skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Author here. I do hire staff engineers these days. A few points:

1. Spotify is a Swedish company with a strong brand identity. Conformity culture is a bit strong, so I can totally understand why they would want "someone like us" than someone who would ask the challenging questions. That's my take on that interaction but maybe I didn't write it well. I edited the article a bit.

2. Staff is a leadership position and like other leadership roles, the impact of your personal belief will not stay at the individual level but rather spread. A positive attitude pays dividents. In that particular example, I went in with negative prejudice. The right interaction would be to have an objective argument and share their view as someone who bought into it and is working at the company. The least they could do is to use that as an opportunity to set the record straight. At least that is what I do if a candidate asks the hard questions. I don't have to convince them, but I'll do my best to honestly answer it and quite frankly maybe I learn something about the company I'm presenting that I didn't know.
Better idea: fully fund schools and stop blaming teachers.
That’s exactly what I started: https://gitlab.com/logotype/fixparser

It’s a quite boring project, but it is niche - and there is no alternative, at least not in the JS/TS ecosystem. Many startups/crypto/financial institutions (including YC startups) uses and are paying customers of my product.

I’ve tried finding an investor (including YC) to grow the project but no-one is interested. It doesn’t matter, I’ll keep going anyway. But if someone is interested reach me at info@fixparser.io
I owned a Galaxy S5, which was slim, waterproof and had a trivially replacable battery
Yes that's correct, but I think it appears everytime with a refresh.
Let’s take a step back for a second: is it the use of technology to ban certain people from the venue, or the way people are being chosen for exclusion?

If the former, and banning people you consider to be your enemies is not an issue here, then I guess I struggle with why using technology to exclude people efficiently is a concern.

If the latter, then I struggle as it should be within the rights of any property owner to exclude their antagonizers (or really anyone on any basis not covered by anti-discrimination laws) from their property. I feel strongly about inalienable property rights, and who is anyone else who hasn’t put money up to own the land to tell them what to do with it? Are we all just a giant HOA?

Or is the issue that it’s a public company and as such is expected to have separate standards?

I don’t mean to be pedantic - I am honestly trying to understand. As a landowner myself (of publicly accessible spaces), if I were to be sued by someone I certainly wouldn’t want to be forced to extend hospitality to those suing me by allowing them onto my land for their own enjoyment. If technology allowed me to do this more efficiently, I’d utilize it if I felt that strongly about the merits of the case against me. But I am not a public company, so perhaps that’s where the issue is?

To be clear, if they were excluding people based on things out of a person’s control or otherwise protected by civil rights, I’d understand that society restricts this - it isn’t a society we collectively want to live in. But I am not sure I want to live in a society where someone can antagonize someone else and we force that party to host the antagonizer for the antagonizer’s enjoyment. That seems somewhat dystopian to me as well.
Mental health is extremely important and should be given a priority in ones. Also, being a startup founder is not the only way to be happy and successful these days.

Still, it is sad to see someone, who apparently has so much discipline and persistence to give. Hit me up on Twitter (@phprunner) in a few days, maybe we can talk.
Well it’s not entirely accurate to say few people use it for that anymore. It has 2.9 billion monthly active users on the platform, so even a fraction there for “what are my friends doing” is more than the population of most countries. I think it’s just limited to demographics not overall represented on HN, for instance

WhatsApp monetization comes through the business offerings. Increasingly, you can use that to interact with companies, small and large
It is ok to give up.
It is ok to come back to entrepreneurship to it if you want at some point.
It is ok to never think about entrepreneurship again.

What matters is that each point you make the decision that makes sense to you.

And if you choose to look back one day, you may find that despite failing being an entrepreneur for some time helped you in ways you may not have realized or anticipated.

Either way, as you said, optimize for your mental health. All responsibilities in life seem like chains some of the time, but if your startup feels like a chain all the time - then by all means - break the chain.
Another way of looking at it is that the advertising followed eyeballs from print magazines to Google and App Stores. I’m betting if you compare websites like g2 or Capterra to the old magazine ads, you’d find much more choice and selection online. For physical computing goods, even Amazon is basically stuffed full of ads these days.

But yes, I do miss reading magazines for the ads ;-)
It's about the international reaction, not (only) about the outcome of the fighting itself.

China can see the price the intensional community levies upon a war now, and, in case Russia accidentally wins, they can also see the price of occupying an otherwise independent nation.

