mrfredward

Yes, but likeability in an interview measures something only loosely related to likeability in the long run. Someone who is a little shy can make a great coworker/employee/friend/whatever, but you won't find that out watching them squirm in front of a whiteboard. An interview only directly measures the ability to win over strangers, and that might right for a sales position, but for most engineering positions it's a big extrapolation to guess how the candidate will perform in a team when comfortable.

So the time value of money is more or less zero now and loan rates depend much more on default risk than any opportunity cost in loaning the money. To an economist, the implications of that might be big, but to a regular person, it's really a small shift in possibilities.

A savings account at 0% doesn't build wealth, but it didn't really do that 3 months ago at 1.5%. Personal loans at 9% aren't much better than loans at 11%.

If you're not planning on making a career out of doing something finance-related, I'd say there isn't much to do differently.

My one recommendation would be to hedge a little against the possibility of asset bubbles. I'm not saying bet on them (I don't know if they'll happen, nor can I predict the future and time them). Rather, I'm saying try not to be in a bad spot if they happen, because easy money definitely increases the chance we could see one. As an example, everyone in this life needs a roof over their head, so if you don't own anything real estate related, a bubble in real estate prices is a risk. A homeowner who plans to stay in their house 20 more years doesn't have to care about annual changes in the real estate market...but a renter does. So own your home if it makes sense for your situation, or consider having money in REITs, or own a rental property. Don't over-extend yourself, but try to avoid needing a tulip and not having one in 1636.

Likewise, if you are relying on investments to retire, and are many years away from doing so, make sure a significant portion is in boring sp500/total stock market etfs. If your time horizon is long enough, not being able to buy stocks at a decent price is a bigger threat to your retirement than a short term drop, so make sure you have some amount of money in the market while the market isn't at all time highs.

As always, it depends on your situation and I'm not qualified to tell you what to do with your finances.

The point that is valuable to the discussion is this: businesses don't worry about disaster preparedness, so the responsibility falls on government, and government run like a business won't prepare either.

Which party racists vote for doesn't improve a discussion about governments buying medical supplies.

>The GOP have convinced scared white, Christian, racist, xenophobic people that all the government does is waste their hard earned money paying benefits to poor, non-working, non-white, non-Christian, non-citizen, LGBTQ's.

It pains me to see something like this in a highly up-voted comment. The point about businesses never preparing for disaster is a good one, and one does not need to claim a party has scummy voters to make it. Adding such flamebait does not strengthen the point being made.

>Compare it to your own job - if I had the same tools as you, could I walk in and do the same job you do?

Should access to a compiler be gated just because amateur programmers probably don't know as much as people with a degree?

The fact that you need to go to a doctor, to get referred to a facility which will run a test, which will then send that test data back to the doctor, and at the second appointment the doctor will go over the data with you to see if you needed to go to the doctor in the first place...is just an absurd waste. It shouldn't be so hard to get a few measurements done on your own body.

And if you know the first character of a two character password, it's trivial to brute force the second, and so on...

>It's still less costly than immigration.

Can you explain this? Its hard for me to imagine how letting someone through a border could cost more than providing healthcare and education to an individual for 18+ years.

If a government really wants the increase the tax base, how could you possibly find a better ROI than letting skilled working age people immigrate?

In the U.S. at least, most people consider it morally outrageous to eat a dog. And yet, many of the same people will eat a hamburger. While there are obvious cultural/emotional reasons people feel this way, I can't think of any logical reason why eating a cow is less troubling than eating a dog.

Put simply, most popular moral frameworks people follow seem full of contradictions like this. And yet, it seems like any attempt to force a different moral framework on people would be a tyrannical force of misery. Any resolution a computer could offer to the contradiction above would make a lot of people deeply unhappy, which is in and of itself a moral problem.

People are emotionally driven, and I'm not sure there exists any logical set of rules that could define a morality people are happy with.

Vending machines kill an average of four Americans per year.

Forgive me for thinking we can't make barreling down the highway safer than buying a soda. With 300+ million people, it's not a realistic target until something supercedes driving entirely.

A recession that costs 2% of GDP can drop the stock market 40%. That doesn't make mathematical sense, but it's been happening all through the history of equity markets because there isn't a strong mechanism to fight an irrational change in sentiment.

