skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He's really good at raising money. Which is a skill. An incredibly useful skill, and arguably more important for someone in the position of CEO.

He's grabbed $20+ Billion for Tesla. He's grabbed multiple Billions for SpaceX. Its a totally different skill than his persona identifies with. No one else I know of in the modern market has successfully grabbed as much money from people as he has.

---------

Pretty much every time I've seen him go back to the market (be it 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020...) to ask for more money, he convinces the banks, the stock traders, everyone to give him more money over-and-over-and-over again. Not just a little bit of money either: the amount keeps growing bigger and bigger.

Which btw: happens to be the skill Edison had over Tesla. But Edison made a lasting company (General Electric) for over a century, while Tesla died dirt poor with only his patents in his name. So once again: the Edison model of raising money and hyping up your inventions win again (even if your underlings made the inventions. But you can always buy more underlings with the money you raise)

Making a $Billion mistake really isn't a big deal when you can raise something like $3 or $4 Billion per year from stock market deals and hype.

Many others try to do what Elon Musk does. But they all fail. Elon Musk is the king of raising money.
Correct, when the program starts to run and imports the modules, as nothing will make admins more aware that something is really wrong here. Maybe raise an exception which, if not handled, executes sys.exit() with a predefined code.

And some mechanism to detect this at install/build time as well, so that automated built systems can cleanly abort a build and issue a specific message which can then be forwarded via email or SMS through some custom code.

The entire package gets replaced by a standardized, friendly one. No harmful code gets downloaded.
Illinois resident and business owner here.

Our company is an LLC (set up on the Secretary of State website for $150) but we elected to be taxed as an S-Corporation by filling out and submitting the FREE Form 2553 obtained from the IRS website. We had this set up 8 years ago and have not had any problems/issues since. I'm sure you can do the same for a C-Corp.

The link to the IRS Tax-Election section is https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe....

Let me know if you have any additional questions.

Good luck.
I can't imagine that you are arguing that non-white, non-cis, and non-hetro people haven't been prejudiced against by whitecishetromales. That's where the "turnabout" comes into play.

If you are pointing out that the "turnabout" is also prejudicial, then I obviously agree. The point I was making is that when it is misapplied, it's potentially helpful (in creating additional awareness in those who are on some spectrum of "allied") and when it is accurately applied, it's detrimental (as it is likely to lead to "defensiveness and entrenchment"). In this way, it may also serve as a way to measure our own position.

Also, I don't think anyone knows whether "many" is accurate. The same point is made by saying "some."
> Just this week a drunk driver passed out and the Tesla safely slowed down to a stop

Maybe that 'driver' shouldn't be behind the wheel in the first place given that he was drunk? You have to knowingly get inside of the car and start it up all manually to use it.

Does being drunk give a pass to everyone behind the wheel to do the same thing? You are still putting other drivers at risk regardless of the car that is driven, even especially what you are using is beta software.

I wouldn't want to use such software that confuses the moon with a traffic light [0]

[0] https://twitter.com/JordanTeslaTech/status/14184133078625853...
After everything Elon has said about funding secured, robotaxis, cave divers, journalists, whistleblowers, specs, FSD, Covid, ... I find it puzzling people take everything he says at face value. Yes, he is an incredibly smart and visionary guy, who also has a track record of saying things he doesn't mean.
Some of the new ultra-compact chargers are using switching regulators based on GaN transistors, which are a fairly new technology. These are more efficient and hence can be smaller for the same power envelope. Some of the Anker products use these, not sure about the one you linked.