Mind you: Taiwan isn't recognised as an independent nation by nearly as many nations as Ukraine is.
I think we should define "power" here.
My stance is that POTUS may have more direct influence on single entities, like CEOs or companies.
Social media however can be used as tool to influence how people think, the majority of the populus. From influencing to straight up brain washing.

I think that this bottom-up influence is far more powerful in the long run than a direct top-down control style if you want to achieve certain beliefs, mindsets, obedience.
And if you are lucky you can write books and give talks about how your luck was the result of your superior dexterity, work ethics, intelligence etc.
Is it possible that there are just some big market players doing some gradual slow sells? And there aren't many buyers on the other side, so prices are pushed down.
"The Chinese are stealing your data and spying on you! This is deeply immoral and unprecedentedly bad!" - The Americans Stealing Your Data and Spying On You
"Every single week we receive requests to create a 'one-stop shop', a 'hub', a 'single front door' or a 'portal'. We often wonder whether we're expecting colleagues to open the single front door or step through the portal and find themselves in the one-stop shop. In nine out of 10 cases, what people really want is some new pages on our intranet."
19 of 20 startups "fail." Meaning they don't exit for huge valuations. Go look at many of the "successes" and the founders had a deep safety net. Meaning they could afford it. Access to affordable capital and luck. Seriously. Don't be down on yourself. Did you learn? Probably. Did you make deep friendships along the way? Probably. Those count too. Don't let hyper-capitalism define "success" for you.
I haven't tried that yet but I'll give both a try, thank you. I'm not giving up on it yet. Good to know they're responsive, I might look at fixing it myself.
How bizarre. It even undermines the argument for transition - if there's no such thing as sex, what are they transitioning from and to?
Ask HN: I'm now responsible of the security of a scaleup, how do I handle this?
Hi,

I used to be just a regular software engineer, now I'm "responsible", of the cybersecurity of a 30 people startup/scale-up, on top of actually building/maintaining features.

We can't afford a full time security expert for now, we're going to raise more money soon, but for now I'm +/- the only guy with cybersecurity experience.

We have huge clients, a big leak/hack would be a death sentence for the company IMO, and disastrous for a lot of people.

I found a few weaknesses on a few websites and on our own(it was just luck really), but I'm no expert, mostly self taught since I was a kid, I'm no junior but I'm far from an actual senior dev, most of the team is not really experienced(just smart bootcamp grads).

We're going to have a red team/agency audit us soon(we're going to get ripped to pieces, 100%)

How do I go ASAP from the scared relatively inexperienced guy I am who feels like the weight of the world is on his shoulders, to a guy that can actually handle this?

What course, book, MOOC website, SaaS, tool would you advise me to go through to handle this?

Thanks a lot
Yes, of course, I don't mean live in squalor, but don't be extravagant and showy with your place, get something smaller for example.
> How many businesses that pay minimum wage really can’t afford to pay more? By my estimation, it’s a fraction, if any.

Have you never used an automated car wash or self checkout?

People can decide their own minimum wage and to be unemployed if an employer isn't offering enough. This is literally what everyone does above the minimum wage.

> We do live in a world with limited resources, but there are certainly enough for everyone if we collectively decided there should be.

Every country that "decided" this ended up with famines killing millions. Meanwhile even imperfect capitalism keeps lifting the poverty floor, life expectancy, child survival rate, etc.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-livin...
End of the line for Birmingham New Street signal box [video]
Nevertheless, thanks for trying to back it up with data. I'll use your method and look at our code when time allows it, to see if I need to adjust my priors.
Yeah, the stock market is one of those things I've convinced myself there isn't much point in trying to understand. I believe I could pick out different facts and construct narratives, but they would probably all be wrong. Legions of extremely smart people believe they understand the stock market and get it wrong all the time. What are my chances?

Tesla is one of those things that cemented it for me. Tesla's market valuation - at least in my eyes - was insane. People would tell me "it's about where Tesla COULD go", but Tesla would literally have to have sold something like as many cars as the five biggest manufacturers combined, and they have very little actual moat. Why was Tesla's stock so high? Because it was. Why is it lower now? Because it is. If you can figure out the real reason why, you can probably predict where it's going next, in which case, congratulations on your future wealth.
How hard it is to come up with good ideas is greatly underestimated.

Here is a paper on A/B testing that the Bing search team conducted under Microsoft.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3171224

Hidden in there in a distribution graph is that 2% of the ideas that were A/B tested resulted in 74.8% of the improvements.