If you think Intel is overvalued compared to AMD, you can short Intel, buy AMD, and make a bundle of money if you are right, so there is a mechanism to keep relative prices in line. If you think the 2020 market is overvalued compared to the 2012 stock market though, you can't move money back in time. Valuation doesn't tell you if/when a crash is gonna happen, it just gives a vague sense that returns will be lower over the next 10-20 years. A small positive return beats nothing, so a rational actor that knows the market is overvalued will stay invested. Hence, there isn't really any reason to believe market valuations are so rational.

I tend to think the market is overvalued right now, but I'm buying stocks anyway, because I'm saving money and don't want to stuff it under my mattress.

Another idea that could make this a viable business: while in general consumers won't pay for this sort of thing, there are certain problems that the medical establishment just does a horrible job treating, where I think people would gladly pay up. Migraines, for example.

I personally suffer from some sort of headache disorder (symptoms are a mix between migraines and cluster headaches, I've had different diagnoses). I went to a neurologist every 3 months for 2 years, at $200 per 30 minute visit, and usually less than 10 of those minutes were spent with the doctor. Every time he made some seat of the pants guess as to what to do next (adjust the dosage I was receiving, or change medications). In the end, I never found anything better than taking a bunch of ibuprofen at the first sign of a headache, and that was something I figured out on my own.

I wouldn't pay a dime to see a comparison of generic and name brand NyQuil, but if a trustworthy source offered me a personalized report on what medications I should be looking at based on my headache symptoms, and had studies to back it up, I'd gladly pay $100+.

>That assumes that the number of available jobs is perfectly-sized and fixed, and that there's no other work that could be done

No it assumes the exact opposite of a fixed number of jobs-- it assumes the other work wasn't being done because wages were too high to make it profitable, but as the workforce grew the price of labor dropped until employers wanted to hire into those jobs. That's the whole idea behind supply and demand.

I'm obviously not the author, but I can think of a good reason not to use rust.

The project works exactly as the original and recreates the memory state byte for byte, so like the original it has different tasks running at once that are reading and writing to shared memory. Rust's borrow check exists to prevent this sort of thing, because it is so hard to do it correctly or prove it is correct once you have done it. So to use rust, the author would have needed to either totally re-architect Space Invaders, or write the whole thing in ugly, non-idiomatic rust.

Rust simply doesn't let you do the things assembly and C programmers did all the time in 1978 (and with the complexity of our software now and the extra computing power, that's usually for the better). C, on the other hand, has at times been described as "portable assembly," which makes it a good choice for someone wanting to stay true to the original program flow.

Well, the executives making the outsourcing decisions still have their paychecks and people who own stock are reaping the profits from cheap labor. It matches the gp comment's description of events just fine.

Can we agree that "most young women" != "women in tech", just like "most young men" != "men in tech"?

Most men don't want to talk about code either.

>I cannot provide a well informed comment, but I can offer this: I am not surprised at all that fund managers are slimy and dishonest.

And that explains why this article is on the front page of HN...not because the methods are accurate, but because the conclusion aligns with what people believe going in.

Fund managers very likely are slimy, but this paper is too flawed to prove anything. Read the rebuttal from Morningstar. In the paper Morningstar's data is being assumed true while the bond funds are being criticized, so when Morningstar comes out and says that their data has a pessimistic bias, and the bonds funds ratings reflect more complete information, it seems pretty damning for the paper's assumptions.

> Diamonds may be symbol of decadence and Masonite maybe the logical answer but you can argue same thing about wanting to drive an expensive sports car where a humble cheap sedan would do the job.

This comparison would be accurate if a Toyota and a Ferrari were virtually identical, with the easiest way to tell them apart being that the Toyota was perfect and the Ferrari had imperfections in the interior because the leather was hand stitched. And if the hand stitching was historically done by slaves.

In fairness, I don't think the article proves much for the system either. A single month of data, when there is pent up demand for people to return books and a publicity campaign, virtually guarantees this month will be very different from all the others.

If Facebook really wanted to stop this they could make the eggplant less phallic looking or remove it entirely. Almost no one is going on Facebook to actually talk about eggplant.

They don't want users to have the same plausible deniability when sharing a cartoon wiener that they had when adding a cartoon wiener as an option. And honestly, it is probably for the better that sexual harassment via eggplant is now explicitly called out in the TOS.

I don't expect much enforcement of this.

