skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The question of what would most benefit a person's path toward happiness isn't the question of what do people need to be happy, though.

Sloppy analog: If I won the lottery tomorrow, it would allow me to buy a guitar I want sooner than another method; but not winning the lottery doesn't preclude any possibility of my acquiring that guitar.

I'm not sure that not winning the lottery means the path without winning the lottery is harder.

Winning the lottery may even prevent other conditions from developing in the course that would otherwise sustain the goal.

Humans and Islands analogies have been waged in many philosophical battles, but I never gathered that one was settled. Personally, I've subscribed to every man being and island and no man being an island all at once, and think both are fundamentally true in constant contradiction of one another and the contradiction is all you can really point to being true. (the original line "No man is an island" was Donne remarking of man's nature with regard to the Christian god, at least as far as I understood it)

I think if you [general you, not personally] hang your happiness on any one thing you're going to struggle or cause undue burden on someone or something else. And that's what the incel crowd gets so wrong; and I must say the proof kind of seems in the pudding there...
The secretaries were specialists: in language. How much better would my posts be if someone who was good at writing and so would correct my grammar (grammar checkers are horrible - or were last time I tried, mostly I don't even look anymore). Often what I saw should be worded a little differently. Spell check doesn't notice when I spelled a different word than what I wanted.

I'm a faster typist than I am at talking, so I don't need a typist. I could really use someone to proofread for me. We have lost both.
Anyone with basic legal training would definitely say the same. Anyone reading too much hacking/legal/mafia fiction may say the same. Anyone from France could say the same, given that expression [0] entered common language back in the 70-80's when expropriating logistics trucks to redistribute wealth to poorer neighborhoods was very common practice.

[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tomb%C3%A9_du_camion
This also depends on what you count as carbon dioxide production. For example, cattle produce methane through gut fermentation, which is a strong greenhouse gas. However, it contributes to warming only to the extent the cattle stocks are growing. If cattle numbers are stable for some amount of time, than the methane produced by them does not contribute to new warming, as it forms closed cycle: methane decomposes to CO2 in atmosphere in a decade or two, which is then captured by grass, which is eaten by cattle. The result is a steady state of stable fraction of CO2 and CH4 in atmosphere, and no warming.

What really does contribute to climate change though is emissions that come from fossils, like fuel for machines, electricity for processing and storage, and gas for artificial fertilizer. The variation in reported numbers is caused by agenda, ie whether one wants to accurately assess impact of beef production, or whether they want to paint beef as worst thing ever.
OMG. This is just brilliant on so many levels. It's not just subversive against FB's rules but also can be the start of some kind of art project as a statement about what tech companies know about us. But the project itself gives us a choice in what is shown to others whereas FB doesn't give us that choice when selling the info to advertisers. It'll probably get shut down real quick by FB though once they know about this.

Edited: as my sibling comment mentioned, I too would buy one of these shirts.
Proof of concept by exercising the idea outside FAANG.

Write a sci-fi book outlining your concept. And ship the book to executives of relative departments. Make it look real.

Pitch the idea in person to those executives. But poke them at how they suck for not being able to do something similar.

Then show the limitations of working on this solo and only if a FAANG was doing it how much better it could be.
Moxie wrote the Cellebrite article.
That just isn’t true.

You don’t need an Apple certified keyboard. You just need one with the command key mapped correctly.

As for ‘explicitly catered’ - the command key was on Apple keyboards before Microsoft added the Windows key, and before Linux even existed.

It seems a bit weird to complain about monopolies while at the same time saying every product should work the same way.
> The data seems to imply a significant number of women are dating men far older than themselves, which just doesn't seem true to me.

My anecdata matches that data. All my female friends are married to older men, in some cases the difference is in the double digits.

Age and height are very hard barriers for women.
Overregulation and bureaucracy are the downfall of the west. The sooner we realise that, the sooner we can fix it.
Ask HN: Why is Facebook getting so much more criticism than the rest of FAANG?
I think it's arguable that they all do pretty much the same things, for which Facebook are being criticized lately. Possibly arguably worse, in cases like Google, and even outside FAANG with the likes of Twitter and Reddit. So why the INTENSE focus on Facebook?
In the modern hookup-based dating culture, you need a smaller number of chads to service a larger number of women.
That’s possible. Assuming he donates the $2.6 million regardless, this could be a high risk, high reward campaign.

So while saying “please donate” might get say $100,000-$1,000,000 more, even a single bid from a other investor/founder who wanted bragging rights for beating PG will dwarf that.

If so it presents an interesting mechanism to elicit donations in rich social circles.
That example is actually the same as The Goal: i.e. you optimize at the bottleneck. The bottleneck in that system is the CEO. Optimizing at the secretary is pointless since she's not a bottleneck.

