skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, and that cash is a part of the revenue that could be used to pay the workers who generated that revenue.

Thus CEO pay is absolutely the concern of workers, unions, and union supported politicians.
1.1 - Correct

1.2 - Why?

2 - The New Deal's Capital's accommodation to Labor was to share the boon of increasing productivity (surplus). Neoliberalism (Reaganonmics) ended that foolishness.

3 - CEO compensation is merit based?

4.1 - aka Glut of labor.

4.2 - I'm curious what our future leaders will do to remedy today's glut of capital, the by product of decades of labor glut without the benefit of appropriate profit sharing.
The FSF doubles down on restoring RMS after his non-apology apology
It seems that The Guardian is trying to fight Facebook. This is the second article today, here's the other: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26777374

I don't assume malevolence on Facebook's part, it just does not seem profitable to hire hundred of thousands of content reviewers and train them to correctly separate truth from falsehoods. Although I'm happy The Guardian is putting pressure on a company as big as Facebook, otherwise they would just not even try.
Around 1% of seed-funded companies go on to become unicorns (>1B valuation).

Total market value of unicorns ~$2T (~600 unicorns). So average unicorn valuation ~3.3B USD.

Let's say you're the founder and your [ultimately diluted] share of the company is 10%. You have a 10Y runway. Your EV in startup case is 330M (10% of 3.3B) * 1% chance of success = $3.3M or $330K USD per year. This is only counting the extreme (unicorn cases) and will obviously vary with equity percentages.

https://news.crunchbase.com/news/private-unicorn-board-now-a...
Render [1] was started just because Heroku stopped innovating.

[1] https://render.com
With that phrasing, this is a loaded question.

Instead, imagine you are facing court and ask your lawyer:

"okay, I see you are a lawyer, but do you make highly controversial statements in public?"

This is a legitimate concern. The public credibility of your lawyer affects the outcome.

On top of that our "lawyer" RMS walks barefoot in court and wears dirty clothes.
Most of these arguments appear to be against large commits or large groups of changes during a release and are not inherently issues with a PR.

They appear to be problems with the mindset of the developer instead of issues with the idea that another developer looks at their code.

For instance,

> More long living branches, more merge conflicts

makes the argument that a PR forces a long lived branch that will result in frequent merge-conflicts.

I could counter that the issue here is that a developer attempted to change so much that the branch desynced. If the developer made an effort to break up merges into smaller chunks, as the article proposes, then the fact that it lives in a branch is a moot point.

And merge-conflicts will happen regardless of PRs. If I'm pushing directly to the main branch to a file that was changed by another developer, I'm going to have a conflict.

The argument about "review-ability of a change decreases with size" also has nothing to do with branching. The same mechanisms the author argues for are valid with a PR. If you refactor something, commit, then make your intended change and commit again, the PR can be filtered by the change in each commit. So the only issue with review-ability comes to the size of the commit.

Something I do agree with is that numbers 4 and 5 can be a concern, but they tend to be an organizational problem and not something that PRs cause. If the organization has a policy of all comments must be addressed, superficial comments can cause a blockage. My experience, though, is a small amount of discussion unblocks them quickly.

The last thing I'm going to address is "It’s easier to fix than to explain the fix".

This is something that modern SCM tools have addressed by allowing a suggested fix where the reviewer can just make an inline change that the author can choose to accept. i.e. Github has this ability and a button that allows the author of the PR to commit the change to the branch.

A few of these issues "might" be things that a PR could exacerbate, but this list seems to be more trying to fill out to number 10 than adding actual substance to the debate.
Hmmm. The traditional (1960's) view (Kuznet's "Inverted U") is that starting from low-tech societies where everyone has more or less the same, inequality rises with the advent of technology, then falls again as democracy and the welfare state kick in.

Thomas Piketty in his magnum opus Capital in the Twenty-First Century argues that the rise in inequality is inevitable (his famous r > g) and only interrupted by wars, depression, hyper inflation, and similar catastrophes that destroy a lot of wealth. That's rather more exciting than stagnation.

