skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Absolute lukewarm take here. Wages are not only set by supply and demand. Institutional power, regulatory concerns, etc... are huge factors in compensation, too. You can argue they're abstracted over by the market anyway, but you're not saying anything interesting until you dive into the tensions between those concerns.

And that's not even touching the fact that the workers are clearly valuable and irreplaceable enough that they can halt production like this.
It's actually something that bothers me about nushell. The assumption seems to be that you have to parse the output of external commands. I think that ideally there should be some metadata that an executable could have to indicate that it can output structured data and nushell could pick it up without the user having to explicitly parse it. That way you could write commands that work on other shells but work better on shells that understand structured data.
Do state universities have the right to create agreements with the big publishers, the faculty, and the university book stores to essentially lock the knowledge behind a private paywall?

Anything taught in a state university should be open-source, full stop.
It sounded to me that the previous poster's point is that the tradeoff between economic opportunities and moving away from grandparents is less prevalent. My anecdote (and census data in another reply) is how someone chose to stay in an economically strong metro despite the fact that this meant grandparents couldn't live near children. People are still often prioritizing economic opportunities over proximity to family.

I don't deny that this is a choice, I'm contesting whether this tradeoff had diminished outside of WFH situations.
Someone should redo this, but with Guix or NixOS
> and am suggesting that you do something to make sure your communications are clear

I believe the best way to have clear communication is by having an extra bit of communication when there is any misunderstanding, which is what I'm doing by following up in this conversation. We all have different meaning for words even if they are written the same (you just need to see how the same religious text can have so many different interpretations).

I have done an effort to spend some extra time to explain the things you misunderstood from my communication. For me, that's aiming to have a clear communication.
Of course, we don't know each other. So the tone and/or interpretation can vary depending on our feelings of the person.

Let me put a simple example of what I meant: I did stated that "if you care more about the PR stunt I can fully understand your point of view", which is actually quite different to assuming that you "care more about the PR stunt" as you mentioned (there is a big "if" there that somehow you missed).
Let me be even more clear of what the "if" meant in my writing:

* if you care about the PR stunt -> I fully understand your point of view.

* if you don't care about the PR stunt -> I don't understand your point of view

As you can see, a thing that was quite clear from my point of view (and I assume for most of the readers), was not clear for you. And I'm not assuming you are a bad communicator, I just assume there was a misunderstanding because we are, in reality, different people with different minds.

In any case, I don't think we make anyone a favor by discussing this more publicly. If you want to have a Zoom chat (because lets be honest, miscommunication is always easily handled via video) about what other things where there might be a misunderstanding, I will be very happy to do so. Please feel free to email me at syrus@wasmer.io
Did you even read your own links? They are carefully preparing soil and planting saplings, not randomly scattering seeds. The exact opposite of what gp is suggesting. They are planting in an intentional manner exactly as I said.
> There is no training to be a good CEO. They are not easily replaceable.

If Steve Jobs—who first created and then basically rescued Apple and started it on the path to where it is today—can be 'replaced' then any other leader can be replaced.

Similarly there are plenty of CEOs that are paid oodles of money that were or are absolute garbage: see Boeing for the last 15+ years as Exhibit A.
“Supply and demand” is a very limited special case of a broader principal, which is that pay reflects power. CEO’s power and control over their own pay has increased, and the power of regular workers has decreased. There are a myriad of reasons for this but it’s certainly deliberate.
Congress already makes more money from cutting deals with their power & influence than they do from their salary...
> You'd be hard-pressed to find a food that's completely missing a particular amino acid.

lentils aren't complete, nor are grains, but the union of their amino acids spans those essential for humans, famously.
IMO an equation like that would be fine as long as you made it possible for CEOs of larger companies to make more money than CEOs of small and medium sized companies.

There’s a job market for C-Suite employees (whether we care to admit it or not). At a certain point you won’t get qualified candidates if you can’t reward them enough, same as engineers or any other role.

The answer for how much CEOs should be paid is the amount of money you would need to pay to employ the most optimal person to run the company. Figuring out what that number is is difficult.
> So what, nothing prohibits the US and Europe from raising tariffs on industrial products.

I mean, there's retaliation. Trade is mutual.
Cars, then?
Good to see that other devs share the same passion by making AI accessible to everyone.

