skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>But we aren't taught how to negotiate, question authority, organization (the real kind, not the following orders kind)

From my experience the far majority of companies want the "following orders kind", or to put it differently: they want you to be flexible enough to be both the independent leader and the great follower when they desire, without any sign of rebellion.

For obvious reasons, this doesn't work. Most of these attributes have some semblance of correlation or causation which makes anyone fitting the above a unicorn. You continuously stamp out rebellion and any sign of independence in teens, you get meek adults who will follow orders and are afraid to take independent actions. Society can scratch its head all it wants, these are the kind of people it trained for.

>Workers tend to underestimate a couple of things: Their value, their ability to work out and improve a workplace situation

I tried this multiple times. It's difficult enough to change things together, now try it in an environment where you're essentially alone. Your fellow worker bees aren't revolting with you, they are far too comfortable and afraid to lose their comfort. Their risk/reward evaluation is screaming "no, don't do this, let them sink alone".

The above works when people learn different things and understand rebellion together does work and it works really damn well, which again, starts all the way at school.
CPUPower-GUI – Graphical Interface to Control CPU Power on Linux
Is it really the case?
Assume you have column with schema name and one with json object. And your materialised view/JsonExtract can be dispatched by schema name for a row.

I see the only suboptimal part if different schemas have different types for the same field and it has to convert it to String.
I assume here that your point is that your company should use that money to pay higher wages instead of using it for stocks buyback.

The two question that needs to be answered are

- With two more billions in wages, how much more/better would have employees worked ? Would that have had a meaningful impact on the stock price ?

- Can these two billions be considered reliable income ? If next year is less good, how easy would it be to reduce wages, if those we increased last year ?

The main issue when discussing wages increase is that once they are agreed, they become a de facto mandatory cost, forever. If you have had a good year and have some extra cash, but aren't sure how much of that you can replicate consistently in the next decade, increasing wages is a very bad idea as that one time good news becomes a recurring cost that can put your company in danger down the road. If you want to do that, you can only send a small fraction of said money every year.

Let's take an example: HCBS announced a 2 billion stock buyback in Oct 2021. Let's assume they use that amount on wage increase. All of it. They need to sustain that wage increase for 10 years until salaries are back to "normal", so they can "give away" $200 millions per year. They have 226,000 employees. So that amounts to employee cost by $884/year/employee. After tax, costs etc, that will amount to something around $50 / month of "in hand" money. It's cool, but not really the life changing event you might have expected. And I don't think that $50 per month of additional salary will translate in any significant productivity gains that will impact the stock in any meaningful manner.
Don't we usually give the low-pay, undesirable jobs to immigrants? Where are they?
How Uncle Sam Is Skimming over $1T from Investors This Year
Are non-US citizens allowed to sign?

EDIT: Looks like one of the signatures is from Tim Bray, I think he lives in Vancouver.
> Raising prices is one possible answer but demand may be inelastic and business dries up at increased prices.

Half-nit/half-tip: if demand changes when price changes, that means that demand is elastic with respect to price. Demand that does not change when prices increase is inelastic (with respect to price).
> but are just burned out doing the same boring problems. Several have taken massive pay cuts to go work in tiny firms.

I hires for a remote office that was near a certain FAANG office. We had applicants out of the FAANG company every week who just wanted out and many even let us know in their cover letters that they were willing to take a significant pay cut.

I know the HN trope is that FAANG jobs are all about doing some LeetCode to pass the interview and then it’s all easy from there, but that’s not actually the norm in FAANG jobs. If you’re collecting a high salary and working for a highly-paid, highly-motivated boss, the pressure is going to be high. It’s not for everyone and a lot of people discover that the high pay isn’t entirely worth it after a few years.
also see https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit
I've seen people get fired from a academia on several occasions... When they couldn't fire someone they beat them down so regularly and buried them so deep people left or had a mental breakdown.
Suspect it's the Caluna font that's the cause - it's got exaggerated serifs.
You're right that if you've got a sinking ship with 1000 passengers, and only 500 seats in lifeboats, no means of allocation will make 1000 less than 500.

But in almost all markets, higher prices reduce demand. I don't own a Rolex because they cost too much, I settle for a Casio instead. Does that mean there's a Rolex shortage?
[[ liebniz chuckling in the background ]]
The easiest way to communicate compensation to employees
> There is another way, which is negotiating and clearly stating one's goals.

I did this once back when working crap jobs. I knew I had leverage because the store was having issues hiring anyone to do the work so I utilize that leverage to try to negotiate a raise and control of my schedule.

Which I got… well sort of. The raise the the most pathetic I ever got, and I was told “that’s all the computer will let me give”.

