part of the game, indeed a normal part of anybody trying to send messages to the West.
New 5G protocol vulnerabilities allow location tracking
A "store of energy" implies some ability to extract energy back out.

"A putative store of value" != "a store of energy".
they don't want me to read their article, why would I
They were assessing character and yes, making a judgement on it, which was their role. I find it likely that OPs behavior came off as seeming vindictive and spiteful, even if not intended that way. They would have done better to observe specific behaviors (which they did fairly with "slouching"), but their intent was likely to judge character and fit for the school, based on the evidence in front of them.

Not saying it's easy, especially for a kid, but if you go in front of a panel like that, if you can demonstrate remorse and desire to change, it goes a long way.
In case anyone wants to know the joke, here it is, told in today's language.

A guy who had never had sex before decided to finally go for it, and went at it with a sex worker.

As it goes sometimes, he fell in love with her, and asked for her hand in marriage.

She said, I don't think it is going to work, because you are so sexually inexperienced. But the guy pleaded with her, and wouldn't leave her alone, so to get him off her back, she told him,

"Go to the woods at the side of the village, there's a tree with a hole in it. Make love to that hole for a year, then I'll marry you."

So a year later, the guy returns to ask her again. She says, Alright, let's see what you've got, and if you can satisfy me, I'll marry you. And having said this, she takes off her clothes, and turns her back to him, gets on her knees and sticks her butt out at him.

And at this, the guy lifts his leg, and front-kicks her butt so hard, she flies forward and drops to the floor.

"What the fuck are you doing, man?!" she yells at him?

And he replies, "just making sure there's no bees inside."
80/20 feels outdated based on the last 10-15 years. It feels like it should be 70/30 or even 60/40. Worse things keep happening and we just keep not suffering the doomsday, societal-collapsing scenarios. We keep getting new technology that saves us time and gives us information. We get access to more diverse opportunities. And new products come along (cryptocurrency, for better or worse) to supplement the old things, so we have way more options.

Your buddy's job at the bank will likely be safe, but consider for some markets that it doesn't really matter because there might always be another job around the corner. Software developers in particular should not be doing 80/20 because of this, since the jobs currently act as a really good safety net. That job market has only experienced one black swan event (2001) and rebounded to even higher levels.

For the US, if democrats get off their ass and start pushing change like they promised, we'll have even better safety nets. Safe tactics will become wasteful tactics because 1) we're historically always recovering, and 2) the downside always seems scarier than the upside. You can spend too much on safety.
The history of the twentieth century is religious fervor being replaced by political fervor. Not sure how this is a new phenomenon.
Why Ships Keep Crashing
It always bothered me how Republicans just appropriated Evangelism, as if Conservative ideology had anything in common with teachings of Jesus. Because Jesus would want the rich to pay fewer taxes, and if presented with a sick person, would go "let him die". Is that right?

I always give the hypothetical of Jesus coming to Earth in secret and running for President in a Republican primary. What would happen? The answer is that he would be laughed off the stage, if we are being honest about it.

This is even before we get to the whole thing of relentless commercialization and never-ending extension of the Christmas season, and the fact that most "evangelicals" never cracked open the New Testament to actually READ it. All we get are some snippets they found online or on TV - of the Old Testament, to show us how lost and vain the rest of us immoral degenerates are.
Wow, reading through some of these examples, it’s pretty clear where VHDL got it’s syntax! I think I do recall some relation between it and Ada, but it’s almost uncannily close. (Looking up now, it was apparently a requirement for it to be based as much as possible on Ada).
Especially with blood around in case the suture leaks or there is a bubble of blood...
Really? You think her being black, or a woman, played no part at all in getting her all this exposure?
How white are you, out of curiosity? What's your demographic look like, and how closely did it match the screeners? Seems like if you were nervous that would be additional weighting in the direction of you being questioned, so the additional weighting doesn't seem to have motivated anything.
For my own part, I mark a difference between fairly defending one's position and what we witnessed above. That was:

* Poorly formed. It has no clear central thesis and could have been reduced to and improved by a handful of relevant links.

* Lacking in charity. The comment in question did not have to be read as a personal attack, as others demonstrate.

