skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I used to be very worry-prone too in the past. Stoicism (the philosophy) changed my life. This book provided a very clear introduction, and I make it a habit to reread it every year: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5617966-a-guide-to-the-g...

I also recommend giving Buddhist mindfulness a try (this book is great: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/64369.Mindfulness_in_Pla...), but in the end Stoicism seems to be more suited to the pragmatic, analytical mind of a programmer, because it provides a very logical approach, as opposed to the more spiritual nature of Buddhism.

I seriously cannot overemphasize the improvement Stoicism has brought to my life. I went from having a lot of the experiences you are having (without the physical problems though) to living an almost completely worry-free life.
Show HN: Rent your apartment online. No brokers
I'd argue that your "spectrum" misses where emacs really shines: nobody really bothers to reconfigure Eclipse or Netbeans as their mail client or web browser, whereas this is not entirely unusual with emacs. This is because emacs has both a simpler set of underlying elements and a richer extension language when compared with something like Eclipse. This makes it IDE-like, but much more expressive and elaborate: there are things you can do with emacs that you could only dream of doing in things like Eclipse.

Furthermore, writing extensions for emacs is much more pleasant than writing extensions for Eclipse, and is done much more widely. And, emacs has been around long enough that you have literally decades worth of extensions already available to you. Additionally, emacs is used widely enough that people are quick to add emacs support for new things: if I pick up a new esoteric language tomorrow, I can be 99% sure that there's no Eclipse support for it, but I can be 100% sure that there's already an emacs mode for it and it's probably on the emacs package manager already, to boot.

All this is both a plus and a minus, in some ways: learning emacs is probably not worth it unless you're willing to put the time and effort into building up your emacs configuration into something IDE-like, but if that's what you want to do, then emacs can do truly amazing things. So yes, what you said rings more or less true for vanilla emacs, but you're radically underselling emacs as a platform for building better things.
Are you thinking of Manatee? http://hackage.haskell.org/package/manatee
According to QS World University Rankings, countries such as UK, Hong Kong, Switzerland and Singapore, which do offer parental benefits and are a fraction of the population of the United States, all place well in the rankings.

Also, the USA is a very large market which is why a lot of pure software companies are headquartered there. Specialization is inherent in larger markets. A lot of other large vertically-aligned technology companies are headquartered around the world, such as Volkswagen, Samsung and Alibaba.

The lionization of specific billionaire entrepreneurs is more due to abnormally low tax rates (by Western standards) on extremely high incomes.
If they are evil and stupid, such having put something discriminatory in writing then it is a winable suit.

The other way is to look for patterns over a longer period of time and maybe say "look all 10 last employees who were let go were women who got pregnant, there is something here".

But unfortunately if they are not too stupid they would use convenient double-speak euphemisms between themselves. Like say they'd call it "restructuring". Or due to "culture fit". Or just "business reasons". They could be winking to each other when saying that but you'd really need of the people in charge to turn on others and testify.
I was mightily tempted to downvote you, not for the substance of your comment but for the complaints about downvoting. Up until the complaining it was interesting.
My experience regarding my religion hasn't been very happy so far too.

Because of my religion, I avoid working from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday (the 7th day Sabbath). I do work if something went bad and people will be blocked because of me, but that's an exception.

I always try to come clear about this with any new team or manager, but I've never had a very understanding response from that. Mostly people will not say anything, but I can tell from their faces they're not happy about my strict non-availability at that time.

My current team has started doing deployments on Saturdays. That was imposed without anyone being consulted on it, which I found very disappointing. I wish religious considerations were taken into account in the workplace, but since so many people in tech are so removed from religious knowledge of any kind, they probably don't even know there are religions where working on a specific day of the week is not allowed.
Emacs is an interactive programming environment for building your own text editor. It is what you make of it. Vanilla Emacs is very middle-ground, just like you say. My personal Emacs is an extension of myself, with lots of functionality only I use. Emacs lets me utilize my skills as a programmer to enhance my everyday interaction with text. This is the promise of Emacs. It is what you make of it.
From the RFC: "In some cases, it is desirable to separate identification and location in HTTP; keeping the same identifier for a resource, but interacting with it at a different location on the network."

Funny how, in the name of "security" or "performance", changes are being made to HTTP which allow easy, user-invisible redirection to a completely different site. The EFF's "HTTPS Everywhere" also has a redirection feature, where regular expressions in files sent from Master Control at the EFF can change a URL inside a browser.

