skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From what I can tell, a "bad relationship" with employer particularly in competitive tech fields is a direct result of poor performance by the employee, which actually seems reasonable. I don't think it makes sense to introduce bureaucracy with the explicit purpose of covering for poor performance, as that pummels incentives to actually perform well at work. It seems actively unfair to people that are doing their job well if a union is covering for people that aren't.

Of course, a union can offer other benefits, but the downside of devaluing good performance seems strikingly not worthwhile.
If you never intend to raise again after YC, I'm pretty sure that would be defrauding them. YC expects that you build VC-scale companies which require several rounds of additional funding, anything else is a failure, if I understand correctly.
I think typically there is just 1 union. Otherwise you don't have as much collective bargaining power. I don't want to form unions over single issues.
Ask HN: Fly under radar or market openly?
I'm building a new product/service in a relatively well established space.

The product is already built and I'm struggling with a decision -- should I launch it but not splash the internets with word about it or should I be open and post it to relevant industry forums etc.

I know the prevailing wisdom about not worrying about this because 9/10 times there's crickets, so stealth would be foolish. I'm not worried about demand - there is tons and it's already being served, just more sub optimally than what I intend to do.

This is a 2-sided platform, so there is the chicken and egg problem. Launching to communities/forums/publicly has the advantage of getting out of the gate somewhat quicker but it will also bring it to the notice of more players quickly. I'm an indie developer and don't have a ton of resources to compete if someone with more resources moves quicker to launch and grow and a similar thing before I'm ready to take them on (some growth under belt).

On the other hand, one approach is to selectively reach out to customers and users, at least for a little while. But the downside is that it'll take me a lot longer to seed the platform with sufficient demand and supply.

How do you weigh such a decision? Is this a false dichotomy?

To be clear, I'm not trying to protect my special snowflake idea. I'm just trying to be tactical about what approach makes sense given my resources to move faster than a more well funded platform.
A union won't help you get your own tailored work situation, where you enjoy never ever being contacted after hours.

They'll work for a situation where everyone gets that, and everyone is treated the same. That's the whole point.

Goodbye work flexibility for your entire company.
Tech Ingredients on YouTube reciently did some videos about increasing small scale solar efficiency by adding DIY reflector panels.

Overview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKhszB4E1_M

Build instructions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knlQFlxCwrs
I wonder about this. I sometimes think my social skills would've been more developed had I had pre-school, daycare, etc, like most of my friends throughout school had had. How much of my social late-developing was that they had years of practice on me from the day when I started kindergarten?
They are surprisingly different.

Ruby has a focus on developer joy and productivity. In some cases this comes to the detriment of language simplicity, and existing features can complicate language evolution.

Surprisingly with this complexity Ruby has had a bit more success with optimized implementations than Python, such as Truffle Ruby.

Ruby is a bit more multi-paradigm than Python IMHO, and has been jokingly called a "language for connecting adults". One can monkey-patch override division to return fractions, with the person maintaining the project deciding if this is a good idea or not. This can potentially make projects with a large number of dependencies harder to debug, which interestingly seems to have created some push-back on importing lots of arbitrary dependencies.

With both Python and Ruby, you wind up having divisions between dependencies because of the poor mismatch between different paradigms - for instance, libraries built to work with Python Twisted or Ruby EventMachine for I/O, or libraries built to work generically or to integrate into say Django on Python's side or Rails on Ruby's side.

Interestingly the communities seem to have different key focus areas - Ruby has historically been very focused on testing (cucumber and selenium for instance) while Python has had a lot of focus on documentation (pydoc and sphinx). Oddly, neither really has had a noticeable literate programming push.
> The dynamics seem likely to swing even more in favor of founders.

What makes you say that?
Anytime.

Total aside, I think it's funny that many 'classic herbivores' like deer, horses, moose, etc, will absolutely eat other animals if the opportuntiy presents it. Vegetarians and vegans have chosen a dietary extreme that even the animals they strive to protect/save/whatever don't display.
There is no "by reference" in Common Lisp; everything is a value. Some values have reference semantics. This makes no difference unless you're mutating, or making unwarranted assumptions about the eq function.

To understand most code, you can just pretend that all values have reference semantics. If mutation is going on and/or the eq function is being used, you have to prick up your ears and pay attention to that detail.
You sure are reaching really far to claim that someone giving you something for free owes you even more.
Facebook Product Data Science has always been a Product Analyst role more than anything else. I did the interviews a while back, and it was a pretty fun experience, but it's not what a lot of people call data science.
> There is no description of what the PR does which is pretty bad form.

The description is in the first paragraph of the PR body text:

> This PR adds support for shared-memory parallelism through domains and direct-style concurrency through effect handlers (without syntactic support). It intends to have backwards compatibility in terms of language features, C API, and also the performance of single-threaded code.
I’ve been in this position myself. To be fair, you aren’t bootstrapping if you’re taking YC funds, right?