I’ve got a similar app, with the same goals and eventually same supported platforms. Slight difference is that it’s open source:

https://github.com/BrutalCoding/shady.ai
Thanks for the reply. Just a little spelling mistake, it’s “safe.” Besides that you write English better than me (a native) :P
The WTO has been fucked over for years now. Practically they've been kneecapped since 2019 "thanks" to the 45th [1], and even before that, they didn't do much against the clear breaches of good conduct that China committed, and for what it's worth it's not like the actions of the 45th were without good cause, even back under Bush the WTO was infamous for being slow as molasses even compared to other international organizations and having failed to update their rulebook because everyone and their dog kept vetoing stuff.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/dec/25/austr...
This actually has a similar purpose to an idea I had for basically creating a "your own backoffice" distribution of software (a little more turnkey, but with the same idea of tying it to a particular low-cost cloud provider). I love the concept and love seeing this kind of thing. I believe in the mission. I think being opinionated about first steps is an important part of it.

What bogged me down were "day 2" concerns around troubleshooting and maintainability. I had a somewhat more ambitious plan that would involve monitoring and rollouts and so forth as well, so it's not really something you do in a shell script and forget about. And I was focusing on the use case of a small group of people rather than a single, disconnected person, because that's so much of what (I think) we use our devices for. And I wanted to focus on using tools in a standard way so that you could actually learn how your system worked by looking at its standard configurations, written in a standard way (not "pkg_add" and "opaque ad-hoc config template") and being aware of how to change them over time as you learned more.

I still think this is great but I'm not sure it's the kind of thing you can just run and then be okay. Hell, I'm a "tech professional" for whatever that's worth and it's hard enough for me to keep homeassistant updated and free from rot. A single server that's not backed up--and even if it were, without features for restoring--or updated (even recommending never updating it--I love OpenBSD and its stability is great but there are reasons to update) just isn't something to tell someone to start relying on for their digital life.
The AI just isn't there yet if we would even want it to reach that point. You have to have someone in communications range to make kill decisions, confirm target designations, and keep the expensive parts of your swarm intact. Drones are pretty awesome as front line aircraft, but they haven't replaced humanity yet.
Not all jobs have quantitative measures for impact. The more a job is decoupled from a measurable value, the more likely that job is to be bid up to "as much as the company can afford."

I've seen this in my career, the closer I get to "SRE" or "platform engineer" the more decoupled my salary has become from my actual measurable value.

I'd articulate the thinking as, roughly:

We know this role is important. We know that having a bad SRE team (or CEO or platform team) is expensive, it could cost us the 100% of the business. And we don't know how to measure the value a good one provides. Therefore we are willing to spend as much as we can afford to make sure we get a good one.
how do you know they didn't learn from the garbage generator too?
They are going for at least relative parity if not absolute parity.
Yes. But now take CEOs and their pay and map it to company performance and stock performance. Are they skilled at bringing out the best in their company, or squeezing staff wages more and more?
If they were serious then they would put the CEOs in jail.
> There is something to be said about the larger centralized services. I’d be hesitant to put any sensitive files on my own server. The larger firms have security departments ready to respond to CVE’s and 0days.

Some people change their own oil, mow their own lawns, fix their own dripping faucets, etc.

Running a secure server on the internet requires different, but not more knowledge and effort, and is less expensive, than changing your own oil.

There's no need to be in thrall to the "larger firms". They have different problems, which you might not be able to solve for them -- but you can often solve your own.
History of the Urban Dashboard
You are arguing against something I did not say.

Show me where I made any comment about the current level of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Show me where I said humanity did not contribute to the increase.

Show me where I said it isn't real.

Show me where I said anything related to your ridiculous comment.

Your indoctrination is blinding you from being able to understand what someone is saying. All you see is "Enemy, enemy, enemy!" and that's it. Facts be damned. Science be damned. Nothing else matters. You bought into the nonsense and are not willing to actually reason about any of it.
Wow djb was on his committee, cool.
It appears to be a diagram to slice the fish up into a number of weird little steaks/cutlets vs the more traditional 'two half-fish filets'

I imagine that deboning that thing after is a right pain.
Do they take ownership though? That hasn't been that way in a while.

Used to be the best warrior had skin in the game. We have them resources so when the lions came or the boars got into the crops, they were ready to kick some ass, even if the rest of us were undernourished due to a drought.

Now they just "take full responsibility" where that just means they have to announce that something dumb happened on camera. Truly a gruesome fate. So brave.
I use OpenBSD for basically everything: laptop, desktop, server. It's been my server OS since 1999. I play with other OSs and come back to the solid simplicity of OpenBSD.

I chose OpenBSD for https://sive.rs/ti because of its simplicity and security, and that it has the mailserver and webserver built-in.
If you underpay elected officials then 1. they just start taking bribes 2. only rich people will run in the election.

This is why Singapore pays them even more than we do.

Anyway, minimum wages (despite being ok policies) aren't what people are actually paid, and of course aren't especially what non-working people are paid. And remember that non-working people, namely children and the elderly, are poorer than workers.
I’d like to see one of these guys use their magic leadership mojo to lead a platoon of marines into battle. I think he’d find that domain knowledge does, in fact, matter.