* Egotistical. Your typical user does not check the CV of every commenter they engage with. This is not a reasonable expectation. Very few commenters are particularly notable people, and this user does not appear to be a noted agronomist whose opinion could be reasonably regarded as authoritative.

All of these combine in my eyes to create a comment worth discussing as poor in the hopes of improving the contributor's behavior. They clearly have good information to share. We would all be better off if that was what took place.

I agree with you that the comment that received this response is also far from ideal. I think it is reflexively glib, but perhaps without rising to the level of meriting a call-out. I recognize that this is a judgement call on which reasonable people might disagree.
More troublesome would be Burma Shave ads on the side of the road
> When is the last time CCP acknowledged wrongdoing?

I don’t know what the last time was, but I know Deng Xiaoping famously described Mao as “70% good, 30% wrong”.

For me, a small payoff a decade later to the family of a victim of a political assassination doesn’t really amount to much. Again, the established order in the US is happy to apologize and tolerate dissent and preach “free speech” as long as its rule isn’t threatened.

It was illegal for union officers in the US to be communist party members up until unions lost their political strength. The Communist Control Act is still on the books but unenforced. Would it remain that way if in the next few years an ascendant communist party like the Black Panthers emerged? I doubt it.

> CCP persecution of pro-democracy

Do you have the slightest idea of how elections work in China? Compare the National People’s Congress to the US Senate. Which is more representative? Which has more minor parties?

> those who wish to practice a religion not endorsed by the CCP

Which religion are you referring to here? Islam? Is that why China has more mosques per capita for their Muslim population than the US?
It isn’t that complicated. In a two party system, you’re forced to pick one option or the other. With issues like abortion being important, it’s a total nonstarter for an evangelical to support pro-choice parties.
The professor submitted one of his own papers by mistake?
I wonder if anyone has ever looked for a correlation between the average lifespan of a species and some distance factor from humans and the effect we have on the environment.
Not going to defend the consistency of English for a second but for that particular example: paper isn’t sliced, so it wouldn’t make sense to refer to “a slice of paper”.

Obviously the standard usage of a “piece of paper” is pretty arbitrary, but slice is clearly wrong.
Why not Julia?
Yes you can talk without being able to read. Nevertheless is reading a very useful skill.
Online Stock Trading Groups Aren’t New, but They Are Bigger Than Ever
Implicit In-order Forests: Zooming a billion trace events at 60fps
Im curious to learn more about these conspiracies of the left. Do you have books to share or other resources?
The Guide to Writing Self-Documenting Code
Yeah it is remarkable that cloud cities on Venus are very quickly dismissed but terraforming a dead rock is...uh feasible?
Funds Bet on a Consumer Boom to Rival ‘Roaring Twenties’
That's all fine and good, but I'd bet nearly 0% of employers looking for Java experts are going to have functional code bases.
Regardless of how linguists classify it, the truth is that there is a direct correspondence in that respect. Every time you can use the present continuous ("I am eating") in English, you can use the Spanish equivalent ("estoy comiendo") in Spanish as well, and vice versa. It's one of the easiest thing to learn for Spanish speakers, contrary to e.g. the present simple which has quite different usage in English than in Spanish.

So saying that Spanish has no present continuous might be true in some pedantic or stilted sense of the word or in a technical context, but it's not very useful otherwise. For all practical purposes, for speakers and learners, Spanish has present continuous.
I mean the guy scraped their site and created a competitor. If I add content to a site, I’m for sure not transitioning ownership to them, but I’m also not giving everyone else in the world permission to take it and use it anywhere they want.
>I know that I personally am in favor of some solution that weeds out misinformation while still giving all political parties voices.

The way this will manifest itself is through a left-wing 20-something low-pay intern who will be tasked to decide whether something is or isn't true. Or put another way, you're delegating what you should or shouldn't see to that intern. Are you OK with that? Because I'm not. I neither want you, nor that intern, to decide for me.

>If you want to talk hate or amplify things known to be factually untrue, you should be fact checked loudly and clearly, and if that doesn't change what you are saying, you should not get to say it any more.

And who will arbitrate this?

