skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There may have been more opportunity for subtle management beyond a dictated top down policy of no politcs/religion at work, but at the end of the day it is clear that the two employees being described by OP needed to go.

Based on the extreme degree of ... inflammation ... fanned by twitter, fb, etc I would say that people who are not able to keep their opinions under control beyond an occasional two person conversation are the ones who need to seek some sort of counseling.

There are conversations and then there are youtube meltdowns. I have no desire to work with the latter. You speak of professionalism and respect. In the diverse world we live in keeping to oneself seems the only reasonable path for the time being.
I've been saying this from the start: the well of issues is infinitely deep as soon as you decide that multiple tenants running on the same physical hardware inferring something about another is a vulnerability. I assert, but cannot rigorously prove, that it is not possible to design a CPU such that execution of arbitrary instructions has no observable side-effects, especially if the CPU is speculating.

I don't know what that spells for cloud hosting providers - maybe they have to buy a lot more CPUs so every client can have their own, or commission a special "shared" SKU of CPU that doesn't have any speculative execution - but I know for me, if I have untrusted code running on my CPU, I've already lost. I could then care less about information leakage between threads.

We're going to wind up undoing the last 20 years of performance gains in the name of 'security', and it scares me.
> But I also like being able to get food from small restaurants from different cultures.

Right now, that only happens because some people aren’t lucky enough to be born in the right house. People don’t work nights and weekends for paltry wages out of their desire to serve people food.

So it would hurt consumers. But it would help those who provide to the consumers.

Imagine how expensive food would be if the people on this forum demanded to be paid “fairly” for weekend and evening work.
The most important point in this article is that just two small changes to Apple's rules would radically improve support for web apps on iOS.

https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

1. Rule 2.5.6: "Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript."

Chrome for iOS is not real Chrome; Firefox for iOS is not real Firefox. Chrome/Firefox for iOS are just UI skins around WebKit, Safari's browser engine. They're not allowed to ship Blink/Gecko for iOS.

If Apple would just remove rule 2.5.6, Google and Mozilla could ship real Chrome and real Firefox, allowing users to choose their own browser on their own terms.

Users could switch from Safari to Chrome to workaround Safari's many bugs (documented here in TFA). Safari would have to fund the work to fix those bugs to compete. Safari would have to be better, or at least good enough, to compete.

iOS users are stuck on IE, even if they switch to "Firefox," and that just sucks.

2. Rule 4.2.2: "Other than catalogs, apps shouldn’t primarily be marketing materials, advertisements, web clippings, content aggregators, or a collection of links."

This rule forbids web apps in the App Store. If you try to package up a web app with a minimal iOS Swift wrapper, Apple might approve it, if they fail to notice what you're doing, but they'll typically reject it, claiming that your app is a "web clipping" under rule 4.2.2.

I'll bet you've never heard of a "web clipping," but the idea is that you can't have an app that's "just" a copy of a web page. But what if the web page is a web app, full of features? No matter. If your app is nothing but a wrapper for your web site, that's a "web clipping," and Apple can and will reject your app for that.

(Whenever anyone mentions this, someone pipes up to say, "Huh? This must be wrong. I submitted a web app with a minimal wrapper and Apple approved it." Lucky you that they didn't catch you, but each time you push an app update, you run the risk that Apple will notice the problem next time.)

Two little rules. Apple really, really ought to fix this.
I wonder how much of this could have been avoided if he hadn’t confused the pyramid of hate with a flow chart.
I would think they would both not advertise these for locating stolen items as well as warn people not to retrieve items they suspect have been stolen.

Retrieving stolen items can be very dangerous, and Apple would want no liability from that.
This was domain squatted by phishers, so that is no longer a safe mirror actually
Get real, they're for children.
CC0 Public Domain Image Search Coming to WordPress
Hat off, deep bow. Haven't seen such clarity of exposition in decades, if ever.

Pity it's about technology on the way out, but hey, "perfection is achieved on the edge of collapse".

P.S. Learned a few things, and I'm even more amazed that all this actually works and gets things moving at over 100 mph ... looks like a very clever Rube Goldberg joke.
> People say "If a business can't afford to pay a living wage, then they should close"

I have a cookie company that raised the pay after we opened our 2nd location (economies of scale, buying in bulk, etc).

Its in my interest as an employer to raise the pay since it typically raises the buy-in from employees. Companies like Netflix and Costco pay at the top of the competitive range and it allows you to run a tighter ship.

Payroll is a cost, sure, but it's also an investment if you can afford it. Raising the minimum wage removes that competitive advantage for me.

