skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The point is that hypocrisy would eventually cause a change, but there would be a period where things would work the way that you describe.

That may be possible, but it's also possible that total surveillance would result in a permanent entrenchement of whoever manages to gain (or maintain) power through the transition. It's very hard for a competing ideology to rise in prominence if it's possible to detect and crush every individual who starts to disagree, before they can even communicate it to anyone else. I think it's likely that with total surveillance we'd soon see the rise of rapid automated enforcement, which would be a incredible impediment to any attempt at changing the status quo.
Of course you can! It'll all depend on what career choices you make. If you become a software engineer to then go develop corporate Java software for Big Corporation Inc, then you won't have much of an impact. Join a startup with a valuable vision and a good product and you definitely will.
I can imagine lots of stuff that doesn't exist (interstellar spaceships with earth as their origin, pink elephants wearing tutus, time machines and so on). But when I limit my imagination to those things that can be constructed using the laws of physics as we currently know them knots without friction drop right off the menu along with the items above.

So if your question was serious then I consider it answered, if you want to seriously know whether something that can't exist can be imagined then the answer is yes, you can imagine it (and so can I), but I can't imagine making one because that would violate the laws of physics somewhere along the line.

You could tie a knot in frictionless rope easily enough, but it would come apart without any work at all and it would not hold anything and you wouldn't be able to grip the rope on either end to tie the knot in the first place. Friction and knots go together unless you're living in a mathematical ideal world, which we don't.
It's hard to judge by commits alone because your public profile doesn't reflect contributions to private repos, which for many of us is our 9-5 work. I look for meaningful open source contributions or a side project the engineer is passionate about, and within those repos I usually skim for code style but I check commit messages and documentation. (I don't want to work with an engineer who writes commit messages like "Misc shit WIP" or "lol 3 AM", and I don't want to maintain code written by someone whose README.md is blank or a placeholder. Part of this is the more I learn about software engineering, the more I realize that making code intelligible to other people on the team is so much more important than elegant code that only the author understands. If you're optimizing for elegance, you're trading a few bytes of compressed storage space for hours of an engineer's on-the-clock time trying to figure out what the heck you did.)
tell that to Disney and cable channels that only show kids shows
They do.

Inventor is a 3d parametric editor. You can make a simple gear, or you can make an engine and apply constrained motion as it would work in real life. We call this an assembly.

I have quite a few drawings that have over 100 parts in them. No big deal, so far? The problem is Autodesk Inventor wants to put a nag screen on everything you open, proclaiming "THIS IS EDUCATIONAL". That's fine for me so far...

Until you realize that it opens up the "THIS IS EDUCATIONAL" for every part, and including the assembly file itself. 101 dialogs? No. It crashes after 70 or so.

So, I went and downloaded a pirate copy. And l and behold, the pirate copy works better than the 'legit' one.

(Solidworks is $175 for student, and Catia has no student option. Creo or ProE just stinks.)
Long time follower, but for a strange reason - enaml is by far the only Qt product that has docking done right - e.g. one can undock windows into floating ones, and dock again into them (plus other nifty features). I've gave a week shot of trying to make a C++ version of your code, but failed miserably (due to lack of Python understanding, and under pressure to see whether it can be done under a week).

I wish your docking area was part of Qt4/5, and other products would benefit from it too - like Autodesk Maya, MotionBuilder, and many others.

Thank you!
This seems as inevitable as Zenefits developing its own payroll service.
Fluid intelligence is a valuable characteristic for engineers, but so is experience. It's great to be able to learn quickly and react to a changing environment, but it's also great to be able to draw on past experiences to predict and preempt future challenges.

What isn't great is a lack of variety. Why would you want everybody on your team to be the same type of person? You want everyone's abilities to be complementary, not identical.
Yes, but unlike either of those it's in widespread production use (Mantle is still beta, Vulkan was just announced). It shipped last year on iOS 8 – this is just the expected next step of offering it on OS X as well:

https://developer.apple.com/metal/
Do NOT run to the nearest weight room and start doing squat weights in response to your back pain. Go see a physical therapist. They'll put together an exercise routine that's customized to you, and ease you into it. Address the core issue first. Then, work up to whatever routine you aspire to, for example weights, but it's a good idea to discuss with your therapist first.
People have been building multiple applications from a single codebase for a very long time. Put all the targets on a continuous build, add tests, and you're set.

The only sense in which versioning matters at all is that if the protocol the applications talk to each other over has to be versioned, and an application must understand the oldest version of the protocol they could potentially be spoken to over.

