skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The 10 Principles of Rationality:

1. Your beliefs and assumptions are facts and logic; other people's beliefs and assumptions are emotions and biases

2. If someone describes an experience you can't relate to, it's an anomaly and you should ignore it

3. You know more than other people (except for third-parties who agree with you: they are an unquestionable authorities)

4. Never engage with issues in the context of real events; only examine issues in contrived, hypothetical scenarios

5. Avoid debates with real people; instead, make up imaginary people and argue against the make-believe opinions you give them

6. If you do debate a real person, your primary goal is to make them look foolish (not to change their mind, or yours)

7. Your understanding of other people's feelings and beliefs is more accurate and nuanced than their own

8. Your wild guesses and baseless estimates are valid statistical data

9. It's ok to bend the truth when necessary to prove a point

10. If someone disagrees with you, it's because they're less rational than you

The 10 Decrees of Rationality:

1. A person's wealth is a direct measurement of their contribution to society

2. The best way to help people is by getting rich as fast as possible (it doesn't matter how)

3. When helping people, it's best to ignore their input and feedback (if they had sound judgement then they wouldn't need help)

4. When someone does something good, they're probably secretly doing it for terrible reasons

5. When rich people do something terrible, they're probably secretly doing it for good reasons

6. Believing in your favorite unproven conspiracy doesn't make you a "conspiracy theorist"

7. Stereotypes are based in truth, except for the ones that you find personally offensive

8. When people say your research is bogus, it means your research is really so profound that they're scared of its implications

9. Super-intelligent AI is the greatest threat to humanity

10. Capitalism is a natural, fair, and sustainable system that makes our world a better place
Among the countless reasons why this is an extremely bad argument, consider that the entire point of wind and solar is to prevent the landscape from being obliterated by climate change.
After spending many years studying philosophy I think that the right approach is that you don’t need to come to any conclusions about anything.

Aristotle often started with common peoples’ viewpoints on any given topic, along with looking at what experts thought and built his own ideas from there, and of course was very successful with his methodology.

Arguments are interesting and obviously some are more correct than others but everyone has good reasons for what they argue for and there is a genius to the collective thoughts of humanity even if it seems like insanity most of the time.

The best starting point is one of ignorance and asking other people what they think, you don’t need consensus but you should be looking for clues, solid ground, and inspiration.

Everyone should get more comfortable andmitting to and saying that they truly ‘don’t know’. Taking a position of ignorance will open the doors to real possibilities and actual progress.
It was bad enough that corporations are allowed to identify as "people." It was downright creepy when companies then decided to become your "family."

Cult connotations involving "chosen" families aside, it's family that's statistically most likely to molest you.
That we have arms and legs that we can control is nothing but an accident, a very complex accident but still.

Our eyes and ears are no different in that sense, only they're mostly input rather than output.

Input is just as dangerous in our bodies as it is in some backend that connects to a database, marketing makes use of these vulnerabilities to control us in some way or another.

I don't think people argue we should cover over ears while walking outside out of fear we get hijacked from things we could hear. In the same way, I don't think there's an issue with immersive technology, one just has to learn to treat it as more external input that needs to be validated and sanitized.
The primary concern is the people who have lost jobs, and for some, careers and dreams. Some of them are probably reading HN today.

But for the economy, it could be a good thing: Talent moving from moribund, unambitious, lower-return businesses to dynamic, often new ones that are hiring and expanding for an optimistic future. (I say unambitous because they are, at least in this situation, cutting costs and talent rather than investing in and taking risks for a bold future.)

Unemployment is low, the economy is growing. Usually layoffs, etc. happen widely when the economy is slow and unemployment high, and then the newly unemployed have a hard time finding new jobs.

If it's going to happen, in some senses now may be the perfect time for the individuals and the economy.
I'm arguing against Malthusian doomerism. I'm not necessarily arguing that growth can continue forever on Earth, though it can probably continue longer than Malthusians predict.

At some point Earth has to plateau. That's fine except for the fact that all our economic systems depend on eternal number go up. I do think that will be a crisis mid-late 21st century.

My hope is that our civilization doesn't eat itself because banks can't operate the way they're accustomed to operating.

I personally think self-inflicted wounds are a more likely cause for our civilization collapsing than limits to growth directly. We could start to plateau (on Earth at least) and be totally fine but nuke ourselves because we can't deal with the implications for our socioeconomic systems and elect a bunch of populist imbeciles.
Brine is just concentrated seawater. What waste products?
Performance in the role they were hired for, which is person/role fit. The response spotlights that the person might be "really, really great" somewhere else, possibly in some other role.