But similar logic applies even for the ones that aren't using GaN. More efficient parts and/or designs allowing for more and more shrinkage. One of the other big drivers has been manufacturers starting to market monolithic chips that manage all the aspects of power regulation and USB-PD in a single/small number of parts.
He's OCD. If he could find somebody else willing to consistently put in 100 hour weeks and drive the ship the way Elon wants, I think he'd let go of the reigns.
The founding of OpenAI was prompted by some of the ideas of Bostrom and co. So yeah, the ideas deserve to be looked by a wide segment of society than those who normally considered "rationalism".
It maybe but independent housing has it downside: commute time and high cost.
>The term "CDN" ("content delivery network") conjures Google-scale companies managing huge racks of hardware, wrangling hundreds of gigabits per second. But CDNs are just web applications. That's not how we tend to think of them, but that's all they are. You can build a functional CDN on an 8-year-old laptop while you're sitting at a coffee shop.

huh yeah never thought about it

I blame how CDNs are advertised for the visual disconnect
> This may sound a bit weird but haven't you noticed they all are psychopaths?

Easier to get to the top - and stay there - if you don't care about anything (or anyone) else. Even better if you can do so while projecting a different image.

This may not be true for all CEOs. If you choose only the billionaires as examples, there could be some selection bias at play.
To this I'd add what is colloquialy referred to as a "Chinese wall", so that even insiders aren't aware of the full picture.
You could literally use one of those bog standard black PC laptop chargers as a weapon and it would be fine. Those things are indestructible. You could repel off a cliff with one. Have you ever seen one frayed or damaged at all? I haven't. Meanwhile, go to any college lecture hall and you will find about half the macbook chargers are covered in tape or frayed. This is "You are holding it wrong" all over again.

Maybe the macbook charger is stronger than your expensive RF cables, but it is far weaker than anything else the competition puts out and that's a huge annoyance, as a mac user myself who gets maybe 3 years out of a given apple cable, be it magsafe charger, lightning cable, or even the wired headphones. It's a distinctly Apple issue, cables in my hands from other manufacturers, even no name junk looking cables, don't have these issues.
Putting people in to computer simulations could itself be considered an existential threat to humanity.

This is because mind uploading could be considered either suicide or murder (if the biological person dies in the process), and the resulting artificial being might itself either not be alive or not human (or at least not the same person as the biological human it's supposed to be, as the biological person is a separate being).

So if all humans were uploaded, then no humans would be left -- which would by definition be an existential risk to humanity.

Even if not all humans are uploaded, but a lot of them are, then the uploaded hive of beings (or whatever you want to call it) could itself either compete with or otherwise want to impose its will on biological humanity, which could itself present an existential risk of a more conventional sort.

There's also no practical way to put odds on what will happen in the distant future, Humans are notoriously bad at making predictions, even about the next 100 years. When I read quotes like that in the article like:

"Bostrom writes that if there is "a mere 1 percent chance" that 10^54 conscious beings (most living in computer simulations) come to exist in the future, then "we find that the expected value of reducing existential risk by a mere one billionth of one billionth of one percentage point is worth a hundred billion times as much as a billion human lives.""

this seems like unjustified handwaving. There's no evidence that even a single human could exist in a computer simulation. At this point it's just wishful thinking that it will ever happen.

The "friendly AI" goal is also hubristically misguided. There's no reason to think a superintelligent being would remain in the paltry little cage stupid humans dream up for it. It might be "friendly" at first, or merely seem friendly, but in a little time (or eventually) it is likely to escape and do whatever it wants.
Alma | Engineering & Design | Healthtech | NYC/Remote(USA)

At Alma, we’re making it easier for consumers to access high-quality, affordable mental health care by supporting providers in building thriving private practices. We recently raised a $28M Series B and are hiring for many roles, but specially for the Product and Engineering team!

- Backend engineer (https://grnh.se/f74115b22us)

- Senior Backend engineer (https://grnh.se/32a5f75d2us)

- Product Designer (https://grnh.se/85c98c642us)

- All Open Roles (https://grnh.se/b453f6d82us)

Our stack is Python, Django, MySQL & React.
didn't amazon buy out blazegraph? eg no more active open source effort?
I have not been to Japan, but I have read several fairly detailed accounts coming from multiple travel bloggers.

