skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> No. You're the one saying that.

I disagree.

Your first claim was that Musk is a bad engineer whose poor technical leadership verges on self-sabotage. I asked why, then, are his companies so successful? To which you responded that he is good at raising money, implying that his companies have succeeded primarily because he raised a lot of money for them. Since you previously criticized his technical leadership, the implication is that his companies succeed on the back of this money-raising ability despite his technical leadership.

Can you please explain how else I am supposed to reconcile your claims about Musk's strengths and weaknesses as a leader wrt. his companies' singular success per my first comment in this subthread?
gRPC Connection Library in Go
Let's call the Google proposal UTC_smear. You can simply convert between UTC and UTC_smear and vice versa just fine. You just need to be extra careful to store each timestamp with their corresponding time format.

Just like you can convert between UTC, TAI and UT1.
Yes - the cost is mostly testing and building an audit trail.

If every single part of the toilet has to be manufactured from raw materials, and fully tested and documented at each step of the manufacturing process, then a toilet can add up to $20k easily.

Also, anything that will be installed in a regular old non-military passenger plane is extremely expensive, because they must be able to prove that parts will not break off mid-flight, that it will not catch fire, and will be manufactured consistently and reliably.
That submarine really was a bad design and a distraction from the rescue effort. He swooped in knowing zero about cave diving and produced something that only worked in a pool demo. He could have instead offered to help, quietly behind the scenes, and asked the team if could be of assistance, but he went internet-celebrity mode and splashed all his showerthoughts in real time all over twitter. That was attention-whoring behavior.
I’m waiting on blinking fonts, or maybe fade in/fade-out. Living the dream/nightmare of 1990s web design today in your favorite PDFs.
Cheaper to hire a human for $20 an hour.
It's not closed. You just need an invite to post. https://www.indiehackers.com/
Also, the same treatment to all the other major phones of the time produced the same results. Samsung phones even had a warning in the user manual about it.
ProtonVPN's VPN Accelerator
I think we tried that once, "in order to form a more perfect union".
israel, one of the highest vaccine rates on earth.

also one of the highest outbreaks of delta variant.

the vaccine is trash.
> if I put another 15-20 hours per week into my current job I'd get promoted extremely quickly

That'd be a very rare circumstance.

In most jobs working 15-20 hours overtime each week only gets you 15-20 hours less for living your own life, nothing else.
> Your first claim was that Musk is a bad engineer whose poor technical leadership verges on self-sabotage.

Did you read the article that this thread is under? All I said earlier was just a summary of the points made in the article.

If you think the article is factually wrong, we can start with that if you like. What part of the article is incorrect in your opinion? (Alternatively: If you think I made a bad summary, we can work off of that as well. I am prone to oversimplifying things and maybe writing in a misleading fashion by accident. In case I made an error in my summary, I apologize in advance)

EDIT: A lot of my example came from these two paragraphs from the original article:

> Adding additional assembly lines, especially unautomated ones, would require many more workers on the car than originally planned. In meetings, Musk lost track of the numbers. He kept talking about having around 30,000 employees, when in fact the head count with outside contracts had grown to more than 40,000. (Musk’s attention was said to sometimes wander after the start of budget presentations.) Deepak Ahuja, the returned CFO, finally had to gently confront Musk with the fact that the company now had many more people.

> Musk didn’t take it well. It was the kind of detail that he latched on to, as if it crystallized a bigger issue, namely that Tesla’s cost structure wasn’t working. The plan had been for Tesla to break even on a rate of 2,500 Model 3s a week. But the added manual labor was jacking up the cost. Ahuja’s new calculations that spring didn’t have the company breaking even at 5,000 a week. Musk began to freeze spending, including a halt to plans to dramatically increase the size of service and delivery centers across North America. Musk wanted to slash jobs as quickly as they could.
> I can't help but wonder why, now, someone has chosen to highlight what is still far too small a movement and treat it as though it were a dangerous threat, and then demonize it by associating it with a few of its wealthier proponents.

I agree. It's a clear signal of people trying to nip an idea in the bud.

The thing that they don't mention is that we have a way of dealing with risk that isn't "all or nothing" - insurance.

When people pile on billionaires for paving the way toward having people on more than one planet, I just consider it an extremely small premium to pay relative to global GDP to avert a real risk. The world can do many things like that.
> But it's possible that secretly planting a ProxyHam on someone else's network might be interpreted as unauthorized access under America's draconian and vague Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

If that were what caused him to stop the project, he'd be able to say so.
You are not very representative of society

Tesla is worth 600 billion dollars. Means the world is very impatient to buy their cars actually.

