skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I'm not sure what difference you see between "rejecting someone for not being masculine enough" and "questioning whether they are, in fact, a man".

I wonder what percentage of these women would've guessed right had she straight-up asked "do you think I'm a man or do you think I'm a woman pretending to be a man"?

That's the difference - the idea that someone you're dating is deceiving you on such a huge level isn't something that's going to be at the front of your mind by default.

(Though I have a higher-level question here: why are we simply believing stated reasons for rejection? People lie about that all the time. It's not you, it's me. People try to avoid confrontations. Someone who's blatantly lying to everyone else has to consider the possibility that they're being lied to as well.)

I have no problem accepting two things from this account: high-effort communication helps, and not being in disguise helps. I think anything beyond that is largely speculative and especially don't see any contradictions.
(2019) particularly relevant considering the online nature of much our social lives since then.
It helps the most responsible people (and everyone else) by not causing a massive wave of homelessness. When people are evicted, they don’t vaporize. They’re still your neighbors, they just live on the sidewalk in front of your house.

Whether you view it as an ethical win or a practical one, reducing homelessness helps all of us.
Very nice work!

Do you think there is a need to educate voters on how to tactically vote in ranked choice voting? Every voting system has strategies to use it effectively and most voters are not used to the tactics necessary for ranked choice voting.

We see a lot of education in how to use the ballot simply, but very little education on "advanced tactics".

In particular, a lot of NYC voters aren't ranking either Wiley or Adams, which is a huge mistake as those are very likely to be in the final round.
Worth noting Australia is still generally a 2-party system in the lower house (1 representative each area) but less so in the senate (where each state elects the top 12 senators). Australians still look at envy at the New Zealand and German systems of Mixed Member Proportional representation (MMP)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_re...
CSPs are hard to get right, but they're doable. Most occurrences of script unsafe-inline and unsafe-eval are due to laziness. As far as I know -- and I use React regularly -- there's nothing about React that makes a strong CSP harder vs normal DOM manipulations.
I'm guessing it's a spectrum in terms of "slacking off" at work. Like yourself I'm quite productive with my work and feel like I can accomplish the same amount in 30 minutes as some others can in a single day.

This gives me wiggle room, working from home I'll take a longer break at lunch, going for a walk after eating and I like to read up on tech news etc as well.

I wouldn't say I do the bare minimum, but I also have a strong sense of not letting people down.

That being said I'm quitting my job as I'm not super motivated by the work and have a side project that I get joy out of every time I touch it.

One thing to think about in terms of slacking off is what you're getting besides money in terms of the work you're doing. I suspect that if you aren't getting much personal growth from the work then it's easy to see how you'd be unmotivated to put in more than the bare minimum. In which case you might want to change job / project etc and work on something you feel will allow you to grow.
I'd love to do that, but health insurance in the US makes it a nonstarter.
Sometimes implementing things from scratch is the ultimate proof of thorough misunderstanding.
Sounds exciting. I would love to do something similar.

> In person classes

I think we'd need to know your geographical location?

> in my experience online content suffer from two issues. One is lack of roadmap - hard to tackle unknown unknown. Two is lack of community and interactivity - when I get stuck on a problem, it's hard to get help; there is also no quizzes, homework, and tests that facilitate learning.

Also, there's a lack of access to experts. If I'm learning a new programming language, it sure helps to have an expert in it who can look at my work, see what I'm missing, and send me in the right direction. It's the same with history, philosophy, or anything else.

> I'm just looking to learn; signaling is not important

My thought: If I do enough, or close to enough, for a degree, I might as well get it. If you're focusing on one subject, and if you really want to learn it well, then that's what the degree is - a program where you learn it well. I'd take the piece of paper if I did the work.

And it's not just signaling. The degree is for you too, or most of all; humans need ritual and reward; there's pride and joy and confidence and satisfaction in it. People spend thousands of hours leveling up in a game, and that's not even real!
Sincere question: are there actual case studies of any electorate moving from a 2 party system to a multiparty system after RCV was implemented?
Stanford via SCPD https://scpd.stanford.edu/ has some great courses. They have programs that cater to working professionals but they are all remote with group-work.
Most western democracies don’t have a problem with fraud allegations in voting. It’s really only the US. And even there, the allegations are mostly a political ploy to push for policies that disenfranchis voters of other parties. Which again doesn’t exist in other Western democracies.
It’s exciting to see another community replace the most pessimal voting method with the second most pessimal one! (In terms of Bayesian regret). I hope the experience is not so frustrating that they end up repealing it as several other municipalities have done after being dissatisfied with IRV/RCV’s weird behaviors.
I’m not clear — did you just ignore everything I wrote and mindlessly restate your claim, in a manner akin to one undergoing a fit of religious fervor?
> But the whole concept of dissent at this level, makes for less respect for the law.