And the context behind a statement like this is that your side is truthful and the other guys are liars because nobody thinks THEIR speech should be curtailed. For example, when Hillary Clinton went around and claimed Trump was an illegitimate President who stole the 2016 election [1] - should she be banned from all social media? By the way, most major media outlets have echoed this sentiment as a 'fact' many times since the 2016 election - the vast majority of which turned out to be bunk. Should the NY Times be banned for that? Or are you OK with only the NY Post being banned for reporting on a true story against Hunter Biden and his laptop?

How about when Democratic politicians and Democratic base claim that Republicans steal elections due to voter suppression, voter id, and gerrymandering - is that grounds for a ban? This happens after every major election Democrats lose. This is so normal you probably don't even notice it. Even today, there are outright lies being promulgated against Georgia's new elections laws by Democrats for partisan reasons - is that grounds for a ban? Or do you just want a laser focus on what Republicans are saying?

Right now on YouTube if you try to cast doubt on the outcome of the last election, it's an outright ban. OK. Let's make it so that this rule applies equally ... but then, I'm watching Sam Seder and he's got a video titled "How GOP Legislatures are already trying to steal the next election" [2] (which is one video in a long series of videos across years making this claim) - I guess it's OK to assert election theft as long as you just assert the Republicans are the ones doing the stealing (and by the way, Democrats have asserted the 2000, 2004 and 2016 presidential elections were stolen - "coincidentally" the ones they lost). Would you be OK with one set of standards by which everyone gets banned? Or do you want double-standards?

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trum...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ITlaEXJGVk
Abortion is a fronting issue. They care as much about it as the "endless wars" and the "deficits". It's OK if their guy does it. You mean to tell me the guy with a Ford F-150, a recreational boat, and tons of "economic anxiety" cares about abortion? People are catching on.

What about "family values"? Haven't heard THAT one in a while, primarily because the last Defender of Evangelism used to shtoop and pay off porn stars.
And your point is? Never claimed they were perfect and some of their more nitty picky hit pieces have been criticized by their followers too.

My point is rather that the issue of "wasting tax payer money" should in principle not have any political side; its about efficiency and both left and right should engage in the question. If anything the side that is vouching for more government should be the one leading the discussion of the efficiency of tax payer money utilization.

Yet most just jump to simple adhomiem attack on the critisizers. "right wing propaganda"; That was my point. That we pretend to care but we don't, and rather switch the discussion to petty tribalist name-calling.

And I'm well aware the sponsors of the organization and that they probably have some rotten eggs in the basket too.
Yet here we are after the solidarity stunts, renaming of branches, the term 'master' is still used. As the change solved nothing, it can be described as a magnificent waste of time.

They are going to be fighting forever over a change that doesn't address the actual issue of what they are fighting against.
I'd like to say that as a rural grain farmer I would like to live in a condo in a dense and walkable neighbourhood with an excellent range of ethnic cuisine expertly prepared by my diverse neighbours.

I consider that desire just as realistic as the desire to live in a fully detached home and work in downtown Toronto.

Life is full of compromises, I'd rather not have a lawn to mow, but thems the brakes!
F# is used in logistics, finance, and insurance. There aren't a lot of jobs, but certainly some big-name companies use it and have teams of dozens working on it.
Mainstream media regularly publishes anti-religious articles, but I wonder how many HN readers actually know and regularly converse with religious people.

In my shoestring travels around the U.S., I'd say most of the help I received was from people who identified as Christian.

I also observed that most charity work like feeding people regularly is done by Christians and other religious/spiritual groups.
Well said. Also purely from the point of view of physics: no energy is stored, you would simply be buying energy _produced_ elsewhere with the intrinsic value you created... in other words you are double spending energy!
i think there is more opportunity than you thing for things to work out well, because the tide of transparency would lift all boats, just the same.

You attack someone, you better know you can be attacked.

I think this would work wonders to introduce principles into people that are anything but principled.

If you vote for someone that says he's for X, but then he actually secretly negotiating to drop X from the table, then what good was that campaign promise / vote ? Shouldn't it be necessary to know you were effectively defrauded ?

There's almost no instance where more transparency is a net loss to society. Politics is far and away one of least transparent undertakings. It is desperate for more transparency, not less
I wonder if anyone has some thoughts on the application of methods like this in the realm of machine learning modelling? I'm very interested in the concept and can see there must be a link but haven't yet thought my way into it
How would you build a cloud city?
As I recall, it was the "atheism+" schism that killed that movement. So: probably, yes.