Branko Milanović’s more recent (2016) Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization (which originated the famous elephant graph [2]) notes that 1) inequality has risen recently within nations, but decreased among nations; 2) the Kuznet inverted-U needs to be replaced by Kuznet waves; 3) there does not seem to be an efficiency-equity trade-off in the long-term 4) social mobility seems to be falling (such that accidents of birth basically determine your station in life again, as in previous centuries).

> periods of great inequality are correlated with significant economic growth (usually related to advances in automation, which tend not to be universally distributed) whereas periods of equality can generally be attributed to stagnation.

Here, Milanović distinguishes "malign" equalisers, which reduce both inequality and average income (namely the ones noted by Piketty: wars, epidemics, depression, etc.), and "benign" ones: widespread education, greater social transfers, and progressive taxation. [3]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznets_curve

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elephant_Curve

[3] https://economics.hse.ru/data/2015/12/23/1132608306/TOC_may....
> Every country that managed to get out of poverty did it by moving up the value chain from subsistence farming to eg. textile manufacturing to eg. electronics.

Yes, but they also built domestic industries which had its gains taxed and used to improve the nation. Doesn't work as well when an international corporation books all of the profits overseas.
That's fine, and you're right about the economic incentive to charge for copies.

I happen to resent the use of legal force to do so, and I'm not alone. I belong to the Napster generation, where the muscle arm of the copyright industry destroyed one of the most promising new applications for the Internet, instead of rolling with it and reaching some kind of mutually-beneficial arrangment. We're all still pretty mad about that when we think on it.

Like it or not, NFTs represent a way out of this. Taylor Swift has trufans, she could easily cut a limited-issue NFT for her new recording of Fearless, with a smart contract which pays a residual every time it's resold.

If she wanted to. Probably not the right time in the hype cycle for her to get on board, there are unsolved questions in terms of user experience.

But the option is there, and if it becomes sufficiently widespread we can do away with the whole tawdry cycle of DMCA requests and randomly penalizing music enjoyers with ruinous fines and lawsuits. That would be all to the good.
Only about 10% of USD physically exists: https://www.quora.com/How-much-US-currency-physically-exists...

'M0' is cash. 'M1' are bytes in bank computers.

It's really not a big mental leap from USD that doesn't physically exist (which is 90% of USD) to crypto which doesn't physically exist.
Hell, Satoshi Nakamoto probably is the NSA.
There is a (seemingly growing) number of people that openly say that the budget doesn't matter. You just print and spend.

Fortunately this incentivizes finding ways to circumvent that regime and point out how absurd it is.
A side effect of improving the taste of tap water would be less soft drink consumption. I hate the taste of chlorine in the water. Its probably bad for you if you bath and shower in it too. Britta Filters for the tap water, and charcoal filter for the shower head are two very inexpensive ways to improve your quality of life. Highly recommend both. And probably some sort of glass bottle for on the go water consumption. I can taste the plastic in water bottles, especially on a hot summer day while it was left in the car.
raises hand sheepishly

All my auto-updates are off. I only update "manually" and one thing for the duration, so that I can isolate any eventual issues.

And Microsoft Updates specifically are banned for at least 6 months. I wasn't affected when it occurred, but I sure as hell won't let them exercise their incompetence of the "update deletes your data, users are our testers in production" kind upon me. (INB4: Yes, I do backup.)
There's a few of them, labelled "annoyances". You can also subscribe to I Don't Care About Cookies' list.
Absolutely horrible writing. F in grammar, spelling, style, etc. Hard to read not because of the subject material but because of the bad writing! Is this what "writers" consider good now?
Yup, we definitely need to have one of the biggest groupthink platforms instated in one of the most unstable regions of the Old World. Great job, guys! /s
>The benefits should go to whoever is responsible for the success of the company. This obviously opens up a political can of worms: the Left will say the CEO can't get anything done without the workers, the Right will say the workers can't get organized without the CEO

And a pragmatism can say that all kinds of CEOs have driven companies to the ground, reducing their valuation even 1/10 what it was, and destroying their market share, and walked away just fine, with golden parachutes and even bonuses...