We have an intuitive understanding of this as engineers. If you've got a program that's CPU-bound then you don't optimize the IO. If you've got a program that's IO-bound you don't optimize the CPU.
You're kind of just arguing past the people in this thread ("these relationships in my life are healthy and not codependent, so codependence is not a problem in relationships"). I would also argue that your takes offer the same "armchair psychoanalysis" you're arguing against, fwiw.

> If we're redefining romantic devotion as an "addiction" then I think we have officially lost the plot.

No one is redefining anything. This term is poorly defined. Codependence is not "romantic devotion". "Romantic devotion" should not be codependence.
When it comes to guerrilla warfare, sometimes you have to use your opponent's own tools against them.
>> Social signals that cost significant resources for something worthless are stupid.

> No, you just don't understand social signals, which was my point.

I don't think OP denies the utility of signaling, only that as an intelligent human being, one must not feel absolutely helpless in accepting and perpetuating all instances of signaling that their peers do.

There are many different cultures with strong means of signaling one's devotion to a partner, without having to essentially burn a small fortune to enrich an exploitative industry. It doesn't even have to be non-materialistic. Many cultures have the gold ring/necklace. It's a signal of a fortune spent, and a retained safety net because gold is tradable.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/glennsolomon/2020/09/15/monetiz...
> assuming the stats they give are correct.

And herein lies the rub.
But;

>It’s arguable she’s the only reason I’m able to be happy.

Is less ambiguous. I would not want to be in a relationship with someone who is that dependent on me to be happy.
Looks like the "State Board of Education appointed 20 members to the Mathematics Curriculum Framework and Evaluation Criteria Committee (Mathematics CFCC) to assist in the development of the Mathematics Framework." Looks like this is more than just a rouge admin, unfortunately.
Or perhaps the benefits haven’t decreased
but the costs have increased. Especially up-front.
Happiness comes from the interaction of a person with lived events.

See, for example:

https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/36/6/1244/819019

A death of a parent is identified as one of the most significant causes of unhappiness. If your happiness is negatively impacted by the death of your parents, is the issue that your parents died, or that you've given away your agency to choose your own happiness?
I am wondering, Why is the Alphabet boards and Google employees haven't been prosecuted for the copyright infringement yet? Denying the copyright is an copyright infringement. They knew he is the original author because he and whoever that person living in Saudi Arabia both use YouTube and they knew he is the one who uploaded it first.

This issues happens because YouTube is not responsible for what they did.

Also, DMCA cause more harm than good. I really don't understand the law system in US.
Nyquist [1] is a XLisp derivative that shares temporal recursion with Extempore. Not sure it had any connection to Emacs though.

1: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~music/nyquist/
Kimberle Crenshaw's theory of intersectionality has been debunked using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that was released just before she released her work into the world back in 1989. If you want to see the debunking head here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6g6D3Cc-Wc (Antonio Moore)

Intersectionality, as described by its creator, is simplistic and misleading. It completely ignores black male incarceration because all of the labor statistics preclude them. Black men's suffering has been erased and its causing a generation (or more) of people to treat them like they are the white patriarchy and that they have privilege they really don't when you look at the data.

Intersectionality has taken demographic disparities in isolation, say white mens rights versus white womens rights, and applied them to black people without nuance to the difference between how white men and black men are treated by institutions in the US.

It's given cover for Feminists to look past racial inequity that is the basis for much of black women's suffering. Go watch the video and look at the data, tell me what you think they got wrong.
This actually violates the “personal attributes” rule. In my experience, this rule is enforced quite strictly — although you can still see the same targeting criteria under the “why did I see this ad” feature.

https://m.facebook.com/policies/ads/prohibited_content/perso...
The Simple Tricks to Make Your Website Blazing Fast
> having a romantic and sexual relationship is not a requirement for a happy life.

A romantic and sexual relationship is very much like having money. Money is not a requirement for a happy life. However, having enough money sure does make it much easier to have a happy life.

It is the same with romantic and sexual relationships. You can be happy without them, but having them is such a happiness multiplier that most people want them for very good reason.

Also it has important societal features. If people are poor and they see all the happy, rich people, and they don't think they have any way of getting money, all the psychology self-help telling them that they should be happy being poor, is not going to work. Eventually, a certain proportion will get resentful.

I think it is similar with singles, especially singles who want to be in a relationship but can't. Telling them that they don't need sexual relationships to be happy is not going to work, and will eventually lead to a lot of resentment.
I think it goes both ways. Women obviously do prefer partners who are successful, higher in socioeconomic hierarchy. Yet not being able to find a partner may lower one's self-esteem, which in turn may reduce the likelihood of doing things that increase chances of socioeconomic success.

