skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Some tradestaff do progress in to 'engineering' roles and in many professional engineering organisations there's provision for recognising this. They tend to be given a title like 'technical officer' and their role is to do the engineering with a bit less maths and a bit more hands-on experience.

Recognising and upskilling the best tradestaff into these roles is one of the most important aspects of a successful mechanical design organisation, as far as I'm concerned. They deliver a critical insight that your degree-educated, never-worked-away-from-a-desk engineers simply lack, because those engineers haven't spent years bending and cutting steel to understand exactly how far you can push the processes.

Example: I've just finished redesigning a proposed lifting device where some idiot engineer had specified steel bent in a radius of half its thickness. Any manufacturing tradestaff will tell you this is complete insanity as the rule of thumb is ~1.5-2* thickness as a minimum radius - any tighter and you rapidly start tearing the material apart along its grains. It's just not done. Yet there's clearly an engineer out there who didn't even consider it and sure enough, as soon as we crack tested the bent area, about 1/3 of the items had cracks.

This is the critical stress area of a proposed lifting device so that's basically a cardinal rule broken, because the manufacturing defect (the tear in the metal) will propagate into a crack over successive lifting cycles until the whole thing breaks in half and the several tonnes of load it's supporting falls back down. Had the engineer talked to literally any tradesperson they would've known to avoid this, yet here we are.
Being passed-over implies a promotion was available.
Would strongly encourage the author to put an example on the front page of the repo. I have no clue what this is, is it like ZMQ, std::thread?
Seems like Demo Day is the reason to come back. From second hand experience it seems raising funds is nightmare fuel. Demo Day essentially solves that problem.
For me it's the space. I can fit thousands of movies on my server in the basement and stream them with ease to every TV in my house.

The quality is better than a VHS tape and I won't risk losing it when the tape disintegrates over time.
Most people would recognize that "...because you need to either stick to one specific implementation of one specific language runtime, or you have to deal with explaining them all" is not just "conversational prose", it was intended to to look like a factual argument for a proposition (notice the use of "because".) If it doesn't need refuting, that is only because it is so obviously wrong.
Nobody Has to be Vile
As someone who went through Waterloo co-op, I consider those one of the greatest takeaways.

It's taken me a while since graduating to realize that most people - tech or otherwise - consider interviewing to be stressful and unpleasant. Waterloo ground that out of me early on, I enjoy interviewing. Going into an interview room doesn't even begin to stress me out - and that's gotten me much further career-wise than anything else.

My interviewing and job-searching ability, and my confidence in it, has given me insane leverage in the market.

I for one am glad that Waterloo's trial-by-fire job-hunt (find a job in your 1A term? sheesh) happened to me. Negotiating, interviewing, and networking are 3 skills that most people leave school knowing almost nothing about, but a Waterloo student can easily rack up 70+ interviews by the time they walk out the door, and negotiated a dozen or so offers.
Shoot me a resume. Email in profile.

https://reschedulemed.com
NTFS Volume Boot Record Graphic
Well, go back in time a thousand years and that would be a good description of why universities were chartered (with the exception that the "important topics" of the day were mostly theology, philosophy, and medicine -- the distinction is an anachronism, come to think of it).
Should Amazon be allowed to forbid Apple TV sales on Amazon.com now that they have the Fire TV line? Sure, you could shop on Overstock or Newegg or somesuch instead, but would that be convenient after all the energy you might have invested into Amazon (ordering products, perhaps even a Prime membership)?

Amazon.com and the App Store both seek to be places where you can find "everything" (in the context of their respective domains, of course). The difference, however, is that Apple's trying to redefine "everything" to mean "everything that doesn't compete with Apple", whereas Amazon has no problem selling things which compete against itself.
Right, although personally I think there'll be a heavy backlash against microservices (that's already begun in some circles.)
I didn't go to Waterloo, but I was a 5 session co-op student at Purdue. What this guy says is pretty much true, but I don't think we highlighted some of the benefits.

I basically lived out of car for 5 years. If it didn't fit in the car, I couldn't take it with me. So it forced me to choose what actually mattered. It also forces you to make friends quickly because you'll be leaving again in a few months. I'm pretty introverted, so this was good experience.

It does prevent you from establishing long term relationships with students not on a co-op rotation. I'd come back to school from working, and I'd always have to catch up on inside jokes, who's dating who, and other silly things that glue groups of people together.

The biggest benefit was the opportunity to work on actual engineering projects with a team of professional engineers and to be mentored. practically one on one. And, of course, I was able to get my foot in the door at a good company and have my career accelerated.