This is one of the reasons @eastdakota's response is really well done — he doesn't say a single bad thing about the person who (unprofessionally) shared video of the event, but instead owns that the company doesn't/can't hire perfectly, and acknowledges the various ways in which they failed this person during the layoff process.
:D and if you scale this to the point where the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is affected, you can also use some of the abundant energy to boil the ocean to replace that water vapor. :) Same net effect (water is taken from the ocean and salt is not) without actually moving the salt back and forth.
Israeli students in a US college that I went to returned to Israel, temporarily, to serve their nation.
The fact the she posted this video to TikTok tells me that Cloudfare did a good job laying her off.

Asking those questions is fine, recording and posting on TikTok, or any social media platform, is not. I hope this doesn’t may her unemployable.
You build it up over time by hiring direct from colleges (or even trade schools).

It has to be a complete plan, not just a slap-dash "we can hire some people and the problem is solved".

To do it best you do NOT hire from the industry, and if necessary you hire from unrelated industries (perhaps, for example, oil rig/pipeline inspectors).
This is something I still don't understand about the original plan: Where is the Salton Sea expected to get more water from on an ongoing basis? If you keep extracting from it and not refilling it, it's just going to keep getting smaller and saltier. Agriculture isn't going to put back out as much as it takes in (the plants need it, after all). Sure, you can drag it out a few more years with desal, but eventually it's not going to be much of a sea, just a salty pile.
A further thought that is too much for an edit… one of Alexander’s final conclusions is:

> I’m glad that some people never develop epistemic learned helplessness, or develop only a limited amount of it, or only in certain domains. It seems to me that […] they’re also the only people who can figure out if something basic and unquestionable is wrong, and make this possibility well-known enough that normal people start becoming willing to consider it.

I think there’s better framing here as well: he is glad that a few people direct their own bounded resources towards what I’d call high-risk epistemic investments.

I’m also thankful for this. As species, we seem to be pretty good at this epistemic risk/reward balancing act - so far, at least.
On paper, she probably scored very low on the performance metrics they referred to. As she said, she was in a 2-month ramp-up, and had one potential contract and it fell through (through no fault of her own, she says). She was reviewed at the same time as everyone else who had been there for years, and they determined (perhaps with flawed methodology and a bad time for review) that she wasn't going to be a high-performer.

She wasn't surprised that she was called and knew she'd have to be defensive about the situation. You could chalk it up to bad luck, or CloudFlare not wanting to take a chance with her when they were already going through the trouble of getting rid of longer-term low performers.

Also recording it, posting it unredacted, and acting like you've been greatly aggrieved when you've only been there 3 months is idiotic and not good business savvy.

A stronger employee would've said: "I disagree with your assessment and would've hoped that CloudFlare was able to provide clearer communication, and I believe you're in the wrong, but I understand you wish to part ways and I personally wish you the best in your firing meetings."

Frankly she sounds like a pain in the ass and doesn't understand the cold reality of the business-employee relationship.
The Mathematician Who Finds the Poetry in Math and the Math in Poetry
On the other hand when someone like TI prices their parts at like 30x the cost (e.g. ESP32-WROOM $3, TI CC3235SF $73) you can probably afford to build up a 10 year supply, especially with volume discounts.
Activities and soundboards are the ones that come to mind. Activities are a pretty heavy feature.
I believe it is unfair to treat people in HR like that. To think about it, they got their job the same way we did (say engineers, or in case of the person on the video sales). I am sure some of them also got fired. More than that people who worked in HR went through hell during COVID and hire freeze.

So yes, the job of HR is to hire and fire people. And of course doing some human resources things, but in reality protect the company.

And please don't compare HR to cartels, cheez. What the actual F? In the current state of everything, I more mad at the software engineers and not at anybody else in this world. The amount of crappy software, services and products available right now is absolutely gigantic, most of us work for corporations that don't value personal lives and privacy and ready to sell your data to anybody.

Please don't put yourself above the people who worked in HR.

It is like being mad at the nurse/doctor at the hospital, that can tell you that she cannot do something for free, just because it is policy of the hospital. Sure, if she refuses to cure a dying man - that is one thing. But in this case they just let go a few people from the company, not like they throw them under the bus.
Indeed many (most?) technology breakthroughs and great products start as "garage" experiments.

- Aviation didn't start with someone rolling out a 747, it started with the Wright Flyer - something that barely flew with just the right winds.

- Apple, Inc. literally started in a garage with an 8-bit computer with 8k ram and you had to provide your own case and power supply, monitor, and keyboard.

- The early stages of modern rocket technology looked not much different than this experiment: Here's a video of Goddard testing at his Aunt's farm:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/transcoded/a/...