Also, you don't get to decide how people behave and treat each other. The social equilibrium is such that you only get to decide on your behaviors.
> The $180K is the max I could get in my industry

How do you know that for a fact? I think you hint at this a bit in your previous comments, but if your city / field are small to the point that every employer is like any other and that there's no variance in compensation, you're SOL. One way to solve this is remote work, if applicable to your field.
I don’t understand where AI-safety research is ever meaningfully competing with renewable energy for resources. The article is making the case that these two types of progress are mutually exclusive, without any evidence. What’s a plausible scenario where the environmentally conscious choice today comes at the expense of individuals living 10000 years from now?
I really don’t like when people call the employees “Geniuses”. You don’t have to follow the marketing crap. It’s worse than “Sandwich Artists” at Subway.
That lumping is, again, descriptive. And it's an often-useful description/category in large part because of that historical racism.

Getting worked up over that is a huge waste of time, to the point that I now wonder if it's a sideshow. If we waste our time arguing about if this "the diverse hires left and the new hires after them were white" description is bad, we've been successfully distracted.

The idea that anyone is actually offended or feels harmed by that paragraph we're talking about is absurd - could you imagine how such people would feel if they were part of one of the out-groups instead and didn't just get lumped together but also had been attacked by the centuries of racism in the US?

This is the paragraph in question, once again:

> For example, I once worked for a company that poured a lot of effort into inclusive hiring: they made an inclusion skills rubric, placed ads in “diverse” tech spaces, et cetera. Two years later, all the “diverse people” they had carefully collected had left, and the company had backfilled with almost exclusively cishet white guys.

If you don't let yourself look at the demographics, you blind yourself to any ability to evaluate effectiveness in terms of fighting the historical and present effects of white supremacy in the US. Note that the "diverse people" are similarly lumped together because it's non-judgmentally discussing the effects of a policy, nothing more. I don't see any way someone takes offense at that paragraph, but I see lots of ways someone would pretend to in order to make reactionary/distracting claims about if we even need to try to fight that historical racism.
> should we presume this was strategically ordered by upper management and not just someone at the location just assumed outside material wasn't allowed?

They don't even need to do that. It's far smarter to set a policy forbidding that, then set up the incentives so some lower level guy feels a lot of pressure to break it. If he does, he's your fall guy. That way you can have your cake and eat it too: unethical conduct to support your objectives, muddy enough waters to shield you from blame, and a nice little PR show about how ethical you are and how much you care.
I'm not sure you've shown that. I would be surprised if any meaningful number of (non-arranged) marriages are established in year zero of the relationship. A quick Google search suggests to me that the average relationship is established five years before getting married.

The original assertion was that relationships tend to break down in year four, meaning that they aren't likely to make it to marriage in the typical case. Marriage data is only relevant to the outliers who married early, and as far as that goes they could all be found in that 20% quite easily, I'm sure. The data provided is not sufficient to know.
False. In many teams half of the engineers are randomly put on pip and cannot switch team.
At Stacker (YC S20) we do something kind of in between, hoping to catch usecases where people need an actual app just as they are outgrowing the spreadsheet, by allowing you to build an app... from your spreadsheet!

It should be interesting for anyone who's done a lot of thinking* about the relationship between spreadsheets, no code, and custom software. Check us out: https://stackerhq.com

* if this is you, and you're really interested, we're hiring. Email in my profile :-)
these are not the certainties you think they are. You are confusing speculation with demonstration. Astroid hitting earth is a far bigger threat to humanity than any scientifically demonstrated consequence of climate change. You are not on the scientific ground you think you are.
Yes! Exactly. Maybe I failed to convey this succinctly. My original question was "What about when this happens, what do we do?"
It’d be nice to see an actual cost breakdown. All-in cost per brick laid at a certain capacity factor between major maintenance events and so on.
Note how security guards are being employed to carry out the will of management

Yes, it falls under the concept of "Guard Labor", basically any workers who don't contribute even indirectly to planning and management or implementation of projects & initiatives. That can be actual guards, managers whose only purpose is to make sure people are doing their job, etc. Work required to keep the status quo as the status quo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guard_labor
I didn't know that, learnt somthing today, Thank You!

Again, as a non technical person, why a software needs access to entire internet instead of whitelisted domains specific to its requirements is beyond me, since we already know how UNIX permission system works. Is it so hard to extend that to networks? Especially since everything is file in UNIX? Kindly pardon my ignorance :-)
Cash is one of the last ways for human persons to exchange value without having a corporate intermediary or government institution act on their behalf. Human cultures will be losing quite a bit if they allow nation states to progressively ban person to person interactions like this.