It takes time to bootstrap a company. It still only pays me half an engineering salary after 3 years.
You could think of it that way, but funds such as those created by the lottery are less discretionary than the general fund -- so isn't this a good thing?
Yea I’m in a bad mood, and that’s not their fault.

Fair enough to call that out.
Researchers are closing in on long Covid
Well, "to be fair", a phone's battery would die in a few days. Airtags are supposed to last for a year.

Why work so hard to pretend these things are the same and therefore deserve to have the same protections applied when it is obvious with a few moments of thought that they are completely different things?
Different weather reports in Australia. How’s weather reporting still so hard?
Even the mayor of Portland (who originally praised the protests) is asking the public to help stop the folks doing violence. How is this a right talking point? Are you ignoring reality?
Because housing in WA has gone up like crazy so a ton of residents are sitting on huge capital gains. The feds might exempt $250k of gain, but they’d get hit in WA.

We can’t have people to hit the housing lottery pay a dime of those gains as taxes, can we?
I think it's interesting that Microsoft got into hot water in 2001 for (among other things) including Internet Explorer in Windows, thereby abusing its dominant position in the OS market to dominate the browser market.

Microsoft very sensibly argued that including (and indeed integrating) a web browser was a logical evolution of the modern operating system.

In 2021, Apple (Safari/iOS/macOS) and Google (Chrome/Android/ChromeOS) would presumably agree with Microsoft's position. Mozilla might take issue.

I wonder what would have happened if Microsoft hadn't been dissuaded (somewhat at least) from completely integrating Windows and IE in the early 2000s. Perhaps Windows would be a lot closer to ChromeOS. And I wonder if Microsoft would have been more competitive with Google, Apple, and other companies if they hadn't been the target of antitrust action.
Just weird to me that people think like this. The obvious issue is poor management and nothing else
That it is about professionalism doesn’t seem to be in dispute.

Who’s professionalism might be, though.
It can be seen that way. But it can also be seen this way: I agreed to come work for this company, and now, I have to deal with unwanted evangelism from my coworkers. They should be free to say whatever they want on their own time, but I shouldn’t be forced to listen to it / deal with it when all I want to do is the damn job I signed up for.

Maybe it’s the captive audience that is the distinguishing factor. I’m not sure.

For example, I work on a software platform where our customers regularly host content that I find offensive and sometimes even disturbing. But I’m not forced to watch/listen to it, so I’m fine with it.
Apple Is Terrible for Your Privacy
> But your release build is not done constantly

Some people (are they the minority? probably?) cut release builds frequently enough for it to be a big pain point.

> and so you have to sign in and accept an agreement - [which isn't] a big deal

It probably is though. Have _any_ agreements you've accepted in the last, say, 5yrs not had blatantly overbearing or malicious terms?
DHH says the trouble didn’t come from objecting to the list. In fact, he’s disavowed it repeatedly. He said the trouble was that the employee said that the list was not merely unprofessional but was one step on a ladder of racial oppression that leads to genocide.

It’s one thing to say someone is acting unprofessionally. It’s another thing altogether to accuse them of being on a path to genocide. If I did that to someone when it was so clearly uncalled for, I would be an asshole and my relationship with that person would be strained from that point forward.

If you don’t like that strain in your workplace, you try to draw a line on speech. It’s not something I’d want from the government, but it seems appropriate for a workplace.
Ah, I see, it is a data ingress problem not a UI/UX/visualization problem and you are in that awkward gap between RAM and disk bandwidths. So, you want a scheme to reduce ingress bandwidth which would allow you to store more data since you can not offload it anywhere else. From this perspective you would want a log optimized for useful entropy per unit storage which you can translate into a different data structure offline later on that is optimized for UI/UX. The most likely scenarios for that would require a very low level integration with the logging infrastructure itself and be either, as you say, a lossless streaming compression or some kind of lossy aggregation/compression, probably domain-specific, that retains the important data. The key problem here being creating an algorithm fast enough to operate at those data rates given that you get at most a few clocks per byte and no way of pushing the data to more parallel compute otherwise you would be able to just push it into storage.
I could see apple or Google outspendimg the chinese government.

Not worrying about profit is a function of wealth rather than government in particular
I think that's OP's point.
Once I was hired at a company founded and run by boomers, and on the first day noticed several stacks of magazines like "Hustler" etc. just sitting on the floor in a manager's office, while we conversed with other colleagues some of whom were women. This was probably 15 years ago, and I didn't quit or anything, but let's not exaggerate the virtues of old people.