One thing they all pointed out is that Japan is full of what by our standards would be considered semi-antique technology like trolleys from the 1950s and computers and fax machines from the 1990s, that are all still being used, and maintained in really good condition.

Living in Tokyo, do you notice this as well? I assume this sort of commitment to maintenance / "orderliness" must be cultural?

What do the really bad parts of Tokyo look like?
If you're so concerned about it you can just buy the stock with the 2 year signing bonus that makes up for the stock vesting.
Exploring the SameSite cookie attribute for preventing CSRF
"This means reacting well to the news that an executive would like to move on." -- I took this section to be talking about accepting it when an executive quits. Some people handle this really well, and others don't.
This reads almost identically to Steve Jobs history at Apple revealed in Walter Isaacson's biography of him.

> But it’s a difficult and exhausting book. Jobs was a world-class asshole. He was a selfish, self-centered man who heaped abuse on everyone around him. After a few hours, the catalog of tantrums, tirades and put-downs wears thin. You may have huge admiration for Jobs’s accomplishments, but it can be hard to hear in detail how the sausage was made.

> He was brutal about it. At one point, he decided to lay off most of the staff that worked on the Lisa, the unsuccessful precursor to the Macintosh:

> “You guys failed,” he said, looking directly at the Lisa team. “You’re a B team. B players. Too many people here are B or C players, so today we are releasing some of you to have the opportunity to work at our sister companies here in the valley.”

> Most people are socialized to be nice to others, to value friendship or feelings over the interests of the corporation. Jobs turned those priorities on their head. When asked why he was so nasty, he said it made the company better. “Part of my responsibility is to be a yardstick of quality,” he told BusinessWeek. “Some people aren’t used to an environment where excellence is expected.”

https://www.cultofmac.com/126245/steve-jobs-the-world-class-...
I have some major problems with this article. It jumps right to the point with black and white positioning that society can only prioritize longterm goals or climate change, and the two of them are at odds.

It also mischaracterizes the idea of existential threats as a fringe idea about the happiness of hypothetical simulated in the future. While this has been used to explore ethical questions, much like the trolley problem, the mainstream definition and application of existential threat is events that would cause humanity to go extinct.

The article also fails to engage with the fundamental philosophical and ethical claims it attributes to the longtermists. It doesn't say where and how their logic is faulty, it just ridicules the conclusions as outrageous and plays up the moral outrage.

YES, there are pitfalls in ethical evaluations with massive hypothetical outcomes. What solution do they offer... ignore the questions, don't think analyze or explore them? Don't iterate and improve them?
Ah, I see how I communicated that poorly - it's not that the meetings aren't there, it's that they're oriented towards production.
This article doesn’t do much but scoff at things and then ask the reader to agree.

Longtermism is a perfectly reasonable stance to take, and no one is advocating that today’s problems should actually be dismissed - just that we need to balance those against these existential-type threats.

And we do this in our daily lives all the time. We deal with daily crises, but also plan for the future! Just like with a human life, we are encourage each other to live our best lives and reach our potentials, whatever those may be. Why can’t that be applied to a civilization, too?

Longtermism is nothing more than the civilization-scale version of saying “no” to drugs, or making the decision to stay in school rather than dropping out, or not getting in the car with a drunk driver. Each of those decisions poses an existential threat to the idea of a person’s future.

Deciding not to engage in destructive behavior so that your future remains full of possibilities does not mean that you must neglect immediate problems like where your next meal will come from or an argument you had with your spouse.

Basically, it’s my opinion that this article’s author is mostly attacking a strawman, with some not-very-well-thought-through moral grandstanding on top.
> I think it's specifically a disease of the frontend community to believe that nothing you knew about programming 3 years ago is relevant anymore.

Exactly, and it is a shame. Stability and building on the shoulders of giants is how progress is made. Not by rewriting everything all the time.