CEOs get more because CEOs get to determine what they get (and the board members and execs rub each other's back when it comes to their collective advantages).

It has little to do with performance and "whoever is responsible for the success of the company".
It doesn't really matter. Even if you post the truth, you will be called a racist, downvoted, flagged, etc. It even happens on HN. Once people make up their mind, they stick to it as the truth and nothing can change them. I do feel for you though. I bugs me to my core when I see it going on, especially on subjects that the media and government misrepresents, like the gender wage gap.
It's pretty bad when you reach the 40-50 node scale with 10's or 100's of TB of data. I've had about half dozen calls with their service team about this over the last year.
It's not that simple. That command forced me over to the app-store to log into my apple id the last time I ran it for example. You may run it enough or be inside the ecosystem enough that you haven't run into that, but then when my apple-id had errors (I don't buy apps, and only have it because apple forces you to, so I almost never log in with it), I couldn't install xcode... and had to go find a fix on some random forums. Now that I finally fixed all that, the updates are smoother, but it wasn't a pleasent initial experience and did not allow me to stay in the terminal.
> So, in conclusion it's a hack... but, it's also incredibly robust.

You know, shell scripts are a hack.

I really wish there was a middle ground between shell scripts and say python. Python has proper lists and hashes and loops and can manipulate paths with spaces or quotes or unicode. It doesn't get dragged down by the escape-an-escape-within-a-regex nonsense that makes things undecipherable. or ${VAR:-foo} or ${VAR##ugh}

But python is a bit fumbly when it comes to invoking external programs. try: ... subprocess.bleh except: ... ugh.
TSMC takes orders years ahead and builds capacity to match working together with big customers. Those who pay more (price per unit and large volume) get first shot. That's why Apple is always first, followed by Nvidia and AMD, then Qualcomm.

There is bottled demand because Intel's failure to deliver was not fully anticipated by anyone.
That actually makes more sense than "Ordinance Survey" :)
Training Your Dog Keep reading to get the help you need From: DOG SYQLING
This Book Is One Of The Most Valuable Resources In The World When It Comes To The Inside Scoop On
Dear Friend,
If this describes you, then you are in luck today.First, you are NOT alone! It may seem like it sometimes, but not knowing how to get started with training your pet is far more common than you’d think.
I ought to know, because I’ve been in the same spot before.Is the fact that you would like to learn how to train your pet but just don't know how making your life difficult... maybe even miserable?
Does it seem like you’ve tried everything in your power to figure it out, and yet, despite your best intentions, you’re still plagued with:
Not knowing how to even get startedNot understanding even where to start with commandsNot knowing how to do the all important house training
Visit the website to read DOG SYQLING full review
> We need new laws for this. GDPR is a good start, if one happens to be an EU citizen, if a bit toothless.

It actually has a better bite than most. The problem is that the one suposed to do the biting doesn't do a lot of it.
Maybe things have shifted, but the Jobs bio and the Gates bio makes one think that in the technology land rush, "better technology" looses to "driven and good at making deals." Perhaps the "worse is better" feature of technological culture explains it, but the Woz and Unix did not win; Jobs and Microsoft won. (Perhaps free software will win in the end, but no guarantees in history.)

In fact, if I had to explain the change in technology over my lifetime it is that the people who understand technology and love elegance and efficiency are being pushed out by the people that want to be wealthy and get in on good deals.
If it is about customer (!) information, does it still apply to people simply visiting websites, and due to not knowing better, not blocking Google and FB trackers? It would not seem like they are automatically Google's or FB's customers.
[3] When I say people are starting more companies, I mean the type of company meant to grow very big. There has actually been a decrease in the last couple decades in the overall number of new companies. But the vast majority of companies are small retail and service businesses. So what the statistics about the decreasing number of new businesses mean is that people are starting fewer shoe stores and barber shops.