They are seeking returns on this investment in the magnitude seen in previous YC company IPOs, as mentioned in the article. Is a bootstrapped company likely to have that outcome? Possibly, but much less likely than those that have swelled with additional funding rounds and more rapid/predictable public interest.
Rust does the same thing with tuples.
> There is another counter balancing force...numerous other opportunities.

The "take it or leave it" attitude strongly insinuates that corporations should be allowed dictatorial control over the manner in which work is completed. There are too many examples to point to which demonstrate the b.s. in this line of thinking.

I may be reading too much into what you wrote, but I never understand the libertarian need to reject government and union control but embrace everything corporate. It's plain weird.
Did you see the commit before it was deleted? I'd love to see a lawyer claiming anything else.
Really small?

How many russians in america are actually sleeper agents?
> Kids need a lot of attention

I'm not sure that's the case. They demand lots of attention, sure, and it's often hard for adults to say "no" as they leverage their ever-gushing cuteness.

They do need a certain level of focused attention with adults, but overdoing it spoils them. Have friend and relative kids come over; most kids are social and occupy each other, learning social skills in the process. An adult does need to check on them every now and then to make sure they are not lighting the cat on fire again. If they seem too hyper, put them in sports, and rotate the driving with other parents. Boys especially need hard physical activity to milk their wiggles out, or they will light the cat on fire.
A bug report is an observation about a particular version. If nobody bothers to test newer versions, you don't know if it's real. The more the code changes, the less likely the behavior is still there.

Now, granted, it's likely that if nobody did anything then it's still broken, but it's still the case that a bug database, considered as documentation, gradually becomes outdated and increasingly misleading if not maintained.

Stale bugs are still in the database and you can still query them. Nothing is lost. The question is how relevant old history is when it comes up in search results?

Maybe querying on open bugs only is the wrong default? Stale bugs should probably be included but with much decreased rank.
"Are you trying to defend the notion that COVID isn’t any worse than the flu?"

Nobody in this chain has suggested it. The person you responded to said that covid cases and death stats are garbage in garbage out. I would largely agree considering the underreporting of asymptomatic cases as well as the lack of distinction between causative and non-causitive hospitalizations and deaths.

The very argument you are making about possibly fewer deaths from other things supports my argument - the data doesn't exist to cover all the variables and some of the data is garbage. There is a huge difference between direct and n-order deaths, both for covid and other things. We could compare either one so long as we are all on the same page, but what's the point? The conversation was about data quality and not about lethality.
It seems you didn't read what I wrote.

I didn't say "tests weren't carried out".

The studies were unblinded at 6 months -- the original plan was multiple years. That qualifies as "cut short" for any reasonable reading of those words.

> It's naive and misinformed to think we're just sticking shit into our arms without understanding it.

Also not even remotely what I actually said.

Did you even read my comment?
> Does this signal that its harder to find those young hungry geniuses? Or that other stages of life are now predominating?

It’s much, much easier to get a high paying tech job now than it was back then. Assuming you’re ambitious and willing to relocate, you can now go to Silicon Valley, make all of the right moves, and amass millions of dollars in a decade of working for the right companies.

Making that kind of money with that kind of point-and-shoot career process (not easy, but doable for kinds of ambitious engineers considering startup life) wasn’t nearly as easy a couple decades ago. If you wanted to really accomplish something and make it big, it felt like a startup was the right kind of gamble.

Products were also easier to ship back then. 37Signals (now Basecamp) built a highly profitable empire on top of software that was basically a bunch of web forms. A couple founders eating ramen could very easily launch a new web product back then. Now it’s tough to get recognized without polished UX, flawless features, and a significant customer acquisition budget. It’s easy to forget just how much technology and the industry have changed in recent years.
So they exonerated everyone for the spying, and punished the guy who revealed the spying?
I don't see how individual unions help solve this problem. A union that makes meaningful changes to conditions and wages at one employer would hobble that employer's ability to compete, they'd go out of business, and a non-unionized workforce/employer would replace them. This seems like a job for government and/or market forces. The latter actually have been working well recently near where I live, as the labor shortage has caused many employers in the restaurant industry to raise starting salaries to ~$20/hr before tips.

That said, this article is about tech workers, not line cooks, so any conclusions drawn from union experiences at $COFFEECHAIN are perhaps not easily mappable to Google.
One problem is the DC voltage requirement is different for every device. Look at the wall-warts in your house. I have in my lab: 24V, 19V, 17V, 12V, 5V, 3.3V. Yeesh.

If you delivered 48VDC you'd still need a DC SMPS at each point, but an SMPS is way more efficient than a transformer.
Same for me.