But things like Thrift and Protocol Buffers have this feature built in. You shouldn't need to version the actual code...
I have read it. I don't find "But Not NOT One, Either" to be an accurate characterization. Basically, Moldbug's position is that white nationalists include lots of vile racists, but that by itself doesn't mean they're wrong about everything, and we should evaluate such ideas critically if we want to actually solve the problems they identify (which in fact many progressives would identify as well, though the phrasing and emphasis usually differ substantially). Some quotes:

Of course, I am not a white nationalist. I am not arguing that you should be a white nationalist. I am just suggesting that there are many bad reasons not to be a white nationalist.

[…]

So why am I not a white nationalist?

I am not a white nationalist because I don't find white nationalism useful or effective. I don't feel it helps me accurately perceive reality. In fact, I think it distorts reality. And I believe white nationalism is a very ineffective political device for solving the very real problems about which it complains.
It'd be FANTASTIC if the NSA used Amazon's private keys. It'd leak tons of information and cause a huge backlash. Amazon's CA would instantly be revoked. It'd cause a ton of damage to them. That might spur tech companies to spend even more on buying politicians, which is probably a good thing (or a lesser evil).

The CA system is not great. But state actors using a CA is sorta far-down on the list of issues because it is so detectable and provable. CAs take a lot of work to get going and burning a CA isn't something anyone would do lightly. (Well except incompetent ones, like CNNIC.)
Anything that's not a bad github profile would be a good profile. Ideally, I would want someone who has done a lot of open source pull requests, or has some interesting projects, or has contributed to some big-name existing project. But even if you don't have that, a profile showing you actively work on programming as a hobby / for fun is a great way to say something about your interest in this career.

On the other hand, I've hardly ever come across a profile that felt truly "bad" to me. The one exception would be that one guy whose history of pull requests is filled political-correctness-fueled changes to comments and function names.
You probably won't use it yourself. You'll use Unity or UT4 which uses Metal under the hood.
My brain works the opposite way, so I would caution against this. I don't truly learn until I actually start doing.
I am shocked by how few candidates have much of a Github profile at all. So the good news is that it is easy to stand out.

Have some projects that are finished. They don't need to be extravagant. Just show that you can ship code and know how to explain how/why to use it in the README or for extra points a nice gh-pages demo page. Once you have a few projects under your belt, you can create a nice home for them with your username by making a public repo with a project name of username.github.com - see https://pages.github.com

For front end, if you prefer codepen over Github as your online code portfolio of choice, that is fine too (at least in my opinion). Or both.
Zenefits doesn't actually offer payroll so they really aren't competitors (yet).

This model was well-established long before Zenefits hit the scene.

By your account, Walmart should manufacture all the items it sells, etc.
gotta love the adoption rate being percentage and not numbers. osx would show as a flat line...
As laudable as the goal is, I always have the same reservations about this kind of site.

Firstly, contracts and licence agreements can be complicated, and there is a real risk that "dumbing them down" in this way will misrepresent either what they actually say or their real impact given actual laws that are relevant. Of course these things can themselves vary significantly from one jurisdiction to the next.

Secondly, there is always a risk that the information on the summary site becomes out of date.

Thirdly, the choice of which points to highlight and whether to present them as positive or negative often seems rather arbitrary and perhaps guided by the preferences of the TOSDR operators.

An example of being out of date would be the Steam entry, which says "No refund policy" despite this being changed a few days ago.

As an example of the final point about subjectivity, several sites are given a thumbs down for claiming varying degrees of rights to content you upload, yet Wikipedia is given a thumbs up for publishing your content under a free licence. Given actual laws with regard to giving credit/claiming authorship (moral rights/author's right/your local equivalent if you have one) that exist in many jurisdictions in addition to the usual copyright provisions, I'm not sure I see a big difference here in practice.

Several of the points raised, sometimes repeatedly, as negatives are also routine in B2C contracts and indeed probably necessary for the services to provide their intended functions -- the ability to change terms, for example, or transferring users' data in the event of an exit. In many jurisdictions there are legal safeguards that would allow for challenging unreasonable TOS changes or disclosures regardless of what any terms say, but the idea that any commercial service is going to fix its terms for all eternity with no mechanism for changing them even with notice is just silly (not to mention legally impossible almost everywhere), as is the idea that a business will promise not to transfer data about its users to any new owner.
My wife and I had a big fight several years back because of photoshop. She was a photographer and she wanted to know the constraints of an image in inches and resolution. I told her that those didn't count for screen use and to just use the height and width in pixels. She had not understood until she googled it and watched a youtube video.
Why would I trust a company like Amazon with a root certificate when it doesn't even use HTTPS across its website?
Yes, providers have every reason to keep their customers trapped within their walled garden. Zenefits has a track record of prioritizing punting the blame ahead of solving the problem:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9499906

it's a running theme in most customer service interactions with Zenefits (Aetna's fault, Intuit's fault, etc.). There's also tends to be long delays in response times because of the back and forth between Zenefits and the provider, and sometimes conflicting responses which make things really frustrating
8 to 12+ months for it to be in a release version of Firefox. https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:How_to_apply#Timeline and https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA document the process in great detail.
1. Don't try to boil the ocean. You can't change the whole world at once, you can only affect your sphere of influence. You first need to expand your sphere of influence.