People sometimes get confused when they see a graph labelled "startups" that's going down, because there are two senses of the word "startup": (1) the founding of a company, and (2) a particular type of company designed to grow big fast. The statistics mean startup in sense (1), not sense (2).
How is it fair to pick up/completely ignore published experiential observations, in continued practice for millennia from another culture elsewhere in the world, conduct a/b tests and publish results without credit? I'm pretty sure the western world is going to continue swindling wellness techniques/practices from ancient texts, quickly run half-baked experiments, cherry pick data to suit a result and "publish" findings.

When these techniques were in development, in the golden era for spirituality, most of the rest of the world were still hunter-gatherers. Empirical rigor was just not a thing.

It's a question of providing due credit for those who developed and practice these techniques as a way of life. If not share some of the capitalistic spoils in the billions from delivering stress relief(meditation based content) through shiny, addictive apps (Yes, meditation apps can be addictive! Surprise! i.e, Headspace, Calm), At least provide credit where it's due.
When countries get excluded from trading with the West and from accessing western tech, it does great harm to them. (e.g. the history of trade embargoes against Iran, something which is a serious problem for both the country and anyone from there wishing to leave and move elsewhere)

Self exclusion isn't necessarily a better thing. It's complicated to actually remedy this history.
managed static site building and hosting.

https://developers.cloudflare.com/pages/
In terms of fatalities per billion km the US is between Belgium and New Zealand. Not really up there with Somalia.

And the ranking there is kind of misleading because the types of countries that collect fatalities per unit distance at all are the ones that tend to do really well on it. We don't have the data for Russia or China but guesstimating based on accidents per 100k vehicles, it's bad.

Whereas e.g. Germany does really well. But fatalities per unit distance for the US isn't even twice the number in Germany, whereas in terms of fatalities per 100k population, the US is 335% of Germany. Consistent with the bulk of the difference being explained in terms of more miles traveled.
We Moved from Heroku to Google Kubernetes Engine 2019
That's the trillion dollar question. Preferential attachment (winner-takes-all) seems something like a natural law. The pink elephant in the living room, which no one dares mention for fear of catching the attention of the elephant.
Tesla is burning its solar roof customers with a price increase
That sounds pretty rational, however it does not mesh with reality of most popular streamers getting literally showered with money. There is definitely some rational subset of population that will stop donating once it's clear the artist has made it. My theory is that when you give money to someone it's a commitment that you like them. And once you like them, you are more likely to contribute more money. I'd wager for top artist this effect will dominate the rational people curbing donations effect.
The new Fearless just dropped, it's not like the streaming numbers are going to equalize overnight. Can you link the data? Sounds like it's interesting
That's what I meant by overwriting: just placing it earlier in your $PATH. Overriding perhaps was a better word.
Providing an Electron app probably has the same reasons behind it as providing an app instead of improving the website.
First, when PG compare wealth of rich persons, he does not just compare salaries but the total wealth that come from the total of incomes.

Second, there is something not to forget about the stocks:

It is a "right" to the proportional part of all the future financial results of the company.

.

So, let's forget about inflation and consider equivalent dollars:

Imagine you have a 30 employees company, that will generate 1000$ of income. Of these 1000$, there is a 50% margin, so it remains 500$ of benefit.

.

In 1965:

- Boss will have a salary of 200$

- 30 employees total wages of 300$ (so 10$ per person)

- Net result of 0$ (total of stocks, going to the boss anyway)

.

In 2017, same company and conditions:

- Boss will have a salary of 50$

- 30 employees total wages of 19,23$ (so 0,64$ per person)

- Net result of 430,77$

The net result belongs to Boss + other shareholders.

-> boss get: 150$

-> other shareholders get: 280,77$

(So in result 200$ for the boss, 0,64$ per employee, 312-1 ratio)

.