I mean, advancing in life generally requires leaving your comfort-zone, but that may be hard if you lack confidence.
While I'm not sure about the sexual partners statistic, I certainly believe the age-range one. This is obviously anecdotal, but as someone with a large-ish social group in their late twenties it is extremely common to see women with partners in a bracket above them. This was true when I was in my early twenties and remains the same now.
The Instagram ads Facebook won't show you
I mean, if you just take it at face value, then it could be interpreted that way. I think the problem is that there isn't an easy soundbite that companies can put out to identify how they will impact equality of opportunity, so they take the easy way to seem 'woke' or whatever other adjective you want to put on it, and attack with equality of outcome. I'm not trying to have a 'no true scotsman' sort of thing, but profit-driven companies are not a great measuring tool for most social issues.

I guess, what I'm saying is, that the outcome being 'only xy% women in tech with a goal of 50/50' is an easily digestible way of saying, women do not have the same opportunity as men to get into tech. But it's harder for companies to outline the steps to ensure those opportunities than it is for them to proclaim that goal.

>We can see for example in scandinavia that you get unequal outcomes if you amplify the equality of opportunities.

Absolutely. (I actually had to look through my post history because I wondered if you were another person who brought up that statement!) What I said to them was, "And that's fair. My argument isn't that it needs to be split and completely equal. It's that the freedom to choose needs to be equal, and the playing field needs to be level, so that who is and who isn't in 'field a' is, in fact based on merit and not arbitrary classification at birth such as gender and ethnicity."
He has abrasive behaviour due to his circumstances. The author has the choice of overlooking the negatives and empathizing with him (pity), or rejecting his behaviour regardless of why (hate).

Both reactions can be rationalized and he has the ability to choose which way he leans.
OKCupid used to have a post of sort of barebones statistical analysis of what men considered "average" versus women's outlook. It was ... enlightening.
> there is no practical way to “tax and redistribute” sex.

But there is a way to improve supply: give dignity to prostitution.
> but how do I persist my programs?

(save-image 'your-fun)
Hilariously, I'm thinking of doing that(using SSH over port 80) at my school.
Some negotiations probably happened behind the scenes.

BOX, INC. v. DROPBOX, INC. | United States Patent and Trademark Office [1]

[1] https://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91200450&pty=OPP&eno...
Quotas guarantee opportunity they don’t guarantee outcome.
Could be seen as ironic, but I frame it more in the light of being critical of something, yet also understanding the value it can bring.

I may be critical of industrial farming, large corporate environmental policies and/or Facebook, but I still might buy corn, own a Toyota and use Facebook to keep up with friends overseas.

I think it can be super hard to take an ideological position at the expense of functionality (obviously depends on how strongly you hold your views, and what the cost of forgoing engagement with that company/person is).
And they are building signal for peddling their ecoin?
Masculinity isn't toxic. It becomes toxic when it blames women for its problems.

Feminism is all for men talking about their issues. It practically begs them to. It is absolutely, positively not feminist to tell men that you're not enough if you can't get a woman.

That doesn't, however, pose an obligation on any woman to listen to you. It doesn't matter whose fault it is that you can't get a woman; it does matter that it's no woman's job to make sure you get one. Exactly what that will require is up to a billion different factors -- but "blames women" is going to be an enormous red flag.

Your suffering is real. You absolutely don't have to just suck it up. Go talk about it. If you don't have a friend you trust, try a therapist -- they're paid to do that. But be prepared for the fact that if your plan is to blame feminism, a good therapist is going to ask you to reconsider your underlying assumptions. And if your friends are just there to affirm for you that the reason you don't have a woman is the fault of the women -- there's a reason the word "toxic" came to be applied.
Which contradicts Facebook's written policy, so I doubt it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27040800

(although Instagram could have different rules)
Python is “supported” but if you want to write a new program in Python you need approval from the area tech lead ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Traditionally, you had _decreasing_ returns to scale. What's new with digital technologies is _increasing_ returns to scale. Very counter-intuitive for traditional economists - or even business people. People like Gates, Bezos, Brin & Page, Zuckerberg and so on have ridden this for all its worth. Let's out distance them as much as we can before they figure this out. Whether competitors or regulators.

That said, I like the story about someone observing Gates at, I think, a graduation ceremony where Gates had brought along a biography of Rockefeller (John D.). Did Gates know before or after the fact that MS had in fact used a competitive strategy comparable to Standard Oil?