And same applies to hiring. In my last 2 roles i wad hired as a team leader or engineering manager, while the company was actively interviewing for juniors to be placed in my future team. I asked to be involved in the hiring process before my start date in order to avoid surprises.
The intent is extremely important to the word malware. the intent WAS malicious.
You can build a skyscraper anywhere in Davis, California
so EIO is a new IO implementation built on top of effect handlers? Will EIO also be part of the stdlib?

ie. will the httpaf server library need to import it as an external dependency like it currently does with lwt, or will EIO already be available?
Then you are, in my humble opinion, doing it exactly right :-) (apart from going all-in and just never closing anything, but yours is a very good middle ground)

> even closed issues can have a very fruitful discussion long after the issue was originally posted

100% agree! In some occasions I've learned a lot from reading long related conversations in a bug report that had been closed or resolved long since.
> Many cities seem to delight in half-assing their own solutions.

You can expand this out to so many other areas, like building code too. It's enormously frustrating that everyone thinks they're a unique snowflake, they cannot learn from other jurisdictions and they must re-invent the wheel.

There are so many issues that so many cities are facing that are solved problems in other places.
> even if you don't do anything

From my experience, this sounds awful. I have a person on my team currently that does nothing and brings down team morale and it’s pretty clear that everyone would want them gone. We might even work better because we wouldn’t work under the assumption that we have N people when we really have something like N - 1.

Perhaps unions are better when you don’t depend on your coworkers’ contributions as directly as you do in tech. e.g. teachers.
> You don't have a right to change ur software to malware.

Yes, I do. I may not have a right to push malware onto unwilling victims, but I absolutely have a right to change _my_ software however I want.

> "wElL yOu ShOuLd HaVe Tested"

Please, no need to be childish here. I have not taken that tone, nor will I respond to it in kind here.

> no you shouldn't push software ... designed to crash apps that use it.

Show me where a `git push` == "push[ing] software ... to ... apps that use it". When the `git push` is to my own repository, mind you, not someone else's app.

> ... in bad faith ...

Finally, I agree with you on something.

Of course this was in bad faith! That was clearly the point. When I write software and put it out there, and somebody comes and uses it, and I break my software to spite them, I am obviously acting in bad faith towards my users.

But that does not make it malice, or my software malware. I did not reach down into other people's computers/apps and change what they run.
While I don't think the situations are necessarily completely analogous because the total workforce size is a lot different, I think it's still worth pointing out that this is somewhat analogous in a lot of ways to the situation with pro athletes. They could easily have stayed happy earning many multiples of an American median salary, even though owners were taking an immensely disproportionate share of the profit pie. But, instead, they unionized, and now earn even more multiples of an American median salary.
That’s not for a second what I am suggesting.
A good conceptual understanding of statistics is always helpful.

It's not really tested for in most places though, where they regard a DS as a service that produces models.
I am getting quite tired of the NFT and blockchain hate.

Every argument against it has been heard. We get it, you don't like blockchain. You don't like expensive inflated art. You think the art has no artistic value. I actually don't care about the artistic value.

But this isn't even about the "Boring Apes" bullshit. So what if someone buys an "URL" to the picture of a monkey? Really, who cares? Well. Apparently a lot of people.

I disagree that NFTs are "useless". The "Boring Ape" whatever may be a dumb (but popular) implementation of NFT technology. But NFTs are not useless. NFTs are a way for people to record data on the blockchain and claim their ownership.

If what you're worried about is dumb people buying things that actually have no inherent value, I have some bad news for you.

I don't even hold NFTs. I think their (current) implementation gives me nothing of value. But that doesn't mean they are useless.

It's like saying IRC is useless because you can't post pictures directly or something like that.

Technology is technology. Maybe more or less efficient but technology is not inherently useless. What we do with it is what matters and I agree NFTs aren't bringing real value at this time.
Web of trust just means "If A trusts B, and B trusts C, then A trusts C." Nothing to do with distributed databases/ledgers.
Woah, okay, didn't totally understand that until you put some numbers on it.

That's... almost unbelievably founder-favored, yeah? Neat.
Both my delicious accounts are still accessible. I was away from the Internet for eight years (jail) and when I got out delicious was one of the only accounts that still worked, since it hadn't changed its authentication system while I was gone. Sadly, 99% of my bookmarks are dead links now.
Photos of cats on dishes, or it didn't happen. ;-)
My maximum is 13, a function that creates an object with 13 properties.
GP seems to exhibit lack of social and cultural awareness. Not all but many people on spectrum also lack social and cultural awareness. They have more in common with autistic people than they would like to.
A startup I was at had plans to apply to join YC but then pulled in $4.5m in funding as a seed round. There's just so much money out there right now, I can't imagine giving up 7% for what amounts to pennies.

