skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If I grow this sandwich shop into a national franchise worth $1 billion

It's very unlikely that you personally, singlehandedly would be able to build your sandwich shop into a billion dollar franchise.

The value of Amazon is not a trillion dollars because of Jeff Bezos alone. He helped get it there, sure, and he deserves to be rewarded for that, but so did 800k other people. Can an Amazon driver afford a house, 2 cars, and to put 2 kids through college on a single income today? My dad could working for UPS for 30 years starting in the 80s. He's retired now with a pension. Why can't Amazon provide that kind of life for their workers? They're certainly richer and more profitable than UPS ever was. One key difference is that UPS is unionized, and then you start to realize why Amazon really, really, really, doesn't want their workers to unionize.

Bezos' wealth is not a problem in a vacuum. It's a problem in a world where he's using his wealth to fly to space, while others (even people who work for him) are being evicted from their homes during a global pandemic, and there are more than enough homes to house everyone. That's the backdrop for all of this outrage.

IMO an example of what would be incredibly immoral is if your ownership stake in your national sandwich chain reaches $1 billion, and your workers aren't making a living wage that can cover rent, food, and healthcare for their families. Yes we want to encourage entrepreneurship, but we cannot do so at the expense of workers. I think we've gone too far in one direction and now the backlash is forming.
"To avoid race conditions", indeed!
Some are more ethical than others, so I don't think that generalization holds in practical terms. Corporations that draw their revenue from surveillance, however, are off to a bad start on the spectrum of ethics.
I'm not the Atlantic, but it's not on my menu. Not because the government of KSA is decent, but because of how strongly I suspect that it would be replaced by something worse.
> 4. Brings temporary residents into neighbourhoods that have no tie to that neighbourhood.

Where I live we call this "tourism"
Nice idea, i might steal it.
"A" and "B" would imply that English is superior to other languages. It also implies hierarchy since "A" comes before "B".

Chess is sexist because the game ends when the King dies.

I say we should ban Chess. Cheers.
It's none of my business but personally I prefer latine[1]. IMO there's no need for white English speakers to tell Spanish speakers their language. We're all on the journey to a world with more than two genders together. Spanish speakers will figure out their own path to inclusivity.

1: https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/10/15/20914347/latin-...
Yeah, I think Google Loon would focus on the critical task of serving ads to those affected by a distaster /s
Classic Mac plus, NeXt cube, Sun IPS workstation.
All from the computer era when I got started.
These are the machines that inspired me.

Would love to have working versions of any, but near impossible now I’m living in Singapore :(
> All I remember is that the mail server transformed this into the "MALE GENITALIAtail table".

I now realize I have a Pac-Man MALE GENITALIAtail table, thanks.
Kind of but not really. reddit has a lot of minority communities that just get mass downvoted too since downvoting costs nothing and other people organize to just mass nuke everything for things like women/trans/whatever focused subreddits that they dont like.

HN is kind of different in that downvoting as at least gated behind _something_, you cant just spin up an account and immediately downvote everything.
"limit the available DNS information to a single domain"

I would like to do this too, how did you go about doing it?
>On top of that, my client was offering to pay this individual to do the work.
They are referencing the whitelist/blacklist debacle.
This seems prone to trouble to me.

Twitter is already very groupthink heavy, and I can only see this amplifying that problem. You see it in Reddit all the time - people don't actually read the comments, just upvote the upvoted ones and vice versa.

I worry this will just make an already very narrow set of acceptable opinions even narrower.
There's an acronym: OOD - out of distribution - for these situations.

There's no reason YT can't detect chess from hate speech if they updated their training set. Maybe they weren't aware of this failure case, or they didn't get to fix it, or by trying to fix it they caused more false negatives. The way they assign cost to a false positive vs a false negative is also related.
> Riot’s CEO sent an e-mail to employees describing the punishment its COO, Scott Gelb, will face after multiple employees alleged that, as a comedy bit, he has repeatedly touched subordinates’ balls or butt or farted in their faces.

> Scott Gelb, Riot Games’ COO, whom current and former employees allege participated in “ball-tapping” (flicking or slapping testicles), farting on employees or humping them

He is still active COO.
No argument.

But the flip side is that I'm also not required to hire someone either.

However, programmers don't get to complain that the FAANGs are gatekeeping/discriminating/etc. when the programmers decided that FAANG jobs are the only ones paying salaries they're willing to work for.
Some of these are decent points, but a couple are misleading.

The security one is the big one. Things were just not as secure (and did not need to be as secure) “back then”. K8s has a lot of complexity, and security should definitely be simpler so it’s harder to misconfigure, but not doing anything is not viable.

