skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I guess they had no choice about the election date, but yeah they should have realized this when they approved the marathon date. And even disregarding that they really should have planned much better, as you said it was predicable there would be immense chaos that day.

The most perplexing thing in recent memory for me was that they had digitized things like apartment registrations during covid yet undid it at some point. What sense does that make?
I work in-office as does 100% of the team. This works great for us. My friend runs a startup with a geographically distributed team. That works for them. There's enough employment available in both areas. You can select what you want.
Remote work was supposed to be temporary. Remember "2 weeks to slow the spread"?
I wonder why they haven't open sourced their fork, over than vague worry it might get DMCA'd
CredCore | Programming | Remote | Anywhere | Full-Time

CredCore is a well-funded early-stage startup based out of New York City building solutions for the $10 trillion US debt sector. Our product suite helps funds and companies navigate the complex landscape of corporate debt deals and make better decisions with AI-assisted data analysis.

We're hiring for two roles:

1. UX/UI Engineer with a keen eye for detail, good at unifying design and code. Expertise in React, Typescript, Storybook, and Figma is required.

2. AI/ML Engineer. Deep knowledge of NLP and LLMs is required. Your work will involve algorithmically extracting information from large volumes of financial agreements and deals, fine tuning models etc.

We offer a competitive salary with equity, a remote-first work environment, and health insurance coverage.

Please email your resume to jeswin@credcore.com
I'm a software engineer with 12 years of experience currently working at FAANG. I've been working with Ruby for a long time and really enjoy it.

Location: Vancouver, Canada
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: Ruby (9 years experience), Rails (learning hotwire right now), JS, some React, AWS stuff, Linux, SQL (Postgres and Mysql these days)
Résumé/CV: email me
Email: hnthrowaway8365@gmail.com
I probably should have led with "I spent 35 years as a software developer and THEN got an MBA." Which is to say... when I make snarky comments, they're firmly grounded on basic comp sci and extensive software dev experience. However, When I show the kids at work how to use old-school command line tools like awk, sed, cut, grep and find, I leave off the bit that they've been educated by an MBA.
That is a sensible approach from the employee's perspective, but surely as an employer I know what my priority is in this transaction. And guess what, the employer is the one making the rules. The employee can choose not to play and pressure them in the market, but they don't have much leverage to modify the rule directly. Not surprising that many employers are backtracking on remote work.

Nevertheless, it proves that RTO is not bullshit, contradicting the title of the article.
No, management has been lying to employees with the "working in an office is more effective" for decades. Now the king is naked and yet companies are trying to manipulate people to return to offices.
No. Covid 2020-2022 absolutely blew seasonal influenza out of the water. Flu came back winter of 2022 but was still vastly outnumbered about three to one.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2022-2023/NCHS3...
who cares what they want.
Two collegial conduct nits on this piece (one from company and/or team perspective, and one from fellow-human/colleague perspective):

> It’s perfectly okay to pretend to comply to buy time while you line up a new gig somewhere else.

The context of this was the writer receiving an ultimatum, and perhaps feeling that the employer was being abusive, so maybe it was OK then.

But I'd hope people don't take that assertion of "it's perfectly okay to pretend to comply" as blanket advice.

For example, imagine a team that, although some coked-up CEO did something obnoxious, the team believed the key teammate who said they were relocating. Then later the team learns the person was lying to them, which they relied upon, so they were left in a bad spot that could've been avoided.

> Many of them admitted that they were actively looking for new roles; some of them for the first time in over a decade. Many of them already have new gigs lined up, and were preparing to resign too. Some of those already have.

OPSEC. You can act in good faith with your employer and not loose-lips-sink-ships your colleagues on their own delicate situations.

Maybe better trust among colleagues on delicate things like this would've helped avoid the other problem: there would be less motivation to "pretend", if the person could trust their colleagues not to rat them out when they don't say anything rather than lie, or when they even hint at their plans.
Corporations do everything in their power, including illegal things to maximize profits. Why can't an individual do what's best for them?
As far as I know, not technically (although I haven't kept up in the area), but you can definitely sweep through a volumetric sample; there are microscopes that can for example illuminate a thin z-plane of a transparent sample and collect the image or those that can reject out-of-focus (off-z) light for a particular z-plane, then move to another z-plane, etc. and then generate a volume on the software side.
> Walking over and talking to someone is still far superior to any online communication.

This is an example of a local maximum. This form of communication is better for the person doing the walking, but worse when looked at through most other frames:

- worse for the person being asked, who was interrupted

- worse for the people who weren't privy to that conversation but perhaps could have learned or contributed except that they were OOO that moment.