To the extent that it truly doesn’t matter, the ceo is a glorified mascot.
Is that an apples to apples comparison? Is the mean inflation-adjusted market cap of all the companies in both their 1978 dataset and 2021 dataset the same?
Of course there is training to be a CEO. Do you think all the good CEOs were born with the knowledge to be a CEO?
I support the workers' decision and negotiating on labor rates is the basis of our economic system. Get what you deserve.

That said, the CEO pay is easily explainable:

> Profits at the struck auto companies increased 92% from 2013 to 2022, totaling $250 billion, according to EPI

> CEO pay at the Big Three has grown 40% in the last decade, according to EPI

If you're the CEO of a company and you increased profits by 92%, I don't know seems pretty fair to me. There's a lot of other businesses that suck and haven't raised their profits in the meanwhile.

I think talking about the CEO pay is the wrong path (though I do admit it's marketable in the mainstream news). Just ask for what you think you deserve and don't work if you don't get it. It's as simple as that.
While the two are similar, polygamy in any form implies some form of marriage or other legal binding. The term being made up here doesn’t require the marriage aspect. If an individual is divorcing and remarrying, then you’re correct.
Platformer is a much more reliable reporting outlet than you, and I'm not your personal research service.
I live in one of my city's ever-expanding historic preservation areas. I can't actually fix the front of my old house without permission. Or remove the nonsense purely-decorative dormer because the city historian will only trust photographs and not evidence of moderns construction materials.

The owner in the 80s needed a permit from the historic preservation board to add the dormer. It's the same historic preservation board I need permission from to remove the dormer. Ironically, the history board doesn't have any of its own records before the early oughts, so they don't believe they issued a permit. (I talked with the old owner back in ~1992 about the odd dormer and heard a lot about permits back then.)

I would love to have that particular board of busybodies disbanded.
> California just passed a law that will give every fast-food worker in the state a 30% raise.

I'm suspicious this article is falsely assuming they were all making minimum wage. That's not the case near me.
I thought we agreed, as a society, that arbitrary numeric thresholds are only interesting if they're in the integer series of K*10^N, where K is 1 to 9 and N is 0 to infinity. Occasional allowances for multiples of 5 -- normally only if the second digit is 5.
To paint the above in starker terms:

Worker pay is set by the leadership, leadership pay is set by the leadership.
THEY ALREADY DO

Nobody said the multiple has to be 5. It could be whatever the current ratio for Singapore is.
> there are only so many large companies, and thus so many CEOs

This is a statement that there is low quantity demanded by the market. It's actually a great example of how the naive supply-and-demand argument doesn't make a lot of sense.
How about this compromise: cut the CEO's pay by 40% and give an 80% raise to the workers.
Like it or not, they've become more efficient at maximizing shareholder returns. 1978 to present included all sorts of financial shenanigans designed to turn a company from the old school "return on assets" model to a financial vehicle that profits on the spread between it's revenue stream and financing costs. I think it's shit too, but the job turned from running a company go making money appear, and the pay went with it.

Don't hate the player, hate the game (seriously, the system is screwed up horribly)
It's more likely that it is the only role that tends to be in the room when the board is deciding salaries. Turns out it's great to be able to decide how much your own compensation should be.
That depends on what you mean by detected.

Stealth technology shrinks radar signature, meaning all else being equal, a radar pointed at a stealth aircraft will return a substantially weaker signal than for a non-stealth aircraft, particularly at certain wavelengths it's optimized to be stealthy in. Thus a system of radars that might have no gaps a non-stealth aircraft could fly through might have gaps where it couldn't detect a stealth aircraft, or radars with the resolution to accurately locate the aircraft might not be able to distinguish it from background noise. Generally very large, long wavelength radars can detect that a stealth aircraft is present, but can't accurately determine location. The only time an air defense system has ever shot down a stealth aircraft was during the 90s when a Yugoslavian force shot down an F-117, but they relied on the fact that the plane was flying along a known flight route. Under ideal circumstances defense against stealth is theoretically possible, but a system that can reliably defend against stealth under arbitrary conditions is at best impractical.

Now that's the case for a radar deliberately set up to try and detect military aircraft flying through some area. The US isn't particularly expecting any foreign nation to fly a small sortie over North Carolina any time soon. Radar coverage in the US is limited; airports have radars that can detect very non-stealthy civilian aircraft a few dozen miles away, and there are many radars at military bases and weather stations and such scattered around, but air traffic monitoring relies heavily on transponder signals for most of the air space. While a foreign adversary probably shouldn't count on the ability to overfly the US completely undetected, we almost certainly would not be able to track it along its flight path.

