Will_Do

National median home price is $410k[1]. Texas is less than $300k[2]. Only thing that's unrealistic is most people who buy a house for $400k will probably get an FHA loan and put 3% down so will have a higher payment because of (1) mortgage insurance and (2) borrowing more money.

[1]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS [2]: https://www.zillow.com/home-values/6915/san-antonio-tx/

> Getting screwed in industry means you lose your right to an income and might never get it back.

Why is this? It really easy to get hired in industry after you've been fired from one job -- especially if you've been there for awhile. I've seen many postdocs or non-tenure-track professors forced entirely out of academia if their contracts aren't renewed. If they don't have skills valued by industry (not uncommon if you spent 5+ years post-PhD in academia), I've seen former colleagues never get a good job again.

This is a silly argument but I disagree. Seemed like a perfectly neutral statement to me, including "I insist on living in NYC because I think it's the best place to live"

I think this is really neat and I also like the HN tagline "learn computational science by tinkering with code" better than learning how to code and Data Science for Middle/High Schoolers.

I've been wanting to see something like this for a long time & think it's pretty neat!

I am really pleased Epic is conducting this lawsuit. Even if they lose the lawsuit, it seems likely they'll end up with at least a partial victory by shining light on Apple's practices.

Apple has been a great thing for the world but I find their App Store practices extremely distasteful.

I’d be very surprised if an Indie creator would create a 1-2 minute read about bikes that 500k people would find worthwhile to read.

Video is offen a compelling medium— especially if you can’t write for a major publication

It'll be harder for you than it would be for him but I still wouldn't discount it! Considering the alternative is (1) trying to get into a PhD program (might require a year or two of remedial classes with no guarantee of success) and then (2) spending 4-6 years doing a PhD, reaching out to the randos may well be much faster AND lowest risk.

If you're a software engineer, I'd venture a claim and say that the rando route will be easier. You have a valuable skillset researchers need -- you can code at a professional level. Use that to get your foot in the door!

I guess the question I have is "Did any *previous* research done by UMN successfully introduce bugs into the Linux Kernel git commit log?"

There are weasel words in this statement that make it unclear and the researchers have been really dishonest already. But! If it's true that their research has never made it out of email chains then it does seem like the reaction is a bit disproportionate to the damages here.

I've been skeptical of the AZ vaccine for awhile. I don't know much about biology but I do know statistics. And many of their published results smelled of p-hacking[^1] by cherry-picking the best countries and the best (often accidental!) vaccination regime. Well credentialed people don't actively criticize it because despite those statistical issues, the vaccine is likely still 60-70% effective which is a big deal. But! If the stats side of the house is a clown show, it hurts my confidence in the entire house, especially when BioNTech and Moderna have been great in this respect.

[1]: Perhaps not in the typical sense of "getting a statistically significant result" but in the closely related sense of "getting a larger effect size

Yea I agree. It all relies on (2) but they do a very poor job explaining what exactly the simulation is. If there is a paper by McNight, it isn't cited and I can't find it. Can't find it on his webpage[0][1] or google scholar.

This is a non-trivial simulation so the details are really important! Shame they are nowhere to be found.

[0]: https://ibi.gmu.edu/faculty-directory/patrick-mcknight/ [1]:https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=sH44LC4AAAAJ...

Question: Would using R inside Docker on one of these Macs work somewhat well?

Previous benchmarks[0] show that the overhead on Intel Macbooks for the Docker Linux VM is quite low for scientific computing.

Would the x86 emulation hurt performance substantially or is there some other issue with this approach?

[0]: https://lemire.me/blog/2020/06/19/computational-overhead-due...

> Under the new rule, the required wage level for entry-level workers would rise to the 45th percentile of their profession’s distribution, from the current requirement of the 17th percentile. The requirement for the highest-skilled workers would rise to the 95th percentile, from the 67th percentile.

This is pretty abstract and probably the most important detail. How much would a software engineer have to make to qualify? I'd figure it'd have to be at ~200k if it's 95th percentile. A number high enough and it truly would be for only highly skilled, hard to find software talent, rather than just labor cost cutting. Does anyone have concrete numbers?

That's pretty interesting! In my view, the set your own fare part and penalty removal definitely moves them from the "employee" zone to "self-employed" in the everyday definition.

I guess AB5 is much more strict.

Yea this is probably the best year to introduce unpopular, rent-seeking rules. You'll never be forced to see any of these people in person and the government has enough on its plate to even consider thinking about anti-trust issues.

I'm confused why they don't rip the bandaid off and just charge everyone at the same time though. Charging Tesla 30% probably isn't feasible but this seems like an ideal time to introduce fees for all companies that are currently allowed exemptions (Netflix, Lyft, Airbnb, Uber, Audible, Airlines etc). Yes they could put up a fight but at least some of them would cave.

Until the government gets involved, they are totally allowed to selectively and arbitrarily enforce the rules. Banning Hey but not Netflix just makes them look like hypocrites and makes them less money. Seems like the worst of both worlds.

Yeah I agree this looks like one of those times where the researches aren't interested in doing the stats at all so just mail it in.

Just ignoring the stats though the results seem pretty solid. 3x the number of citations with ~100 observations. If the tweets were truly randomly assigned and there aren't big outliers driving results (big ifs, not gonna go deep enough to find out), their conclusion should be fine.

I think the Buffalo incident yesterday[0] gives us a good indication of just how rare a good cop is. Even though there were dozens of cops that witnessed it, they all lied and claimed that "During that skirmish involving protestors, one person was injured when he tripped & fell".

Then, after the cops who nearly killed the man got suspended, all 57 people on that particular team resigned "in disgust because of the treatment of two of their members, who were simply executing orders,"[2].