2. The easiest way to do that is money. (ex: Bill Gates, Elon Musk) Barring that, you need to write an awesome book, or have something published (Stephen Hawking, Albert Einstein), or get elected (Barack Obama). Chances are, those will lead to increased wealth also.

3. Use that to introduce the change you want in the world.

The thing is, the most difficult part is expanding that sphere. You're one person of 7 billion. That's not even a one in a million chance of impacting the world. The odds are against you. That said, you can make a change in your community, maybe even your city. The key is, you have to start right where you are and impact what you can.

If Albert Einstein had asked 'should I become a patent clerk if I want to make an actual impact on the world?' people would have flat out said NO. The thing is, it did give him steady income and time to think, and thinking is what he did best.

Now of course you can shortcut those steps by being a martyr for whatever cause you want (Nathan Hale, Mahatma Gandhi), but then if you have to ask, you're already doing it wrong.
That was my go-to move when friends would plan a trip to a casino. I don't have the patience to learn and practice the odds-shaving tricks out there and I don't have the disposable income to toss down a decent chunk on the slight chance that I'll win an amount proportional to the risk...

...but I do like hanging out with my friends and occasionally agreed to join up. In the end, I just hung out and played low-stakes games, getting "free" drinks the whole time. Ended up spending about as much as if we'd decided to hang out at a moderately pricey bar, got tipsy, and had a good time hanging out with my friends.

I just looked at it like any other night out spending a few bucks on drinks and maybe a few more playing Megatouch or feeding the jukebox. At no point did I hold any expectations of winning loads of money.
Godly Dreams the Lord has given me over 15 dreams please do not pass up
At least some of those are H1B posts to prove there's no one in the locality with seven years experience with Windows10. Some are also pencil whipping a HR checklist before hiring the bosses kid or the hand picked internal candidate. You want a CCIE and are offering $50K? No one applying is not necessarily seen as a bug.

At megacorps the relationship between the people writing reqs and the actual job are often rather strained.

I could never qualify for my own job req, and I work there. I got in via networking and portfolio. Seriously, HR lists specific versions of AS/400 software and the department doesn't even work that closely with the AS/400 group, ya know. In fact I think my AS/400 password expired, aged out so I need to regain access, although I really don't need it. People in my department "need" windows 8 experience but our desktops are win7? A+ certification preferred because everyone in my great-grand department requires it on paper? You listed the exact model number and firmware version of a specific spectrum analyzer from a company that is no longer in business under that name? Seriously?
Thanks for the words of encouragement.

I'm not totally pessimistic, I was really referring to the knowledge that doesn't translate to a new job. After 10 years and working deeply with a lot of stuff I am among the 'Do you know..?' types for questions about the inner workings of the product. That is really just baggage.

Processes, experiences probably can be reapplied elsewhere. But having read some C files from 1996 (I .. didn't work at that company at that time), reciting the product's API every evening after dinner and being intimately familiar with the current .Net code base is time invested in this job and this job only.
Several questions/items:

1. If you are "signing them up on the site" and they aren't paying, are they continuing to use the site? If so, just suspend their account until they pay or if they don't pay after that close their account.

2. Is it a product that you are getting signed contracts with an agreement to pay? If so there is always the possibility of that you could pursue a legal angle.

3. I would focus on finding out what their hold ups are on paying by digging deeper. Offer to hold their hand on the payment process. From what it sounds like these customers potentially like your product and may see an initial use in it, but it is not something they are willing to pay for and are trying to be nice and hope you go away by just not paying.

4. In the future you could raise the price of your product and offer then offer various discounts for paying on-time or early.

5. Is it a one-time fee or subscription service? You may try playing with the pricing and payment terms (i.e. if you only offer a monthly price try adding additional terms like quarterly or annually. Or if you only offer a one-time fee try breaking it up over time).

(Edited to fix typos)
Because your comment lambasts him for doing an interview, not for anything he said.
Thanks! Monetization is not fully thought out yet but I'm envisioning a freemium model down the line. Basically, either start charging after a certain usage threshold (e.g. an hour of free browsing per day), or charge for extra features like server-side ad-block, ability to pick the country in which the server's IP is located, HTTPS access (even though HTTPS is currently free), etc.
So is this some sort of mesh network?
This is where I rant about "common sense". Common sense is a first approximation of reality. It's actually right the majority of the time. If "the majority of the time" is sufficient for your purposes, it's fine. If it's not, then you're a fool for relying on common sense when you need accuracy.