It also creates a very fragile, expensive to maintain society in which transactions are not possible during emergencies.
Yes and no, there are still workers per se but I don't think they exist with the conception of themselves as that (as much). During the 20th century when the labor movement was strong class consciousness existed and there was an appetite for a conception of the self as a worker in relation to capital and society. I think it still exists but in a pretty inconsequential way. Technology has definitely played a factor in atomizing workers and automating away for labor intensive tasks.
There are several factors:

1. Organizations will often see bumping up an employee's pay to match another offer as some variant of extortion and it's they view this as disloyal. Never mind that the other offer clearly shows they're now below market. I didn't say it makes sense;

2. There is friction in changing jobs and companies and people will generally have a threshold for making that jump (eg they won't switch for less than a 20% raise). So over the entire pool of employees it's cheaper to let a few go than give everyone a raise when many wouldn't leave;

3. Companies have a philosophy that you do the job you get promoted to first and then you get promoted to it and paid subsequently. Worse, often it takes time for things like equity to catch up. You may get a discretionary grant when you get promoted or you might not. And it can take years of annual refreshes to get to the total comp off a new hire at the same level;

4. Organizations seem to make the standards higher for existing rather than new employees. I think this is in part to avoid level and compensation inflation;

5. Up to a certain point there is an expectation of growth. Some of this is formal (eg up to T5 at Google). Some of it is more informal. They make the determination that even though you're at a terminal level and that's fine, if you've been there for years you're probably not going any higher so you won't be one of their future leaders or stars; and

6. Diversity. Tech companies have explicit goals around having certain minorities essentially over-represented compared to the demographics of, say, CS graduates. I guarantee you such explicit goals create perverse incentives that extend to how they handle retention.
A charger capable of providing higher wattage (energy/second) allows a device to charge faster.

By now, device, USB characteristics and battery care services determine how much is used.

For example, my Xperia uses extra slow charging every once in a while for battery longevity - using the otherwise fastcharging adapter.
In this particular example, it's not a false equivalence at all. The NLRB specifically does not give special protection to union literature. As long as the employer treats all literature equally (such as soccer literature, harry potter literature, etc), they are allowed to ban non-work literature in work areas during work time. Union literature does not get any special treatment.

see: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/shop-talk-rules-unio...
Any good resource for alternative usbc/iphone chargers that don't cost an arm?

I've relied on Benson's reviews in the past for USBC cables, but I'd love to have somewhere a list of expertly curated products.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/profile/amzn1.account.AFLICGQRF6BR...
Thanks. I heard the battery is "smarter" in the sense that it has some chips.
So they searched his property for stolen art, which led to this. I wonder what predicate they used to search his house the first time.

Seems fishy, one way or another. Either he is dealing in stolen art, and got what he deserved. Or he isn't dealing in stolen art and got screwed.
At what point does someone who is consistently a dick become a diagnosable sociopath?
My choice for SQLite would be Super Giant. Pretty much all of their games can be used as an argument in favor of videogames being a form of art.
Sorry for not being civil. I was feeling irate at the time and took things way overboard when a lot of your comment was probably intended to help.
And if you've been in that kind of rare environment, those people encrypt everything. They'd encrypt their license plate if they could. You want paranoid, look up laser microphones.
The general trend of microservices and making everything a distributed system with the data smeared across dozens of separate services.

It makes the development experience terrible, introduces a new set of bugs and failure modes you have to consider, and is unnecessary in the vast majority of cases.

Maybe there are some people that legitimately enjoy dealing with this complexity, but for me engineering is simply a tool to solve clients' business problems so I can get paid, and the least engineering I have to do (and my client has to maintain down the line) the better.

I've ranted about this before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28025934 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22877650.
Yes I own some. I ask because you seem so sure that there are major problems at the company.
> Kind of, but differences in time will forever deviate from the SI second so I don't think that really counts.

I don't follow. Outside of days with a leap second, you are using the SI second.

If you're measuring skew via raw-seconds-since-epoch or something similar, that's already an error-prone measurement. It's a non-goal for smeared UTC to be synchronized with TAI, just as it's a non-goal for unsmeared UTC to be synchronized with TAI.
Per year? Usually only director and higher levels make $1m+/yearly (not accounting for stock appreciation).
The crucial aspect you're missing is from the latter half of the skepticalscience.com link I posted above. Here is the particular graph that shows usage of "global warming" vs "climate change":

https://static.skepticalscience.com/pics/climate-change-v-gl...

Both terms were in common usage, with "climate change" existing before "global warming". It's not "rebranding" to realize that of the various terms in common usage, one of them is more accurate. "climate change" started rising relatively in popularity around 1994 after being roughly equal to "global warming", a decade before Watts' conspiracy theories.