Now you can ask yourself what are they considering improvements which is a valid answer but that really struck me.

Section 4.3 Figure 3a.
Why do you want to avoid GC?
UK Government’s Plain English website:

- http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/

And related free guides page:

- http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/free-guides.html

———————

Wikipedia also has a “simple” version here:

- https://simple.wikipedia.org/
You really don't think there is already more than enough inequality?

I get the case for some capital accumulation. Capital does make for an amazing economic engine that we all benefit from. Capitalist countries are richer than non capitalist countries. Easy to understand. But there is a point where more capital accumulation and inequality just makes the rest of us become serfs to oligarchs.
you might have skipped the most important step, being born in a well connected rich family that can give you free advertising for your products. This really boosts your luck!
>I'm interested in hearing from people in the know of how Google could use its very sizable and knowledgeable resources to compete with ChatGPT.

Google is already building a rival product. IIRC last year they showcased it during their hardware event.
It is doing what ChatGPT does, but is targetted explicitly at answering questions and giving advice, instead of trying to converse. They said it wasn't ready at that point and likely they are facing exactly the same trouble ChatGPT does, e.g. the model confidently making stuff up.

I have no idea about the internals at google, but that seems to me a very likely direction to go. I could imagine AI generated answers as a first result in Google searches, with a promp for further user interactivity.

To be honest I am actually surprised that they got caught of guard by this. They have AI technology with similar capabilities to ChatGPT and I suspected they knew that people aren't interested in a wall of links to terrible websites, but actually want an answer to their question.
It's not that the parents are exploiting their children to fund their lifestyles, it's that they really have little to no income because people are living on poverty.

The government is not working for the average person, and it is beyond me why so many people in England still vote for Torries after so many years of ineptitude on public display.
Do you really think that Elon Musk's contribution to electric vehicles is comparable to Jobs' contribution to smartphones?

Steve Jobs worked on personal computers before they existed. He was recognized as a visionary with his first iconic device, the Apple II, and he make a huge impact on computing with the Mackintosh which came out in 1984. The list of ground-breaking devices which he worked on is longer than anyone else's. Almost everything he did between the days of solder-yourself computers and the point when everyone had a camera/internet/voice/video/touchscreen-enabled device in their pocket was pushing towards making personal computing and networked communication easier, more user-friendly, better designed, more reliable, etc.
This type of thinking is pure toxin because it essentially reinforces exactly what you don't want.

If Peter did in fact work hard and now he's stripped of the results of his labor while being told that probably he only managed to accumulate capital because he was just exploiting others, what incentive landscape does that create.

Is a lot of profit a function of factors much less commendable than creating value for others? Sure. But by lumping in the productive people with the parasites, you are undermining those people who deserve your protection the most.
It might be a consequence of not being a native speaker, but many of those are completely arbitrary choice of synonyms to me.

Can you guys shed some light?

Why is discussion better than dialogue? Work with better than collaborate? Concentrate on better than focus on?
One of the more unexpected parts of the Twitter files (part 7, in fact) is it reveals some well developed linkages between the US intelligence services and media companies. If the US is blurring the corporate-government boundaries, the Chinese are certainly much more aggressive in their activities. And all these agencies run extra-legal kidnapping operations.

I'm rare in that although I don't like it corporate spying doesn't really scare me. Corporations can't do very much without breaking the law. My concern is that this information is then passed on to the people who are empowered to come and drag me out of my home. Some of whom aren't even subject to my legal system. It makes more extreme measures like the GDPR seem insufficient.
“First they came for the lawyers “

(Obviously they didn’t come for the lawyers first - the lawyers were the first who were strong enough to pick a fight over it or know how to respond - it’s shrapnel holes in returned bombers)
> what they do and why they are necessary should be explained to the user.

Which would require showing this info somewhere even for essential cookies. Is a popup required for this?
An aberition in the system is not a rule. Look what happened after the person that was supposed to win lost. That will never happen again the system will see to that
https://archive.ph/rdpmG
That’s easy. The hugely successful entrepreneurs that have been able to start their business due to the welfare state contribute back by paying taxes on their success. I’m a decently successful saas-founder, and I don’t mind paying taxes on my profits. I don’t view it as being robbed. I view it as contributing back to the system that backed me.

