skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A female founder acquaintance of mine (who's quite smart and capable) went on a Twitter screed a couple weeks ago. As it turns out, someone else had copied her idea, and her startup now had a competitor. The competitor was also able to raise a solid amount of money despite her being first to market and her having more relevant knowledge of the problem space (by her own estimation).

So, this scenario isn't exactly uncommon in the startup world. It happens all the time. But because she's a minority female and her competitor is a white man, it suddenly becomes an example of white supremacy and the patriarchy conspiring to oppress her. The VCs who funded the competitor? Obviously racists and sexists, and she called them out explicitly as that on Twitter.

I considered reaching out to her to offer some perspective, but ultimately demurred. Why? I didn't want to be caught in the wurlitzer. Better to let her make more problems for herself than offer a sense of perspective that could get me cancelled.
A few years ago I was programming for a VLIW processor that had delay slots for all kinds of instructions. These were longer, however; I think the branch instructions had a delay of about 5 so you could pack all sorts of mischief in there.
You missed the point by a very wide margin.
Yes, exactly. It doesn't always work like you'd expect. Custom find modules can use custom variables and thus you have to define them manually in every case. This macro gets you half the way there, at least.
> the Culture has been monitoring the Azad for decades, fully knowing how corrupt and evil they are, horribly torturing people 24/7. Yet they take decades before even setting up a contact.

Look to Windward explains why; previous rushed interventionism went very, very badly.
Yeah you can do whatever you want with it, it just displays an image, so as long as you can generate the image you want you can load it up.

Just note that it takes a couple seconds to refresh so don't expect too much in the way of animations.
I highly recommend midi keyboard + synthesia
> Fox News successfully argued that no-one in their right mind should take Tucker Carlsen seriously

This sounds like another repetition of the same bad legal take on the "rhetorical hyperbole" standard based, probably, on the McDougal case or one similar [1]. That argument is made with respect to particular statements, not that nobody would ever believe anything they say. But don't take my word for it, read how the court in that very case talks about the standard:

"In particular, accusations of “extortion,” “blackmail,” and related crimes, such as the statements Mr. Carlson made here, are often construed as merely rhetorical hyperbole when they are not accompanied by additional specifics of the actions purportedly constituting the crime."

You will note that it's limited to particular statements in a particular context, not everything the person ever said for any reason, nor to anything ever said on the show. This same standard was used in, e.g. the case vs. Larry Flynt[2]. The media loves to misrepresent this argument as applying very broadly to everything a person says whenever it comes up in contexts with a political opponent, but the claims made are far narrower and rely largely on people not bothering to read legal rulings or knowing what on earth "rhetorical hyperbole" is to begin with. If you take this as some defense of Tucker, it's not, the other side does exactly the same thing whenever rhetorical hyperbole comes up.

So basically every time you see the meme "can you believe that X argued in court that nobody would ever believe them" you can be sure that you are seeing this tired misrepresentation of the rhetorical hyperbole standard.

Which seems apropos in an article about the media losing trust, as I know from actually reading a lot of court rulings just how uniformly terrible legal reporting is to the point where I actively mistrust all headlines by all outlets and refuse to consider anything but actual court papers off of Pacer.

Outlets love to put out headlines with unreasonable billion dollar defamation claims (even if actual awards are a tiny fraction thereof and they have no realistic hope of getting anything but a headline because their prayer for relief doesn't have a prayer), or to headline meaningless procedural motions as somehow dispositive (The Supreme Court denied a hail Mary petition for a writ of certiorari to decide whether suit could even be brought in the first place? Quelle surprise! The case must be almost over!), or to talk about "harsh questions" during oral arguments (the side that gets questioned more wins slightly more often, they may be trying to shore up the arguments for their ruling). There are far, far more tropes than this, but seriously, if you care at all about accuracy, take a course or two on legal procedure so that you understand the different courts and levels of appeal and actually read legal rulings.

Granted, that takes at least some small amount of legal education, but honestly, the public has neglected legal literacy for far too long.

[1] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-yor...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Flynt
This is a problem that extends far beyond the man to woman relationship. Intellectual mindshare is being locked up due to cancel culture and the fear that unpopular ideas - whether objectively true or not - or even just poor wording could be weaponized and used to attack the person expressing them.

If you think this isn't happening, I challenge you to think of a single unpopular thing that you believe and ask yourself if you'd be comfortable expressing that attached to your real name in a permanently recorded medium.
Whether the author's claim is right or wrong is immaterial. I was looking for the claim itself, and the OP helped me find it again.
Yeah, but isn't that the same thing, said in a different way?

