mamurphy

Would anyone do differently in their shoes? It sounds like they volunteered for a task force, and would be facing individual liability with no assistance from their union if sued for any work resulting from staying on the task force.

If you volunteered to program the Foo system at your job, and your company announced that you would be individually liable for any losses anyone suffered for your further work on Foo system, would you keep volunteering to program Foo or would you look to work on other projects?

The website isn't loading anything for me right now.

Current law does not allow him to raise the defense of whistleblowing at trial. This is ironclad precedent and won't be overturned without a new law being passed or the prosecution agreeing to it.

The government would get to tell the jury he gave away XYZ classified documents, and he would not be allowed to even mention why and would have no chance of getting that overturned on appeal.

Snowden has said he will come back and stand trial if he is allowed to raise whistleblowing as a defense. The government has not taken him up on that offer.

edit: First source google had to offer: https://whistleblower.org/in-the-news/wsj-op-ed-why-edward-s...

Excerpt:

>[M]embers of Congress, journalists and advocacy groups keep repeating the same argument: Mr. Snowden should turn himself in, mount a solid defense and all will be righted at trial.

That’s a fantasy. I served as legal adviser to two high-profile whistleblowers between 2010 and 2013, former NSA senior executive Thomas Drake and former CIA officer John Kiriakou, both charged with espionage. I also witnessed last year’s court-martial of U.S. Army Pfc. Bradley Manning (now known as Chelsea Manning), who faced charges of espionage and aiding the enemy. Here’s a run-through, to the extent that I am allowed to offer, of how such a shadowy proceeding would unfold.

I read an article, that I can't find now, that convincingly argues that the SAT is one of the most equalizing factors for privilege. Impressive extracurricular, recommendation letters, and even grades are easier to buy than a higher SAT score.

Prep helps, but prep has a limit. A Golf tutor, high tier equipment, admission to private school with a large golf team, etc. are more easily bought.

The first four comments when I got here were disparaging this tweet chain and saying masks don't work. I did a bit of research and found multiple articles claiming masks DO work.

These sources acknowledge that masks are a contentious point and that some experts disagree with the part of the articles I am quoting below. Even the CDC recommends against members of the public using respirators without specific risk factors (having Covid, or treating someone with Covid). The CDC wants to prevent hoarding, as they should.

But many sources claim that a homemade mask from a spare vacuum bag or dish rag makes you a bit safer (2-5x safer than nothing), and I'm going to make one for myself and use it when going out. From the overall body of evidence, I believe that masks are substantially better than nothing, and a social norm of everyone wearing masks would lower Covid transmission. If you disagree provide sources and reasons.

>Wearing a face mask is certainly not an iron-clad guarantee that you won’t get sick – viruses can also transmit through the eyes and tiny viral particles, known as aerosols, can penetrate masks. However, masks are effective at capturing droplets, which is a main transmission route of coronavirus, and some studies have estimated a roughly fivefold protection versus no barrier alone (although others have found lower levels of effectiveness).[0]

>The public doesn't need to wear heavy-duty respirators, but it's a smart idea to don a face mask or wrap a clean scarf around your nose and mouth if you're going into a crowded place during the COVID-19 outbreak, an infectious disease doctor told Live Science.[1]

Even the CDC agrees that "The role of facemasks is for patient source control, to prevent contamination of the surrounding area when a person coughs or sneezes. Patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 should wear a facemask until they are isolated in a hospital or at home. The patient does not need to wear a facemask while isolated." [2]

Other articles agree that sick people wearing face masks helps prevent them spreading to others, e.g., [3]

I have read sources that Covid19 can be transmitted even if you have no symptoms. So if everyone wears face masks, then everyone who is infected with no symptoms will have a reduced chance of transmitting the virus. Unlike social distancing and lockdowns, masks have almost no downside. Why are we not heavily promoting masks for anyone going out of the home!?

HN generally loves the NYTimes, great article: [4]. Homemade masks aren't perfect, but the article explains that "of course masks work — maybe not perfectly and not all to the same degree, but they provide some protection. Their use has always been advised as part of the standard response to being around infected people, especially for people who may be vulnerable."

I encourage everyone reading this to consider making a mask out of an item you already own and wearing it when leaving the house.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/23/can-a-face-mas...

[1]https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-do-face-masks-work.h...

[2]https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/respirator-use...

[3]https://www.cedars-sinai.org/newsroom/covid-19-for-most-mask...

[4]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-...