> "The neighbors complained"
Believing AI tools are going to give people anything approaching Pixar capabilities demonstrates your ignorance perfectly.
I mostly agree with you, with one exception:

> Remember: the whole point of the GPL is to reject copyright, and that specifically means lots of corporate freeloading, because the whole point of copyright is to stop corporate freeloading

I don't think this is true. My understanding (which could be flawed) is that the whole point of the GPL is to weaponize copyright in order to guarantee freedoms, not to reject it (a subtle but important distinction).

Also the whole point of copyright doesn't seem to be to stop corporate freeloading, though that is of course part of it. It's point is to ensure that the original creator has rights to benefit from the work, whether that means getting stolen from by a huge corporation or stolen from by teenagers passing memes over the internet, or adapted by an individual/sole proprietor as part of some larger work, etc. My guess is we probably agree on this part and the debate is probably over semantics (i.e. you might have meant "business in general" by "corporate" rather than specific corporations).
All example 83-b have this problem. Since there is no form and it's just a letter, you can just add the line and do it yourself. IANAL.
As I wrote, Cleveland is just one example. There are literally thousands of other cities around the country where housing is affordable and home ownership rates are very high. Broaden your horizons.
A lot of industries self-inspect with regulatory oversight. For example, the SpaceX Starship mishap investigation that required 63 corrective actions from SpaceX before they were allowed to fly Starship again was done by SpaceX with FAA oversight. It seems that the oversight was effective; I highly doubt that SpaceX would have imposed 63 corrective actions on itself without effective oversight.

It's hard to see how it could be any different. SpaceX engineers are the only ones with enough knowledge of Starship to do an effective investigation.
Yeah because MIT, BSD, etc don't exist or anything
> I am so done with "awful but lots of money." I won't even do boring but lots of money any more.

> I recently took a shocking pay cut to get "not awful and very fun."

Curious what your financial situation looked like between these two stages. It's easy to be willing to take a major pay cut to work on a fun project when you've already got 6 figures stashed in savings and your house and car are paid off.
In a number of cases, yes. Whole departments are being slashed/they are exiting certain business lines so no need to pick up the slack there.
Conventional wisdom is the tension leads to lower interest rates. War in the Middle East? Lower rates. Stumbling economy in an election year? Lower rates.

The Fed watches neither of those metrics; they watch inflation and unemployment, so I wouldn't actually make this bet, but it's a story people like to tell.
At this point, we are in full bandwagon/meme territory, aside from the few companies that actually do need to fix their cashflow.

Now that the stock market will probably immediately reward you if you just recite the mantra "we overhired, COVID, etc", it's just the latest way to juice your stock price. There's enough padding when you have thousands of employees that your products won't suffer too much, and it gives you an excuse to reorg and perhaps find more efficiencies in the process. In theory, I can see the draw of "a reset will make us faster".

Of course, new efficiencies aren't guaranteed and the company's output may stay the same or shrink in the future, but at least the shareholders got more money.

Layoffs in December can potentially be bad press, so what we're seeing now is the execution of the 2023 plan to Big Reset before the market judges this type of move as a bad look again. Everyone else is juicing their stock prices this way, why shouldn't we?
Sounds like we need to bring back the beaver fur hat industry.
Some alternative sites do this (for HN content) by AI :

https://histre.com/hn/

https://www.kadoa.com/hacksnack
NPR when I was in college used language and an affect very similar to broadcast news from the 60s or 70s, which is before I was born so it's certainly not like it was "speaking to me on my generation's terms" or whatever.

And I preferred it that way. The new "hip", vernacular style they go for sucks. If I want that shit, podcasts exist. I thought it sucked when they were starting to do it and I was still in the young, "hip" demo they were trying to target.
> "Like I mean that on most topics, I could demolish their position and make them look like an idiot. Reduce them to some form of “Look, everything you say fits together and I can’t explain why you’re wrong, I just know you are!”"

That isn't making them look like an idiot, reducing them, or demolishing their position. That is completely failing to demolish their position! While also failing to convincingly explain your position.

> "If you have a good argument that the Early Bronze Age worked completely differently from the way mainstream historians believe, I just don’t want to hear about it. If you insist on telling me anyway, I will nod, say that your argument makes complete sense, and then totally refuse to change my mind or admit even the slightest possibility that you might be right. (This is the correct Bayesian action: if I know that a false argument sounds just as convincing as a true argument, argument convincingness provides no evidence either way. I should ignore it and stick with my prior.)"

Maybe the correct action is to see that how the Early Bronze Age worked has so little effect on your life, no testable hypothesis to confirm one way or the other, that it doesn't matter which one you believe, or if you believe both (even if they are contradictory, that's a thing humans can do). Instead of doubling down on one, let go of all of them.
Two minutes? That's less than half a cigarette.