At school, the biggest benefit was that I had a better context for what we were learning in class. I was able to ask really good questions because I had a better understanding of how each topic fit into a larger picture.

Co-oping doesn't give you the typical, Hollywood version of what college is supposed to be like. But who cares? It gives you something much more practical.
I wonder if historians will someday uncover the annotations in people's ebooks, because that's all digital era readers will leave behind.
> The logo is hard to read at a distance

What?? No, it's literally 4 letters with a flame above it, it can't get much simpler.
AES cannot be trivially brute forced. The key phrase is also unlikely to be trivial because the convenience has no value.
Researchers in China have created genetically modified human embryos
what is your deal?
A more relevant comparison would be if Amazon were to forbid Apple TV and Roku and Chromecast sales on Amazon.com because of the existence of the Fire TV.
Deterministic but too hard to predict is a form of non-determinism, as far as humans are concerned.
Newton also went more or less crazy and spent his last 4 decades studying alchemy and astrology.

Some of the replies to Newton's paper were on the order of, "Well, I held up a prism and took a quick look and it seemed ciruclar to me! Mr Newton is a fool."

OTOH Goethe (yes, that Goethe...), 200 years later, made roughly the same argument and developed some pretty amazing results from it.
Or maybe he thought that he had suckered Yahoo every bit as much as he was thinking YouTube had suckered Google.
Carrier Phone Unlocking
We are looking to have cell phones carrier unlocked for use on other networks, globally. The unlock method needed to have these devices fully carrier unlocked (no chance of relocking) is either by carrier or manufacturer engagement preferably. These unlocks must be a one time action. Meaning that these units cannot be flashed, jailbroken, rooted, firmware unlocked, or IMEI swapped as it will result in the devices being relocked by the originating carrier to their network. If unlocking Apple devices (iPhone/iPad), these devices HAVE to be authenticated by Apple's server. Please advise without this authentication, unlocking Apple devices will NOT work at all. Detail records that are available to the client will show that those devices were authenticated and released by Apple. Can you please help me find the right person ? You can contact me at carlosrivas0422@gmail.com. Thank You
Lol.

For most lawyers out drafting contracts, we're still in the days of mainframes. We write code by hand which will probably never be run on a real judge, but we hope we haven't made any bugs.
JavaScript Idioms
> If it's such an attractive market why is the city having to push and prod Verizon through the FiOS deployment?

Because Verizon stopped caring about landline Internet for a while already. Not because it's not profitable, but because current Verizon execs are all from the wireless department (unlike previous Verizon CEO who was from landline part of the business and started FiOS effort to begin with). I.e. Verizon just wants more profits from wireless and wants to get rid of landline altogether. It's idiocy or greed or whatever. Nothing good anyway. We are lucky NYC actually holds Verizon accountable for their contract (since they got massive tax cuts for promising to wire the whole city with fiber).

> Verizon's lack of substantial profit margin on FiOS is well-known.

After Ivan Seidenberg has left, FiOS was doomed. Wireless execs weren't interested in making it more profitable. Not because it couldn't be, but because they didn't want it.

> The price they charge for 0.5 gigabit is what they have to charge to make up for their unionized workforce, build out requirements, etc.

That's nonsense. They charge lower prices for the same line (which is the bulk of what they get). Barely anyone in residential FiOS pays such crazy prices (businesses is another question). I.e. they can provide much more bandwidth even for their lower price tiers and still be profitable. They just want to rip off the higher one.
Nah. With my "no screens after 10" rule I'm still swimming in physical books, usually with receipts in them.
> an individual who had good faith claims

How do you know this?
I guess I am reaching. But like I said, I'm looking for a "steelman argument"[1] in favor of the idea of a "safe zone"—a worst-case one-off emergency scenario where it might be warranted to have one.

If we can agree that it's warranted in that case, then it becomes a matter of agreeing exactly when it becomes unwarranted—which is a much more fact-based debate to have than one where one side just shouts "Freedom of Speech!" and the other side just shouts "Freedom from Persecution!" and neither side believes the other's bullshit one iota.

[1] http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Steel_man

(Also, I think this is the most I've ever been downvoted for speaking in the classical hacker-vulnerability-probing "but what if a tornado of Hitlers hit the school?" style on HN. I'm not even using any inflammatory language or anything, whereas all the replies to me are acting as if I was some social-justice type spouting off about "my right to not hear some white cis male talk about the time he went to Vegas" or somesuch. It's interesting; is this one of those "if you try to take an orthogonal position then you're supporting neither side, so both sides see you as supporting their opponent and hate you" effects?)
So if a man got passed over and a woman got the promotion, would the man have a good case, in your eyes?