Regardless though, I had successfully negotiated something, sadly it didn’t matter, despite slightly bumping my pay and gaining better control of my schedule, corporate came down with an idiotic merge and a plan to get rid of all full time employees that backfired, and they all left.

Suddenly, the manager begins to shift more and more responsibilities to us, to the point where I control what days I work but I am now working 12 hours nights because the only other people good at their job left.

After one night, I said fuck it and just abandoned the job, didn’t even give any notice, and I never felt particularly bad about it. Surprise, the genius moves pulled by corporate ended up pushing the company into bankruptcy.
In order to hire them to generate the value for said profit.
> one of these "our automation banned you, we won't tell you why, fuck off" episodes

More like "We can't tell you because it's AI and the (AI) won't tell us why it made that decision".
Creating policy based on "truth inspired" creating writing is how we got the CFAA
And that's why we should wait till engineers are replaceable before we try to unionize....
Because many many companies herd pets using kubernets.

The number of single-server setups with kubernetes thrown in for added complexity and buzzwords I’ve found is way too dang high.
A fungus isn't a plant so its not comparable but I think a fungal network underground will likely end up being the largest organism on the planet if we ever care to go looking for it. We often forget fungus when we make mono-culture environments especially forests but they are critical at passing about nutrients for all the vegetation and I suspect we may find some pretty massive ones in the world.
I'm familiar with Mosler and MMT.

MMT requires the government to raise taxes once inflation starts rising due to previous money printing.

What are governments doing now? They are actually thinking of handing out more money to people to offset the effects of inflation (thereby making the inflation worse).

In other words, MMT requires governments to always do the right thing, which they don't.

That's ignoring the theoretical underpinnings of MMT which are by no means unassailable.
In the UK it's called Inheritance Tax and is basically a 40% tax on your estate when you die. They add up everything, the house, vehicles, savings & shares, artworks and that is then taxable at 40% in most situations. This means generally you have to sell a lot of things to inherit anything valuable from your parents.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax

> Inheritance Tax is a tax on the estate (the property, money and possessions) of someone who’s died.
>
> There’s normally no Inheritance Tax to pay if either:
>
> the value of your estate is below the £325,000 threshold
>
> you leave everything above the £325,000 threshold to your spouse, civil partner, a charity or a community amateur sports club
>Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Surely there is a middle ground between "every single transaction that has ever occurred in the history of the blockchain is public and visible to all" and "no transactions are ever visible to anyone including governments investigating crimes that have exercised due process in obtaining warrants and subpoenas".
yes right. I'm thinking of implementing add-ons for all popular note taking services like google, evernote, onenote etc so that the notes can be imported using gitnoter.
I've found that asdf has replaced a lot of my brew installs. It's great to be able to pin tool dependencies per project. I used, and liked, brew for a long time, but my tooling these days is almost entirely MacPorts, asdf-vm, and Docker + docker-compose (I'm also intrigued by podman).
In the us, a few years ago, my program offered a stipend of 22,000 usd per year. Provided I taught a few classes, graded homework, tests, etc. While doing research and taking my own classes.

That was very lucky, many programs do not offer stipends and require people to take out loans.
Be careful with that notion. There are more businesses that do make profit under reasonable conditions or can at least afford it and will win down the line. There are businesses who _think_ they can't afford it, but they might just be lacking imagination and long term thinking. Think of Henry Ford as an illustrative example of someone who had the imagination and holistic view, and thus improved working conditions.
"Because of ISO" has to be the lamest C++ excuse, and perhaps the fact it's seeing more use recently reflects a larger problem.

Also, remember, that ISO document is known for two decades to not actually describe the language as implemented, but the fix (pointer provenance) is controversial enough that the committee keeps "forgetting" to fix it. The ISO document describes an imaginary language which would be incredibly slow and useless if it really existed, the document exists because the real C++ language is sort-of similar to this imaginary language and for some people (though it seems gradually fewer over time) that's enough. Any pretence that ISO requires it to "work for everyone" is nonsense since as documented it isn't in fact working for anyone.

† One of the fun side effects is that you can't explain what ARM Morello ports do in terms of the ISO standard. CHERI reifies provenance, which would be fine if the standards document explained what provenance is, but the C and C++ documents deliberately do not do that. On paper Morello ports just waste space to make some valid programs crash, which is weird.
I agree with the other poster. However, the assertion that modern central banks have been a failure and disaster for the societies they serve is independent from any conclusions about Bitcoin.
Because in this job market, I have power, and I can use it elsewhere.
It’s not impossible but jumping ship usually results in better conditions with less effort.