- worse for the organization because knowledge shared this way is ephemeral & siloed by definition

- ineffective in large organizations, where teams often span offices

And all that's before considering the "worse" that comes from having your staff spend 5 hours a week (average in the US) commuting to the office.

In effect, the person walking over is burdening the other party and the organization rather than spend a little more time to craft a question in writing. Weak written communication skills are at the root of why so many organizations are bad at remote work. If oral communications is all that works at your org, then remote is going to be really tough for you (and your inter-office communication is also probably terrible and you should put the whole company in a single building).
These kind of blogs do not help remote work argument, it is polarising the discussion. Especially when the advice is to sabotage the company while drawing your own plan. BTW, I completely understand remote workers and I have no issues with the remotes in my team.

Take the argument of working in a cheaper state or country. These kind of perks that only IT people have, can easily turn into envy with the majority of the other workers who do not have this. They may need to commute hours every day and still need to pay grand villa rent for a basement room.
For those of us who don’t stare at parsers on a regular basis, this seems odd to me:

newtype Parser a = P (String -> Maybe (String, a))

So, on a successful parse, it returns the result and the rest of the string. That’s seems error prone and rather weak. What ensures that the “rest of the string” is, in fact, a suffix of the input? I assume the purpose of this design is for compatibility with lazy input sequences, where the “rest of the string” could still be lazy. But surely some Haskell type magic could ensure that the supposed lazy suffix is actually a suffix.

If I were writing a serious parser intended for human use with nice error messages, I would want to know the position and length of the parsed output, which I could infer from actual strings with known length, but which I may not be able to efficiently infer from lazy sequences.

So I’m confused. Why is this a good design?
We are talking about taking something that individuals pay for, that costs about $40k in total at affordable schools, and making it totally free for as many people who want it.

If additional people want to pay beyond the cap, wonderful. But I don’t see how the financials make any sense otherwise.
>Before COVID there were a ton of people who wanted to work remotely but couldn't

And then there's all the people that didn't know they wanted to work remotely, until they were forced to experience it.
Surely you’re capable of scheduling a meeting if you need to talk to someone or share a screen. Scheduling a meeting is far preferable to interrupting someone who is busy, in the office or not.
Why Did People Comply?
That sort of thing is only going to accelerate the amount of crap, derivative music that is already flooding the market

The difference between music and driving a car is that music is art. Many of those who labor in the space enjoy creating from scratch. Technological progress does not automatically make things better
Some zero-price schools in the US, like high schools, have essentially no standards at all. You can get a diploma even if nearly illiterate.

Good schools with high standards can be delivered with or without paid tuition, and the same for bad schools with no standards.
Microsoft Defender was flagging Tor browser as a trojan and removing it
Can't see the article but I assume they are comparing it to Dept. of education spending as most do. The vast majority of educational spending is at the state and local level which people frequently leave out when making this comparison.
If the company needs you, you get to do it your way.

Also, software dev doesn't actually need a team, and, as the "key players" tend to go WFH more and more, the teams become worse and worse value.

This ends with the decline of "team managers" and "filler players".
Anybody have any real insight into why this has become a thing all of the sudden?

My company is doing RTO after claiming WFH was the new normal. We haven't seen any decrease in productivity. Is it because WFH gives employees too many choices?
For young children (that is, before entering school), children are often at home all day being cared for either by a parent or a nanny. If you don't have a separate area to work, it can be really difficult to explain to your kids that Mommy or Daddy can't play because they need to stare at a screen for hours.
If that is what happens, then I agree with you.
Location: Kosovo
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: no
Techologies: JavaScript of all kinds, React, Node.js, WebRTC, Web gaming, SQL(Postgres, MySQL), NoSQL (Mongo, Redis, DynamoDB), AWS.
Résumé/CV: https://suldashi.com/cv.pdf
Email: ermirsuldashi@gmail.com

I'm a senior full stack engineer with 8 years of experience, with a particular background in WebRTC. I focus on the JS stack but I'm willing to try out new things.

My latest project: https://jsforgames.com
Website: https://suldashi.com
Because the Constitution was written hundreds of years ago by people who were afraid a foreign interest would subvert their nascent state?
Pre-Covid COL would be great too.
> also many are not and are more productive in an office environment