Saying “Package Managers” is fine until you realise they solve only part of the problem. The mainstream ones are good tools to update package (and dependencies) from version X to Y. When you’re running a distributed system, it’s often not that simple if you want to be reliable. Coordinating a slow global update of your application from version X to Y (safely) is pretty tricky and I’m not aware of good self-contained solutions to this.
https://archive.is/uE0kI
Completely aligned with my parent, day-to-day operations are often slightly more complex than making sure your server run your app properly, I'd argue that our services are increasingly dependent on others (in both directions, dependencies multiply and are more and more critical). That's also by interacting more with external entities that they bring more value.

> The best solution I can come up with is a synchronously-replicated append-only log store which is utilized in a primary/sync-witness/async-witness/... configuration. The first tier of resilience would be synchronous and provided by a set of witness nodes which must ack as a majority to progress primary. These nodes would ideally be within 1-2ms of the primary. The async witnesses could be in orbit and/or on mars. These are more about extreme geological disaster recovery. The witness nodes would also use a separate consensus protocol to decide when the primary needs to be taken down and replaced with a sync (or god forbid async) witness. They would be able to elect an emergency leader separate from the primary who would be authorized to stop the bad primary in the hypervisor, and edit any relevant DNS records to ensure traffic stops hitting the bad system.

This part was what I felt deserved a counter-point though. Consensus is indeed at the core of the issue once you want distributed fault tolerance. However, I think you'll quickly hit two things with your approach: 1-2ms of latency, I fear that it may come with highly correlated failures on the "first tier of resilience". Moreover, the "second tier" being much farther, keeping them in consensus will imply harsh trade-offs. If you use synchronous consensus protocols, you'll slow down drastically the "first tier" (assuming you want consistency), if you go for the asynchronous replication (not consensus, this matters...) then the second tier can't really intervene on leader election or failover without risking a partition on a false positive (and if you try to be conservative there your RPO will suffer).

If you're into these (fundamental) issues, I'd recommend Leslie Lamport's work (i.e. https://www.college-de-france.fr/site/en-martin-abadi/semina... or http://www.lamport.org/), the paper pointing a disappointing impossibility: https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3149.214121 and its generalization (https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/167088.167119).
"Night" and "Day"
Externalities caused by Airbnb opposers:
1. Block people's access to tourism
2. Worsen the economy by artificially cuts demand from supply
3. Hurt tourism workers including restaurants workers, etc
4. Create segregation which is partially what nativism is about
5. Hurt people who live there and love talking to travellers

If you don't want "other people" in your sight and zero nuisance, buy the entire street. Personal preference relying on inefficient resource allocation should be paid for.
I’d love to have had parents who could afford to dump $1m into my fledgeling startup.

That he did proves he owes others for his success as much as his own wits and hard work.
Jokes that evoke racist hatred are not good, though. You don't actually know that NOBODY - literally you said that not a single person - was offended.

Also, so what if someone was offended? Isn't that mostly irrelevant to this debate? The goal isn't to stop people from offending others, the goal of changing our speech is to reduce the unknown harm that words can do re: normalization of hatred of minorities. The 'jokes' you describe aren't funny and do in fact have a potential to cause real harm in the world.

I would posit that unchecked hatred towards minorities online for decades is one of the reasons we are in this 'mess' of language today.
> "Hi! Welcome to ___. What do you want to eat today?", "I want to eat item one, fifty-six, eighty-seven and ninety-one", "Do you want to eat item one, fifty-six, eighty-seven and ninety-one?", "Yes", "Please make a seat. The food will come right away!" (all without making any Hmm or Err noise)

this already happens today, with human servers. The menu items are numbered, and you tell them the number instead of the name of the dish.
A Tool to Measure the Health of Open Source Communities
That article was about fraud. So, are you accusing the authors of this research paper of fraud? Do you think they just made up the data? Maybe altered their figures?

Or are you just accusing them of doing poor research? Did you read the paper?
I have no knowledge of the example situation you provided (I don’t recall any such jokes about software skins), but consider the possibility that in some cases where “back in the day we did it and no one was offended” it was in fact the case that people who were offended weren’t welcome or weren’t able to voice their opinions.
Aside from addressing the article directly, I appreciate the author going to such a length to explain his point of view to the potential candidate. So often I experience such little communication when engaging potential job prospects. Often I'll reply to a recruiter and end up being ghosted.
It's clearly racist that White plays first.
There seems to be a fundamental problem with outsourcing your content moderation. If one of your rather semi-highly trusted mods strongly dislikes what others are saying and your policy is on the vague side the mods could take down content primarily just because they don't like it as seems to be in this case. Not a huge issue if you're FB and as long as the masses don't find out about most of the deleted content, a real issue for the society.
> The clones really made the PC a success.

Yes. Price competition is a wonderful thing. They undercut IBM's pricing model. IBM tried to get it back with the PS/2, which was patent protected. But that totally missed the point.