It took awhile but I finished the article. I don't see much self-gratification in phrases like:

> we saw around a 30% increase in our cost per click (CPCs) in Google search.

Or this:

> This took a TON of back and forth, basically building logic that an out-of-the-box attribution solution already has in SQL, but we finally got to a place where we could salvage around 50% of attribution data.

The self congratulating I saw was

* they decided to try this before it was foisted on them by externalities.

* they worked their asses off to make it work.

* they have a competent BI team.

I don't understand why they also eliminated most first party cookies though. I respect that level of respect for user privacy but it goes beyond my personal expectation for privacy.
Public company stocks need to go up because that's how millions of people with economic profiles not dissimilar to Google SWEs fund their retirement.
> Except that's not what happened at all

You're not disputing anything I wrote though.

If a license violation is reported and Unity ignores it their legal risk is higher than for violations no one has reported. The report forces their hand, to a degree.

From the post: "Enforcement is seemingly totally random, unless you get reported by someone, apparently." ... which is another way of acknowledging enforcement isn't random. The report matters. That's what moves the responsibility for adhering to the license from the asset provider (VLC in this case) to Unity.

BTW, "other people are doing it too" isn't a great excuse for violating license terms. If that was OK, then licenses would be generally be almost meaningless.

Regarding Unity's direct usage of LGPL code, that's on them. They need to make sure to honor the LGPL license. Nobody made the claim they weren't, so I'm not sure it's relevant.

Here's another bit from the post that I thought was telling: "After months of slow back-and-forth over email trying to find a compromise..." What compromise? If you find out you're violating an open source license you stop as promptly as you reasonably can. It's not a matter of negotiating with Unity -- that's a separate agreement. It sounds like they eventually came to the right conclusion re the LGPL components, but why was honoring the LGPL license even in doubt? It makes me think they aren't really sincere about open source licenses (and maybe other licenses or any kind of agreement). Note, this point is entirely independent of Unity and whether or not they are screwing VLC. When distributing binaries built with LGPL code, they have a responsibility to honor the license, but only seemed willing to do so reluctantly and belatedly, after pressure from a business partner.
> Because it's an external dependency that must be installed manually in certain cases?

It is everywhere. About the only case where you’d need that is on Windows but then if you are installing LaTeX on Windows getting Perl is a tiny bit of the complexity of the whole thing.

> A site must be up to host downloads for this prehistoric thing, and those binaries must be built, tested, and kept up to date by someone who might one day just vanish once they become bored of thanklessly maintaining a holy relic.

It’s not any more prehistoric than emacs, bash, or GCC; its latest version was published about a month ago. The CPAN is perfectly able to handle downloads. And it’s going to be in the repositories of all Linux distributions for the foreseeable future, considering how many tools depend on it. It is under active development; I don’t know where you got the idea that it was one guy in his basement doing it.

> Yes it may take more effort to rewrite it natively now into whichever language the latex compiler is written in otherwise, the real braindead decision was not starting out that way.

The real braindead decision is to jump on every language du jour just because. There is an optimum and I am sure at some point it will get rewritten in something else (see lualatex for example), but we cannot rewrite everything that works from the ground up every time a new shiny language shows up. Latex does not rust but I am sure at some point someone will find a clever pun and there’ll be a Show HN about it. In the meantime raging because a bit of software use some random language is not very productive or helpful.

> I mean shit, a modern equivalent would be of having to install python to use rustc or something.

From my experience rustc is not easier to install on Windows than Perl. On Linux it does not matter as everything is in the repos anyway.
Do you use it for new non-hobby projects? If yes, do you mind sharing what you build with it?
You are right.

Power is easier to transport than water.
Slack CTO Cal Henderson is out
I said practically free.
They never convinced AT&T or VZW to give them access. So now their network-auto-switching is of no use since T-Mo and Spring merged and any T-Mo MVNO gives you more-or-less the same service as Fi, but cheaper.
You are really cherry picking to bring your point across. Google was not the only layoffs this week and last year we saw a dramatic increase in number of layoffs in tech from prior years. It is still hard to predict how this trend will continue but healthy is not the word I would describe things at the moment.
>> Beavers are driving...warming the Artic

There are not yet many Tesla charging stations in the Artic, but the Beavers will eventually adapt. </sarc>
God bless Peter Thiel then
If we switch to renewables, there will be plenty of water, which is now used by fossil fuels.

U.S. thermoelectric plants are the largest source of U.S. water withdrawals, accounting for more than 40% of total U.S. water withdrawals in 2015.: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=50698
Latching on to some vendor narrative, I see
Nitter link for those without Twitter accounts https://nitter.net/eastdakota/status/1745697840180191501