Meaning, unlike increasing returns to scale that was something for which there was an historical precedent. The basic idea being: when my competitors revenues go up, my revenues also go up. A fatal long-term proposition for those competitors.
I think relational "age brackets" play a huge role in the incel phenomenon. Let's assume that by convention the male partner in an adult relationship has to be 0 to 6 years older than the female.

This means that a female of 22 years can look for a partner between 22 and 28 years. A male at the same age can only look for 18-22 year olds (consent age, maturity of younger females) resulting a 33% smaller age range for potential partners.

The male "hunting range" is further diminished by the fact that they cut the ties to their high school at the age of 19 (college, job). This means they lose access to younger potential partners and have more equally aged women in their environment, who are likely more attracted to older males.
ber: Berber

ln: Bantu Lingala

ku: Kurdish
Many of those responsibilities have moved into the domain of the Product Owner / Scrum Master roles, which can work pretty well in my experience.
Even without a business account, you can click the 'why are you showing me this ad' button on FB and it'll give you similar text (although sometimes it's more vague depending on how the ad is targeted)
I hope work isn't a net-netagive, but there are always things that must be done that you don't want to do. Sometimes you can hire someone else, but often you cannot.
Yeah, no, you are wrong. We are social animals. We haven't evolved to be happy alone. My wife is my best friend. I am absolutely the most happy when my best friend is around and the least happy when she is away. I love doing things with her, talking with her, etc. I have tons of hobbies and interests that don't involve her. I could easily fill my days with those things. But frankly they aren't on the same level as my wife in terms of generating happiness, not by a long shot. And I don't think it is co-dependence. It's just best friends enjoying being together.
I'm really worried for my teenage son. Dating was brutal when I was doing it 20 years ago, and as far as I can tell, it's gotten so, so much worse since. Modern dating can't literally be "winner take all", but it sure looks like it's getting close.
>if you manage to write some code solving some problem, you at least memorized a solution and somewhat understood it

Or got someone else to do it for you.

I think you underestimate the skill of interviewers. You can learn a lot about a person from one directed conversation, if you want to.
A million dollar startup idea:

Instead of a spreadsheet, use ML to predict if you will get sex or an excuse. Predict the excuse with a confidence level, and add suggestions on what to do for breaking the pattern. Happy coding :)
Right. I believe that is the place where the American side was (on paper) consuming hundreds or thousands of times the normal rate of Canadian cigarettes.

What was happening was that the cigarettes were being sold as export items (so little/no Canadian tax paid), exported to the American side, then smuggled back into Canada via the Canadian side.
When you use the word "codependent", what do you mean?
On Basecamp: You are what you do, not what you say or write
I remember reading about being able to pull a fuse to disable cellular connectivity on Teslas a few years back and you could also opt-out of data collection but it was apparently an involved process over email.

Has anyone been through going 'radio silent' in a Tesla more recently?
I think it really depends on your background. For people with a questionable job history, poor credentials, modest intelligence, a speech impediment, and a criminal background self funding to Raman increases in difficulty less than working directly for Facebook. However, ridding the VC train has a lot of the same dependencies as working for Facebook, but is vastly more difficult.

The same is true of networking and friends and family financing. I might look at scraping together a ~200k seed round as trivial, but that’s not true for everyone. On the other hand if 5 of your collage friends are working a FANG companies that’s also a huge leg up.
Just to add, 99th percentile latency to the institution processes is an ok metric, but 99th percentile latency to personal or departmental processes is a naive and bad one.

If you are not making an effort to be complete on what you are measuring, you'll probably want to put more 9s there.
You're probably thinking of Marxism-Leninism, though it's hard to know without knowing what country you're talking about. I'm not even sure what a "Marxist" country could possibly entail. They'd dedicate all resources to analyzing society through the lens of historical materialism?
Humans are social animals. The size of our brains, ability to use language, are all "nature's" solutions to social problems.

That women are deep down attracted to men of status is hard-wired, and the result of thousands of years of natural selection.

The nexus among status-seeking behavior, current economic realities, and the changing marketplace of dating, is the primary driver behind "incels".

In other words, nature is a significant factor in this problem.
That's not enough. One of the often espoused counterarguments is "do happy people marry more, or does marriage make people happier?". You'd have to continuously check happy people and keep a control group from marrying. Checking just the widowers doesn't account for the severity of the loss.
Unfortunately major religions seem to approach this subject with a cudgel. I think a more charitable reading of their approach is often recognizing that sexual incompatibility is just cause for (otherwise taboo) divorce.
do you have more information on this? what's it called? this one? http://caroadcharge.com/
California has really been pushing the idea that all their students are equal, while quietly opening more charter and magnet schools to support the students that are "more equal than others", it's just plain inefficient to split the levels of student achievement into completely separate campuses instead of just different classes.