Sometimes the majority is wrong. Two important examples are Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), in which the court held that black Americans could not be U.S. citizens, and Plessey v. Fergusson (1896), which held that laws requiring segregation of white and non-white races were constitutional. Both of those decisions are now considered wrongly-decided at the time. Justice Taney, who wrote the opinion in Dred Scott, will go down in history as a villain. Justice Harlan, who wrote the dissent in Plessy is a hero.
Hey, thanks for the feedback and trying out Brisqi, I appreciate it. Brisqi is more of a personal app than the one made for teams so I don't have any team oriented features on the roadmap yet. May be in the future I'll come back to it.
Why is Instant Runoff Voting the worst possible voting method?
> I think you mischaracterize these people as "rabble". Many of the vocal "woke" figures are highly educated, highly intellectual, and well-off. Professors, top business officers, high-achieving scientists, writers, engineers.

That is the actual structure of a revolution. Your parent comment is misguided; revolutions that aren't led by elites are rare and, when they occur, generally don't go anywhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt
That ship has sailed. The progressives have been playing the strategy 'if we just follow the rules of the game, eventually they will play along'. But the populists completely threw out the rulebook a number of years ago, they no longer want to play the same game. And now there is a new breed of younger progressives coming into power who recognize that and also want to throw out the rulebook. Interesting times coming.
https://www.amazon.com/Self-Made-Man-Womans-Year-Disguised/d...

Based on this cover, I would have thought it was a very gender neutral looking person, and probably a lot less masculine if she wasn't frowning like that. But yeah, there's a huge difference between not being masculine enough vs. not being obviously a man.
I was not aware of this, thanks a lot! Will definitely look into it
or even better you can use !sp

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27598042
Stripe probably has better lawyers with more experience dealing with payments than the publisher. They might even be the same lawyers Substack has since they're both YC companies.
Workaround:

registering domain and hosting site content outside of US gov or US gov-friendly jurisdictions.
I don't know. Sure, you are raising your kids, but they are going to be adults, some with kids, some without - and that is going to require some information.

I think it is a grave injustice to children to, for example, not introduce them to a variety of religions so that they can better understand folks they might run into. Same for not having comprehensive sex education: It matters little to me that a parent thinks some sex - or birth control - is a sin: The child still needs to learn about it so that they can make good decisions even if it goes against the parents' beliefs. Some parents want girls to just learn to cook and clean, and demand an emphasis on such classes.

And so on.

I'm not convinced it is entirely your right to do as you please with your children: To me, it is only OK so long it is healthy for the child and doesn't infringe on their rights... which they should have, and the US refuses to give.
He got canned because his work place was not-inclusive to people on the spectrum despite of the big G claiming otherwise.
No, it's not comparing the suffering of plants and animals. It's only pointing out that by virtue of feeding an animal, you necessarily kill plants. So when you raise an animal to eat, you're killing both the animal as well as the plants it consumed. The 7-10x number is relative to the number of plants you'd have killed if you instead ate plants directly.
That interpretation doesn’t read as a contradiction because its not.

My interpretation is that communicating in a feminine style (more subtext, longer messages, longer + consistent correspondence is how I would interpret it) is what will get you a date, but initial attraction and in presence masculinity (communicated via a different conversational style, appearance, and behavior) is what is preferred.

So the contraction is that there is a difference in communication styles online and in person.
Open source WhatsApp clone built with Ionic, Capacitor and React
Do you drink wine, or anything where you even occasionally care how 'open' the glass is? A saucer's way more open than a cup. I'm sure there are vicious debates over flutes vs. saucers on champagne-appreciation.net forums or whatever!

Not at all the same, but texture too. Meringues are I think the best example of that.
>Equity is a word being used to mean equality of outcome.

You state this as a fact when only an extreme minority of people actually want equality of outcome. The key to NASA's statement is the word "available". They aren't talking about guaranteed outcome. They are specifically talking about opportunity. It is an ad advocating for equality of opportunity.
You end up with Candidates who are neither principled nor charismatic but have blessings of Party Boss and fits in a narrow zone of like/dislike factor.
> What is a sufficient tax level to maintain security, external / internal threats

I don't think you read my post. I was saying that taxes are a cost, that are used to pay for things.

They are not a benefit in and of themselves.

The services are the benefit. And the taxes are the costs needed to pay for that benefit. But they are still a cost.
Yea somewhat of course, since they are swamped with requests, but i would say that probably it is more biased towards people of both genders who look good on photos and who can sell themselves. “The top 10% get all the matches” so to speak.