What could possibly go wrong?
+1. People who have been in management (or are "people" people) are often good speakers that do very well at a surface level, so it requires digging deeper to get a richer picture of what they were thinking and what they did.
This is not how Type I hypersensitivity works. Epitope recognition is powered by a biological RNG (somatic hypermutation) and evolves at runtime via the process of somatic / V(D)J chain recombination. Your body learns to be allergic, perhaps due to a bad ashy vent (you got sick that one spring), under-stimulation (play outside!), or just plain bad luck. Unfortunately for all of us, the immune system has no concept of the innocuous nature of harmless antigens. It will continue to pick up bad habits until the day we die. But thankfully it also keeps the trillions of cells, leaky programming, our own broken and errant self, and other uninvited guests that would just as soon eat us at bay (bacteria, viruses, cancer, fungi, nematodes, ...).
I'm really confused about the order of these. The episodes are numbered but there's multiple sequences with no indication of what "series" is what.
Interesting pattern of feigned disbelief in the comments here. Anyway, I thoroughly agree with your assessment.
> When the deceased was committing a felony themselves, why can't they take 100% of their own felony murder charge? We don't need multiple people to face full consequences for a single act.

If you view punishment retributively, as a blood price that must be paid, that argument makes sense -- when you have multiple people available to take the cost, only one of them should need to (of course, if you view it that way, its hard to see how the person who died can, if felony murder has a blood price, be said to pay it.)

But, while retribution is no doubt part of the basis of punishments in the American system, its not the sole basis. If two people act together to commit a murder directly, we punish them both as principles. If two people act together to commit a felony in which someone is one of them -- whether or not it is one of them -- why shouldn't both be fully liable (whehter or not both can be punished) for felony murder?

A crime doesn't necessarily have only one principal, and when it has more than one, we don't generally only punish one. And if it has multiple principals and one of them is not subject to the jurisdiction of the court, or immune to punishment for some other reason, that doesn't absolve the other principals of punishment. I don't see why felony murder, presuming that we should have it at all, should be an exception to that rule.
Not I, I don't know why but I was thinking IP version issue but that makes no sense.
I installed a Raspberry Pi and an LCD with a battery in inside of an old Mac Plus. That's kind of a laptop right? http://i.imgur.com/ID7chQk.jpg
FYI, there are mod kits for sodastream machines to connect them to large CO2 tanks. I installed one on mine recently, love it so far.
Could you e-file the return instead of mailing a printed copy?
If it's any consolation, I also dislike promises, though I don't know that much about them. I feel they don't solve the problem they set out to solve, "callback hell" or cleanly interleaving async and sync code together, and I don't find their syntax aesthetic. I feel JSONP, message passing and state machines are cleaner. I'm unsure why many love promises, and was surprised by the level of what I'm only comfortable describing as "standards fever" over the emergent promises spec.

I also think arrows are cool.

Ah, that was refreshing. Thanks you for having the courage to buck the promises trend, which contributed to inspiring me to speak my mind as well! :)

BTW -- your karma is enormous. What's with that?
Agree that that's the ideal situation, but I've found that stand-ups can be invaluable in detecting and avoiding wasted effort that's about to happen because not everyone on the team has all the context needed to avoid it. For example:

Mary: I fixed the missing-messages bug, and I'm about to refactor the protocol to support faster logins.

Jon: We should talk afterwards, I'm also touching the protocol to edit the login screen.

Dyneshwari: I did an unrelated UI change that doesn't interfere with anyone.

Shruthi: I just started laying the groundwork for ads in the stream.

Manager: We should talk afterwards, legal has a bunch of new requirements on the format of ads.

Su: Nothing to report.

Grant: Oh, we moved all the test databases. You need to get the latest base data in your environment or you won't be able to work.

Joe: Jon, loop me in when you talk to Mary, I just had to change the protocol for UI widget X and I've got some tips for working with it.

Not quite 1 minute, but it could save several hours of work when Mary, Jon, and Joe coordinate and make sure they aren't stomping on each others' toes, and their little mini-meeting probably won't take more than 20 minutes.
Yes, I was very sad and frustrated about that the first and only time I went to a hackathon.
I used Mailman for more than 10 years, to run a fairly large (3,000-person) list. Before that, I had used a number of other mailing list managers.

It's true that Mailman was rock solid. But it had a number of features that made it difficult for users and administrators alike.

In particular, users who were not computer savvy complained bitterly that they couldn't easily search through the archives, couldn't understand how to subscribe and unsubscribe themselves, and that the archives (in their repeated messages to the moderators) didn't look like the mailing lists on Google and Yahoo.

In other words, it wasn't sufficient to have solid software. Mailman needed a modern UI. It took some time, but that moment seems to have come. It's a bit too late for me; for a variety of reasons (many having nothing to do with Mailman), I recently moved my mailing list to Google Groups.