If anything this C-suite freakout seems like a result of too much Covid isolation. Lots of executives are hyper-extroverts who need lots of coddling from people they've hired for that task. Some needs just aren't fulfilled over Zoom. This last year set these super entrepreneur dudes [and, to be fair, their top-percentile coding-god employees too] on tilt, and they're lashing out trying to get back on track. It's their company; if they want to sacrifice some jobs and profits on the altar of their warped personalities how can we blame them?
This sounds exactly like what OP indicated.
There is no long term if you can’t keep the lights on
You cannot realistically make a CPU invulnerable to performance analysis

And you don't need to.

There is really very few uses for real multi-system vs multi-process shared systems.

Take a look on that whole "cloud" thing.

All people I knew who worked in cloud hosting tell that most system are ridiculously overprovisioned, effectively nullifying any economic justification for a shared system
What are alternatives to controlling negative externalities? My understanding is that they are by definition not fixable by the free market, and anything that is not the free market is government essentially.
Nobody is bringing politics to the workplace. But the person refusing to use the pronouns is kind of being an asshole?

I mean, it's a workplace, not a school. You don't get to choose how you call other people, period. Other people's pronouns and names don't really matter to your day to day job, just call them whatever they want and go on with your life.
If you've got a codebase where the intent of the code isn't clear, where you can't track bugs, and where you can't fix them without being confident you're not breaking other stuff, surely those are all fundamental problems worth addressing?
> The ability to afford adequate housing, food, and clothing. I'm not saying we should mandate people can afford a 1500 sq. ft. home, ribeye steaks every evening, and Ralph Lauren Polo threads, but how about at least a one bedroom, one bathroom apartment; nutritious, nourishing food; Walmart clothing at a minimum.

Now, what does adequate mean? I guess a place to sleep, a place to clean oneself, food and clothing seems like a reasonable bar for a wage above poverty. Are there many full time jobs in the US that do not allow that?

> Removing the "tipping" system. Increase prices such that an employee can afford the above mentioned necessities.

Removing tipping and increasing prices beyond the tipping, it reduces to just increasing prices. I guess not very smart people create these enterprises, if only they hiked prices… And seriously, they definitely increases them, it is just a necessity. But I would not call this as a change in the model.

> I think the industry will go here no matter what changes we do or do not make to policy, business models, etc.

We do not have to necessary speed it up. People are already having difficult with keeping up with the changes.

> We either decide these people are expendable, or that they are human beings worthy of a baseline of a dignified life. I define a dignified life as the ability to have at least the minimums I described above.

Are there really only two options? Is not that a bit simplistic? And what does that even mean, do you think we should provide everyone with the job that ensures they have the mentioned stuff. What if they have different needs. And what if they do not qualify for any job, should we provide them with the exact stuff that people who work 40h a week get, or the equivalent in money? How is that fair for those who do these boring jobs.
Personally I’d have no problem if Apple was forced to give all streaming music services like Spotify a sweetheart (below cost) percentage, say 5%, which wouldn’t cover the totality of merchant fees, gift voucher markups, and dealing with fraud.
You are leaving something out that seems quite relevant to me, which is that the list wasn’t just objected to as unprofessional but that the conversation was escalated to the highest possible level, linking it to genocide.
Most small businesses require the owner to take significant financial risk, or work for free for years or more.

Each growth stage presents tough choices of additional risk, as well.

An employee doesn't shoulder any of this. There is a world of difference!
Elementary OS 6 beta
I've never liked the idea we should expect businesses to provide a living wage.

If we, as a society, think there is some sort of minimum standard for living. (We should) Then we, as a society, should pay for it.

Increasing minimum wage seems like a roundabout unfair way of doing that via selective inflation. Which as far as I can tell would be largely a wealth transfer from the middle class to the lower class. Who spends a larger % of income at places people make minimum wage?

I think the government should guarantee some minimum wage and top people who don't earn that. Obviously a lot of moral hazard issues and complications with a system like that but I think it is better to have businesses worry about employing people and governments worry about welfare.

What seems to always be left out of these "if a business can’t pay a living wage, should it be a business?" discussions is what exactly are people going to do instead?

I'm ok subsidizing people's labour. I'm not ok subsidizing people's leisure.
I wonder if this is evidence of friction in the labor market. Maybe all this terribleness had built up, but most people won't change paths in a big way because it upends their life for a while. You're not going to learn job B if you're already in job A because, even if job B is better, the first year of B will suck more than A while you're a newbie.

But then a pandemic comes along and takes away job A, meaning that there's not extra friction to leaving job A. You've already left! All these people have gone to job B (or location B, or family arrangement B, ...) which was better all along, it's just that the change had too much additional overhead in normal times.

Now you have places which depended on that friction wondering where everybody went.
Currently, US capitalists exploit workers both in the US and in poorer countries, with the later being super-exploited. Under this arrangement, the vast majority of the value created by both groups of workers is captured by a handful of capitalists.