Anyway its an interesting time we are in. One company (Match) owns like 90% of the dating apps and gets to “dictate” the future procreation of our species, if we put it in extreme terms.
That's a rather blanket statement. Depends on the work! I have certainly had paid employment where I frequently just sat down at 8am, programmed and programmed, realised about 3pm that I hadn't eaten yet, and stopped for a break. It would never happen in the office, but it happened quite regularly early on in the pandemic-induced WFH (thanks to me happening to be on the right project to allow it).
This makes me want o throw the computer out of the window. Copying a large file between two partitions on the same SSD makes the computer absolutely unusable - mouse freezing, sound freezing
Would that be meaningful when the method is known to the voters ahead of time? It’s like the team with fewer total yards winning the Super Bowl... wouldn’t be that surprising since both teams know that it’s points that decide the game.
You're presuming to speak for @miltondts, while contradicting what they said. The argument at the top of the thread was that good implementations are to blame for perf decay.

> It should be pretty obvious that many features should have no perceptible performance impact if they're not actively being used.

That's true, and irrelevant. It's also true that feature bloat is the number one cause of software slowing down. It doesn't have to be all or most features, it's still a fact.

I've lost track of your point. Software is bigger? I agree. Some software is bloated and uses resources it doesn't really need? I agree. You're arguing with everything I say, but don't seem to be trying to have a conversation or to understand or give any benefit of the doubt. Some of the things you're saying are true, I may not be disagreeing with you, a lot of this is just not relevant to either my points or the comments I replied to.

> Google Chrome, downloads tracker. Is there a good reason for it to use CPU while you're not clicking a download link? Nope.

Did you mean to include during downloads to refresh the page, or during scrolling and interaction with the page? I don't understand your example, have you seen the tracker consuming copious CPU? Does this example support your argument about engineering failures somehow? I opened my Chrome task manager just now and my downloads tracker is consuming exactly 0 cycles. Have you seen Spotify shuffle consuming CPU? If not, why did you bring it up?

> Most features literally have no reason to use CPU if they're not being used.

This is completely meaningless, until you name all features and all software, and define what "feature" means in all cases. You have no basis here to make any claims about "most features" of software.

Many features do have reasons to use resources. Caching is a feature that always uses memory when not in use, and caching is absolutely ubiquitous. Rendering is a feature that uses CPU even when the user isn't asking for anything. Speculative downloads, background processes, pre-computation, event driven callbacks, timers... the list of things ("features") your OS and browsers and applications intentionally do when you're not looking is very, very long. Claiming otherwise only demonstrates ignorance of what's under the hood. Naming a couple of cherry-picked features that don't use a lot of resources is not particularly compelling.
This is fine, except for the annoying tools that think they need to then print their software version, and exit.
> If anyone can give Amazon a run for its money in treating its employees badly, my bet is on Intel.

For sure this, but for me it is the money. In the last year I was promoted and gained 11% at Intel. I left for a startup, and gained 40% more.

I'm pending an offer from a FAANG now and I anticipate that within a year I will have 2.5x my previous total comp at Intel.

Further, Intel markets to its own employees in an extremely disgusting manner. Great Place to Work, Overpriced food branded as healthy, Programs for meditation and whatnot, which all sound nice, but mean next to nothing.

Just provide some decent comp and remove non-technical managers from managing technical people and processes. Pitching a project was always a nightmare of whether the non-technical manager would get the idea (or understand the possibilities) or not.
I love taiibi's substack! As to that comment, WOW. There's this weird internet hate for guy's like weinstein or jordan peterson when, even if you happen to disagree with them they're incredibly tame about what they say.
I can understand people used to a HLL running into this. It's useful to read the documentation: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/vector/insert mentions that references/iterators may be invalidated.

I'm not going to pretend that I understand everything on that site (particularly anything about complex templates and things like SFINAE) but often there's comprehensible stuff in there. It can be really helpful.
Could you elaborate how RCV is less complicated? Just by eliminating tactical voting? In traditional voting you often limit yourself to the incumbents, isn't that a lot fewer choices?
My favorite: slicing.

That one blew my mind when I found out. You can rip off a chunk of an object by accident... and nothing happens whatsoever. There's no warning from the compiler.

You can stuff a Derived into a std::list<Base>, it'll work just fine, and if Derived happened to say, hold a pointer, it'll happily vanish into the ether.

Besides the amount of confusion that can ensure from this, it means you can have problems if you want to introduce inheritance into a place that didn't have it before.

Especially if it's some sort of external component. You think you're clever inheriting from a framework class and adding some data on top? Nope, the internal structure you don't control doesn't want to cooperate with that plan.
I'm hopeful as well. I believe that humanity will definitely suffer from climate change to an extent, at least in this century, but eventually will figure out sustainable energy and thus not go extinct.
I use a VSCode plugin called Dendron for this. It provides some commands to operate over notes, like renaming, for instance.

https://www.dendron.so/
Sorry, I will share it with you tonight! thanks!
Indeed. The fury of revenge is totally understandable, but also not very constructive; it did a lot of sad things throughout history.

