skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not sure I understand what this has to do with autism. Eg the "should we use React" situation - I have quite a few colleagues too (presumably not all of them autistic) who tend not to answer directly the questions that they're being asked until they can reframe them in a clean way going back to first principles. I think it serves them well in some instances like systems design where this kind of behavior is particularly useful, and it's very counterproductive in other settings such as dealing with higher level execs, who tend not to ask the "right" questions because they don't have all the context, but feel like they're being stonewalled when asking what (to them) sounds like a simple question. Balancing this is a communication challenge for everyone.
> Where did I say that it's harder to form relationships today than it was in the past?

> I firmly believe that easy access porn is one of the worst things happening to the young men and women today.

"one of the worst things happening" is clear enough on its own. "young men and women" refers to the population at large. "today" is in contrast to historically

> I (23) know many men around my age who suffer from chronic porn addictions to the point that it severely impacts their ability for form real relationships

"many men" is not describing a rare phenomenon. "to the point that it severely impacts" is a clear attribution of cause and effect.

> median age of first exposure is getting lower and lower

Obvious meaning in context: things are getting worse over time.

> it exposes your implicit biases more than it does anything about myself

No, you are resorting to disingenuous semantic games because I pointed out the inconsistencies in what you wrote. Namely that you have provided absolutely no evidence for the things you are claiming and I see no obvious reason that they should be the case.
Yeah damn, what a tragedy, they won't be able to make Star Wars Jar Jar Binks' Revenge 2 The Search For More Money.

No no no. The best part would be killing these garbage media companies that have been pumping out content so terrible it has literally damaged the intelligence our society.
Just wanted to say that you've hit on a real problem: the rich-get-richer feedback cycle in which all the good projects are taken by high ranking engineers. On my teams, including at Google, we intentional counteracted that by giving the interesting work to the person just barely qualified to do it, and biasing the crud toward the senior team members.
It looks like you are overfitting a couple cases of individuals mistreating you into a set of rules which are not true to reality. The reality of sociology and group psychology is a rich, vast tapestry of anthropological progression that numbers over 7B individuals today and countless others of their ancestors over the past 500M years; from when we began as apes and progressed into hominids and then sapiens.

"The allistic (non-autistic) person is not hearing what I'm saying."

"I care more about doing good work than office politics."

"The person underestimates how much I know about the topic."

These are statements that, when read on their face, seem to apply to disagreements that you have had with individuals. None of them seem to complain about (or even address) the ways clusters of people behave as a group.

I don't think this blog post is actually about autistic people, or allistic people, at all. I think this post is about one person, and some other people that the person had conflict with. If the author is reading this, I think it would do you well to slightly reframe things in that light.
not that i want to defend the practice, but real-world speeds being a bit less than half the advertised speed is about what i've experience from every ISP i've ever been a customer of.
> It's truly disturbing when Zuckerberg says something so dystopian, and people 'in the trenches' call for more.

Or maybe people here on HN are sick of finding --in team after team-- those 1 or 2 people who take forever to finish their work and drag the whole team down.
What specific acts did the Jan 6th rioters commit that would count as terrorism or insurrection? Is it insurrection to damage public property and disobey government orders? How were they planning on taking hostages without guns? Were they going to beat people with flagpoles?
I think Donald Trump is a man lacking any redeeming qualities. He is self serving, a liar, incurious, a charlatan, etc. He was right to pull out of Afghanistan and he was right about German dependence on Russian resources and he was right about European NATO members needing to pay more for defense.
> How about therefore thing we've yet to observe if it exists fails to behave as we naively expect.

As I understand it, the "behavior" of dark matter in Kroupa's analysis is the behavior that is claimed for it by dark matter proponents. So if dark matter doesn't behave the way dark matter proponents say it does, the burden would be on the dark matter proponents to modify their models to say how it does behave.
They don't. Read claims 75-85:

https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...

Note that "on information and belief" is lawyeresse for "we don't know this is true, we only have suspicion". Claims 76, 77, 82, and 85 (as well as a lot of the complaint) are so hedged. The claims they're not hedging are more limited: basically "Meta employees were paid to update a database of dangerous individuals and organizations, and Meta shared this database with others (75)" and "OnlyFans' parent company Fenix has a presence in Hong Kong and other countries (78-81)". Claims 76, 77, 82, and 85 must be true... because the alternative would be devastating to their case /s.