How about if they were both the same gender?
Isn't she super rich too and a big CEO? Anyways, it's silly to take a side simply because one side has more money than the other, that has nothing to do with it.
The world's languages in 7 maps and charts
And for readers, the author of The Haskell School of Expression and numerous interesting papers (and libraries) on Haskell and multimedia.

http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/hudak/SOE/
https://github.com/Euterpea/Euterpea
I'm afraid I don't understand what it is you're asking. If you could clarify I'd be glad to go into the details of my "deal".
Heh, if you started out with this justification, we could've had a productive conversation =)

This is certainly a valid perspective, hackerboos. But did you know why it didn't happen?

1) External factors A: Singapore gained independence at a time when its neighbours were all hostile. Malaysia wasn't exactly friendly (though not overtly aggressive), but Indonesia was overtly aggressive. LKY described Singapore as a 'Chinese ship in Malay waters'.

2) Internal factors: It is important to remember that at the point of independence, after announcing the separation from Malaysia, LKY was brought by special branch under guard to the Istana. He was forbidden from returning to his residences for fear of Malay retaliation. It's easy to forget that, at the time, Malay Nationalism was strong amongst the Malays. The risk of race riots were real.

Combining 1) and 2) together, you can see that cancelling Malay would have jeopardised Singapore's security - both from within and with its surrounding neighbours. Also, the status of the Malay language is still a contentious issue in Malaysia today. (This is complex, and has something to do with the concept of 'Ketuanan Melayu' in the Malay archipelago)

3) External factors B: Singapore thought it would be an advantage to have its citizens be multi-lingual, in line with its status as an entrepot. Therefore it would be in the best possible position for trade: with China, with which it has maintained good ties, with India, with which it celebrates its 50th year of diplomatic relations this year, and with its neighbours (Malaysia is still the largest trading partner, as of 2014).

Personally, I am able to communicate in English, Chinese and Malay, which gives me an advantage when doing business in SEA. Most startups operating across multiple markets in SEA would agree.
Presumably it’s like when a master chess player simultaneously handles games against 100 amateurs.

It’s not possible to remember the full history of each game in detail, but a very experienced player can still usually make a reasonable move after a short time inspecting the board.
Corporations cannot donate money to campaigns at all, either directly or through PACs. A corporation can have a "captive" PAC whose expenses it can pay (for example, letting it operate out of their corporate offices), but all donations that pass through to a campaigh must come from individuals.

When you hear that "Company X gave money to candidates", what you're really hearing is "people who reported that they work for Company X gave money to candidates."
I didn't really agree with that point either. I don't care much for the aesthetic but it's pretty recognizable at that size.
> I'm not sure a company can be personally sued.

Depending on what you mean by "personally sued", this is one of the main reasons limited liability corporations exist: So the shareholders aren't personally responsible for lawsuits the company gets involved in. This is where "corporate personhood" comes from, the idea that, in some limited circumstances, corporations can function as people to make legal proceedings possible.

Suing a company to redress a grievance is feasible. The company has an office, assets, and so on. Trying to track down and sue everyone who has or had a financial stake in the company is not feasible, and if it were, companies would cease to exist because nobody could stomach the risk of all of their personal assets being up for grabs if a lawsuit doesn't go their way.
I agree it's what the 'next economy' will look like, but it's also what the 'last economy' looked like. Prior to the entire tech movement was agriculture, resource harvesting and material manufacturing.

Previously farming was done by hand, now a single machine replaces a hundred workers.

Previously coal was mined by hand, now a single machine replaces thousands of workers.

Previously trees were axed by hand and sluiced by river, now you can clear a forest with a couple machines and a couple skilled operators.

Previously producing cloth required massive numbers of skilled workers, then the loom was invented.

I often see this argument that we're in some unprecedented state of replacing labor with automation. I don't see any proof of that. I think we replaced labor with automation at a much faster pace during the industrial revolution and made it out just fine.

I'd love to see some stats on the differences if anyone has them.
ICARUS neutrino experiment to move to Fermilab
MIT Measures Neutrino Mass by Singling Out Electrons
Certificate Authorities normally run as software on a box somewhere.

Sometimes they keep this box offline, but they need to keep a sub-CA online somewhere, or they wouldn't be able to issue certificates.

