skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Rather than being treated as rare phenomenal outliers, these unicorn companies are a necessity for venture capital funds to be successful. So when a startup takes those venture dollars, they are almost always going for a big exit, or they’ll be pressured by their investors to hyper-growth their way toward one. Extreme risk, extreme reward.

To expand on this: Venture capitalists are incentivized, by the nature of how they invest, to drive companies towards becoming unicorns and attempting the extreme-risk-extreme-reward scenario. If you put $10M towards a company, and it says "Great, we're stable and our employees are happy and productive and we're building the cool thing we wanted to build and we're about to get enough sales to break even" and it doesn't hire or grow, the investors won't see the $10M back for a very long time. That scenario is only slightly financially better than the company shutting down, and in practice, given that the investor needs to keep thinking about the company, being on its board, etc., it's not worth having that distraction.

So even if your company would be successful, if it's VC-funded, it's going to get pushed to be either hyper-successful or to fail.

And even if it's hyper-successful, it will probably experience mission drift. Early employees at Tiny Speck who wanted to build a neat MMORPG are probably very financially happy with Salesforce's acquisition of Slack, but all that remains of Glitch is a 404 page. (Read their shutdown announcement: https://www.glitchthegame.com/closing/) So if you're going into the startup because you're mission-driven instead of profit-driven, remember that the people who decide your mission are ultimately profit-driven.
Most laptop keyboards don’t have a Page Down key, though most that don’t will have Fn+Down emit Page Down. Space and Shift+Space are super useful on laptops especially.
What a mindless comment.

Realistically speaking, rent seeking is the only way present young and future generations are able to participate in economic "growth" effectively. The human population grows, but the chance to participate in the industries and locations with the highest ROI on human capital does not. In fact, wage stagnation and inflation have stunted ROI on human capital in many non-growth industries in developed countries already.

In fact, in my country where given the current trajectory of public policy I will see a huge net loss in pension benefits despite paying into the system more than any previoius generation in real terms already, without rent seeking through investing, I would literally end up poor as fuck and a slave to the state and would never have a chance to stop working short of just dying.

Rent seeking is how the current system works, get over it.
All news is fake propaganda, worse than the bots posting here
That's my diagnosis. I've tried on and off since at least 2006 to affect the course of that culture, to make managing R packages more tractable.

I'd say the R dev community was then actively hostile to a culture change to support any model other than individual contributors working at their desktop.
I journal most nights pretty much about whatever is bothering me emotionally. This helps me get it out there and be more conscious of underlying emotions. A lot of stress for me comes from bottling up emotions...

Also i like to go on long runs with no headphones. This helps me step back and process whatever is happening and think of new approaches to rough problems when I’m not in the weeds of the problem.

Anything that triggers boredom, IMO, is a healthy tool. Sometimes thats a day off in solitude on a long hike. Other times it’s just a vacation where I don’t bring my laptop.
"hey we need AI/VR for this!" - hahaha
The author of this article is astrophysicist not biologist or virologist. It appears to be propaganda for Chinese CCP!
Honest question: if I deposit ten billion dollars in my bank account at a regulated US bank, what happens to it? Is the bank not going to buy T-bills with it, or even commercial paper? What are the rules around this for regulated banks?
We also socialize and travel. I personally miss going to the office and interacting with coworkers.
> So if in another company a man discriminated against a woman, it increases the probability that the same thing is happening to the OP?

This is clearly not what anyone here is saying you should really take a moment to reevaluate your position. We're not talking about one man in one company but a historical and systemic suppression.

Additionally, you'll notice that the person you are responding to does not act or treat their colleagues differently, only that they consider where these noticed actions come from.
There’s barely any investigative reporting here. Reads more like an opinion piece.
Or takes forever, for some older/middle aged people, living in their own a bit isolated communities where there's no need to learn the new language
Also known as "generalizing from a single datapoint". And if not from literally a single datapoint, then from the datapoints implicitly cherry-picked from around you, aka your social bubble.
When currency is being devalued year after year, lost income (up to a certain amount) most certainly is an expense. The longer you sit out of the asset inflation game, the more you fall behind. So whatever the cause for you falling behind has to make up for it. Maybe I’m wrong, but that model has served me well.
Maybe it's an explore/exploit thing, social media is good for exploring but to build depth we should switch off the socials and hit the books every other week.
People from Caucasia?
True decentralization means you don't get to complain when Bitcoin is used to do everything you hate.