If I'm hyper-paranoid about my statement signaling beliefs I don't hold, isn't that just an indication that people are trying to assume too much based on that "signaling"?
the oppression olympics get nobody anywhere

the problems genders face are interrelated, invalidating all men that complain about something just because of a history specifically disenfranchising women will not help your cause
You're factually wrong. Donzinger's house arrest stems from a contempt charge brought in the aftermath of the RICO suit brought against him by Chevron. He was placed under house arrest while his appeal of the contempt charge processes.

Chevron would have had no reason to bring a RICO action against Donzinger if it were not for Donzinger's suits against Chevron in Ecuador.
I’m taking the point as: the tools were worthy but didn’t catch on, so nobody invested time in updating them.
It’s really not though. People can spread any rumors they want. Giving blunt advice or not funding a company or whatever other perceived slight still exposes you. The risk is still there from the first contact to the last.

But in any legal setting this will get shut down immediately unless there’s valid proof.
On that note, it'd be nice if GitHub or other repo hosts had a way to leave project feedback that wasn't entirely around something that needs fixed.
Only really self-hosting. But many would consider the admin of that to push it away from the definition of "decent".
How to Listen for Platform-Specific Events in Flutter
Blog post is dated 2018-04-12; this needs to be in the title.
This though is one of the terrible things about people adopting Github as a pseudo-resume for job applications. It's now routine to demand "Could I see your github respository" and strike out anybody who claims not to have one. Because of this just ignoring issues can create a huge amount of anxiety as you imagine your future employer's reading through the litany of complaints about your software and / or your failure to address them.

It doesn't apply to everyone but I can see how to some people this would be really problematic.
Did GP say there was a problem?
Not to mention stuff you did as a teenager can somehow disqualify you for future prospects.
The comment was about the last decade? Seems kind of irrelevant to bring up an obstacle from the 90s.

> Over-monetizing their dev tooling was a significant contributor to Microsoft's loss of dev mind-share over the last decade.
Credit where credit is due. I'm pretty sure Max Braun did this first. Check out all of his other projects: https://braun.design
I've loved computers my entire life. You don't suddenly become a different person when you enter a new decade. You do start to recognize how young (30minus) software engineers don't have perspective.
Would you like to expand on that point?
I'm glad you took the face-value interpretation there.

Sarcasm is easy to disguise in pure text communication.

Back in the day when I spent as much time on comp.lang.perl.misc and scarydevilmonastery as I do in HN these days, that sentiment was less ambiguously delivered as "HTH, HAND, FOAD"
Does it need to float? Could not some sort of mountain plateau work that's the right altitude but perfectly solid ground, just high in the sky?
Data Science 101: Life Cycle of a Data Science Project
I don't think you have this right. The problem is not paying for developer tools, the problem is investing your time in proprietary solutions that might go away any time. For a long and resilient career developers have to stick to tools and technologies that are not dependent on ephemeral corporate support.
> There's a common theme there.

Ironically, and perhaps opposite to the point you're trying to make, this is part of the reason I prefer to evolve my Emacs towards being an IDE than to use an actual IDE. Bolting advanced tooling onto Emacs takes lots of ongoing work, but at the end I can be damn sure I actually understand what the tooling is doing, and why - and I can easily patch any piece of it to stop doing things I hate or don't need.
True, but a broken society isn’t good for the individual either.
And worst case for women: I would not invest in a company that would potentially make me evaluate such options.

Indirectly: Men should be wary of partnering up with women because investors might see such a partnership as "danger zone" and pass.

I KNOW sexism exists and should be eradicated. Unfortunately the current way of doing things cause lots of unintended consequences for women. I (a man), for one, refuse to put myself in a position where I'll have to make explicit decisions for men vs. women on the merit of their work because there is a chance that if the woman "loses" they'll label me a sexist (they can genuinely feel that way, but I know that my intentions are not towards gender discrimination - unfortunately there is no way to convince her of that if that happens). That means I tend to not work with women, even though I hate passing on people that will do the work well. If they have a history with such activism, it is worse because whatever happens, if they are terminated for any reason, it will most probably be labeled discrimination. If they have a social media following, I'm screwed. So it is difficult. I don't want to pass on them but the potential consequences for any misunderstanding are too large. I don't want to live and work while walking on eggshells.
Because you're ignoring how find_package works and how dependencies use the variables inside of them. Not every find script creates some sort of target.
We cannot put it past that if they not meet the quotas, they will get fired. So its either pee in a cup or get fired.
There's a big difference between paying for the required tools for a technology and the bonus tools. Java's basically impossible without an intelligent IDE, and C++ isn't far behind. But Ruby/JS/Python? You're just fine with VIM+Tree (if that).