Admittedly joining YC in theory has knock off benefits like AWS credits, but the reality is most companies willing to give you discounts or credits because of YC will give you that same discount just for getting funding. You're basically giving up that equity for networking.
We are in 2022 by the way.
I suspect. Though I'm not aware of such a study being done. I'd really like the hypothesis put forward here to be tested.
“re-emittance of light with a higher wavelength”

I would say that the re-emitted light has a “longer” wavelength. Fluorescence always produces a longer wavelength. UVC becomes UVB, UVB becomes UVA, UVA becomes blue, etc. Though different materials increase the wavelengths to different degrees. That is why “black lights” can produce different fluorescent colors.
Exactly, so if I apply to YC while intending to go big, but not raise additional funding rounds, am I defrauding them with a bad-faith application?
Had other trends continued as they had been in the '50s (in the US at least), it would have brought a diminished number of hours in the workday and overall improved quality-of-life.

Instead, things went alright until deregulation allowed the market to capitalize on the increased supply of labor, wages stagnated in the median due to supply depressing wages, and now the market has adjusted to operating under the assumption that each household has approximately two able-bodied people who can contribute to the workforce. So we have unprecedented GDP and most of the money is kept by those who can employ other people, not the employed.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide...

relevant graph: https://www.cbpp.org/income-gains-widely-shared-in-early-pos...
Is it obvious? court cases have a way of exposing the edge cases of 'plain english', as well as a general tendency to interpret ambiguity against whoever happens to benefit from it. Lawyers would tend to describe what you're doing as a 'crayon license', and it's often an apt description. I would not like to wind up in court over this license, on either side, and I will as a general rule avoid them.
If I voluntarily share my lunch with someone at work, I can't poison it even though they got free food. Even if someone at work is stealing my lunch, I can't poison it.

We have a right to basic safety even in situations we aren't paying for things. That extends to the digital world. You can't put malware in your open-source project without a giant disclaimer "THIS IS MALWARE. USE ONLY FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES" or something like that
The best thing to do is to actually read SAFE templates, they are self-explanatory. Pretty much now these are standard instruments for early-stage investing for everyone, not only YC, so investor or founder you’ll see them a lot.

https://www.ycombinator.com/documents/
Ask HN: Could we have created and 'distributed' a variant faster than vaccines?
Leaving aside the ethical dilemma, could science have created and 'distributed' (by that is meant 'allow to spread') a variant of a virus that is far preferable to an original virus, such that the new variant becomes the dominant strain very quickly, with far milder symptoms, and that confers immunity after recovery? Say we created Omicron light in March of 2020, or soon thereafter, would that have saved lives?
Odds are usually represented with a colon -- the base odds are 1:4 (20%), not 1/4 (25%).
I'm picturing a drill sergeant doing drill on this and barking out orders: "Laugh"! "Chuckle"!
Using a lockfile and checking in your dependency tarballs [1] can help insulate you from these problems until you're ready to face them.

I created shrinkpack before left-pad and thankfully it meant that we were unaffected.

A lot of developers, understandably, baulk at checking in dependencies, but there is a concrete benefit in being able to continue uninterrupted during outages.

[1] https://github.com/JamieMason/shrinkpack
Please don't make irrefutable arguments based on theoretical downvotes
s/2020/2022/?
More than the specific $ figure or % ownership etc (these are all minor details), what I'm interested in is the "general goal" of YC's approach. What the YC approach is aimed at creating and incentivizing founders to do, and how it might be different from other VCs.

PG himself wrote about the dysfunctions of ("typical") VCs here: http://www.paulgraham.com/venturecapital.html i.e. emphasizing and incentivizing growth at all costs, stealing ideas, interfering with intelligent (but slower) management of a company.

I assume that by contrast (if he's writing that), YC must take a different or better approach or philosophy.

Is that true?

edit: I'm being downvoted for asking an important but I guess slightly uncomfortable question?
It is so strange that Google lobbied so hard against something like this and then tried to ensure it didn't get traced back to them. Almost like it saw there being a big downside to a union being formed. I really wonder why that is?

Honestly, I really can't see this anti-union rhetoric as anything but being terribly naive.

For further evidence of bad behavior that you can't avoid by changing jobs (because under this scheme you wouldn't be hired!). https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-google-others-settle-anti-po...
You misunderstand my use of render. I don't mean render during gameplay; I mean turn an abstract idea, like an NFT for a bull horn hat, into a 3d or 2d asset that aligns with the art direction of the game.

There's no chance for asset reuse across games. Not only do the asset file formats differ from game engine to game engine (or platform to platform) they also differ perspectively, aesthetically, and thematically. Madden 2023 has incentive to sell NFT assets for sports jerseys. And Elder Scrolls 6, NFTs for wizard robes. But render those assets in the other game and they will look out of place. Even two games with wizards in them will have different aesthetics, mostly to differentiate in the marketplace!