everdev

It is a little far fetched to think the audience didn't listen or ask questions about any potential risks.

It's easy to go back after an accident and find multiple points of failure and find things that could have been done better.

My guess is that most people thought it was a minor or acceptable risk. Unfortunately, they were very wrong.

But that doesn't mean the PPT slide is at fault.

Sure, but I guess by that same logic not rigging a foreign election would impact a country too.

Sorry, I think the point I was trying to make was that most governments try to openly influence politics in other countries rather than protecting free elections.

I totally agree that vote rigging would be particularly egregious. However, I'm not sure that backing a regime with money / weapons / training, etc. that then goes ahead and rigs the vote is that much better.

I think it's more like one scenario is stealing money and the other is investing in a gang that steals money.

I just find it interesting that we openly try to pick political winners and losers in other countries.

How do you feel about any foreign political intervention?

I'd guess that 50+% of 3rd world leaders are supported by some foreign government financially or militarily which keeps them in power.

But yes, it doesn't feel good when a foreign government tries to pick a winner in our elections.

Does anyone know the details of these "election systems"?

> Russian cyber actors in the summer of 2016 conducted online research and reconnaissance to identify vulnerable databases, usernames, and passwords in webpages of a broader number of state and local websites than previously identified

This makes it sound like just election-related state websites.

> a Russian campaign seeking vulnerabilities and access to election infrastructure

For me, the term "Election infrastructure" sounds like it would include voting machines, voter registries, vote counts, etc.

Wild guess -- Rep. & Dem. political parties are more motivated by self-serving interests than guided by any sustained principles.

Both will easily flip on war, justice, tax reform, voting, etc. as needed.

Part of the problem is it's easy to complain and spitball ideas when you're out of power, it's a lot more complex to gain consensus and implement policy when you're in power.

A few reasons:

* Access to decision makers

* Greenfielding a product

* Excitement / fast pace

* Novelty

* Great learning experience before launching your own venture

It's not for everyone, but I've interviewed dozens of developers who only want to work at startups for these reasons.

And for founders, obviously there's the upside of owning a business, the status of being funded, the ability to be your own boss and the potential for massive impact and wealth.

I have a similar aversion to JS as the author, but unfortunately it's still the best tool for the job in manipulating the DOM.

Phoenix LiveView looks really cool. Under the hood though it's injecting JS that diffs the current DOM and the new DOM and renders the changes rather than the entire tree. At the end of the day, it's still a JS enhancement.

The biggest problem IMO with JS and performance is event listeners.

If they setup event listeners on each card, talk, etc. it could easily kill performance.

Turns out this is easily solved by setting up a single event listener on the root element (body, #app, etc.) and then checking the event.target to see what changed.

It's better than the alternative of giving in. Shutting down / reopening the company takes $$ and I still think you'd have a decent lawsuit against the new startup.

Threaten to shut down the company. Then your shares are worth zero.

I think Marx talks about this. The problem in his view was mostly the assembly line disassociating your work from the end product. He valued individual tradesmen perfecting a craft and moving any repetitive work to machines.

But I don't think it's quite right. Take a look at the joy in mission control when they achieve their goal. No one is responsible for physically making any part of that rover, shuttle, etc. but the joy of accomplishment is still real.

I'd imagine the joy of launching a highly successful digital product is just as real.

I think the disassociating comes from not feeling like you played a part in the product. I think authority over a product's idea/vision is just as satisfying as authority over it's physical shape.

Main discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19624226

Unfortunately, our sense of prosperity seems to be relative.

If 90% of the town has a free house and free food, but the other 10% live in bigger, safer, cleaner houses and are eating better testing/healthier food, I don't think the 90% will be as excited.

I think most humans strive for the best available rather than being content with the minimum they really need. This probably isn't a great way to find happiness but it is a pretty powerful motivator.

I'm self employed and had to explain to my kids why taxes in the US were so complicated and took hours to do over the weekend.

There must be powerful forces at work because Republicans have touted a flat tax or a return the size of a postcard for decades but when they controlled all three branches of government couldn't get anywhere near enough votes to pass it.

It's truly an abysmal system and I hope my kids don't have to do a giant math problem every year when they're adults.

> But for us, ethical means moving in the direction of least possible harm against other people, animals and the planet.

There are short descriptions below each service that explain just that.

For expenses, it would be nice if there was a way to automatically shut off or throttle traffic after $X a month.

> Basically removes all of the major drawbacks to move to serverless

What about cold starts, debugging and runaway expenses?

Proof of Concept is a vague term and doesn't give you any sort of protection or defense. If it's against Craigslist's terms you're taking on some risk by making and public and promoting it.

When I ran a business I liked to have 2 payrolls worth of cash set aside. So, if a customer was late paying by 3 weeks we'd still be OK. This turned out to be a pretty cautious approach and we were never in danger of missing a payroll (or the following one).

Keep in mind payrolls are for work that's already been performed.

Having enough cash set aside for the work that's been performed plus a month of future work is having 3 payrolls worth of cash set aside at all times.

I could see it working if all companies had to do it, but in a scenario of two identical companies where one can spend more freely they're probably more likely to grow.

300 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute...

https://merchdope.com/youtube-stats/

I think the point was that any cohort with a strong voting record for one party will still have members that vote for another party based on a single issue.

It's not unreasonable to think that someone might agree with the bulk of a party's platform, but disagree on a single issue that's most important to them and can't bring themselves to vote for anyone in that party because of it.

I can imagine guns, abortion, the military, taxes, etc. might fit that bill as someone's single most important issue.

True but there's also a lot of unknowns and variables in any business and mangers have to guess sometimes. In that sense mood and atmosphere can matter if you're on the fence.

I think there was once a yogi or guru-type that criticized the denuclearization effort saying why get rid of nukes if we still have the mindset that can justify using them?

I can't help but think the same is true of AI or any technology that could be used for good or bad.

We spend a lot of time trying to control the tools, but less time trying to improve culture and ethics of the operator.

True, that's one complaint I still hear about quitting is that a lot of events and groups are still managed on Facebook.

Most of my friends (~30s-40s) openly talk about how negative their experience was with social media (interrupting family time, seeking approval / likes, losing an hour or more to endless scrolling, having to have an opinion on everything, stirring conflict between friends and family, etc.) and how they've deleted their accounts.

It was useful and novel 10+ years ago, but for traditional uses like sharing photos and messaging, SMS or Google Photos is easy enough these days.

It's been widely discussed that people who consume less news are generally happier and I'm sure that's the same with social media too.

The article is hard to read on mobile because of the nav bar overlaying the content.

Good catch. Here's the 3rd tweet:

https://twitter.com/KayColesJames/status/1100488434500685824

If the CEO of a public company owns 10% of that company's shares and 90% of their new worth comes from the value of that stock, I can imagine them caring a great deal about increasing the value of the stock.

This is what people are referring to when they say "shareholder value" -- diving up the value of the stock.