There is very little of substance in the complaint. In all seriousness, I think plaintiffs have read public sentiment against tech companies, and I imagine their strategy here is to throw as much mud as they can, bamboozle some credulous journalists, and hope Meta et al settle to avoid bad PR.
I feel like scientists today have forgotten a fundamental truth about science and understanding: We can never _know_ when we are right about our theories. We can only ever _know_ when we are wrong about them. New evidence can arrive at any time, and that evidence will either bolster our theories, or prove one or more theories incorrect. New evidence is always arriving.

I mean do we really believe that we know everything about this? Somehow, we A) know we have large knowledge gaps, AND B) believe that we understand things we have unanswered questions about.

We have a LOT of confidence about dark matter and exactly zero direct evidence.

It seems much more likely to me (I am not a scientist) that we are wrong about things that we assume to be hard facts and those error(s) have artificially produced the need for dark matter in order for things to make sense.
Ah, that makes sense. So something like:

select whatever from thingy, relation, widget
where thingy.id = relation.id1
and widget.id = relation.id2
and relation.type1 = 'thingy'
and relation.type2 = 'widget'
What if I stand on the street corner and read the code for that virus out loud to everyone passing by? Is that speech?
Sounds like a waterbed… and there are google hits of other people with the same question! You are not alone.

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/11/22/1714220/to-expla...
Pareto principle:

Meta has 83,553 employees (source: Wikipedia) which means that 292 employees are producing 50% of the output.
You might be right about the ultimate outcome, but I think the questions you ask may be wrong. In the example of changing the checkout to React I might ask myself would it increase development trajectory and look for numbers related to that. Things like how many features were delivered last quarter and what was the scope size of those features? How might these things fit into a react framework and does it improve delivery times on our future project plans? Is our system a proprietary one and how long would it take to onboard a new developer vs hiring someone that knows React and can add value within a week?

It's easy to decipher that nothing is wrong with the checkout page as it exists from performance. What's really being proposed here is an attempt to get ahead of it before it becomes a problem. Keeping the growth needs of an engineering team in mind you have to remember nobody wants to work on a technical stack that uses ancient technology and hasn't been updated because "it's not broken". The evaluation just seems like it's too narrow of a focus the way it's worded here. Just my 2 cents though.
In this, you disagree with parent. QED.
Metrics for scoring: error/cost/fitness, time to solution (t), dollars to solution ($), resources in terms of {carbon, kWh, USD,}, costs in terms of costed opcodes,

Whether there's a logically plausible causal explanation (for quickly-discovered probably just associative relations)
100% support this because I would never buy a GMC, Buick, or Cadillac under any circumstance anyway
John Carmack famously said:

“I can send an IP packet to Europe faster than I can send a pixel to the screen. How f’d up is that?”

https://mobile.twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/193480622533...
Yep, that sounds about right.

My two tips are:

1) Treat services you call like your own code. Familiarize yourself with the server code. Try running it locally and poke at it. If you run into problems in staging/production, go look at their logs and monitoring dashboards (if that's still allowed; I have a feeling that things have changed around permissions since I left). What I learned that there was never an error I needed help with as soon as I read the code and error logs of the app I was trying to call. "Oh, this deprecated field is actually still required, it's just IGNORED now", that sort of thing. In the real world, it really helps with open source libraries. There is never any useful documentation. So get used to reading the code, and you'll never notice it's missing. As you get good at it, it really becomes a productivity superpower.

2) Fill out all available forms. I wrote and maintained a monitoring system at Google. I remember going to some tech talk about how the network worked, and realized that I could be using a high network priority instead of Best Effort, just by filling out some form. In the unlikely event of a network problem, we'd probably still have monitoring! Fill out the form I did. And one day there was some network incident where a lot of consumer-facing apps were slow/down, and my service didn't miss any messages. No unnecessary outages or pages or a long night, all because I filled out a form that anyone could fill out. I honestly felt a little bad because I guess we could have lived without the monitoring if it would have saved GMail. But hey, victory goes to the team that's willing to fill out the form and maybe have a quick meeting about it. Not everything in software engineering is programming.

There is quite the ramp up time, and there is a lot of learning to do, but once you get a handle on it, you can really do great things at high speed. If you ever leave, you will miss it. As much as people complain about the tools/systems/libraries, it is all really top notch. The "real world" is a hodgepodge of half-baked systems that all cost $30,000 a year. (Whoever wrote Prometheus left too early and cloned varz instead of Monarch. Hurts my soul every single day.)