Some people will say that the stocks value, based on valuation, does not correspond to 1 year of revenue.
So, for example a 100$ stocks might correspond to an expectation of 10 years of 10$ benefit.

But, on the previous article the 312-1 ratio corresponds to a year compensation, that is repeated every year. So it means that as a boss, you will also get new stocks or bigger capital for your stock every year to have this ratio maintained.
Ooof that burns. Feels weird to have a UX expert but then ignore them? But of course, corporate knows best haha.
Looking only at the base pay completely misses the picture for CEO compensation as you have noted. Obviously Bezos didn't make $13B in a single day from his $80k/year salary.

Imagine if he took that 13 Billion Dollar single day income and spread it across every employee at Amazon. That would be a life changing amount of money for almost every warehouse worker. Roughly $22,500 each. And that's just one day for Bezos.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/21/bezos-record-multibillion-do...
PoS is replacing PoW at scale. It's time for new arguments.
1-2k/mo will get you a Dutch person, too. Those are not bad wages.
People want to pay for services, not software and licenses. They want turn-key solutions that are available via API and GUI, instantly and on-demand. This is the fundamental reason why AWS is so successful and the demand is constantly proven with every new product launch.

Elastic (and other vendors) complaining about this instead of using it for their own success is a problem of their own making. At least a few companies are finally learning.
A billionaire (or a sufficiently wealthy millionaire), along with their family, has practically unlimited agency. You don't. Their wealth is also self perpetuating.

A billionaire can spend 1% of their wealth hiring well compensated professionals to manage their wealth and keep it growing. Just the fact a billionaire has their wealth means they have access to influence and opportunities you will never have.

Even someone with a mere hundred million in wealth only needs a 1% yearly return to have a million dollars a year. Even that paltry amount would allow them to live better than anyone you or I know.
Again, that's not true. In that same deposition a third party testifies that Guiffre did fly with Minsky. Choose to argue semantics all you want, but it's a credible accusation.
L-Tyrosine worked wonders for my "inattentive ADHD"-like symptoms, and it works better and has fewer side-effects than the medication my physician prescribed.

Just a non-essential amino acid that is a precursor for dopamine (and epinephrine/norepinephrine by extension), 2 thyroid hormones, and interestingly enough, melanin.

Not medical advice. My point is that it turned out what I needed was a "supplement".
> People used to say “when you don’t pay for a service, you’re the product”, but now you always are the product and sometimes you even have to pay for the privilege.

> As an engineer, I’m tired of working on systems that are openly hostile to the end user, where the best and most elegant solution is rejected in the pursuit of an extravagant business model.

This hits me hard. I feel this deeply almost every time I interact with a new startup product, etc. There is a great fight to be had here in having the most elegant (read: user-friendly) technical solutions ("software you can love").

At the same time, I can't help but feel a bit dismayed at the state of startups and the industry overall. I fear the future, where everything a new developer comes to learn is a VC-subsidized startup business model only to later push a "pay up or get out" statement.

Will the kids who are learning to write today using Apple Pencils on iPads, actually have the same opportunities to work with computers in the same way others here have? I deeply fear the rate at which software and technology is moving from a "solve real problems" model to a "solve the same problems, but with a subscription" model.

> We’re building software you can love, and big tech can’t compete with us.

I truly hope so - and that I can plan some role in turning this situation around.
Off-topic: I submitted the exact same article only a few hours before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26777030 ; I thought someone else submitting the same thing would end up being a simple upvote on my submission instead of a separate submission?

I don't care about the points or credit, glad it's on front page. But apparently there's something I don't know about the workings of HN? Thankful for someone clearing that one up and sorry for taking up the space.
It's not nearly as compatible as you might think. Interestingly enough, MongoDB's CTO managed RDS at AWS.
I found doing the new prefixes for 64-bit to be a pain--so much so, that I basically rewrote mine from scratch.
Are the fake-meat companies tech companies? I thought they are more like contract manufacturers, brewers, or other industrial foodstuffs.

No doubts on the access to cheap debt, though.