When your asking for more but 99 of your colleagues aren’t the answer is usually “no, because no one else is complaining”
What a bad employer Musk seems to be.
You could replace “crypto” with “web” and it would make these statements equally broad and absurd.
Trying to make your programmers work 40 hour weeks seems so out dated. Sure, a brave few can regularly work for 8 hours straight, but for many after a few hours they’re better off stopping for a decent while.
Reasonable is subjective. I have seen a developer borderline lose their job because they didn’t like the terms and conditions of a library that management wanted to use on the app. Even after management confirmed they are ok with the terms.

Sometimes you do just need to accept decisions and move on. Or find a middle ground.
This sort of gatekeeping is a part of academic culture I just don't get

This is just a hypothesis, but I'd predict a high correlation between becoming an academia lifer, and having certain preexisting personality disorders, stemming from having never derived a sense of self worth from anything other than academic achievement since they learned to speak. Or maybe I'm just speaking for myself :)

Similar to the top tier of tech companies being destructive and amoral in their own ways, not only because they're corporations, but also because programmers see technical challenges waiting to be solved like a moth sees a porch light, but see ethical problems dimly. (still probably speaking for myself...)
No chrome?
Yeah, sorry that was a typo, I did not base my argument on the 86 million number.

I'm saying, if our brain has 86 billion neurons, there is a vast majority of it that is not used for language. And even in the language center, those neurons are used to understand written language input and output in digital as well as analog form across multiple fonts (so including OCR which GPT-3 does not do), and spoken language (both hearing and speaking. Moreover, humans can learn many languages with different grammars, in addition to body language cues, dialects and sociolects and slang, and humor/sarcasm.

So I still argue that is a 3 order of magnitude difference.
A Message from Replicated’s CEO
'Additionally, we were provided with a second email Elon sent, this time to all employees, reiterating the “in the office” expectation.'
https://reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/v2bt39/elon_everyo...
I've been thinking it would be useful to create a sub-language of python with only essential features (removing hard to explain features such as 'is', ':=', and a plethora of non-essentials) -- that is, fully backward-compatible with python. This would also make restricted interpreters easier to write as well. I know micropython exists, but the goal is more minimal size than simplicity and ease to learn.
It sure does reduce the amount of work. But there's a lot that remains or just gets shifted to another area/technology. Who's setting up the image build pipeline? Who's handling the scaling and capacity planning? Who's planning how the deployments actually happen? Who's setting up the system for monitoring everything? And tonnes of other things...

Kubernetes helps with: networking setup, consistent deployments, task distribution. That's about it. It's more standardised than plain VMs, but you still have to deal with the other 90% of work.
Reminds me of the "Electronic Lab" toys I had as a child https://www.petervis.com/electronics-lab/200-in-one-electron...
Voice, exit, or loyalty. That’s it.
The skeptic voices are almost always as idiotic as the hype voices.
Online voting is a horrible idea, anyone who tells you it's secure has no idea what they're talking about. Even if we were to assume a hypothetical future where it's implemented as an immutable smart contract on a widely used blockchain that's large enough to be too costly even for state actors to attack. Then the attacker just targets the devices citizens use to access the vote. Currently we have two mobile OS and not much more in the PC world. An exploit in just a single one of them would open the door for massive manipulation.

On top of that there's the trust issue, which I find absurd that this isn't more often discussed even with other forms of voting. For example in the US they use those idiotic electronic voting machines with catastrophic consequences for people's trust in the system. All this should be banned and only paper ballots allowed. Then when it comes to counting, citizens need to be allowed to observe the process (without interfering of course). That's the only way to do it and ensure both security and trust. The process must be easy enough that most voters can understand it. Electronic voting is the exact opposite, almost no one understands how it works on a technical level and even fewer people are going to be able to verify the code. Such a system is begging for collusion and fraud.
Browsers are an app platform. That has been true for a decade now. They don’t exist to manage hardware, only to expose everything as nice and standardised apis.
- “What do you get if you multiply six by nine?”

-“forty two”
Sounds like an advantageous negotiating position for those supplying the labor.
Who says we all want to switch to crypto? Maybe we want the freedom to divide our personal savings any way we see fit.

Democracy is a nice value, but so are freedom and human rights. I expect to have the right to buy crypto or not.
Even if you have a PhD it sucks. Everyone without a PhD is trying to one up you, and everyone with one has invented ten other arbitrary things that ensure you are human trash on arrival.

Also, imagine all the people who failed out of masters or PhD programs who end up in management and are resentful. It's a surprisingly common thing.
Cross-platform, customizable ML solutions for live and streaming media
Categorizing is much, much faster than having to enter the transaction manually. It's also less error-prone.
> The government,” isn’t “printing money.”