So basically, you're arguing that "common sense" tells you that women at tech conferences are recruiters or HR. And from a common sense perspective, it may be right. But you didn't say common sense. You said "How is the prior negative if it is accurate?"

By definition, the prior is not going to be accurate for a significant minority (if not a majority) of the women at the conference. And every time you're wrong, you are negatively affecting individuals. Don't want to talk to recruiters? You avoid them. You don't bring them into conversations, or don't assume they can keep up. Your avoidance harms their networking opportunities. You're hurting them.

This, this is why bias matters.
"- Google can use your content for all their existing and future services"

That's the basis of some of the strongest services offered on the Web, if that"s deemed negative, this service is not for me.
http://www.thefakeguardian.com
Unfortunately seems heavily mouse based. I'll stick with Spectacle myself.
What service do you provide for the moron betting the table minimum that entitles you to play his/her hand?
"Which opinions are disqualifying and should be no platformed? Don't worry, I know them when I see them."

That's comforting.
I love it so much in Windows, I'm sometimes annoyed when I forget on my Linux work machine and drag windows to the side only to have it flip to another desktop instead of fill the side of the screen.
Android Apps can be deployed and distributed a variety of ways. E-Mail is one of those ways. Bluetooth sharing is another.
I'm more interested in the behavior and demand for privacy features shown by youth - than the technical efficacy of the implementation.

As engineers we can solve the technical issues over time and improve the status quo, but changing peoples behaviour is incredibly hard.

All of the most effective encryption tools in the world won't matter - in the context of privacy - if people don't care about them, or are aware of the risks that exist, or if the tools aren't designed in a way to be usable by the average human.
Alex Payne is a socialist activist. https://al3x.net/2015/03/03/jacobin.html

"After several years as an enthusiastic reader and supporter, it’s my pleasure to announce that I’m joining the Jacobin advisory board."

Jacobin describes itself as “a leading voice of the American left, offering socialist perspectives on politics, economics, and culture.”

Regardless of the merits of socialism or neoreaction, even bringing him into the discussion does nothing but strengthen my argument.
Xilinx SDSoC program – FPGA development in C++
Even if that's true (citation needed), "fluid intelligence" isn't the end-all of important intelligence at work. You need people who aren't distracted by the newest shiny reinvention of some old thing. You need mastery, which can only be gained by time in the trenches.
It is not the languages themselves that are scary. It is the people using them. So if the competition look for e.g. Erlang programmers and you don't for some kind of messaging app. Then you should be worried. If they use it for big files, then you should be less worried. Because they need to solve a few more limitations in Erlang/OTP to make it work well.
Build Secure User Interfaces Using JSON Web Tokens (JWTs)
I think you don’t need it. But now you’ve got it, and the point of the article was to explain how and why. Since Steve Klabnik put pressure on Miller to bring Yarvin’s politics into the conference, bringing in his has to be relevant.
> 1) Expert benefits consulting seems like something that could be made easily accessible via research online

If you have the time to sort through it all and become an expert on the various products in the market. Oh, and if you make a mistake, you bear all the risk. Also, remember that most HR departments collect people who were terrible at every other job they've ever had -- these are not people you trust to do things correctly. You'll likely end up paying less in the long run if you pay someone else to do it where that is their entire job.

> 2) Obamacare FUD?

There is a lot of FUD around the ACA, but some of it is warranted. You don't know what changes the GOP is going to try to force through, and Obama himself keeps delaying implementation of certain requirements.

> 3) Haggling is a feature?

For a business it is. It's not even an inconvenience, you just hire a professional negotiator and if you save more than his fees (which is usually the case), you come out ahead. If you're not big enough for hiring a negotiator to make sense, you're not big enough to have leverage to negotiate in the first place.

> 4) This seems like expert consulting re-worded

It mostly is, but employment / tax law is not somewhere you want to read a few tutorials on the Internet and call it a day. Again, if you're big enough to worry about this, it'll be worthwhile to pay an expert consultant for the risk coverage alone.
Which is why certificate signing requests contain only the public key.
More than that, the Mozilla request also mentions code signing certs, makes it clear this is not just an internal AWS thing:

Customers of the Amazon PKI are the general public. We do not require customers that customers have a domain registration with Amazon, use domain suffixes where Amazon is the registrant, or have other services from Amazon.
That's not what ADP is doing. :)
> You'll use Unity or UT4 which uses Metal under the hood.

Why do I have to use those engines?
yes

https://gigaom.com/2008/09/24/digg-raises-28-million-in-seri...