Then you can upgrade with Sublime (or the like), and things like Visual Assist (by Whole Tomato) which made a huuuge difference in my first job.
Very disingenuous to include NFTs in the same category as Bitcoin. NFTs live on Ethereum which is in the process of changing its consensus from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake.
That's not a great example because if there's any profession that was always post truth throughout all of history, it's lawyers.

If you hire a lawyer, the lawyer generally decides what argument to make in court. The things the lawyer says do not necessarily reflect what you believe, or even reality as you see it. The lawyer is expected to say whatever is calculated to make it more likely you will win in court. While there are some rules governing what a lawyer can and cannot say, they are limited to certain egregious behavior.

The client generally only decides whether to plead guilty, not guilty, or whether to settle in a civil case, or whether to fire the lawyer.

While a client could try to pressure a lawyer to make certain arguments, the lawyer is not ethically required to listen as long as they think it's better for the client if they don't listen to the client.
I just want to say that all the light greyed out comments match my upbringing and worldview as well

Without an explanation about which parts people find disagreeable, assuming thats how people are even using the voting system here, I have no idea what the real world consensus is or what they wish for it to be
I dabbled a bit in x86 on ARM emulation quite a while back, but didn`t make it beyond a couple of concepts. It´s crazy how much the box86 people accomplished in a relatively short amount of time.
You pick a ripe Medlar and you pack in in sawdust - it undergoes something that is closer to decomposition than ripening (but isn't).
People's reputations and careers can be destroyed by a simple accusation of discrimination made on social media, let alone by an accusation levied by a founder against one of their investors.

If the accused also have a powerful position at a company, then that company also faces large liabilities, both reputational and financial. Everyone knows that the costs of litigation in the US are astronomical.

It is less known but equally true that the costs of arbitration (and to a lesser extent, mediation) can be high. Prohibitive for a startup, still painful for a larger company. Which means that all a potential accuser needs to do to get their pound of flesh is threaten litigation, and name an amount less than what would be paid in arbitration.

So our current system, on social media and in the courts, puts a tremendous amount of power in the hands of those who might accuse. And yes, the gender _alone_, or protected minority status _alone_, is enough to set off alarm bells in an executive who has already been burned.
I didn't do this in this situation, but I sometimes downvote by accident in an attempt to collapse. There are a lot of people on this thread so it could have happened.
Holi and Diversity in Software
While I have no doubt that the author's examples are true, and of course sometimes feedback is misinterpreted. However, I've never found this line of argument compelling.

Yes, as a man, sometimes you do have to be careful about how you give feedback to female founders, coworkers, or employees. It's a skill to be developed just like 1,000 other little skills you need to develop be reasonably successful in life.

This same "but men might get in trouble for an innocent mistake" argument was used when women first entered the workforce to decry the unreasonable burden having to work with women placed on men. You still see variations on it today.

Yes, Twitter mobs are a thing and the people who participate in them are horrible. But if you are having trouble giving feedback to women, that is not women's fault. It is simply a skill you need to develop.
The men are assuming based on the female founder’s gender _alone_ that she might accuse him of sexism.

Not necessarily. In a social situation, you may be more afraid of what other people will think than of what that one person will think.

If that one person misreads you and hates you, it's not some big career-ending problem. It only becomes a big career-ending problem when a whole lot of other people agree that you doing X is some major issue that "obviously" was rooted in some kind of nefarious intent, such as sexism.
> Do people do anything with the astringent types?

Yes, we do. Both have their own merits, but astringent types have a couple of serious advantages over non astringent, 1) they store much more sugar than the fuju types and 2) are untouched by insects or birds until ripe.

Really versatile fruit and very good if you know how to use it. Astringent types can be treated industrially to became the same as non astringent ones. Kaki is at least three totally different fruits in one.
a) NFTs as a concept aren't tied to a particular blockchain

b) if you choose today to put yours on ETH instead of a chain that is today not PoW, you don't get to play the "but soon(TM)" card IMHO
This reminds me, whatever happened to the hand drawn circuit simulation ink? If anyone recalls, that video went viral back in late 2000s
[1] https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/25/2/364

In [1], it is shown that caffeine decreases insulin sensitivity in cells. E.g., muscle cells use less insulin.

[2] https://academic.oup.com/endo/article/142/6/2702/2989741

In [2], it is shown that insulin inhibits mitochondrial oxidation of fatty acids.

These two findings support the finding in OP - if muscle cells use less insulin due to higher caffeine levels, they use more fatty acids oxidation.
The NDA comment actually is an interesting thought. I wonder if that may actually get implemented in the future actually. And basically women would be breaking the NDA by complaining they had to sign an NDA thusly inferring an irrational accusations online that we've seen run rampant in the past decade.