I'm very happy to see this new set of functionality aimed at making Mailman relevant for a new generation of users. Kudos to the maintainers for sticking with the project, and for providing a valuable service that shouldn't need to be outsourced to third parties. And for not only pushing forward with the internals, but also on the UI. It looks quite snazzy and impressive, and should help to keep Mailman relevant for many more years.
"Everyone (myself included) stood silently and nodded our heads."

Why did you applauded his behaviour?
So you could blame the method (which you didn't follow) later?
> This seems like a perfect example of felony murder.

Its literally a textbook example -- its one of the standard examples used in teaching the felony murder rule.
> Say what? Nobody writes a sendmail.cf from scratch, unless they are crazy.
The point moreover was that he had a custom version of the config file (not just default).
On a somewhat related note, I find it interesting to note that a lot of technology per se is not very family friendly. Family Sharing was only recently introduced by Apple. Before that, it was very cumbersome for a couple to share their music libraries. The same applies to most subscription services. Take Amazon for example: my wife can share free Prime shipping with me, but not Prime Music.

I wonder if this is for legal reasons (licensing, etc.) or because of the people that create such services. My wife's hypothesis is that since a lot of technology is created by single, young and not very social people, it doesn't even cross their mind at design time the fact that a couple (or a whole family) might want to share some of their contents while still keeping their own individual accounts.
Another of the 10,000 here - this is such a delightful story.

Also just discovered the "units" conversion program and disappointed that the default Mac library has only 586 units. And shockingly there don't seem to be compatible libraries out there.
It really depends where you work at (regarding to technology != family).
I have worked at both different places both where there was place for a family and places which didn't. Not very surprisingly the company where you could actually function with a family had a lot fewer employees leave - which again saves a lot of money for the company.
Banks can take from Telecoms playbook to compete as a digital only bank
I'm 29 and have exactly the same problem.

I think visiting sites like HN although interesting, don't help too much with this since you see everyday new projects and ideas, and it makes you feel like you are doing nothing with your time.
Thanks for the illustration. Andrew or whoever is interested in propagating this concept should consider throwing together a few examples and a calculator on a website so people can play around with the numbers.

This is super innovative and cool - provided it holds up legally and with the IRS. (I gather it's meant to be a tax-efficient approach.) I sympathize with Andrew's motivation because as a founder, if my company made it big, I would want all the employees to do well. I always figured in that case I would just pay them out of pocket and take a huge tax hit to make it happen.

On the other hand, as a founder who has not yet "made it", an extra 50% hit on top of the 50% the taxman will take, is way more than I can stomach. The potential for outlandish wealth is part of what motivates me, even though I would be fine with much less. But the percentage and threshold can be adjusted to find numbers that should be suitable for anyone.

One thing that I'm not clear on and I didn't read through all the legalese is on what basis the "taxed" amount is redistributed to the remaining employees. If it's based on share vesting like a normal system, it sounds like it wouldn't change the distribution much. If it's an even split it sounds potentially unreasonable, for instance, to give 2.5 million an employee who joined 2 weeks ago.

Either way cool stuff and I'd expect something like this to become standard in Silicon Valley.
The flip side is that you can attract a heluva lot of superstars this way pre iPo
What would have happened had he simply assigned a lesser sentence? Would the judge face criminal penalties? Seems unlikely, but IANAL.

Maybe the right principled stand is to "do the right thing" and let a higher court face the same moral decision when challenged. Eventually you get to the top.
I think a scrum/kanban board is a very strong instrument in implementing a healthy development process. There should be an explicit method to updating the board - even if the method is just "you can move only your own tickets". If there is an intact development process that lacks a board&ticket system I don't see it is necessary to implement one. However, broken development processes often have a problem of priorization and communication and discplined ticket and board tracking system can help there a lot.

Now, the daily standup is one method of updating the board with the added benefit that it provides maximum bandwidth of information of team status in a brief time to all team members.

The author stipulated that in their team everyone else already knows what others are doing. If so, great. However, I think it is really naive to think this would hold for all teams. For teams that lack this amount of coordination and transparency I would see a healthy standup that is brief and to the point improves teamwork as it helps synchronize work.

Not all teams are composed of equal members. There can be coherent products whose team members work on completely different areas of the code and the product to implement the feature and in those instances I would imagine it would slow down total velocity if everyone would need to keep tabs on what everyone else is doing. For instance, a dedicated tester might be a part of the team, who is not so interested in explicit submits but rather what is the current end-user interface status.

