skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It can be generalized. Sex drive is a biological imperative. To suppress it takes a lot of effort and adaptation. Workarounds take a lot of effort.

When you buy certain species of pets, you will only be able to buy them in pairs. Holding them solo is considered animal cruelty. I do consider holding humans solo cruelty, and people advocating things like "the world doesn't owe you a companion" cruel. Maybe the world isn't able to provide, but it should endavour to.
To figure out the causality, you'd need an experiment where people are randomly removed from relationships though random external events.

We do have an imperfect example of this, in the case of widowers. When someone is widowed, does their happiness tend to increase, remain level, or decrease?
https://www.perforce.com/blog/vcs/ai-code-review-evolution
Bay Area freeway traffic has rebounded, but congestion has not
You are correct. It's one of many sleight of hand tricks used to exaggerate the impact of beef. For some reason, certain parties don't want harm reduction policies on these issues, they want you to stop eating Beef altogether.
Signal should sell this exact design on a targeted t-shirt and then advertise that.
Via USB you can still use a USB blocker, but if you connect via Bluetooth, nothing can protect you, correct?
In my view, the categories they provide, and even the question itself perpetuates racism.

I acknowledge that the data is useful for understanding communities. But the question should be reframed to not reinforce racism.
No. Marxism is for the abolish ment of social classes, with classes defined as contradictory groups related to relationships of production.

So a Marxist would want, for example, the employer/employee distinction to be abolished. But there would be no issue with inequality in the employee class, an employee may very well produce 3-4 times more value than another.

This is something that Marx explicitly wrote about - he thought that different people had different needs and abilities and thus should receive sometimes very different amounts of resources. The examples he gave would be someone that works much faster and better that someone else, or someone that has children to raise.
Nice presentation. I have made my own list, if anyone is interested: https://github.com/r0f1/linuxhelp
> The “problem” with high level languages is the complexity of their runtimes - you can’t easily reason about what and how will get optimized.

Yes, agreed. This is the point the author was making, and noting that we have room to actually improve the languages, and make some basic optimizations easier to think about and code explicitly.

> object reuse via pools may be even worse than creating non-escaping objects in a tight loop.

When does this happen in practice, and how likely is it? What does it imply about object lifetime if your objects don't escape, and why wouldn't you be re-using an object on the stack or local scope instead? How often would replacing a non-escaping object creating with a re-use that escapes be a realistic alternative? I'm sure a contrived case can be setup, but this seems like an unlikely explanation to me as general advice. It's bad practice to hope your objects don't escape, and difficult to ensure. In general, if you want higher performance, then avoid using new in hot spots. The difference is often an order of magnitude in an flat O(n) loop.
Though you can't have text in the image, you could put the target filters as the post's text and use the image to grab the attention.
>Her response was that they had so much "male privilege" and that they have no excuse for underperforming. That, thus, they should still be _ahead_ of women, presumably, despite the goal being that they... shouldn't be.

This will be downvoted and poorly received, but the fact is that women despise weak men. If a man is in a poor state, most women will be visibly disgusted by him. A man generally should not expect sympathy from women, because most of the time he'll get scorn instead.
Is Brownian Motion deterministic or not?

If your view is that Brownian Motion is not deterministic then does that not contradict the idea 'that cause and effect holds in a closed system' as any sort of absolute?
The no text rule has not been enforced to disable an adaccount for years now. It merely de-ranks you. Source: Worked in advertising.
Subaru is partially owned by Toyota and is slowly being absorbed into the company.
Calling the DNA and the life it produced worthless seems a bit simplistic. Consider e.g. worker bees, which are infertile and rarely reproduce, but are certainly not worthless -- they are crucial to the success of the hive. This is an example of kin selection. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection
> I seriously doubt my car has records of my emails, pictures, videos, and social media feeds even though it has Android Auto.

Even if you car does not, your phone does. So the phone being connected to the car during the time when the accident occurred, could lead to checking that you were in fact, watching unboxing videos on Netflix at the moment the wreck occurred while you were in the driver's seat.
There is a reason why not, and it’s that mail clients reply based on the header fields, not the envelope recipients.

A separate “blind forward” field in a mail client could be a nice addition, but it too falls apart because drafts might be started in one client and completed in another.