So, a CA private key and public certificate can be compromised in much the same way a single server certificate.

With a CA private key and public certificate, one can easily emit a bogus certificate for *.google.com or any other domain name. If this CA public certificate is trusted by the browser, a user would hardly notice.
The deal being what is the point of posting 2 top level comments with the exact same content and intent. Asking not to get downvoted unless people provide evidence, and you not providing any evidence for starters.
That's not quite comparable to what Apple's doing.

Here's a better analogy:

Amazon sells set-top boxes. Apple TVs, Rokus, the works. They also sell HDMI sticks, like Chromecasts.

All of a sudden, they come out with a product called the "Fire TV". It integrates with Prime, and in comes in either stick or box form, depending on your preference.

All is well in the world.

But then, all of a sudden, Apple and Netflix and Google find that their Amazon product pages for Apple TV and Roku and Chromecast (respectively) aren't published anymore. When they ask Amazon about it, Amazon stubbornly replies with some rule in their ToS about mentioning competing products.

Is Amazon's behavior in this scenario ethical? Is it worthy of brushing off as "that's how the market works"?

This differs from your analogy by the order of events. In your analogy, your movie theater existed before the attempt to buy an ad for a competitor.

In the case of my analogy (and, indeed, in the case of what Apple's doing now), it would instead be akin to you running a TV station that runs ads for a theater, you opening up a theater of your own, and you then banning the ads of the other theater while running your own ads on the TV station you own.
This looks great, but they really should give some credit to R-studio. R-studio clearly inspired them more than SublimeText and Eclipse.

- "It's heavily inspired by great projects like Sublime Text and Eclipse."
On top of this, there's such a thing as a "vertical monopoly" (which vendor lock-in facilitates).

The myriad of comments about how Apple "isn't really a monopoly" assume that horizontal monopolies are the only "real" monopolies, but vertical ones are just as dangerous and just as harmful in just as many situations.
Zenefits is looking for all levels of developers. Specifically on the front end.

Jerickson@zenefits.com
Look very closely at the usernames. We are not the same person, just similar usernames (the other one has two 'v's). Not associated with the other poster at all, it's just a coincidence. I also don't think it's the "exact same content".
Is your intent to prevent companies from becoming successful, or would that just be a happy side effect of such a policy?

Edit: The question was sincere, and I can't think of any reason for which a corporation of means should be in some way more responsible for frivolous lawsuits than one of lesser means, or of an individual.

The logical outcome, to me, seems to be that if there were some inequal burden in the eyes of the law for "wealthy companies" that it would invite frivolous lawsuits on the grounds that suing wealthy companies is now a zero risk endeavor.

If I, as an individual, could sue Google with zero fear of retaliation, I can't see why I wouldn't, on the off chance that I might land a pretty large windfall, if I were to win.
My argument is that whether the idea of a "safe space" is warranted, and who should be allowed to make use of such a space, are different questions.

A "safe space" might have valid medical reasons to exist—in fact, it would likely be a concept quite easily unified with that of a counselling office.

But, for it to have the correct incentive structure, it would probably require you to get a note from a real honest-to-god psychiatrist at the beginning of the year before you could make use of it. Otherwise you end up in the stupid rut of the "ignorant-but-unaware-of-it" people avoiding the very properties of an education designed to bash their narrow views open.
The plot of a formula is the formula itself
Nobody is even alleging bad faith claims at this time, the claim seems to be about lack of evidence. I addressed that separately.
Well, an apprenticeship is far more of a commitment than what is needed here. Rather young people are looking for a survey of what specific careers really look like. Might be impossible, but job-shadowing might be the best answer. I shadowed a judge for a morning as a high schooler, and it was tremendously enlightening, but it could have been a lot better if he did it frequently and if I had a chance to shadow other professions for longer periods.
The only standard that I'm holding C++ to is that it's been around longer, which means that the big holes have been patched (or bilge pumps dispatched), and developers who use it are realistic about what they are able to achieve.

That doesn't seem like a very high standard to hold Rust to. The problem is there's still holes we don't know about, and the developers who evangelize it are all starry-eyed about "never having to deal with memory again!"

When the shine wears off a bit (on both the language and its users), the big holes can be found and patched, the bilge pumps dispatched for the small ones, and Rust can move forward with a lot more confidence.
According to other posts in the linked discussion, other apps are being rejected under the same rationale and for the same reasons, and attempts to appeal those rejections aren't going through (Apple's reviewers are continuing to reject new versions of these apps until they remove any/all mention of "Pebble" in their metadata).