I most miss D, Spanner, Blaze, and Monarch. Spanner you can buy from Google, but I can't afford it. Bazel is open-source. The rest... you just have to settle for something not as good.
Having worked inside and outside Google I just want to say how happy I am that products can't be launched without privacy and security review. I've seen some outright garbage launched at other companies with obvious, gaping holes in their privacy and user-data security stories and it's completely terrifying.
>The reason that environment no longer runs is because the company decides it's no longer profitable to run it. Blockchains build incentives to run that environment into the operation, so as long as there are users willing to pay, and the environment is efficient enough, in theory the environment should never not be running.

So why would that need blockchain? If this is a viable model to run the game, why wouldn't game companies have a direct 'pay us to keep up the servers online' model now?
That might work if it was conscious and intentional. If Aunt Martha, sends you a stream of political spam and you occasionally click on them in case there was some implied nonpolitical or interesting content, you've fed the algorithm something, and now you're in the "My Tivo thinks I'm gay" rabbit hole.

There might be ways to redact your profile, but they're hardly well publicised and surgical.
Except for sumo I've never been a fan of sports broadcasts. Between Corgi racing and Excel I may have to rethink this.
There's a huge backstory on that [1] but, for me, a vastly larger story about Bowlus as a champion sailplane designer and pilot. Here's a video of him and the Lindberghs doing some gliding [2]. Those events are stuck in my mind because my father used to hang out with Bowlus and others, and had a small collection of photos of their sailplanes.

[1] https://bowlus.com/the-story-of-bowlus-the-ultimate-rv-luxur...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d759qru28pA
Alt-F11, thanks. Is there a macro recorder built into Excel that could make learning VBA syntax and UI-API equivalencies easy?
Project home page: https://www.subtext-lang.org/
It is because of conhost. You can actually replace the default Windows one with the new OpenConsole and it makes your entire PC faster. Kinda neat.
That sounds like a dysfunctional organization and a good example why trying to measure "impact" in the sense you're describing is not a good idea. Let's say you're on an internal tools team that's building tools that others in the organization rely on to build whatever products your company is making money of. You might say your direct "impact" [edit: is small/zero] but your indirect impact is definitely not. In a well run company those people would be highly valued for their indirect contribution.

You're absolutely right that how a company is organized, and its culture, is directly linked to those outcomes. The ability of individuals to make impact is also very related to their being in the right position to utilize their strengths aka role fit. In a well run company managers try to optimize for all these things. Ofcourse the best intentioned managers can't always place everyone in the perfect spot and lots of projects have work that isn't super shiny but is still important.

Sounds like you made the right decision in leaving.
The word “fun” doesn’t show up until paragraph 19 and that’s the problem with these kinds of games in a nutshell.
Interesting q & experience, thanks for sharing it. In my experience like/dislike is usually more of a topic raised by people who are focused on A) integrity to a subjective concern and B) relational and fidelity-focused subjective ethics. For example one of the main lenses on their life is, "I will show the world that I'm a good person, and someday they will see it".

An interesting response to A, for example, is to show how the situation is a false dichotomy or an unnecessary question. A similar solution to B is to define the problem with more detail, because the blind spot of this kind of issue is typically attention to the particular details being folded in, and the details being left out.

For those reasons, zooming out a bit, I'd also ask: When do you think this particular question is relevant? In what kinds of situations does it offer leverage? In what kinds of situations may it also cause unnecessary frustration or delays? A lot of times an intriguing question comes up, but people don't stop to consider that a question like this is also like a prompt or invite to apply a given subjective model. In this case it makes sense to question the questioner, especially if the stakes are meaningful and there may be better models.

It also seems like it might then be worth considering rephrasing as: "Why do you agree with that thing, and do likes/dislikes have anything to do with it?" This way one doesn't force the model and can still determine how it may impact the situation.

There are a lot of people out there who are not only uncomfortable with the like/dislike perspective on any given issue, but who will do almost anything to subvert the raising of that perspective. It is either too personal or too random for them to care, since they are rather interested in group intent, subjective hard-logic based on a given definition, etc.

Interesting q, hope you keep going with it.
I stand corrected about the anonymity of the surveys. I wasn't a manager and I can't say I paid much attention during the meetings. But there are a lot of sub-managers who have just a couple of reports and it can't be particularly hard to figure out. Still, I shouldn't have stated it as fact. I'd edit the post if I could.

You didn't confirm or deny that manager performance was tied to those connections data. Care to clarify this? As I said, it was a guess on my part.

My manager was actually a great guy and our group was productive. He only got that way after the surveys became a thing and - I'm guessing - his superiors started getting uptight.