The founders of great spiritual movements, Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, all warned against revenge and called for forgiveness (even though Quran calls more to the due process and justice while gospels call to radical forgiveness). This is easy to understand rationally: a society with a lot of revenge keeps killing itself and keeps nurturing cruelty. Such societies tend to not survive for long.

I'm very sorry for all the Black, queer, Jewish, Arabian, East Asian, etc people who were victims of bitter oppression. I adore those of them who struggle for justice, cessation of oppression, peace, and reconciliation with the rest of the society. But I would not join those of them who strive for a war and a revenge.

Fighting against a powerful enemy, it's important to be watchful and not become the enemy's mirror image. I hope the people among them who possess more wisdom and compassion will eventually help most of them choose a better path.
>One tell is when they quote anonymous sources => propaganda. Another is using unconfirmed reports.

This just shows a total lack of understanding for how journalism works.
After WW2 propaganda got a bit of a bad name for itself so it renamed itself public relations. Anything that talks about propaganda and not PR is out of date, but still valid.
Are Covid Vaccines Riskier Than Advertised?
Have you read the Damore memo? It is fundamentally about how Google should increase diversity, given the data showing that most women are choosing to not go into engineering-like fields, rather than being forced out of them.

It's a corporate policy proposal, and it was posted to a private internal board of people interested in how to shape Google corporate policy to increase diversity. Sort of a workgroup. In a sane world, that's exactly the sort of workplace discussion one would want.
Digibarn Alto
> I suspect react doesn’t support the policies well

Frankly this sounds like something you just made up.

Why would React require any weakening of CSP rules? Is there something special about React that requires loading it differently than any other JavaScript?

On the whole, React is a win for security, because XSS is by default impossible, due to the indirection provided by the Virtual DOM abstraction. As long as you (and your dependencies) don’t dangerouslySetInnerHTML, you’ll eliminate most XSS bugs.
Morning People May Be at Lower Risk of Depression Than Night Owls
ungated: https://archive.is/AUkgo
I feel like approval voting gets overlooked too much in discussions of voting systems. It's so much simpler than instant runoff, and so much less prone to spoilers than first-past-the-post.
Online dating is a skewed game (for M/F), if you're in the top 2% of attractiveness for men it's great - otherwise it's not worth it. This is compounded a bit by region, if your dating market is pretty even or skewed where there are more women than men (NYC/DC) it gets a lot better (I suspect actually for both men and women, but don't know) - in the bay area it's not worth it.

Women get a lot of matches which while a lot better than no matches (can go on dates, get practice, etc.) leads to a filter problem. Many (based on OKC data [0]) tend to pre-select based on attractiveness*, so the top 2% of men get most of the matches, which pre-filters out high quality candidates that would have a chance in real life. It also leads to lower quality interactions (since those men have more options anyway).

If you're a woman with hundreds of matches it's not really a surprise they'd be multi-tasking on a zoom date, the dates are abundant - each one has low value. This shifts as people get older though - if I had to guess that's probably part of why your recent matches improved after 5 yrs, suddenly there are fewer men available and the competition heats up (both because there are fewer available men and because there are more younger women getting more attention).

If you're a man that gets one match at best every other month, they're so scarce the value is high. I think honestly women and men have a poor sense for how extreme the difference in online dating experience is.

We're not that different from other apes in a lot ways, if you're not really good looking and you're in a skewed market online dating is a bad approach for you (imo).

[0]: https://www.amazon.com/Dataclysm-Identity-What-Online-Offlin...

* Men do too obviously, but not to the same winner-takes-all extreme (based on the OKC data).
Sure: no failures myself yet, although battery is an issue on 4 hour+ flights, and tapping into a layer of redundancy by charging always feels a bit odd.

The iPad is actually mounted on the yoke right in front of you, some people mount it to the side with suction cups against the window, and starting to fiddle with the backup phone is already a distraction if the main hands free one goes down. Issues friends had were heat shutdowns in summer, plus one already cracked screen where the backlight then suddenly failed.

You rarely use the iPad in critical flight stages anyway, it’s more a navigation aid and displaying other traffic, and good practice to (see battery point above) keep the screen switched off for longer to stay proficient in the traditional approaches anyway.

The arguably number one case were an iPad with the fast updating screen is helpful in a crisis is an engine failure or similar emergency where you need to find a place to land fast, and as it knows the airplane you’re flying in, terrain underneath, winds etc it literally draws and uneven (different terrain) circle around your current position and shows you what is probably realistic. Another one is as potential fallback if one of the actual instruments fails, once had a stuck compass for example.