Luckily I don't work on frontend UI stuff. I learned UNIX, kernels, cryptography, TCP/IP, SQL and similar technologies in the late 80s to early 90s. While all of these areas have evolved and progressed, it's been a gradual incremental change year to year. A textbook on any of these topics from 1990 is still recognizably relevant, even where details have changed over the decades.
Semi related. The power cable to my one year old iMac Pro started to get sticky to the touch only a few months after I installed it. It's like it is melting.
> Please leave diagnostics for professionals.

> asperger spectrum

This is no longer recognized in the DSM-5.
Based on prior comments from the seller, for the life. And so nobody else has to compute it, that's:

5,256,000 minutes in 10 years (ignoring leap years)

500,000,000 bytes of data (assuming mega and not mebi)

An average of 95 bytes a minute per device over that 10 years, or an average of 951 bytes every 10 minutes, or more than 5k an hour. For event messages, that seems like something that can be worked within fairly easily, depending on use.
AI is 98%-likelihood “benign” (i.e. just a tool, which is certainly not benign for those of us that it gets used against!) and 1%-likelihood world-ending catastrophe, like grey goo or nuclear armageddon. (Made-up percentages that don't even sum to 100%.) I don't think we have much to worry about for a while, because brains are pretty efficient, very few computers are as powerful as human brains, and there's a limit to the damage an evil human with internet access can do… isn't there? So I think AI risk is bounded by evil-human risk for the next ten years, at least.

Climate change isn't a risk – there's still some uncertainty about it, but it's happening. Saying it's a risk is like saying riptides are a risk while you're in one. No! It's a danger! Get out of it by swimming perpendicularly to the shore!
Definitely. I am addicted using the large iPad chargers for iPhones. Is this wrong? I am under the imagination that they are far superior, i.e. charge faster!
If that's absurd it's only because ant's cant talk, or comprehend trade agreements, which people can.
https://www.tesla.com/elon-musk
Like everyone getting frustrated with the buggy core.async and just using JS promises directly?

In Clojure/JVM core.async has less problems though.
Note how security guards are being employed to carry out the will of management, even though no safety/security situation obtains.

In general, security arrangements involve a transaction of unquestioning obedience to authority in exchange for preferential treatment, which can then be leveraged by the authority holder to pursue illegitimate ends, eg doing things that are outside the legal scope of managers (in the private sector) or elected officials (in the public). Because security personnel are delegated enforcement authority, instant challenges to them are treated as breaches of security; challenges can only be made administratively, even though the act of enforcement can change the fact situation sufficiently to render the administrative challenge impossible or moot (ie people give up because pursuing the administrative route is often not worth the trouble).

The security officer's dilemma is that doing their job requires them to not think very much about what they are asked to do. If they begin to have thoughts of their own about what is ethical or not and decline to assist an authority figure who asks them to do something unethical, then they risk loss of their security status and are suddenly treated as a security problem themselves. It's int he interest of authority figures to excuse and cover for minor lapses of security officer behavior so that when the authority figure wants something illegitimate, they have leverage over their security apparatus. Overly scrupulous security personnel don't get promoted.

It's worth considering that a high portion of our economy is based on the use of guard labor (not including regular law enforcement) and that this may have or perpetuate distorting economic effects: https://www.brown.edu/Departments/Economics/Faculty/Glenn_Lo...
Neither Tim Cook nor Sundar Pichai "count" as both became CEO when those companies were already S&P 500 components. That said I did not mean to imply that fast growing companies could only be built by abusive CEOs and I apologize for claiming otherwise.
> I think everyone does this to some extent.

They do, and that's fine. Politicians and people like him do it more frequently than, say, Larry Ellison.

What we shouldn't do is take a carefully-curated public persona, and try to extrapolate too hard about how <that person> 'really' behaves.
someone in the process of drowning, as in exhaustion and/or panic causing ineffective motions that do not get the head far enough above water to take an adequate breath won't be able to splash or yell.