Heh, I like how you checked up on me, but use amzn-throw for your comment. Comms is watching you Wazowski, always watching. Anyways, I still stand by my general sentiment.
> by slowly and reluctantly altering the traditional society, like the Chinese?’

No need to have some kind of "cultural revolution"?

>Endless growth – green or not

These arguments are all the same. They take the current rate of growth, plug in a time period longer than has elapsed since the death of vitalism as a theory of life (an idea which, today, is laughable to consider), and conclude that we need to stop growing immediately.

Obviously we have to stop growing at some point. The Sun produces a finite amount of power [1], the density of the Universe is very low, etc.

Why now? The eco-pessimists never answer this question, and that is because right now is the wrong time to stop growing. This article does not attempt to address it at all, but flings a few symbols around to put on the air of rigor. Bonus points for somehow managing to use the word "decolonise". At the current rate of growth, the right time would probably be in about 150 years. But the rate of growth has actually been slowing down over the last century, and will likely continue to gradually slow, as scientific discoveries continue to become more difficult. Taking that into account, the end of growth is probably half a millenium out, supposing a huge war or other disaster doesn't set us back.

I suspect the real reason people want to advocate for the end of growth now is because everyone wants to be a revolutionary; everyone wants to make the kind of great, world-shaking advancement that Einstein or Fleming or Borlaug did. To admit that while we probably have to stop growing, it won't be for a long time — that would be sort of dull. You can't sell books about it.

1: Energy per unit time.
It's 2022, you're about 20 years late to leaving Network Solutions. If you didn't leave as soon as you could (circa 2000), maybe you should have left one of the last few times they had a high profile security incident.
^This guy has worked at FAANG.
> I say that people with chronic porn addictions have a hard time forming relationships

Well originally you used wording that would imply a significant subset of the population. But even ignoring that it remains a completely baseless claim. How are you eliminating all of the other potential explanations that exist? And how are you arriving at the conclusion that the porn addiction is the cause of the problem as opposed to one of the effects?
In every other HN thread, people slam FAANGs for being so bloated, and we praise the small startup where everyone on the team gets shit done fast. And in every other thread, people ask "What the hell does <BigTechCo> need 10,000 engineers for??"

And now Zuck says "We've gotten complacent as a company, and we have to turn up the heat and sense of urgency, and get rid of people who aren't contributing"... and HN freaks out at this 'dystopian' missive.

Pick a lane, people.
We are talking about accepting that you are wrong, not incessantly pointing out that others are wrong on some minor thing. Resisting people who do the later is perfectly healthy.
Because you often only get to join these companies if you’re passionate about your field of work.

You can’t force a programmer to find meaning in rock climbing (for example).

You might propose working on your passion for programming outside of work, but it’s complicated and people end up in two minds about that.
Top Gun still exists in the minds of everyone who has seen it. It is an idea as well as a performance. And you don't need to consume any particular encoding of the performance to continue to either enjoy or hate it. Art is weird like that.
not paying for streaming services anymore. happy to pay for netflix but having to go all over the place is insane when i get much better service by fucking pirating
Those are all fair points. My only counterargument is that for a certain class of requests, the simplicity of not needing to worry about a separate background jobs queue outweighs the benefits that the job queue provides. There's some fuzzy line where those benefits become worth it. And you're probably going to cross that line earlier with a Rails app than with an evented one. There are lots of cases in Rails where problems are solved via background jobs that would most likely just stay in the parent web request in an IO-friendlier environment.
We stop knowing about it, but it still exists. It's just a number. You can't delete a number from existence, you can just delete your copy of it.
Golang: Discarding outer structs in JSON unmarshal
How Airbnb is ruining local communities in north Wales
There is nothing of real value on Instagram. Just delete your account and never look back.
Shenanigans are common, but this specific kind is not very common.

How could anyone know that? No government cares to investigate this sort of thing, and those individuals who could become aware would mostly be subject to NDA.
Could you type at 2400 baud?

I upgraded to a 9600 baud modem in 1992, I think. That was finally when things felt "fast."
The link in the first half of the sentence you quoted, leads to a Cloudflare page that has lots of info which may answer your question.

"Cloudflare Area 1 is a cloud-native email security platform. It crawls the Internet to stop phishing"

and also

"Proactively hunt for attacker infrastructure and campaigns with our massive-scale phish indexing."

and also

"Scans the Internet for attacker infrastructure, sources, and delivery mechanisms to stop phishing attacks days before they hit the inbox."
Nice...I would give you an award if I could.
I still do. Been using it for over 30 years now.