hnaccount141

Typically overtime pay requires approval from management

> In other words, the relationship with hundreds of countries has been very one-sided for a long time. US industry needs to export to thrive, but if countries like Turkey impose 140% tariffs on our autos and trucks, markets are de-facto shut down.

These comparisons (and conclusions of one-sidedness) always leave the greatest benefit the US has enjoyed: access to a massive labor force willing to do work most Americans aren't[1] at wages lower than are Legal in the US.

[1] https://www.cato.org/blog/americans-think-manufacturing-empl...

Context matters. In a vacuum, the 85% rule is fine. In reality, it excludes a single company whose CEO not only holds a position in the administration making the rules, but who clearly holds enough influence that the president himself shot a Tesla ad in front of the white house.

Given such visible conflicts of interest, the administration should be bending over backwards to dispel perceptions of impropriety. The fact that they aren't, and that these coincidences keep occurring, should be telling.

They give you a unique URL associated with your account that you can use without manually logging in. It does somewhat defeat the purpose of private browsing mode depending on what you're using it for though.

The myth of the rags-to-riches, by-their-bootstraps entrepreneur is foundational to so much political philosophy in the US. It informs popular opinion on a wide range of public policy. Building a more accurate understanding of the nature of wealth and class mobility allows individuals to make more informed decisions both in their personal lives and at the ballot box.

That's the whole point. Permabanning on the first offense ignores the reality that these large-scale moderation systems (automated or human) tend to lack nuance and context-awareness, leading to false positives. A system of escalating warnings adds slack to protect good-faith users from those sorts of moderation failures.

There’s a difference between production and rent-seeking.

> People got up, admitted they were Progressives and that they were wrong about the ideals of rehabilitation instead of punishment.

People asked for rehabilitation instead of punishment. All politicians did was stop punishing (some) property crimes and call it progress. No meaningful attempt at building a rehabilitative system was ever made.

Perhaps Castle Bravo would be a closer comparison? I think the point stands.

That's not what GP is saying. The (potentially) copyright infringing part is the reproduction of copyrighted material, not the encoding itself. In the same way that learning the lyrics to a song isn't copyright infringement, but performing that song live without permission would be.

When you press the BT button in control center it shows a message saying "Disconnecting Bluetooth Devices Until Tomorrow"

The fun thing about markets is that there's one for labor too, and apparently the labor market has decided otherwise.

> The concept of "bullshit jobs" is so hilarious. Honestly it like someone watched "Office Space" and thought it was straight up revolutionary philosophy.

> Then decided to stake a huge chunk of their academic career on it.

> I assume the creators of said concept regard their jobs as of the utmost importance and regard.

The claim made by Bullshit Jobs isn't that N% of jobs are objectively useless in the grand scheme of things, it's that N% of people feel that their jobs are useless. Its n analysis of the alienation of workers from their work.

There are decades of well defined laws (and case law) regulating discrimination in hiring, housing, commerce, etc. Why should software be treated any differently?

The data itself is plaintext, but it's stored in a sqlite db rather than directories of markdown files on disk.

> because the name is constructed to make it look like being male is what's bad

I'm open to this argument because it's clear that many people take it this way, but how else would you state it? Everywhere else in English, an adjective limits the scope of the noun it's attached to. "Toxic chemicals" doesn't imply that chemicals are inherently toxic, "red car" doesn't imply that cars are inherently red. "Toxic" is probably needlessly sensational though, I'll grant that.

> bad traits like being violent or domineering can be called out without having to pointlessly gender the terms.

I agree with this. To clarify I think part of the frustration/misunderstanding with the term comes from it being applied at the wrong level. It's a descriptor of a social/cultural phenomenon, not a trait of an individual. If a man is being violent, it may or may not have anything to do with toxic masculinity, and invoking toxic masculinity to describe his actions would be inappropriate and needlessly gendered.

It really only makes sense to start talking about toxic masculinity when asking higher level sociological questions like, for example, why men are so over-represented in violent crime stats. It's a term to use when exploring causes, not effects, if that makes any sense.

It's like the difference in terminology between an ER nurse and an epidemiologist. The nurse might just say "flu", because at the level they operate that's the issue at hand. For them to speculate about the origins of the specific strain would be inappropriate. For the epidemiologist, however, these questions are exactly the point, because understanding the details of how an outbreak spreads can help us be more prepared in the future.

> Who's to say that men are incapable of dealing with their emotions through sombre silence?

The argument generally being made isn't that teaching boys stoicism is wrong. The argument is that it's wrong to teach boys that somber silence is the only acceptable way of dealing with their problems, and that anything else is a sign of weakness (for which they'll face social consequences).

I'd also separately argue that the way we go about teaching this has a tendency to lead to a behavior that more closely resembles avoidance than stoicism.

The term "toxic masculinity" doesn't imply that masculinity is inherently toxic any more than the term "burnt toast" implies that toast is inherently burnt. Toxic masculinity refers specifically to expressing and enforcing masculinity in a way that's harmful (to men as well as women).

Teaching boys to epxress masculinity through strength, assertiveness, self-reliance, etc. is totally healthy in moderation. Teaching boys to be violent or domineering isn't, nor is teaching them that showing emotion or asking for help is weakness.

More like saying that an oil worker is different from some guy quoting There Will Be Blood. The problem is that the difference in credibility between the two isn't easily accounted for once their posts are vacuumed up into a giant dataset.

Advising against blind trust in non-experts' statements doesn't imply a recommendation to blindly trust experts' statements.

> Soooo, which is it? You can't have it both ways, either trial and error or "educated guess".

Sure you can -- trial and error doesn't mean the things you're trying have to be picked out of a hat at random. You can choose a starting point based on existing research and iterate from there based on the results experienced by the patient.

This has been my experience working on a distributed team as well. I think my ideal setup involves getting the team together in person once or twice annually for a few days where the focus is brainstorming/collaborating.

> Well, I'm glad someone is because everyone else seems to be worse off as a result

Fortunately mass incarceration and just doing nothing aren't the only two options.

> - The folks at the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, which commissioned the survey, depend on those numbers being high in order to justify their budgets and salaries.

I'm not sure I understand this argument. If, say, it came out that 100% of the local homeless population became homeless elsewhere and were bussed to California, how would that reduce the demand for a department tasked with addressing the problem of homelessness?

Torrent trackers don’t host the content either.

I spend a lot of time experimenting with atypical tunings that wouldn't be captured in a dropdown, and I could see this being really a useful tool for learning my way around tunings where there isn't much existing repertoire to pull from. It's a super niche usecase though, you'd probably cover 99% of players needs with just Standard, drop d, DADGAD, open C and maybe open D.

The question isn't whether or not the USD can fail. Of course it can. The question to ask is whether Monero or any other given cryptocurrency will fare better than the USD in the event that it does collapse. That seems much less clear at this point in time.

"John is no longer with us" is a completely reasonable thing to say, unless it's coming from the person who shot John.

I'm honestly more surprised that any social media apps were ever allowed on government devices.

> The bank doesn't exist anymore and its shareholders got nothing. The customers' reward is they can make payroll. What bailout?

Depositors knowingly took a risk by keeping more than $250K in an individual bank account. Rather than allow depositors to face the consequences of that decision, the government will now be making an exception to their own rule and covering depositors' losses. That's a bailout.

If a company would have been unable to make payroll because of this, it would have been a direct result of their failure to adequately assess and mitigate risk.