I see this assertion every time the WFH/RTO topic is brought up, but there's never any data to back it up. Mind changing that?
Yeah 5) was a real eye opener for me. A lot of conservative thought revolves around the idea that government shouldn't provide services that family, faith, and friends can provide, but when it came right down to it voluntary mask wearing was out because of exactly what you said.
Works for me too. Have you modified your trust store and removed signers? It's signed by the Amazon Root CA, so it's a short chain, but if you removed them then it would show as invalid.
In many (most?) EU contries, kids are evaluated and steered into vocational/trades or college-bound tracks at about middle-school age. College/university education may be free or close to it, but not everyone can go. EU approaches to education are more likely to lock you into your socieoeconmic status than those in the USA, where if you are smart but poor you will have schools falling over themselves to recruit you so their enrollment stats for "underserved" students look better.
The point of these schemes is to provide you with energy at precisely those hottest/coldest parts of the year. If you want to pay more for potentially redundant backup and/or take the risk of the whole system going down, then you're only going to be more miserable.
Modos Paper Monitor (2022)
You've made a reasonable proposal. But the writer of the blog wasn't offered anything so reasonable and that's why they're mad.
You see how that’s inherently about putting the preferences of the 5 people *above* the preferences of the rest of the office, yes?
Proprietary telepresence systems have been around for a long time and they are good enough for keeping international relations going between country's governments, so they probably would be good enough for your company. They are more expensive than you might think they should be until you get into the engineering and understand what it takes to make it seamless and reliable.

The question is, does your organization actually know the value of communication between remote parties? Companies that actually run the numbers on the value of remote collaboration can pretty easily figure out if it's worth it.
> In the office they are.

lol what are they doing? Staring at the ceiling? What makes them always available in the office and not always available at home? How is this still a thing being discussed? Perhaps, at home, they are actually able to get some work done.

Again, this is my office. I'm sure there are some offices where people legitimately aren't doing much of anything at home. Statistically, that just has to be true. Maybe this is the wrong company?
Location: California, US
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: Not at this time
Technologies: Figma, Sketch, Adobe Creative Suite
Résumé/CV: https://allie.goodson.dev/resume-2023-03-10.pdf
Email: allie@goodson.dev

I am Allie Goodson, a designer based in California, focused on user centered design. I communicate easily and clearly with technical teams to ensure products are usable and accessible. I am looking for opportunities with companies that will provide the chance to get my hands on a variety of products at all stages of development. If you would like to know more about me, please visit my portfolio website: https://allie.goodson.dev/
The Ukrainian experts dismantling bombs for clues to Putin’s arms supply
Autolock your workstation when you're removing your Yubikey
Tax Abatement

What doesn't get discussed enough is the huge financial incentives that cities give to corporations to attract big businesses.

Those incentives (like no corporate taxes for 10-years) are based on companies literally having people physically in-office.

Cities don't want corporations to move "on paper" their HQ.

Cities want the economy benefits of more local jobs, which equals more income & home taxes that follow.

So cities structure corp incentives to having people physically in-office that way it aligns their interests with the corp interest.

As such, companies are forced to bring people back into the office as a result to maintain those tax incentives.
> There’s the age-old question of how we pay for this. Sanders proposed a Wall Street financial transactions tax. A 0.1 percent tax, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate, could raise $777 billion over 10 years. Or we could hike taxes on corporations and the wealthiest Americans.

I have no problem taxing wall street or "the wealthiest Americans", but I don't see the connection between this proposal and this funding source. It feels like taking money away from people who don't vote for you, and giving it to people who do. That's a bad direction to go down, and I'm generally skeptical about politicians who do this (which is a lot of them).
Oh yeah. This was a snarky comment. Serves me right for trying to be clever over a text channel. It is very easy to misinterpret this as a legit comment.
Direct link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9U4ARQzos
I know a family who still wears masks in public because their daughter is very sick, very weak, and they don't want to risk her getting covid. Perfectly sensible. I also know people who wear masks in public because they're a little nuts... just can't let go, or politically or psychologically hung up.

So what can you say? You see a stranger wearing a mask, you don't know if it's for a good reason or not. Probably the odds are that it's an emotional or psychological hangup, but it may be for a really good reason. So you need to just shrug and let people do what they think best for themselves. They're the ones responsible for themselves.
Isn't it obvious? Someone's "temporary hack" stopped working, and even though it's not been important enough to refactor for the past 100 years it's important enough to drop everything right now to fix when it breaks.
Then why is it that when I had a problem with the IRS that it was an absolute nightmare to solve. Even getting a person on the phone was difficult. But when I have a problem with an Amazon order, I can get a refund in a few clicks.

Turns out my power to choose to not be a customer gives me infinitely more power over a company than my right to vote gives me over a company.
> there seems to be a lot of resentment about this, and I don't really understand why.

You don't understand why people don't want to have to go job hunting to keep a WFH position?

It's one thing to say "this is fine, get over it", it's another to say "I don't understand why people are resentful", I think that second part is pretty obvious.
The morale effect might be real for you, but for a large group of workers, their morale has improved since WFH. On my team of 24, only one chooses to work in the office...
I understand the sentiment (I also now enjoy doing WFH, even though it took me a while to get used to it), but this post comes off as whiny and entitled.