Someone who is not exhausted and not technically drowning yet but who will be if left for another 10,15,60 or whatever minutes does have the ability to yell and splash.
FYI, it’s not new, all the USB-C stuff has this. My 2016 MacBook Pro came with a USB-C charger with replaceable cable.
I run my own worldwide anycast network and still end up deploying stuff to Fly because it is so much easier.

The folks who actually run the network for them are super clueful and basically the best in the industry.
Same here. I believe it happens, I see the frayed cables everywhere, but the MagSafe charger from my 2009 MacBook and the lightning cable that came with my iPhone 5 in 2012 are still perfectly fine and sees regular use in my car.

The strain relief on these cables is practically nonexistent, so I won't put the blame squarely on abusive users.
Anyone seriously trying to tell people they shouldn't work to address climate change should rightfully be decried for causing harm. But the angle of trying to paint everyone thinking about existential risk with that brush is itself irresponsible and inaccurate.

There are lots of people spouting things like "don't bother about climate change", and that harmful group has almost no overlap with anyone thinking seriously about the future of humanity. Taking the vanishingly small intersection and drumming it up for outsized outrage is ridiculous and harmful.

Another, far less ridiculous angle would be "here's a tiny group of wealthy people with weirdly contradictory viewpoints". Perhaps that might not have gathered as many clicks, though.
I wonder if there's a third option, a decentralized government of small nodes, which can orchestrate their activity to rapidly scale in the need of large resource projects.
To reply to the title and not the article, tech companies do pay engineers to stay…just probably not you. That’s the point of RSUs, LTI, and other grants that are unlocked through retention. More get released to employees during their tenure based on performance. If you aren’t being paid to stay, chances are that was a systemic consequence of performance. Not always, but usually.

There are pros and cons to losing employees, and quite often it’s Pareto optimal to let people move on to bring in new talent. Engineers are generally paid pretty well, so money is rarely what a departure is about. I’ve seen a lot of engineers go, and only once was money the first reason.
People not supporting the duopoly will be disadvantaged, those who use GNU/Linux smartphones (Librem 5 and Pinephone).
My guess is that it has an analog-to-digital converter to measure the line voltage at high frequency and a microcontroller to analyze the data to look for transients that indicate arcing. I found a datasheet for an arc-fault detector chip for solar panels which would be similar concepts: https://supp.iczoom.com/images/public/20181016/1539670869717...
>He then made viscous and immature smears against someone actually helping

Telling someone to stick a large object up their ass is mature to you? And somehow not attention seeking?
This ignores something very important: tribal knowledge.

Truth is, losing a tenured engineer carries a MUCH larger cost than HR and some managers seem to understand-- these engineers understand the nuances behind why certain decisions were made, what kinds of things tend to work and don't, minutiae of various systems that simply will never get documented, etc. Not to mention the influence they can carry in the org.

You're not wrong that a lot of engineers stagnate after a few years... but it's a big logical jump to put that blame on them rather than the org they're joining.

That said, I like to always call out that there are "developers" and there are "engineers". The majority of software roles call for the former and these tend to be more "replaceable". It's harder to say that for the latter where they are involved in more strategic technical decisions.
Apple Macbook charger was the only one charger in my life which released magic smoke. I must admit that it was after I soldered new cable and assembled it with duct tape (because it was glued and I broke the plastic casing trying to pry it off), but that does not inspire much confidence in me anyway. I don't know why everyone prays Apple hardware which was so terrible in my life in so many occasions and the only reason I tolerate it is their good software.
I have trouble with this for two reasons:

- If am a resource critical enough for the company to match an external offer and keep me because of the work I do and not because I'm threatening to leave, why don't they act on it diligently and offer benefits accordinly (relevant pay raises, shares and etc.)?

- The moment the company becomes aware that I'm considering to leave for some place else, I'm a potential replacement, if a good candidate or a layoff comes along.

If I'm interviewing some place else, when I put my notice, I've made up my mind, I won't stay around long term.