> It's just tragic that the crap SW and HW won the market.

Crap SW and HW made the market. There wasn't much of a market for PCs at the PS/2 price point. There was a much larger market at the PC clone price point. (I'd guess that halving the price led to something like 10 times the volume. The PS/2 was locked out of any meaningful volume just by the price.)

General rule: The PC I can afford is better than the PC I can't. Sure, it may be technically inferior. Doesn't matter. The one I can't afford has zero utility for me, so the one I can afford is actually better (for me), no matter how crap it is.

The other thing that made that market was the clone vendors cooperating to define the EISA bus standard. It created a huge market (all the clone companies put together) for peripherals. And because you could get anything in an EISA peripheral, that created a huge market for EISA PCs. It was mutually reinforcing to create an exploding market. If they had fought each other with competing bus standards, that would have killed the market.
So you're saying nothing other than, something less complicated will come along eventually? See OpenStack. You're saying nothing.
Short answer: no.

Long answer: there’s not even a simple native client that can even try to replace these apps. Often you see recommendations about some cartoonish app called Fluffy. No it’s no good. Every client is half baked, half cooked other than main client which was a electron monstrosity last time I checked. So the client space is still a mess (other than the org changing the name of its main client something -> riot -> element -> next name change awaited) compared to other personal messaging cum audio/video call apps. But a promising mess. Or so I hope.
> Their cost basis for those stocks is their value at the time of inheritance. This way no capital gains tax is ever due on the stock gains

Are you sure that's the way it works in the US? If so that seems somewhat absurd. In Canada there's no inheritance tax but capital gains are realized on death and the cost basis resets. So your heirs inherit the assets and an associated tax bill which honestly makes perfect sense to me (at least for things like stocks).
I agree that it seems to be a pretty poor paper.

>They even acknowledge that the correlation could be due to a factor that isn't being accounted for.

Related to this, they're performing a regression between Airbnb prevalence and crime, but they only control for a single variable: income[0]. They look at others in a robustness check, but a single control variable practically screams p-hacking.

They also don't address the fact that both Airbnb prevalence and crime are nonstationary[1]. Regressing two nonstationary time series results in a nonsense coefficient[2]. Two totally unrelated time series will have a high coefficient if both exhibit consistent trends.

[0] "We report the results based on using income as the main tract-level control variable"

[1] They are consistent trends over time, see https://www.investopedia.com/articles/trading/07/stationary....

[2] https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/94723/using-non-st...
You're right, and I think a lot of data structures (all of them?) can be seen as special cases of relational databases.
I also feel like there are similarities to logic programming languages like Prolog and Datalog, and a language that combined them while still allowing the programmer to finely tune performance through explicit hints could be powerful.
That’s a perfect example of something that literally every single time I’ve seen it mentioned was in the context of people expressing outrage at other people’s activism, and never in the context of an activist actually advocating for it.
Not responsive to the argument. k8s is maybe a "deployment strategy", but it's certainly not the only one. Or the best one for all circumstances.
Curious whether this was considered leading science or if most serious scientists questioned it at the time.

I'm guessing this sort of thing also happens today under the label of science and will be HN fodder in about 100 years.
Because the pieces really are white and black, or light and dark. The list is not black.
I figure that the less front you present to an attacker, the less they have to attack. In an argument, say less. In a mob situation, minimise your apology.

Write at length and you're almost guaranteed to present something someone will take issue with. Even if it's not a danger to you physically or to your career, it's likely a waste of your time!
> But well, nobody would ever think about going back into those ugly interfaces!

Some of us would like to get our toolbars back.
Big-tech INFY, TCS, Wipro, HCL plan campus-hire over 20k fresh grads each
Does a hotel not add economic value?
AWS’s on demand pricing is high but their reserved pricing doesn’t leave a lot of flexibility.

Why is it just 1 or 3 years? What if I only need it for 6 months or 2 years? Can’t I just get a discount proportional to a custom length of time?

Why can’t I choose the amount of money I want to pay under the “partial upfront” option?

Why can I only reserve some AWS services and not others? Why can’t I reserve a certain amount of S3 storage for example?
I read the paper. I don't think it is bad. They don't actually make many claims in their conclusions. I do worry about the N (they don't attempt any sort of effect size analysis, but that is, unfortunately, common enough), and I have a some quibbles with how they do their response time analysis, but otherwise the methods are rational, and conservative.

Just because a whole bunch of news articles make big claims about a small little research paper like this, doesn't mean that the paper or authors did.
A-I-opia. Think like myopia or hyperopia.
> intent only

Communication is a multiple party activity. It's not just a speaker and a speaker's intent. The recipient and how it's received absolutely matter (and should). I've said plenty of things I didn't intend to be stupid. Still stupid.