You don't get to complain when honest people lose cumulatively billions of their hard earned savings to scammers and hackers.

You don't get to complain when peope hire hitmen, buy drugs and child porn with it.

You don't get to complain when data mining centers hook illegally to the power grid and steal millions of dollars of energy.

Or when countries avoid sanctions, or manipulate other countries through it.

That's precisely what decentralization and deregulation looks like. It's the law of the jungle. Enjoy.
This comment is absolutely crying out for more elaboration. I tried to do a little searching on my own, but couldn't find anything close.
Except by not commuting, you can move somewhere where real estate is cheaper.
> But apparently the staff was indeed forced to hand the keys over on their way out and start from scratch instead of just standing up the same data on another DNS and doing a blockchain style split. Why this happened seems to be IRC drama.

Well, no, not really. More likely the reason for this is that taking the database with them would have given Lee a reason to continue legally harassing and essentially bankrupting them.
Just saying "disagree with me? Then you are just playing a status game" isn't a criticism, it's just making stuff up.

The world is full of evidence that one of,if not the biggest factor on people's wealth is the wealth of their parents. It's incredibly hard to escape povity.
I agree what you say, although I might add that the harm potential by a "not-understanding rich of the poor" is much greater than a "not-understanding poor of the rich"
> I didn't have to worry about compelled speech like that 10 years ago.

Imagine that- society has changed in 10 years. I'm sorry you can't be arsed
The worst part is that your wealthy family member is right.

It is well illustrated by a quote from Terry Pratchett

> The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.

> Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

> But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.

> This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.
there is going to be some of that for sure.

i expect people reading this comment will not understand your point to mean "some" and will probably read it as "all". despite the length of your comment to the contrary, they won't parse and extract the meaning but, probably without even noticing it, rely on biases and shortcuts to interpret the meaning more rapidly (and wrongly).

i'm pretty confident you are not suggesting it is responsible for 100% of the signal here, just some <100% of it.

as a counterpoint i'd offer up those people who have been traumatised by their living conditions. they often adopt a choice mindset and it is harmful to them. so no, actually a choice mindset and taking responsibility in a horrible environment doesn't actually help.

i say this with some bias as someone who has adopted that kind of mindset and watched those not taking responsibility for themselves perform better in many areas precisely because they excessively (from my perspective) seek help from others and ignore responsiblities.

i have a number of experiences where i've ended up supporting someone extensively, because they come to me "in a difficult situation" only to realise i'm less capable of supporting them then they are of me in terms of resources and opportunities. its quite mind blowing at the time, but i try to understand how it happens - my suspicion is that their bar for 'failure' is so damned high that they will actually not use their piles of resources for psychological reasons alone.
I guess what bothers me is that visualizations are supposed to leverage our intuition and gut feeling. Like in Geometry, the teacher tell you that when the lines are parallel, the angels on on a bisecting line are the same. You "see" it on the image and it immediately makes sense.

When you have a weird new operation that doesn't behave in any relatable way then the visualization is effectively useless. I explained a bit further here how you can completely skip this pseduo-2D stuff and things remain very clear:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27246386

Maybe the 2D plane is useful in other contexts and it's an analogy that's worth internalizing - I don't wanna knock it entirely - but in the case of Fourier Transform it's a high cognitive load for something that's actually not that important and easy demonstrated from the roots of unity.

And the net effect is that the stuff that can't be visualized, and that is arguably more important, is glossed over b/c it's not pretty enough
I agree that there are rich people who know little about what it's like to be poor or even middle class. But not all rich people were always rich.

I grew up poor, and was poor as a young adult. After working 2 jobs, going to school and trying to keep my family together on next to nothing, I was able to climb my way up and get to "middle class".

Despite being poor for a while, my kids were happy and they didn't know anything different. When we were able to finally afford cable, my oldest daughter couldn't believe she could watch cartoon network. It was the best feeling knowing that I was able to provide some level of comfort to my family without struggling every month to know how we were going to afford basic utilities and food.

We moved to an apartment near an affluent area where my kids would be able to go to a good school. There we met some very wealthy people. Casual conversations with these people regularly included topics such as going on vacation to Hawaii for a month, going to a ritzy steakhouse for dinner regularly, etc. I was surprised at how these people just expected others to be able to afford the same luxuries.

At the same time, I also met some wealthy people who didn't talk like that. After getting to know some of them, I learned that some actually earned their way there. They grew up poor, worked hard, went to school, worked harder, had some luck by being in the right place at the right time with the right set of skills, and eventually became wealthy.