A C-level executive making some sort of change without any good reason always sucks, but one should really know better than to call the CEO of one's previous company an asshole in public. It's unprofessional and will reflect badly on you.

Plus, the advice about never taking an ultimatum is... weird. The author doesn't even seem to notice the apparent contradiction between stating this and them later commenting on immigrants not being able to be as picky.
> Conversely, if you let these assholes exert their power over you, you dehumanize yourself in submission.

I normally like strong opinions even when I disagree with them. It is usually refreshing to hear people share their true feelings in an unfiltered way.

This, on the other hand, feels bitter. It seems to be coming from a place of hate.

By all means, stand up for yourself and your ideals. Sometimes you have to make difficult choices to maintain your own integrity. But, conversely, deciding to make the choice to return to an office is not "dehumanize yourself in submission".

Many people, perhaps most, will just go back to the office because they aren't convinced that they are locked in a life-long struggle to free themselves from some imaginary battle between the oppressors and the oppressed. They will realize that a job is an offering made to them, the conditions of which may change from time to time. Some will actually relish the idea of hanging around the office with likeminded coworkers.

This is a cancer of our times: to see every single thing that happens as one side being an asshole exerting power and the other side being dehumanized into submission.
There's so much to unpack here.

Firstly, I think it's ok that some companies are 100% remote, some are 100% office, some are mixed; potential employees choose based on their wants and needs. Personally I like mixed. I'd never do 100% remote or office again for sure.

Second, I think this "choose the company who isn't giving you the ultimatum" makes sense only when there's a choice. For a long time developers have had a huge amount of leverage as the market was so they the ones making the ultimatums. I can see that not being the case in the near future.
I think the resentment comes from the assumption of: "We should just return to the status quo before..."

If you look back at the history of work experiences, there were several old "status quos" that we no longer accept. We don't accept, manual labor for 60 or 80 hours a week. We don't accept an expectation of staying at one employer for your entire career and then retiring on a pension. But society evolves. Assuming that something as disruptive as COVID should just be put aside without evolving how we operate in our world is exactly where the resentment comes from.
You give them entirely too much credit. They were told by others (primarily Wall Street) that they are to do this. It provides them with three things:

1. Real estate holding investment increases.

2. Control.

3. Silent layoffs.

There's no reason for RTO. None. They're doing it to save money and regain control of their workforce.
because you need 3 transits for a positive detection of a exoplanet. And given that the habitable planet around a sun like star is anything from 250 - 700 days the observation time is too expensive so they focus on red dwarfs instead. I also find it pretty annoying as well, especially when science communicators try and extrapolate observations on red dwarfs on what is typical extrasolar system.
This is becoming less true. In my workplace people are increasingly requesting at least some face-to-face interaction, both for business and social reasons. I've even had interview candidates request a desire for some sort of direct social interaction.
> The US also spends a lot of money on the military. Whether prudent or not, at least that spending produces an objectively superior product. We spend even more on education with ambiguous results.

Nice. Didn’t think I’d see “bombs over books” argued so early in the morning.
remote-first means hiring the best-fit people for your company at the time and them working precisely when they're ready to be productive, zero commute, zero overhead.

good luck competing with that.

source: 25 years and 8+ companies working remotely.
Require immigrants to be self-sustaining at some minimum amount. Have a job ready or otherwise prove the ability to pay for your housing (someone willing to board you).

Otherwise, instantly applying government handouts to someone without any skills - language or otherwise - and often with kids and disabled relatives - makes the idea of unlimited open immigration a daunting cost.
No, they’ll have people willing to commute 30 minutes a day to make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to talk to. Ask service workers what their commute is like and how many days they have to be “in the office” for.

Edit: found the people that have never worked retail or restaurant
To be fair to POTS, it at least made up for frequency response with near zero latency. What you describe is worst of both worlds -- latency of commodity packet switching plus bandwidth of POTS.

Personally, I'd always choose zero latency over audio fidelity in a two-way communication medium.
Police in the United States have conducted airstrikes on civilian homes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_MOVE_bombing
> Today, as some companies are changing their remote work policies to be return-to-office, there seems to be a lot of resentment about this, and I don't really understand why.

I mean, this is a ridiculous argument supporting remote work because it works so much stronger the other way.

You literally had companies change centuries worth of corporate work for overnight to switch everyone to remote work.

If anything the people who want full time return to office have a much stronger argument that companies have suddenly changed everything on them, as opposed to the people who are complaining that now that things are normal companies are reverting the changes they made for a once in a lifetime pandemic.