Is it ok for the Washington football team to be the Redskins because no current fan or owner intends to be using a racist name?

It's not only the hearer getting upset that matters either. There's room for error and for grace and tact on both sides of a conversation. But it's definitely not just intent only. Humans don't work like that. Hell, even computers don't work like that.
Yes, but /how much/ was the client offering to pay? This whole situation screams of someone trying to get a cheap deal, then getting mad when the attempted victim wises up. (This is pretty typical with loud-and-proud small business types, IME)
> a software engineer who considers writing any tests beneath them, a job for someone else

I'd also balk at that for an interview take-home test.

I was an Indian QE guy looking for a dev job once. I was that guy whose job was to write tests for someone else, which wasn't fun at all.

If I had interviewed somewhere and I felt the conversation was going towards "how good are you at writing tests, write some", I'd have noped out of it immediately.

Specifically because testing was being offshored (think of the early 2000s) and development work was being held at HQ at my then employer.

I would expect that this work would be my day-to-day based on that interview.

That sort of "stale smell" around the job of writing tests for someone else's code stinks to say the least.

Right now I'm on the other side of the hill, I'd consider it a red-flag if someone interviews me for a day without asking me "review this code" or "analyze this design", but merely whiteboard a bunch of algorithmic C++ code without any tests.
You just have to make the fine enough that it covers the cost of defending it against the people that do contest it.
This is a few years old now, but demonstrates (most clearly in figure 3) that the process of political meiosis began in the mid-1980s. Political scientists are undecided on the driving factors, but the accessibility of cable TV and the internet were probably accelerating factors since they facilitated the emergence of media and social silos.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
But they are not naturally so. We decided to make them that way.
Interesting because at the same time looks like YouTube is testing removing "dislikes" count. I wonder if at some point all social media will converge on a set of standards that they can all get behind.
This feels like affirmation of the Chinese Communist Party method of censorship unfortunately. I wouldn't be surprised to see more countries take this anecdata and run with it.
We definitely need a term for this so when we are a victim of this, we can easily raise a flag. I have a few ideas:
- Bot blunder
- Artificial stupidity
- Algofail
- Machine madness
- Neural slip
Does that same logic apply to Syria?
Thank you! Although TBH linux gaming has been usable to the extent that I probably will never have to run windows ever again..
I think it matters whether or not the amount was explicit, that's not clear in the post. Also, based on the (inexplicably) one time the author mentions the candidate was Indian, it's plausible the latter was wary of being exploited.
Show HN: Send SMS via Twilio from your Google sheets
TikTok’s algorithm figures out your deepest desires
We're going to resurrect the transatlantic accent.

I already have started add a hard 'ng' on 'going to' because my phone keeps abbreviating it to 'gonna'.
> Worse, though, Big Sur hides the (X) until you mouse over the literal bounds of the banner - not even the area where the hidden (X) will appear is initially valid.

I so intensely hate this design trend of hiding UI elements until you move the mouse cursor into a “magic” area that makes them appear. I work a lot with tools and websites that do this and it’s simply maddening.
> 1. It's owned by governments at some level. I think we can all agree this would largely be a disaster at any sort of scale;

Henry George enters the chat:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

There's a reasonable philosophical case that land ownership is a very odd concept, probably wrong at some fundamental level -- people may feel a sense of possessiveness over a place, but most territory isn't a fruit of anyone's labors and attempts to base claims on "improvements" run afoul of the problem that (a) what constitutes and improvement is fairly subjective and (b) really not a matter of the underlying territory claim anyway. And in some sense, having land as property at all is married to the idea of a social order which can assign its disposition, which is close enough to the idea of property itself that it starts to become clear that all property is at some level also government property.

Now, whether it's practical to treat it that way is a different question, but a system where people own and trade in leases that they pay to the state as a tax is also... pretty similar to existing property tax + private leases, it's just that a lot of the private leases would essentially become a public revenue source. And it gets especially interesting if you try to envision an economic system where that's the primary tax.

Personally, I think it could work at least as well as the current system, but the transition might be politically intractable, and it's not a hill I care to die on, so...
Which community/platform has tried this?
The problem also goes in the other direction. That is platform rely too much on automation that human signal gets too faint. For example humans have a hard time flagging actual hate speech on these platforms as well. Another example: Every so often there is a front page post on HN where a company like Google will automatically shut down service for a customer (false positive). The customer has a hard time getting through and having this false positive corrected because their signal can’t reach through the layers of automation.
In economics there is Goodhart's law.

'Any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
In Denver the law is that a person can only AirBnb a property that is their primary residence. If you have an ADU or want to rent a room you can do that full time. We rent our place when we travel..

It seems like a good compromise to me.