Not all people are comfortable in asking support due to shyness and so on. Having an explicit process of synchronizing work and announcing impediments can help there a lot. Since impediment removal is part of the process, the person asking for help does not need to feel like a bother (and they notice others need help too), the work progresses and everyone is more relaxed. The counter argument is that people should already be good at teamwork - sadly this is not true, great teamwork is not inbread to humans, but, everyone can learn it and having a teamwork supporting process in place helps to maintain a healthy culture.

So, I suppose, in the end, it's not necessarily about standup vs. no standup, it's about having processes that helps supporting a healthy team culture, whatever it is. For small teams with long term stability this is less of an issue but the more ephemeral the team constitution is and the larger it is the more value a healthy standup process can bring (healthy as in by-the-book-scrum healthy - to follow the manifesto style - I prefer a by-the-book-scrum standup that is about bringing value to the team to a standup that is converted to a managerial status update).
I agree—the problem is that it does not logically follow and is contradictory, but he is right that knowledge of the CLI makes things a lot easier. However, I'm with you in that I don't think there should be any pressure not to try it anyway. I have a custom-built desktop machine that I can install anything I want on, so if something breaks or falls over, I can simply reinstall another OS (while getting real work done on my laptop).
What the New York Times  gets wrong about California’s water crisis
Emacs is a repl for the programming language elisp.

It has a lot of elisp functions (1.6m lines iirc) that are very useful for shaping text including, but not limited to, almost everything that people think is so unique to IDE.

Elisp and the editor pieces within Emacs are focused on providing you the tools to manipulate text of all types and from many different sources and outputs, not just a few programming languages.

People write academic papers, books, organize their lives and yes program with emacs.

Yes it's much much more then an ide.

Whatever you do, master something and become truly fluent with it. It's worth your time and will pay you back many times over.
I'm 40, started working as a programmer only about 10 years ago, so I definitely have more lost opportunities that you. But I don't care. I manage to make a good living, enjoy what I do and get the appreciation of my clients for the work I do, and that's what I wanted when I went my own way.
I can understand though, and I think part of the problem is actually HN. When I started reading it I was suddenly informed of many new (to me, at least) programming languages and other technologies. I felt behind and thought I needed to learn, or at least understand, them all, but I didn't have the time -- I had much work to do during the day, and then no will power to learn anything new in the evenings after I had finished working for the day. So then I felt guilty about it -- how do other people manage to both work and learn all those things at once? I don't know. I just stopped feeling bad about it since (as stated above) I make a good living, enjoy myself doing this and get appreciated for my work, and that's what important to me.

There are two things that I do that might help you though:

1. I only read NH when I'm not working (i.e. mornings or evenings). That means I can focus on my work rather than get involved with something else.

2. When I read about a new exciting technology, unless it's relevant to what I am working on at the moment, I bookmark the page, in case it becomes relevant in the future. In the process I realised a lot of it is trends. People on HN get excited about something and a year later they're excited about something new, and then the old gets criticised. So basically, I saved myself a few hours learning something that wasn't so important to know after all.

Edit: formatting
They don't.

Also one of the "managers" (that's his title), manages no one.

He's a scrum master of sorts, who goes around interrupting people programming to remind them to move their tasks to "in progress" or to "closed". I assume so our burndown chart moves down. I've been tempted to replace this guy with a script.
Would you be willing to sell these?
VCs typically don't want to have two companies in the same space in their portfolio due to conflict of interest. I wonder if YC has an analogous desire.
Come on, if you have time to write this why don't you finish the picks you owe us? It's been half a decade already. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/schuyler/lockpicks-by-o...
Hi

I'm interested to hire an engineer full time for my fintech startup focused on the secondary private placement market. when are you free to talk?

my cell is 415 799 6604

Thanks,
Cathryn Chen
I can't believe nobody made an emacs joke yet.
> The biggest gripe I have with daily stand-ups and I am sure there are others (including the author) who agree with me on this: they often run over and turn into meetings/debates.

In my last job we rotated scrummasters every iteration. Daily meetings were not starting on time and running long.

My first turn I closed the door and said: "Ok, I want to keep this under 5 minutes so lets go around quickly". A couple of the guys who usually showed up late came in when we were almost done. I completed the meeting with a friendly reminder the meeting starts at the agreed time, sharp. After that, everybody showed up on time and meetings ran less than 5 minutes average.

> More often than most, the question of what did you do yesterday usually results in: I don't remember. And you know what, if you have a lot on your plate, that is a fair statement to make.

Someone having "a lot on their plate" is a symptom of poor iteration planning: no team member should be working in more than one thing at a time. Also, tasks should be sized between half a day to 2 days of work (around 3 to 12 ideal hours)

If your scrum board shows a bunch of small tasks less than half-day work, then your team went too far micromanaging and should combine them into single tasks that take no less than half a day to complete.