Fortnite has the support-a-creator program, where players can enter a creator's code in the in-game item shop to choose to divert a percentage (5%, but they have upped it to 20% once for a special event) of all in-game purchasers to a creator of their choice. The creator can be a map-maker, streamer, blogger, etc.

The program incentivizes continued content creation by creators, and dis-incentivizes moving on to another game, as the creator's SAC revenue would dry up over time.

[0]https://www.epicgames.com/affiliate/en-US/overview

>It looks like an olympics logo at certain sizes, and an abstraction of a cut jewel at others.

I see at least three things: a flowery circle in five colors at very small sizes (Olympics logo?), a cut jewel (around a white star) at medium sizes, and the white star (surrounded by colored arrows) at very large sizes. It makes the logo quite confusing for me.

This seems like a similar setting to the lighthouse in the 2019 documentary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lighthouse_(2019_film)

>Not at all the same comparison.

No, their comparison was perfect! They said roadle owned 70% of roads, not all of them. Sure, businesses can hope that they get their traffic from non-Google search, but if customers are going to Google for 70+% of search, that's a doomed business strategy.

Their point isn't that Google is bad for consumers, it's that it's unfair for businesses if Google is driving all the search to its own properties that you are trying to compete with.

Are you absolutely sure about that? There are several other services at $20/month that would offer a much more compelling value proposition compared to Digital Ocean's lowest-tier droplet.

I would definitely have signed up for a competitor if DO droplets cost 400% what they do now. As other commenters have said, this space is a brutal race to the bottom in pricing. DO is great, I might pay 50% more for their current services, but not 300% more.

>Frankly, I have to wonder who is the audience for this post.

I had the same thought. My guess would be founders of "hot" companies. Altman is signaling that he knows all the ways to be a great investor (and presumably puts them into practice).

Your landing page should have, at minimum, a description of the product or a relevant video (maybe this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX0A9odwZ5U) before your ask for signups. I don't stream right now, so I have no incentive to sign up for this.

But I occasionally watch streams. Maybe I could recommend this to a streamer I watch. I imagine many people in my shoes would just close the tab at https://get.incent.com/ingage when it requires a log in. Maybe also some streamers, your target demographic, would close the tab if they are skeptical about giving a log in to a product they know nothing about.

That youtube video isn't ideal, maybe you have a better once, since it feels like it could be 30 seconds and the first half is the noisier half.

> How exactly would this particular trade-off increase total deaths? Do you think this is happening in Oslo?

What if I am having a heart attack and the ambulance is on the way? If it gets there within 5 minutes, I can be saved, if not I die. Oh well, no going over 20 mph, I'm dead.

I would hope Oslo has a carve out for emergency response, but I don't see one in the article.

Much, much, more abstractly, as the article points out, suburbs are much denser in American than in Olso. "If I could work on my lifesaving cancer cure 8hr/day I would cure it in 10 years, but at 7hr/day I only cure it in 12 years. I can only spend so much time at work and commuting. Oh well, no going over 20mph, it takes me years longer." Lots of productivity losses (some of which are undoubtedly going to result in loss of life) if a(not atypical) American 20 mile commute now takes an hour instead of 20 minutes.

It would take restructuring of roadways on a massive scale in America to have this policy not result in staggering productivity/time losses. The article admits this ("it's going to require both institutional and far-reaching cultural changes", "It will take decades"). Without massive changes, adopting this policy would, as the article states, "incite riots in no time." I'd welcome taking steps towards transit restructuring.

However, there seems to be little political will for even basic incremental steps. That's why zero deaths seems impossible - getting even basic, functioning, public transit is hard in America.

The problem is incentives. If you are the only chip in town, who cares if you go for a long lunch and aren't that creative in pushing performance limits? Capatlism creates winners and losers, and creates incentives for people to try their best to not be on the losing team.

When the walls fell.

Nice video. I've definitely heard this narrative before. There was a great blog post on HN a while back bemoaning feature lists but I couldn't find the one I am remembering on google. I found two other on-point articles of interest, though:

https://www.cmswire.com/information-management/everything-yo...

https://werd.io/2016/stop-writing-specs-start-finding-needs-...

Why was the title shortened on HN to remove reference to mechanical keyboards? I think the subject matter is both relevant and helped generate interest in the thread. Also, most of the comments are about mechanical keyboards at this point.

What keycaps do you recommend, generally?

Have you ever tried the "Falcon" Z-77 keyboard? It's been rebranded/knocked off by several Chinese manufacturers (different brands all have the same distinct falcon logo in the top middle of the keyboard) and is available on Amazon for around $30.