In practice, deviating from existing MTA and MUA behaviour as specified in RFCs - included the handling of the Bcc header - produces innumerable edge cases and interoperability gotchas, which is why we try not to fuck with them much. The worst case scenario being, all too commonly, some well-intended script installed by a frustrated sysadmin that tries to fix an impedance mismatch and ends up inadvertently creating either a software laser or an open relay.
You mean older?
"Elementally electrical action" ain't no well defined concept I've ever heard of.
> these hard statistical realities have increasingly robbed me of the romantic impulse

I think you should reflect on how sensible it is to apply population-wide statistical trends to your personal situation (which is not statistical at all). If you follow the statistics you should not start a business or go to college[1]. I really urge you to take seriously that your own personal experience is more valid than statistical instruments and that, even if by some measurement you are "below average" (whatever that means) you can still be happy and healthy.

I agree that men are doing "worse" than they have been and I do think your girlfriend's attitude towards men who are struggling is not in line with egalitarian principals. I also think that you're promoting a view of society where winners taking all is expected, and in that kind of society, you would expect men to be distributed away from the "middle" of society. After all, if you imagine it's a zero sum competition, then the winning men would push the losing men towards the bottom of society as much as possible to protect their gains. I think this is worth pointing out because I do not think we need to follow that model of society.

Humans will secure the resources they can in situations where zero-sum resource distribution is enforced, but altruism and reciprocity are also possible if we build systems which allow them. If you live life like you either win it all or your life is a waste, then it will almost certainly feel like a waste[2]. You do not have to do that.

[1] https://erikrood.com/Posts/college_roi_.html

[2] This doesn't ignore the many people who are at various kinds of social and material disadvantage. The statistics are real, they just don't mean that men are disadvantaged as a whole.
did you read their home page?

""State-of-the-art end-to-end encryption (powered by the open source Signal Protocol) keeps your conversations secure. We can't read your messages or listen to your calls, and no one else can either. Privacy isn’t an optional mode — it’s just the way that Signal works. Every message, every call, every time.""

Have you observed them get sued for records and be unable to deliver?
Bye Bye Hey
> it's certainly possible to have an idea they didn't have

No, it's not.

It's possible to have an idea they didn't have, but not a good one. It's incredibly arrogant to think you, a random person who doesn't work for a company, has a good and novel idea that their 100,000 employees didn't think of.

And what is the value of an idea with no understanding of their internal operations anyway?

> that's a pretty pessimistic take

OP is asking how to accomplish something that is so uncommon, I have never heard of it in 20 years in the software industry. Never. It doesn't even make logical sense for the company in question.

It's not pessimistic to tell them it isn't going to happen. It's just basic reality. Reality is deflating sometimes -- sorry.

> It's even more possible that they quickly entertained the idea but never pursued it, for a myriad of reasons.

Yes, this is absolutely possible. If it's a good idea, it's actually likely.

And that means it's even less likely that OP is going to be the magical key that opens the lock.

No FAA(M)G-size company has ever said, "Well, this is a great idea, but we just don't have the one person we need to pursue it!" They have the people, and if it were a good idea, they'd pursue it.
>>Way to dogpile on people when they're down.

Married people live longer on average compared to single people.

https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20191010/marriage-t...

Just wanted to add to the dog pile. ;)
This is both an ad for Signal and an ad for Facebook Ad's ability to target depending on who is reading it.

What I mean is that for your average consumer, they'll read this and be horrified that Facebook is using the information they voluntarily gave Facebook to make money. But someone who is buying ads will read this same thing, be impressed by just how tightly Facebook can target, and put $10K into an Ad Account to try it out.

As to me, I use Facebook, I am willing to see ads within Facebook using the information I share with Facebook but where I draw the line is Facebook "leaking" into my wider web browsing history (either tracking me, or using my non-Facebook browsing to advertise to me on Facebook). Therefore, I use Mozilla's Facebook Container extension and blacklist Facebook/Instagram's "Share" tracking buttons.

I also access Facebook from a mobile browser rather than app and use Signal instead of Facebook Messager, to limit Facebook's ability to track my location and other phone meta-data.
Well unless you light them on fire?

That said I wonder if this isnt because its easier to restrict supply with branded artificial diamonds, compared to mined ones. If they expect the diamond rich regions of africa to stabilize in the next two decades, then they have to move away from natural diamonds asap.
Another is s7, one C file to embed. I use it for computer music, I love it. It's a Scheme that is heavily influenced by Common Lisp.
I completely agree - it's why I love the title "Software Engineer in Test". QA should be a critical engineering role that supplements the team - not a place that people see as a stepping stone for later roles.

There should be the same career progression possible in your QA department as any other engineering department.
This is that facebook project though (not just the same name), see here: https://github.com/rome/tools/blob/main/website/src/blog/pos...