Also, banks should chip in a lot more than they do. They’re basically printing money and should be taxed harder.
The programmer most likely assumes short-lived objects are "free" (as they effectively are in Java), and can be allocated in loops and so on without filling up memory and without incurring any real penalty to performance (via TLAB or possibly elision).
I cannot say that I'm a clear Indie Startup entrepreneur. Because I'm not. But I work in the area of engagement and finding new customers for the product that don't really exist yet. I've started to raise my language skill, so I even didn't know English well, and it seemed impossible to me like learn foreign language for 3 months. But I'm still here. I have already spent 7 months trying to find first customers (our early adopters). It's almost impossible, hard, it takes everything and more from your healthy life. But I stopped trying to give up because it's not an opportunity, rather a block - it's only in your mind. Of course, I want result, and success. My key is to diversify my life activities. Never forget about hobby and my personal time. It helps not to be frustrated. But work is work, make money is not the only target - more energy are eaten when you haven't any results..
V2 is not going to make up for a deficit of 12 million troops. Red Army went from about 1 million men to 12-14 million men by 1945 (which number it depends on whether you count the Navy and other branches). Germany invaded with 3.7 million men and by the end of 1942, the Red Army was both larger and better equipped than the Wehrmacht, which was already experiencing shortages.

I mean, it's not even close. And the Soviet Union, with enormous quantities of oil, iron ore, and other raw materials, could mass produce tanks, planes, and heavy weapons in massive quantities.

This was why Stalingrad was so important -- it was the gate to the Soviet Oil fields, and once that gate was closed, the war was basically over. Had Germany been able to capture the Caucauses, one could argue that the USSR would be starved of energy and so dependent on the US or some other nation to supply it. But that never happened.
That’s fair, though isn’t the combination of people who believe those things plus also want their car purchase to explicitly signal their socially conservative political views (if we assume that actually is the strategy at work here) still a niche, rather than what would otherwise be valued as the largest car company in the world?
Probably nobody knows for sure. I can say why I’m not bullish but it’s just a post hoc rationalization.

Tesla: general economic environment, stiffer competition and too many things piling up that will come “next year”, which will dry up one of their historical advantages (i.e. get paid now, deliver never). Probably some sell pressures from Musk cashing out for twitter and from a certain demographics of investors hit particularly this past year. On top of all that, Musk has been in the media too much and his true self started showing, alienating mostly potential customers and not making much inroads with the more conservative folks.

Meta: that just seems the nature of the space. Products are in and out within a few years, retaining mostly a certain demographic which grew up with them. They were able to stay relevant via good acquisitions, but were not able to do so for a couple of cycles now due to competition not interested in selling (Snapchat, TikTok). To accelerate the decline: general economic environment, privacy restrictions, and an expensive pivot to VR where the market seems way too small to support such valuations.
Man, I was just trying to answer the question “why does this work in Northern Europe but won’t in the US”. Not everything is an attack.
Comparison is the thief of Joy. It sounds like you need to get off social media.
Yeah, after all what is more technological dependence, more surveillance, constant attention hijacking/addiction, huge powerful conglomerates like Apple and Google controlling huge parts of the economy, mediated experience of the surroundings, and so on, compared to being able to more quickly find your way back when your car breaks somewhere outside the city!
What do you make of the assumptions behind my 23 kgCO2e / day guesstimate of ChatGPT's carbon footprint?
I like the small details, for example that the "pause" button doesn't immediately paus the music but it's (sort of) a very quick fade out instead. Actually, I would love to have that for normal music apps as well, normal pausing always seems so abrupt to me.
I'm afraid the author has a very wrong attitude for entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is not about following someone's advice mechanically or a guaranteed get rich schema. It's about building competence and understanding something about the target market better than anyone else. The author didn't mention what kind of competence s/he has got from all those attempts, so I suppose it has never been the goal. The competence may or may not lead to a commercially successful enterprise. But even in the case of failure, the explanation should still be based on competence, e.g. "I understood that the product didn't provide much value to the target audience because of X, and also the audience turned out to be Y, and the competition was Z. So while I learned about the market a lot, I couldn't offer anything that would provide so much value that the target audience would be ready to pay for with amounts sufficient to maintain developing the product".

If the postmortem is "I tried to follow what influencers said, but it didn't work, so I'm tired, I give up" then, well, no surprise here.

And yes, startups are hard. Very hard.
"Consumer tech" like social media. And the reason is 30+ different smaller markets, because this business makes little sense if you can't capture 100s of millions of users.