I bought one (the HUO JI version) after encountering several reviews from folks saying it compared favorably with their $100+ boards. I'm quite happy with it, and it's hard to have any idea if I'm missing out on anything and, if so, what I'm missing out on.

Sounds like IKEA was warned in advance and police were there to try and prevent people from hiding, letting them know it was not welcome.

I also imagine IKEA has a loudspeaker system. If they announce "please, everyone, store hours are over, leave the IKEA" but you stay hidden, you're trespassing.

Two comments, both directly replying about his age to separate claims that no one is over 30, is "spamming?" And from this you can predict his age? Seriously?

>Measured by hours, recruiting is one of our largest investments.

That's literally the next sentence of the article after “We spent less than $1,000 on hiring." The article explicitly acknowledges this issue.

>There might be new competition now at a certain level, but there's also the oversupply of lawyers and the continual closing of law firms all across america. Those are kind of competing stories about what is happening.

Can you rephrase so I can understand what you mean?

"There might be competition on some level" BUT "there's also the oversupply of lawyers" -- that means that all the lawyers are competing with each other because there are too many. How are "the lawyers are competing" and "there is an oversupply" competing stories? An oversupply would lead to increased competition.

I've only used discord -- do threads exist on slack? Or is GP right and lack of threads is a major downfall of chat apps, including slack?

megaremote seems to be located in Australia and was looking for work in May[1], the claim they work for slack seems to be complete fabrication/wishful thinking/cynicism

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19797592

Relevant tweet that links to this same article and has a self-referential political cartoon: https://twitter.com/PatChappatte/status/1138145415604449280

The linked article is currently down for me, as is the Google cache; does anyone have a mirror? I presume the article explains the Netanyahu cartoon that the tweet references.

My hot take without (being able to be) reading the article: No more political humor because of an internet mob seems like quite the shame.

Well, wait a second here. Tptacek seems to have been clear in saying that Assange being extradited from the UK itself is much more likely than being extradited from Sweden. Assange ended up being extradited from the UK itself.

Since he was forced out of the embassy into the arms of UK police, and never planned to go to Sweden, I don't think we'll ever know if he would have been extradited from Sweden (or on route to Sweden) or not.

Tptacek was making a point that's a bit more nuanced than you seem to give credit for. He hasn't been "proven wrong" by the UK allowing US to extradite Assange.

I don't see alternative services on this page (https://landing.google.com/sre/sre-book/chapters/monitoring-...) Do you have any alternates you would recommend?

Ah, to be clear: Subconscious biases still exist to some degree. In recent years, in government and large corporations, diversity hiring goals have completely dominated the hiring process compared to subconscious biases.

I don't think you agree with that statement; if you did, would you think that it is a good result? I don't. I don't think the solution to past unfairness is to tilt the see-saw in the other direction, creating more unfairness.

You replied to another poster:

>Good. Then we're in agreement that hiring for diversity is of no detriment. Incompetent white people are hired because of subconscious bias and incompetent people of color are hired because of diversity goals. We've achieved equality.

I disagree strongly, and I somewhat agree with that poster's response to you. To me, equality means equality of process. To reclaim a phrase: equal opportunity -- not equal results. All bias is bad and should be fought against. Anti-bias training, examining disproportionate results to see if bias was an underlying cause, and race/sex-blind hiring, all are possible steps in the right direction.

To correct for subconscious bias for white males with conscious bias against them hardly seems the path towards equality.

There are tons of people over their heads, everywhere, of all races and sexes.

But as the other person who replied to you noted, people now are openly stating that they want to avoid hiring white males.

>Sadly I've had to bring up my genetic background recently as a pure survival mechanism because people keep telling me to my face that they don't want to hire white men so I need to let them know I'm not white so I don't get instantly filtered out.

In recent times, I have not heard that more frequently about any other race/sex combination. To me it's undeniable that the hiring climate has changed drastically.

>If you’re a white male, you could easily have been hired simply because of your skin color and gender and not your abilities.

This may have been the case decade(s) ago, but I think the climate is very different now. With the prevalence of social "justice" hiring policies, I'd be much more confident I was hired because of ability, rather than to fill a quota, as a white male than any other race/sex combination.

Sadly, affirmative action creates "mismatch" that often worsens the problem it is trying to solve. Minorities are highly recruited to fill quotas, even if less capable. This (1) puts them in over their head setting them up to fail and (2) creates a perception that the minorities are inherently less qualified (rather than the truth, that they are being over-selected for).

One of many articles on this topic: https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-sad-...