Seems like the author could take it with him when leaving facebook, which is nice.
It hurts to admit, but I would probably actually buy one of these
"cuddle parties"... It's about as close to the real thing as jerking off to pornhub is to the happy marriage with a loving partner. It may take care of the immediate physiological urge, but that's it.
Prodigies absolutely exist. But this proposal is also so woefully uninformed as it rejects a basic fact: some folk are more intelligent than others. We don't know why -- it's both nature and nurture -- but we know it exists because humanity has observed it since forever.

Equity in education isn't to see a kid that's doing well and think, "well fuck that kid, we'll just make him bored out of his mind and ultimately become disinterested as we force them to sit through another year of class on a subject they already mastered."

Rather, it's simply to redirect resources (read: money to hire more teachers so there's a smaller student to teacher ratio) to the schools whose students are achieving the least. And teachers are the ones that get to make that determination.
I'd be surprised if there weren't different tiers of advertising accounts just to prevent normal people from having access to this. For example, you have to spend at least $10k before you get the next level of targeted information.
Thank you, I just bought two! But any idea for if you're connected via Bluetooth?
The rule doesn't exists anymore. Ads with a lot of text simply get penalized when it comes to distribution.
Because your threat model is not everyone's threat model.
Sorry the links didn't format right. Maybe they will in a comment?

[1] Longer version of this post: https://www.dropbox.com/s/1d96l1ood9re55h/Ask%20HN%20Re-esta...

[2] Full post-uni work history: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/11x8um0lpccji7wmvnlk6/Post-un...
I was about to write that. This is very visible in operational teams.

Depending on what is going on, an operational team will spend 20 - 40% of their time firefighting or at tightening screws and oiling wheels - maintaining systems. Sometimes it's a good week and it's just 10%. Sometimes you launched a new product, and it's 60% because everything is failing.

As a conclusion from there, it's not a good idea to schedule more than 50% - 60% of deliverables with deadlines, because the right outage is going to toss those estimates really quickly.

That's in itself the definition of sufficient slack. If you don't have that, prod fails and no one is around to fix it. If you do, someone can usually start poking at it quickly.
For any that haven't seen it- a great essay on advertising and how it relates to cancer: http://jacek.zlydach.pl/blog/2019-07-31-ads-as-cancer.html
That's a relief. Thanks for the context!
As I post this, four of the top ten apps on the Kenyan PlayStore are in clear violation of Google's own rules on payday loan apps and the current number one looks suspiciously like a pirate streaming service.

I can't say that I understand the scale of moderating the PlayStore and as others have mentioned, this blogpost is vague with its numbers. Judging by what I can see, the current system is not doing enough.
I don't think you're arguing against what the parent actually said. If you need your partner in order to be happy, and when they are not around you're unhappy, that is not healthy. Not healthy for you personally, and not healthy for your relationship. That's dependence (or codependence if it goes both ways), and that's not the same as simply missing someone when they're not around.

You can be 100% devoted to your partner and relationship but still be happy when the two of you are apart. A polyamorous relationship, or a person who has a whole other life completely separate from their partner, is not the only other option. You seem to be creating a false dichotomy here.

Pinning your happiness to the presence of another individual is not healthy. You cannot be with that person 100% of the time. And what if they die, or their feelings change and they don't want to be with you anymore? (Certainly either event would be devastating, but it should not destroy your only source of happiness.) How is it healthy for you to put all your emotional eggs in their basket? And even worse, how is it fair to the other person, to make that person an essential part of your constant happiness?
>pegging your happiness on something external to yourself - material wealth, social standing, another human being

You have incomplete and varying, but nonzero levels of control over all these things.

I agree with the whole "if you're not happy alone" rule of thumb but happiness isn't a binary. It's a scale. And amassing a little more wealth, becoming a little more respected, having a partner, all those things can add amounts of happiness that push someone from "unhappy" to "good enough". Look at the reverse case when people lose all that stuff if you really want to see how evident it is.
Agreed. This is also ancient wisdom. The major religions all maintain that spouses have a duty to sexually please each other.
> This is because low-income and minority students are more likely to be tracked low performing in lower grades

Are they actually lower performing or is this an effect of bias?

It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that children with less resources do worse. I thought the purpose of performance tracking was to give the ability to help those who were struggling. Instead, you're saying that it's more helpful to just not know who's struggling and that somehow creates more equality.
The goal and concept of Marxism is to remove economic capital as an input to the circumstantial function that defines a person's outcome. What inputs' weights should increase to replace it is open to interpretation.
In at least some jurisdictions, allowing someone to do this over a period of years can create an easement that has ongoing legal effect. You don't lose title to the land, but neither are you allowed to prohibit the neighbor from traveling over it.
In the US maybe. In the rest of the world, the PS2 had more than 10x more sales and most of the best games of the generation. The real disruption from Microsoft came with the 360 against the PS3.
No, just respond with "I stopped caring".