Since you want empirical results, that is 0 good cops out of the 57 people on the force. We can employ the rule of 3 to establish an upper bound good cop rate as 5.2% (95% CI).

This isn't to say that the cops are by nature bad. Rather, the institutions and norms that exist in many police departments ensure that nearly all cops become bad cops.

[0]: https://news.wbfo.org/post/graphic-video-two-buffalo-police-...

[1]: https://www.investigativepost.org/2020/06/05/police-unit-res...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(statistics)

What a strange comment.

Taiwan informed the WHO in December that person to person transmission was likely taking place[0]. The only sense in which it hadn’t been confirmed is in a tautological sense the WHO hadn’t confirmed it. Doctors in Wuhan were getting infected and Taiwan had proof of that.

[0] https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/2a70a02a-644...

Yeah I suspect Youtube's policies is the main reason to switch rather than any limitations with the audio podcast in RSS. They always have an enormous amount of concern in trying to follow Youtube's policies and not get demonetized/strikes. Given video RSS is not popular, switching to Spotify makes a lot of sense. The RSS feed may have been collateral damage.

It is breathtaking that conferences organized and attended by affluent tech employees are not being canceled when conferences like SXSW and ComicCon are being canceled.

It hurts the people behind SXSW and Comiccon much more to cancel their events but they did it anyways. Is our industry really so much more unethical than average?

I find his COTI quite misleading/confusing. It seems he is counting 100% of health care expenses (100% of premiums) but not counting the ~70-80% of premiums an employer pays the median employee in median weekly earnings.

In the college field, he also uses a semester if college tuition for some reason. Since this is a 1 time cost, it should almost surely be accounted for differently.

The article is also very confusing. He alternates between considering the inflation rate and not considering the inflation rate. I still don't know if he is claiming that BLS is claiming that, for cars, the inflation rate is 0.

I also find his COTI quite misleading. It seems he is counting 100% of health care expenses (100% of premiums) but not counting the ~70-80% of premiums an employer pays in median weekly earnings. In the college field, he also uses a semester if college tuition for some reason. Since this is a 1 time cost, it should almost surely be accounted for differently.

My guess: Facebook makes an enormous percentage[^1] of its revenue in the US compared to Amazon/Apple. This might make it legally more tricky to argue that its Irish profits are not actually US profits.

Also the IRS would definitely go after Amazon instead if it were politically motivated.

[1]: Can't find absolute numbers but US users have 10x revenue per user: https://www.statista.com/statistics/251328/facebooks-average...

He will definitely save a bit of money on taxes. I suspect his marginal tax rate is ~24% (20% Cap Gains + 4% Medicare). So this donation will lower his net worth by ~7.6B.

In any case, this is a giant amount of money by philanthropic standards. I doubt more than 4-5 people have ever given as much for all of the things they support.

A collapse in wages seems unreasonable. Wages are almost always sticky and so wages will go down at most at the rate of inflation.

Also this line:

> Compensation appears to be proportional to the level of sacrifice

Is a doozy and not at all how modern economies work.

I do agree with the general sentiment though. The mechanisms controlling supply and demand of SDEs are not well understood and it is much easier to imagine a shock to SDE supply/demand than doctor supply/demand or lawyer supply/demand. That being said, this would result in a reduction of employment rather than a reduction of wages for those lucky enough to continue being employed.

I agree with the general sentiment. It is staggering that they have spent at least 10s of billions if not > 100b trying to diversify away from ads and still do not have meaningful alternative revenue stream. It is one of the biggest mysteries to me. How is it possible to throw so much money and so many smart people at so many different problems and have no results? Microsoft and Amazon don't seem to have this problem but Facebook seems to suffer as well.

That being said, their advertising business is insanely successful. I suspect they could at least double their stock price (and thus the wealth of their investors) if they dumped their speculative bets and focus on ads. It is extremely profitable and revenue keeps growing > 20% from a large base.

As someone who worked on these models in the consumer credit industry, it is possible they there isn't any discrimination. The only thing that comes to mind is recent inquiries, which have a minimal effect on credit score but are highly predictive of default. If she applied for a few credit cards in the previous half year and DHH did not, it would explain the difference without being discriminatory.

Much more likely, in my view, is that the algorithm looking at something that is so highly correlated with being female (e.g., Homemaker as career) and default. This would almost surely fail existing regulatory tests against discrimination. Since most credit applications ask for household income, ...etc. It is doubtful their applications otherwise looked meaningfully different.

Edit: Checked the application, and you are indeed required to enter in household income and not your individual income if you share a checking account.

What do you mean the old way?

Will it print what foo is if I type logger.info("{foo=}")?

The subjects quizzed are on page 9 in [this pdf](https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/suppl/2019/03/12/181464611...) seems pretty general.

This is something I never considered. I always assumed that the main reason US software engineers are better paid is there is a (perceived? real?) benefit to being close to businesspeople / close to the customers / close to the culture / some other benefit that depends solely on geography. I did not think that the quality of education could be a significant driver. This paper opens that possibility.

The elite schools are especially striking. I would have never guessed that CS students from Stanford/MIT would be so substantially better than students from Tsingua/Bombay. These schools draw from vastly larger talent pools (1.4 billion and 1.2 billion) than US undergrad programs. According to the study, the results do not materially change when only native English speakers are considered.

It’s worth investigating if the exams are biased in some way but if this holds up to scrutiny, it will change my views on American Universities significantly.

Have we already forgotten about the ink girl who was disappeared[0] barely a month ago? All she did was say things and now she's gone. Probably forever. This is absolutely not disputable.

[0]: https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3478513