It's certainly increasing the maximum potential supply in ways divorced from any market mechanism. They are central planners and they're failing hard like central planners did before.
See my sibling comment on this. I think this is an ideal case for an RSE: if you have a shared codebase that ends up being contributed to by multiple members. That avoids legacy problems where someone contributes, leaves, someone else modifies, none of it is in source control etc. However, this assumes that you have a group that is structured around some common IP or library - and sure, there are lots of places where this applies. This is generally more mature research, not something that a PhD student has just come up with.

There are of course scenarios where someone comes up with some very high impact work, and there's an obvious need to make it robust or user-friendly, spin-out, etc.

It works less well for groups where everyone works on different or loosely related projects. That's not an efficient use of an RSE's time, in my opinion. Though of course you can have a situation where lots of people do random projects using the lab's core code. In both cases, there is a use-case where RSEs embedded in a university can train students on good coding practices.
Can confirm that every time I have wanted to hire someone and didn’t get the right applicants, I offered more money and did get the right applicants
> "If this old way of doing things is so error-prone, and it's easier to use declarative solutions like Kubernetes, why does the solution seem to need sooo much work that the role of DevOps seems to dominate IT related job boards? Shouldn't Kubernetes reduce the workload and need less men power?"

Because we're living in the stone age of DevOps. Feedback cycles take ages, languages are not typed and error prone, pipelines cannot be tested locally, and the field is evolving rapidly like FE javascript did for many years. Also I have a suspicion that the mindset of the average DevOps person has some resistance to actually using code, instead of yaml monstrosities.

There is light at the tunnel though:

- Pulumi (Terraform but with Code)

- dagger.io (modern CI/CD pipelines)

Or maybe the future is something like ReplIt, where you don't have to care about any of that stuff (AWS Lambdas suck btw).
> I'm totally against money laundering. It takes the money away from us people for streets, school and healthy care.

I think you're confusing money laundering and tax evasion.
> There is another way, which is negotiating and clearly stating one's goals. Workers tend to underestimate a couple of things: Their value, their ability to work out and improve a workplace situation, and often also the ability of their superiors to change perspective and collaborate on moving forward.

Anecdata, but I’ve seen this backfire tremendously. My wife worked for a skilled nursing facility. They had 18 therapists (pt, ot, and st). 6 decided to stand up to management and demand a lighter case load, a 3% raise (hilariously low I know), and increased transparency from management. They all got put in pips for various “other issues” and eventually all of them were fired. These jobs aren’t that low paying either ($70-$100k / year), so it’s not like finding a new warehouse crew.

Eventually the place ended up downsizing and eventually merging with another facility. The rumor on the inside is that they never really recovered and saw more attrition across other parts of the organization.

I say this backfired because the employees ended up getting fired. Even though in the end the company ended up not doing well.

I guess my point is that never underestimate the stupidity of management. They will let their companies fail in order to not succumb to employee demands, regardless of how benign they might be.
Yeah but am I going to get the job if all I have is garbage published in no name journals?
Securities are regulated, snd startups which try to collect cash from the public become securities
There are plenty of far worse life destroying scams that we don't regulate. Variable interest rate loans are a huge example.
... then they fight you ...
There's no regulatory burden. Pre-IPO equity funding rounds always involve some kind of valuation process and negotiation. The investor is purchasing a certain percentage of the company for a certain number of dollars.
A better title would have been: how to make the universe do (a whole lot of) math for us [1]. What so-called neural networks do should not be confused with thinking, at least not yet.

And the fact that we can get the universe to do math for us should not be surprising: we can model the universe with math, so of course that mapping works in the other direction as well. And this is not news. There were analog computers long before there were digital ones.

---

[1] ... using surprisingly small amounts of hardware relative to what a digital computer would require for certain kinds of computations that turn out to be kind of interesting and useful in specific domains. But that's not nearly as catchy as the original.
Not true at all. A lot of people simply do not want to work. I know the manager of a Costco, and people come to work on their first day and then leave during their lunch break never to return.

Costco offers great pay and benefits.

The biggest thing people don’t talk about is a lot of workers got paid to stay home during Covid. In essence, they were living like the 1% and got used to it. Now they don’t want to go back to living their pre-covid life but guess what? Everyone can’t be part of the 1%.
I’m surprised they even let you in without one.

Everyone “scientific programmers” potion I’ve seen wants you to have a PhD and be a domain expert.
Unless they establish that it's a single root system I wouldn't dethrone Pando just yet. From the description it's at least 9 separate seagrass beds, so I doubt it's all one system.

As a side note, I'm going to see Pando this weekend.
They expect more than 40 hour work weeks from factory workers?!

The "minimum 40 hours in the office" - to me - would read like "sure you can do remote work, as long as you are in the office full-time", but if his expectation is people pulling 60+ hour work weeks it becomes "sure you can do remote work, as long as it's after you're done with the regular full-time office shift".

Any of which is already terrible on its own.