Maybe could also tack on that you count winters to tell your age.
Awk is nice when I need something more complex than just a straight up 'grep' (And has support for both basic and Perl regex) but I really think that sed is the best solution for almost all of the examples in just because of its readability vs standard regex and its power with streams.
> "No Text" rule in Facebook ad creatives.

Where can this rule be found? That seems like a really odd rule, and https://www.facebook.com/business/help/388369961318508?id=12... says the opposite:

"Avoid too much text on the image itself. We've found that images with less than 20% text perform better, though there is no limit on the amount of text that can exist in your ad image."
It's a learning moment for users who press Ctrl-s to save their work due to muscle memory from other environments. That's when they get a crash course in Ctrl-q and screen/tmux.
"To be ruled is both necessary and inherently discomfiting (as well as dangerous). For our rulers to be accountable to us softens its intrinsic humiliations, probably sets some hazy limits to the harms that they will voluntarily choose to do to us collectively, and thus diminishes some of the dangers to which their rule may expose us. To suggest that we can ever hope to have the power to make them act just as we would wish them to suggests that it is really we, not they, who are ruling. This is an illusion, and probably a somewhat malign illusion: either a self-deception, or an instance of being deceived by others, or very probably both." - John Dunn

>Regardless, I don't think a billionaire looking at the elected government of their country and saying "I know better than the people you elected, so I am justified in evading taxes and spending that money how I think it should be spent" is a morally justified position even if it is true.

What if the elected government is actually evil? Ever heard the quote, "When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty"? There are a number of dictators, aside from the obvious example, who were democratically elected. There are many countries who use their people's wealth to fund genocidal campaigns against minorities within their borders. Some of those countries are representative democracies.

If it is true that an individual knows better than the elected government and is more moral than them, and you still insist that their power (for what is wealth but liquid power?) be squandered or used for evil ends, I just don't know hwat to say to you. It is a baffling and honestly frightening position to take. To abnegate your own will and submit to that of the people, out of blind faith that they will be right. It is the core to the surrender to every lynch mob, every witch hunt, every moral panic that blinds people and initiates their frenzies of hate.

"We are not as good and smart as we like to think we are" - so we should just allow the zeitgeist to determine our morality and sink our intellect to the lowest common denominator? Is that really what you believe? And which of us, exactly, is "alleviating responsibility?" I place it on a broken system; you on a fallen people.
OP means that the top 20% of men are getting all of the attention in the dating market. it's a well known fact at this point. i think the numbers largely come from dating apps but they reflect real life pretty well (from my anecdotal experience)
worthless is a human value judgement. biologically things don't have a purpose. those with more successful traits on average passed these traits down.

evolution is just things happening. there's no goal, no purpose, no meaning.
Reduce the amount of text, theyll let you run it.
I don't know about second study or what flaws they had, but that definitely is possible if:

A) the men in the study are having "side chicks" i.e. in sexual relationship with multiple women at the same time.

B) women are more selective with whom they sleep with i.e. they rather not have sex than have sex with a "loser".

It only doesn't make sense if everyone are in monogameous relationships and everyone has sex as often as everyone else.

For the study cited in the post it could be different definitions of "commited relationship" i.e. maybe more of the young men don't view their relationships are serious, but the women who they are dating view it as such. But also I am not surprised that 20 year old women are dating/marrying 30 year old men, but that is seldom the other way around.
Try substituting 'crave' for 'need' there. You're assigning moral weight to something that acts more like hunger, or attempting to breathe whilst drowning.

People can adapt to this lack more gracefully than they can adapt to drowning, but it's not a thinking process being addressed here. This is an animal drive and you can't switch it off just because it's ungraceful.
> having a romantic and sexual relationship is not a requirement for a happy life.

This reminds me of rich people who think that money isn't that important.

In reality, loneliness is one of the leading causes of suicide.
You believe in quotas, you believe in equality of outcome.

In fact I could be inclined to agree with you in some ways; its more accurate to state that progressives don't believe in equality of outcome in much the same way as they don't really hold any disdain for racism/sexism or any of the other causes that claim to champion but they like the power that comes from doing so.

For example no progressive has any issues with an imbalance in genders in nursing; this of course contrasts brilliantly against theirs views on it in the tech industry.
I like this video based on a dancer's movements:

https://youtu.be/qAH0ZXtQTKI

It reminds me of one of my favorite works of film/animation, "Pas de deux".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WopqmACy5XI