Of course the US does not rely on detecting foreign aircraft to protect against an attack on the mainland, but instead practices a strategy of deterrence.
I don't follow why workers' pay should increase at the same rate as their CEOs' pay. They're subject to entirely different labor markets with accompanying risks, opportunity costs, supply, demand, cost of replacement, etc.
That's why the pay rates are different, but that doesn't explain why the pay rates should increase by different percentages
I'm too young to have firsthand experience, but I've seen the speculation that IPSEC was an example of this kind of strategy. It's certainly more-- ahem-- flexible that it probably ought to be. I know there have been exploits against ISAKMP implementations. I'd assume the baroque nature of the protocol drove some of that vulnerability.
> Use the same framework to explain CEO pay.

Sure. It's the same framework that explains the pay of Lebron James. The NBA became a massively popular global game during the era of fast growth globalization, in which billions of consumers entered into the active global economy.

Now you've got like 50 players earning $30m or more per year in the NBA. To play a game in just the US market.

~450 active players earning around $5 billion per year in just league salary (not counting endorsements).

Now do it for global football, NFL football, Nascar, Major League Baseball, Hockey, F1, and so on.

Who knows the insane total compensation figure. $30 billion?

The economic force producing that comically massive figure, is the exact same reason Tim Cook is worth every dollar he's getting paid to operate the juggernaut that is Apple. The same goes for Nadella at Microsoft.

The top 450 NBA players earn more in salary every year than the CEOs of the S&P 500. Why shouldn't a CEO get paid extraordinarily well, as well as an NBA all-star, for operating a $10 or $20 billion market cap corporation? Obviously they should.

The only time I see arguments against high CEO pay (speaking generally), it's from people that know absolutely nothing about what a CEO does or how exceptionally difficult it is to operate a very big company.

And should mediocre CEOs that fail or otherwise perform poorly get golden parachutes? No, of course not. Exceptional CEOs should get properly exceptional pay. They deserve to earn drastically more than the average worker.

The common Redditor railing against CEO pay, looks at a Tim Cook and thinks they can maybe do what Cook does (he just sits in his chair in a big office while other people do all the work, dur dur dur), or what Nadella does, or a random S&P 500 CEO does. In reality they can barely do their own basic job, much less one ten tiers above them. The average Redditor is further away from being able to do Tim Cook's job than they are being able to do the job of Lebron James. The issue is the average person doesn't know anything about what a CEO does at all, they're entirely ignorant of it. However they can watch Lebron James play basketball and immediately understand they can't do anything like what James can do, because they get the physical visual display immediately, meanwhile they know zip about the job of a CEO at a big company. As usual the issue is extreme ignorance and mediocre education.
The person you're replying to is suggesting that their pay rates are inelastic due to scarcity.
Great metaphor. Thank you.
Why not have a law that C-suite compensation can only increase as much percentage as the lowest increase in the company?
The Loyal Wingman concept seems to lend itself to small squadrons of f35 and f15ex command planes managing much larger groups of drones that are actively running radars and using AESA arrays for command and control.

Those drones seem to look more like cheaper loitering weapons platforms than F35s but who knows what happens when the other side isn't so stupid.
There's actually an interesting book on this topic (first chapter covers exactly what you just wrote):

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25135194-prisoners-of-ge...
Should We Pay for Clicks?
Hacking Google Random Number Generator
This is true, but they also tend to get free use of things like homes and cars owned by their company.
If it was the city, sure, but it’s private property so this feels like complaining that a hotel charges a hefty cancellation fee for no-shows. Yes, it’s eye-watering but short of passing a law capping this I don’t think there are options other than not accepting the terms for use of someone’s private property.
The argument is not that CEOs are not valuable. The argument is that there's no obvious increase in their value since the 70s that might justify their relative pay increase.
If you ran your own github clone (self-hosted Gitlab, Gitea etc.), we could fork that script and improve upon it, potentially
I'm just amazed how, with enough money invested into propaganda of economic liberalism (still a paltry sum in the grand order of things), you can have smart people around the world repeating your mantras without noticing for decades that you have not even pretended to live up to your own faith.

Many of them acolytes actually ruining their domestic economy by executing on these principles.
SREs aren't on the board of directors setting the pay for other SREs who are on their board of directors though.

The elite/ownership/"capitalism winner" class are playing on an entirely different level with their power and influence. Don't kid yourself into drawing comparisons with your situation and miniscule in comparison compensation. It's always heads they win, tails you lose.
The workers also contributed to that 92% increase in profit.
Though this argument falls apart with evidence that CEOs of big firms do need to deeply understand their companies domain. It may work to a degree, but doesn’t seem to coincide with the most valuable companies.

It’s why when Intel was floundering a few years back they got rid of CEO and brought on a CEO with deep engineering expertise.

Tim Cook is a wizard of supply chain, and in many ways that’s a large part of Apples current success, IMHO. The list goes on.