Edit: Wow, the eggplant lobby found my post. To be clear, I'm not against the eggplant emoji, or its sexual connotations, but I am convinced that it gets used exactly the way its designers expected it to be used.

Oh man. It's not as bad now with shaders, but I remember how horrible learning fixed pipeline OpenGL was. You'd try to write some simple code, the result would be a black screen, and you'd just keep adding glEnable/glDisable calls to your code over and over until you figure what invisible piece of global state was ruining your day.

In the sort run, sure, low interest rates make the assets of the rich more valuable, at least on paper. In the long run though, low interest rates push against wealth inequality. People who have more money than they need collect interest, people who need a loan to get an education or buy a house pay interest.

Also, it doesn't seem plausible that an asset bubble is the reason healthcare is expensive.

The word "panic" is usually used to describe someone behaving irrationally. If you see a guy running from a lion, you don't say "he's panicking". If you see a guy pacing and sweating because he has to do his taxes, you do say "he's panicking". Many of the same biological mechanisms are at work, but the word is most commonly used when those mechanisms lead you astray.

A major oversight here is rate of acceleration. Every organism and vehicle on earth has the same gravity and similar coefficients of friction to work with, so rates of acceleration have roughly the same cap, but the speeds change by orders of magnitude.

So an ant can go from full speed, to stopped, to full speed in a fraction of a second. A car on the highway will take several seconds to stop, and much longer to smoothly accelerate, leading to standing wave type effects on highways. This is much less likely with people walking, and even less likely with ants.

The dynamics of cars on the highway is governed by the difficulty of changing speed and direction. For ants, this constraint is negligible. So these things don't really compare.

How many people are commenting here because the color of this badge meaningfully affects them? The debate on this post is happening because it's easy to have an opinion, not because there is anything of significance to be gained here.

From the wikipedia above: "...everyone can visualize a cheap, simple bicycle shed, so planning one can result in endless discussions because everyone involved wants to add a touch and show personal contribution."

Honestly, I've met a handful of IT bureaucrats who enjoyed the power trip of holding up dozens of people on a multimillion dollar project over an outdated policy.

These people are the exception, not the norm, but it only takes one.

Sure, lots of it is automated. There has to be a fantastic level of automation to achieve that 1 minute per order.

Amazon is one of the most brutally efficient operations in world history. We read every week about workers afraid to take bathroom breaks, and according to the article here workers seem too busy to notice their coworkers dropping dead of heart attacks. The sentiment of us here at our keyboards saying "wow, I can't believe it takes more than 30 seconds to put my order in a box" seems really wrong.

30 seconds to grab an item off a shelf in a huge warehouse, wrap it, put put in a box, tape the box shut, print and attach a label, load it on a truck, and complete all the required tracking steps? And we still haven't accounted for managing all these people, cleaning the warehouse, or even stocking the shelves.

Edit: CNN says it takes a minute of human labor as of 2016 (https://money.cnn.com/2016/10/06/technology/amazon-warehouse...). And that's shelf to delivery truck, so there is plenty more in that process that it leaves out.

Most people rely on some amount of self-delusion to cope with tough things. I've witnessed this tendency, and in reaction I sometimes swing too far in the opposite direction and end up with my own cynical delusions.

When I get things right, and achieve somewhat of a stoic realism, I find there is a lot of benefit in accepting the world as it is, but it is lonely.

On a more personal note, I probably can't say anything to ease the loss of your cat, but forgive me for making an attempt: Your love for your cat and the memories you have are real, as real as anything else in this world. Even if there's no grand story that this is all a part of, the feeling of loss you have now is evidence that you found a source of joy and meaning on a personal level. Loss will always hurt, but the fact that something is finite does not prevent it from being good.

With W2 employment, you and your employer split the payroll tax responsibility. When you're self-employed, you pay both halves.

If you adjust your rates accordingly, it's a wash for everyone involved (this is one of many reasons the 1099 price per hour should be around twice the W2 price per hour).

None of this has anything to do with CA income tax.

Most kids in middle school don't have careers, property, deep responsibilities, or most other things adults focus on. They just have phones, a handful of friends, and some sort of position in an arbitrary social hierarchy, and so they put most of their focus into getting social approval. Grades matter only to the extent that they get social approval from adults.

Telling a middle schooler to just quit social media is like telling an adult in a capitalist society to just not worry about money. It isn't that easy to opt-out of the thing most of your world is based on.