If I was in management, I'd at least consult my HR department about it. Better safe in court.
The fairness doctrine was solution to a monopolist problem - there were only 6 TV stations (because broadcast frequency was limited and broadcasting expensive). It also didn't work that well - stations gave lip service to fairness by representing opposing views badly. Most people don't watch TV anymore and cable has hundreds of channels. It's hard to see how the fairness doctrine would be relevant on the internet, with tens of thousands of providers, and without similar monopoly-producing conditions.
The Intercept article covers that possibility. The workers they interview say that the issue is the time crunch, not the lack of bathrooms.
He didn't defend Minsky in a tone deaf manner at all though, what he said was completely taken out of context. In the post where the lady "outted" him, she literally quoted what he said and then paraphrased it to mean something completely different.

RMS literally said that its possible that Minsky did not know that she wasn't willing because she was being coerced by Epstein to appear like she was. What is tone deaf about that? It seems pretty obvious that Epstein coerced his victims into acting a certain way.

The post took this and rephrased it as "RMS said she was entirely willing", which wasn't even close to what he said.

> And very little twisting was needed to make his discussion of what really is rape reasonable?

Except he never questioned what is or isn't rape. He didn't even question whether the girl in question was a victim, it was pretty clear that he agreed that she was. He only said that, because of coercion by Epstein, Minsky likely was presented with the appearance that everything was ok, even though it wasn't and that this would have affected his judgement.

Of course, Minsky's wife also said that they were on Epstein's island together and that Minsky did not engage in any of the accused activity anyway. But that's neither here nor there.
> How come other professions like Law and Medicine were able to make huge progress overcoming similar problems while tech continues to lag behind?

There were class action lawsuits that required law firms, law schools, medical schools, and hospitals to accept women doctors and lawyers.

Technology didn't have these interventions so it's unsurprising that sexism is more of an issue than in other fields.
To be fair, software in general is a complete shit show. The amount of things that don’t “just work” are staggering. Then we built 10 or 20 shaky layers of abstraction, one upon the other, until we ended up with the computing landscape of 2021. I tried gettin a Radeon driver to work on a laptop running ubuntu recently. What a disaster. Getting stuck in dependency hell, strange compiler errors, seg faults. Bleh. I gave up after 3 days of messing with it. Sadly this is a very common experience. It was more economical to just buy a macbook and move on with my life. So I do feel bad for this guy and see where he is coming from. But software and the ecosystems around them are just so bad.
You only have to look. Certainly you won't find them in celebrity pop culture news network, duh.
So I just crossed this over in my head with the current "It doesn't work" post/discussion... Now I'm imagining GitHub issues like "This didn't work, it needs internationalisation to handle Norwegian laws!!!" or "This project is broken, I used it everywhere and now I'm in jail facing 11 charges! Please fix or I'll use some different legal advice for all my future crimes!"
Jamie Metzl Questions the Origins of Covid 19
>People on this thread work as programmers

Yes

>want to get handsomely rewarded for their work by their company

I want a fair portion of the value I generate for my employer

> too often too tight-fisted to pay for tools which will make them do their job better and deliver better results

I usually don't control the purse strings. When I did freelance work the first thing I did was buy CLion.

>What does this say about people in the profession?

You tell me.
Alexander Hamilton founded the NY Post in 1801 to trash his political opponents. It's always been this way.
Social media does bear responsibility for how it is designed. From AI algorithms that detect what you react to (actively learning to show you your triggers) to upvote/downvote mechanisms that promote the most reactionary content.

Before social media, the aphorism was that an angry customer will tell 10 people. The modern version is that an angry person will broadcast to the world and may also be picked up by groups that exist to amplify anger.
Yes I believe I remember you mentioning that you are poor several years ago, sorry to hear that hasn't changed even though you're the top female poster on HN, I believe patio11 landed a lucrative job at Stripe mainly because of his creds on HN?

I don't think you're alone in having nothing better to do in life than posting here, basically anyone posting here right now has nothing better to do in their life. We have a lot more in common that you might think. I'm not saying find something better to do than posting on HN, far from it, heck I'm doing it myself right now. What I am saying is perhaps find other topics to discuss if you want to rid yourself of the curse of being constantly "exhausted" from daily interaction with people (men) in deciding if they're all being "just sexist pigs!"
I do not believe we can have an open, honest discussion of sexism (or racism) in this country when one side of the discussion is effectively shut out.
For What Reason Is Site Traffic Imperative to My Business?
For that particular situation, I'd stay silent. I agree there's a risk, and that this is a problem.

Longer term though, I'd make sure we hire female investors into my VC fund. I'd take them along the journey of investing with this startup, and if I felt a female CEO needed to be replaced with a man, I'd discuss this with my investment partners. Any harsh feedback, if given, would be coming from all of us, and a mixed panel would be harder to accuse of sexism.