Lk7Of3vfJS2n

How did you measure that they're the cheapest and easiest? And cheapest and easiest for whom?

I did and I did.

> Firstly is that actually true?

I created a new account, posted legit content, and none of the content appeared until ~5 days later.

> it will not kill you

How do you know it will not kill me?

What if I don't have to pay this month's rent and launching the site today instead of five days later amounts to $500? Both of these are true for me right now. The creators of HN can't possibly know the cost to a user to post something.

How did you estimate that "it will not kill me" also means it will not kill my spirits to not try again? How do you measure this cost?

> Nothing springs to mind that is that important that:

Merely because nothing springs to mind isn't proof that no such thing exists.

> What specifically did you have in mind?

I have different things in mind for different sites.

What's your definition of a genuine user?

These measures aren't the only way to stop spam.

> but content is king.

I would like to see content is king go up against cash is king in a site.

I'm not sure I understood everything you said.

How do you determine a user is an idiot or not when good ideas look like bad ideas initially? Experts can have blind spots.

The option for reputationless discussion should always remain open in my opinion.

> how high is the cost really?

The cost can be proportional to the proof of work.

Everything has a cost. How about determining the cost and providing means to pay for it? Paying works for many things in the world. It works for ads, for example.

Why must the cost be annoying a human by requiring reputation instead of a monetary cost? How is annoying a human a better solution than letting people pay? Do you really think pissing people off will stop them from expressing what they want? It might be more likely that people will express what they want, nobody will hear them, and they'll leave, taking good ideas with them.

Just as there is a cost to moderation, there is a cost to losing good ideas. How about letting a free market decide?

How is Vale's memory safety approach different than CCured?

Why is it not really suitable to a lot of applications?

Figuring out where the spam came from doesn't prevent the spam coming. I would prefer a solution that prevents the spam from coming.

I built such a system. I made it available and nobody used it or cared. It works great for me.

I'm curious about the other half of this question. Are any engineers in need of an employer rating system?

The point of that tunnel may be to prevent entities that are inside the VPN from sniffing cleartext RDP traffic. If an attacker gets VPN access you want to limit their ability to do damage inside the VPN.

I'd be curious to learn why CPUs don't have conditional move speculation.

I don't know if IP range reputation is part of SMTP but I wish sending email worked without it.

Behaving better isn't the only outcome. Another outcome is leaving the service permanently.

Looking forward to a Job Search simulator.

Or your advisor accepts a job at a company in another state in year 2...

I don't find the parentheses beautiful.

I'd like to see dynamic code running on a CDN.

> This seems like a continuation of the never ending quest for people to sacrifice themselves for the betterment of a corporate profit they will never see.

Reading the essay I didn't see a reference to "the betterment of a corporate profit". Doing good work doesn't mean starting a startup, if this is what you meant.

> Your point about valuing peoples' time is important, though. We have not yet found the right balance for everyone.

Did you try paying candidates for the home assessment? People's time costs money. Paying people not only helps attract candidates but also helps the company reduce the list of candidates to take the assessment.

I'm inclined to say the interview process is imbalanced with more power in the hands of the employer. If you're looking for the right balance, try turning over some power from the employer to the candidate.

The candidate's cost was 2-hours worth of time. Was the employer's cost 2-hours worth of time?

Why not pay the users instead of the mods?

If there's a market for paying users directly for content, and also as a way to not need mods, someday this market will bubble up.

Sometimes I wish there was a law that said if you knowingly say something that isn't true with intention to deceive then you can get sued for it.

Please make it possible to pay without a credit card. I want to support the site but without sacrificing privacy or anonymity.

By creating something they couldn't.

Are you saying a hypothetically perfect language is unattainable? Why? Is there proof for this?

Has Rust gone beyond the point of no return? Have less elegant features possibly been embedded in the language that have put Rust on the track to never become the hypothetically perfect or unblemished language?

It could suck less if candidates used an application system that gave candidates more visibility into the job search process.

Like require employers to summarize the most important thing they want (1, 4), require a response or the employer pays the candidate a fee (2), shows the number of applicants to a position, the last time a resume was reviewed, the last time a candidate was interviewed, the number of candidates interviewed (3), does not require the candidate to signup to apply (5).

If software like this was written and worked well and shown to candidates, and candidates didn't jump on it when it appeared, then candidates may have only themselves to blame. If you want something enough you need to also do something about it.