A socialist US would cease exploiting other countries (including China) and instead pursue mutually beneficial trade (much like China does). This would likely include some amount of reparations and re-building of local industry, easily funded with the vast amount of value no longer stolen from all workers.
I agree that a leader should not single individuals out in a public way. That’s wrong.

However, if DHH’s verbatim quote of his response is accurate, it sounds like things had gotten out of hand with this company’s culture.

If a leader says “this is unacceptable - we will do better going forward”, that should be enough in this kind of situation. But apparently it wasn’t for the employee that you allude to.

A third of the company had joined some D&I committee and that committee apparently felt that its scope extended to the entire operations of the company. It sounds incredibly disruptive.
> Honest question: why do discussions about minimum wage in the U.S. never propose having teenagers having a different minimum to adults?

Because its effect would be a transfer of jobs from working class adults to middle class kids.
> You can use short-living branches to avoid repetitive merge of master

> No, this doesn't work. It does if you have very few developers, each working on individual branches. But when multiple developers are working on multiple-feature branches together, that doesn't scale. We encourage backporting master often into your branch to limit the risk of conflicts, and stay on top of the latest changes. For example, we continuously update dependencies. We also merge and ship on average 10 times a day.

Those are development branches that should be treated like master/main and developers should be writing short feature branches which are merged into those branches.

And in the simplest case when you start work on N+1 then that becomes your main branch, and you fork off the stable N branch. Both of those are treated the same and devs should do PRs into them. Those PRs should ideally be simple things that are easy to review which should be single commits. This enables squash+rebase on those daily private branches.

You can also fork off a nuclear reactor branch which is long-lived, occasionally merge back from the main branch and then merge into main later. I'd discourage that since you have the issues of merging and porting, potentially both ways. But again you shouldn't have devs directly committing to that branch and then pushing, they should be opening PRs of their work into it, when its merged, then other devs can pull that branch and rebase their local work on top of it.

I've helped out individual devs with commits on top of their feature branches from time-to-time, but I consider that they've got the ultimate "write lock" on those branches. Typically as a result of actually chatting with them in zoom sometimes it might be faster to just push a commit with the work. But once that is done, its their private branch again, and I expect them to rebase and for me to have to deal with that if I look at it again.

EDIT: Also the long-lived feature branches are going to be impossible to adequately review when it is time to merge them back into main. That code review needs to be happening all along the way if that is your process. You can't adequately review 4 months of work by several devs once at the end of it all. They need to be doing that the whole time. That calls for a branch they're doing their own PRs and code review into.
Unfortunately we can no longer look at court decisions as arguments either way.

Large companies simply settle out of court in order to silence the facts.

- If they are wrong and are successful in getting out of it, they might walk away with a judge "confirming" that they did no wrong.

- If they are wrong and the evidence is overwhelmingly conclusive, they might write a cheque and walk away.

In either case the public does not have any convincing argument based on evidence. Therefore we have to go by subtext.

Apple was accused of slowing down the devices intentionally. They admitted the bare minimum (low power mode), then wrote a cheque that made the rest of the accusations go away.

To me, that's as convincing as a verdict by a judge.
Why not? Globally, they're a corporation like any other

It hits at a flaw in capitalism where rich people get to dictate what poor people do, but we generally don't mind that
GUTTS Limited Beta: A nutrition tracker that puts health before profit
Hello all,

This is a side project we've been working on for a few months. We wanted to understand how diets translate into health outcomes, but found that existing solutions had misaligned incentives.

To this end, we decided to build a product and business beholden entirely to the customer, not 3rd parties pushing vertical integration schemes.

Feedback is deeply appreciated, thanks!
There is nothing you can tweet that will improve the world. Lol
Lenin’s work more than a century ago is very much still relevant today. If you haven’t read it, give it a try https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/
The franchise part is interesting, although McD’s owning them or not doesn’t matter as the cash flow is what’s relevant. In this case I wonder what the terms are for franchise owners in EU vs USA and if they account for higher wage laws.

There are a number of reasons corporate entities operate certain or many stores at a loss. Very well known example is flagship locations that are locally at a loss, but earn for the brand on other ways. Example being Times Square NYC locations. This still makes sense at a franchise model, but less likely I bet.

EU isn’t a flag ship obviously, but I also didn’t say loss. Loss leading is similar, but not a perfect analogy (sure).

My earlier example still holds, even with franchisees per the term, but you should expand your bad event set to loss or low profits. On the net, being in Europe is worth it despite higher operating costs, but maybe USA operating costs need to be lower as a result.

I mean this all to say, there are so many factors involved such that it’s a false premise argument without controlling for intra-market differences.
Would you also have zero issue with a talented person who felt passionately about gun rights, free-speech or banning abortion?