What I learned during this time is that rich people are not always rich because someone handed it all to them. Some are very much in that category though. You can always tell by their conversations. Rich people who have never been poor or even middle class will converse about things casually that poor people can only dream about, while those who did not grow up rich reserve those conversation topics and are sensitive to other financial situations. This is why I think the 1% is a sliding scale to some extent. It's not a static group of people so we have to stop demonizing all rich people.
“…if Steve Jobs focused on what he was passionate about, he would be a Zen monk in some monastery…” - sounds like bunk to me - you won’t be surprised to hear I didn’t know the guy personally, but everything I’ve read about him and heard him say in interviews etc. suggests he was deeply passionate about both design and technology? Zen might have informed aspects of his aesthetic sensibilities (is that really Zen though?) and maybe his spiritual life, who knows, but I wouldn’t have thought becoming a monk was exactly his ‘thing’?
I also have an instinctive loathing of the self-help industry (and ‘personal brand’-ers even more) and I agree that you need skills and hard work to back up your passions and dreams - when you get a chance, or create one, you need to be able to capitalise on it (a mistake I definitely made in my life when self-promotion outclassed capacity to deliver), but why not have a ‘dream’ and allow yourself to think differently some of the time? Especially if you can visualise some sort of tangible path to achieving your goals and break them into doable steps… Much good in the world has been created by people with a bit of imagination, a dream if you like, of how the world might be made better (and arguably much ill also)… People are blessed with the capacity to experiment - to try things out and do something different if they fail... I’d like to see a world were people were more able to do that and survive to fight another day - without worrying about being deported, or made homeless, or getting into debt, or needing food aid, or even not being able to afford a family… Maybe there’s some sort of balance to be aimed at that lies between long term dreams and goals
and short term pragmatic compromise, between experimentation and practicality… Life might be better with some art alongside the accountancy you know?/pure theoretical and sometimes unproductive scientific research alongside hard-nosed capitalisation andy marketing makes both stronger and gives both the ability to continue to flourish in the long term?
> uMatrix has been discontinued. The repository has been archived.

It still works.
Hey there! Would you mind talking to her on my behalf?

I am actually missing a thumb entirely on my right hand and had at one point reached out to both her and the researchers she worked with on it. She never responded and the researchers said she held the rights to it so I would have to talk to her.

I would be EXTREMELY interested in speaking with her about either testing or even purchasing one if I find it is something that could help me!

I have an email in my profile she can reach me by.
> There’s a myth that you can financial-plan your way out of economic hardship but it’s simply not true.

And if the situation was some people cannot escape this hardship, and there aren't spare resources allocated to other people, then we could say OK, our basic premise must be wrong, it's just inevitable that some people will suffer this hardship.

I think it's plausible this was sometimes true in a middle ages farming community during famine. If we re-allocate food from the "wealthy" with plenty to eat to those with none, some might starve anyway, there just isn't enough food.

But in our society that's not the case, we have tremendously wealthy people and these people in hardship, therefore I argue the fact you discovered is a failure of policy and it is worthwhile to contemplate whether politicians you consider supporting are addressing this failure, or whether they instead believe (or pretend to believe) the myth or perhaps in fact they consider hardship for others a desirable outcome, ie they are despicable people.
Frankly, sir, it is the reason you wish your anecdote to remain anonymous that such perfidy survives. If these traitors to human reason and the public’s faith in their interests serving the general welfare - after all who is the one feeding them? - became more public, perhaps there would be less fraudulence? But I suppose you have too much to lose? If so, why do you surround yourself in the company of bad men?
A lab leak doesn't require much other than carelessness and ignoring protocols. Engineering a virus that would become a world pandemic is practically impossible at this point and no one is really claiming that that happened.

One is far fetched the other is not.
I think this is a really good article, but I think that one of the things it misses is that a huge reason the math works out so badly for startup employees is because founders and VCs take the lion's share of the gains.

I mean, in my experience at startups, founders typically own around 40% of the equity. The option pool for all other employees is around 10-20%.

Now, I certainly believe startup founders deserve far more equity than anyone else, but this highlights that the risk/reward trade-off really only makes sense for founders. I mean, what founders risk in terms of opportunity costs and lower wages is usually only slightly more than very early stage employees, but their reward is ~10-30x. The reward, in rare cases, may also make sense for C level hires at proven startups that are already growing like gangbusters, because they'll get a ton of equity. For rank-and-file, though, the issue is that even if the startup hits it usually becomes more like a nice bonus than life defining wealth.
Fake news has become a corrupted term. In the context of this paper it is the original term, which is completly made up news. For example an article entitled "Biden has Mcdonalds for breakfast everyday and 10 reasons why you should too".