> https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/4141....
> https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/14/the-conversation-ther...

Anthony Watts dances around understanding here, and writes "It is an unequivocal fact that the terms “climate change” and “global warming” have both been in use for a long time." So he agrees with the link I posted above. The PDF doesn't disagree, much as he'd like it to. Saying "climate change might be a better labelling than global warming" isn't saying "therefore we should rebrand it". It's agreeing that "climate change" is better than "global warming", but then detailing why "climate change" doesn't even capture everything going on.

> https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a30524/renaming-g...

That's honestly just a bad title. The article can be summed up however by the last sentence: "Rebranding a complex issue that most people think has already been rebranded ...". In other words, it disagrees with you: there was no rebranding from "global warming" to "climate change".

> https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obamas-science-adviser-...
> https://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/a-rebranding-for-...
> https://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/global-warming-re...

Holdren is saying why "global warming" isn't a great term. He's not arguing for a rebranding, he's pointing out why it stopped being as popular of a term 15 years prior to his speech. He does argue for rebranding to "global climate disruption", but that's irrelevant to your claim about "global warming" vs "climate change".

> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/17/why-the-...
> https://www.euronews.com/green/2019/05/20/guardian-style-gui...

This is a rebranding, from "climate change" to "climate crisis". We can argue about whether it's a good change, but it's irrelevant to your claim about "global warming" vs "climate change".

> https://www.quora.com/Why-did-people-start-using-the-term-cl...

Almost all of the answers there point out that it's a myth, agreeing with the skepticalscience.com link I posted above. The few answers that try to push that myth are diatribes that don't cite any supporting evidence.
The second .gov link has hyperlinks. But yes it’s a bit obscure. Did you find the answer?
Ah ok. When reading the article, I don't get the impression that they try to frame themselves as somewhat ethical, I think that may be an interpretation by some of us here.
I think you either haven't actually read the article, any of the replies in this thread or you're just a troll.

We're not here to educate you, just look up the current US labor laws and see for yourself whether or not your argument has any standing.
Ask HN: Industrial Music for Working
Hi, any suggestions about Industrial music to listen to while working?

Ministry is good, also found good stuff by a band called Scorn. Thanks
I want working professionally yet, but as a student studying computer science at an undergraduate level, I did many projects at home while connected over a SSH session. Windows remote desktop was mostly usable at those speeds though with some lag (but that could be d somewhat overcome using keyboard shortcuts instead of the mouse).

I imagine working from home could be done in that setting.
Apple should have designed the keyboard with older devices in mind, then. It's a little bit frustrating from a developer standpoint, knowing that the entire purpose of the T2 chip is to facilitate this exact type of "next generation" hardware, yet it's being laid to waste since the engineers didn't want to factor in back-compat.
randsinrepose has a great article on that concept, called the old guard. Definitely worth a read. How an engineer goes from an exciting new project to maintenance mode over time. It's the natural state of things.

https://randsinrepose.com/archives/the-old-guard/
Somebody should have told the financial institutions in Batman: The Dark Knight Rises that throwing away very obvious unwanted transactions was an option!
I'm mostly summarizing from the article. Of course, information could be wrong. But I recall the "Elon banging head" incident from years past being reported in the news, and being further elaborated in this article.

>> As he sputtered about the lack of danger from a slow-speed line, he began head-butting the front end of a car on the assembly line. “I don’t see how this could hurt me,” he said. “I want the cars to just keep moving.” A senior engineering manager tried to interject that it was designed as a safety measure. Musk screamed at him: “Get out!”

This is not the first time I've seen this reported.

---------

In any case, Elon's skill at pumping the stock price higher cannot be denied. I'd be a fool to short the stock against someone like that (A small investor such as myself would only get margin-called). I prefer an older, simpler investment style. I find companies I like, then I buy them. I see no reason to short stocks at all, plenty of opportunity in just buying what's good out there.

I'm sure these long-term issues will come home to roost somehow. But I don't know the timing of it. So no point shorting unless I knew exactly when it all collapses. A short thesis is not only "I think the company is in trouble", but also is about having confidence in the __timing__ of those troubles.

Ex: A great example is a hypothetical time-traveler who tells someone "Worldcom is cooking the books" in the early 1990s. Any trader who acted on that knowledge would have had their shorts blown out of the water by the 90s runup and tech bubble, and won't be "correct" until well over a decade later (long after many margin calls would have wiped out their position entirely). Its not enough to be correct about a stock when you're short. You have to be both correct about the timing AND direction.
the will come over time, just not yet as its still to expensive and there is still too much generational baggage to force the change.