Or auto generated junk like "[Man|woman|person] in [your city|your state|your country] has [biggest|smallest] [body part]" and they generate it for 100s of combinations.
Changing out glibc for musl can be done if you control the linker invocations on the object files. This would be extremely difficult (but not impossible) for those like myself that use closed-source third-party shared objects linked against glibc.
This feels like how Cuba had their own two currency market with the CUP and CUC.
C# is probably the best if you're after a job, there aren't many jobs in Rust or Elixir afaik.
“Rent seeking” has a specific technical meaning, which is not the same as “collecting rent”. Most SaaS companies are by no means rent seeking, and in fact it’s hard for me to come up with an example of one that does it.
So, I actually get what you mean here, and have used both R and Python in anger for a number of years.

This is all about tradeoffs. Fundamentally, if your package doesn't compile on the latest version of R, it gets removed from CRAN. This means that each version of R has a consistent set of packages that (mostly) work together.

Contrast with Python which does facilitate reproducible builds, because you can hack together ancient versions of Python and make them continue working. I could go into a massive rant here about pip, but it's trending in the right direction now and I don't want to discourage any of the people working on it.

R is better in terms of being able to ensure that for a given R version, any package you install will be compatible, Python is better for making sure that that one application built three years ago keeps working in the same fashion.

Also, it sounds like you're running a nix based system, have you considered (I'm sure you have) using the system packages. For example, the Debian/Ubuntu ones are pretty comprehensive, at the cost of using older versions. I believe that R-studio also have pre-built packages for Linux (but have not tested this) so that could also work.

To be fair, conda is pretty good as a package manager, because it handles the C++/C dependencies. But to your Docker point, that's how I handle the insanity that is python packaging, especially in the data science space, so it may just be an issue with the field itself.
Yeah, "misleading" is generous here. It's flat out wrong. Perhaps this article was also written by a "robot".
> a postdoc in my lab told me not to continue wasting time trying (and failing) to reproduce [Top Institution]’s “Best Paper Award” results from the year prior. He had been there when the work was done and said they manipulated the dataset until they got the numbers they wanted.

Isn't that the moment where you try even harder to falsify the claims in that paper? You already know that you'll succeed so it wouldn't be a waste of time in your effort.
I remember there was an Interview with former presidential candidate Mitt Romney's wife who talked about how difficult their college days were. She said that they had been so poor that they had to sell some stock from Romney's trust fund... I think it's pretty natural not be able to relate to the circumstances of another person's life (I myself have trouble thinking abut how it would be to live on $50000 or less per year) but it's really dangerous that a lot of the decision makers in politics and business have no idea how to life is for people with less money.

The left wing parties who traditionally looked out for the working class are now led by people who have never been working class. That's not a good trend.
I see a lot of R is very hard to reproduce use Python, or R is hardly a programming language, and I honestly have to wonder if this is really written in good faith, and on a forum that's supposedly a bastion of Scheme love, no less.

R is far more of a Lisp than Python, and in a field that heavily relies on DSL abstractions (which definitely includes clinical laboratories), R is going to fight you a lot less than most choices.

In regards to packaging, you have MRAN snapshots, you have conda (which will give you binaries on Linux), you have renv, roughly in order of preference. The situation is not ideal, but it's certainly not worse than Python, this is not a hill I'd die on!

Julia might be an exciting and welcome alternative to both; from where I'm sitting, it hardly even enters the conversation currently (in data science where I'm at, it's all Python and R, with Python unfortunately taking by far the larger slice of the pie), but I wish it a bright future, it's a great language.
> immoral

So, how do you feel about throwing gay people off buildings?

Edit: Yes, I know this isn't any part of why we have sanctions against Iran. But it should be.
From the HN FAQ.

"It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic. More here."
Seesaws for giants: Chasing Chicago’s movable bridges
I know both pretty well at this point, and would say that python is a much better language overall, but the stats/ML parts (especially pandas) are pretty inconsistent with both Python and themselves.

That being said, R is amazing for exploratory work, while Python is better for integrating with the rest of the world.
This is a special case of a more general problem. Inferior technologies very often win in our industry because they are better marketed as well. Marketing is a completely distinct and unrelated skill from doing.