joebob42

I think in this instance "democrat" is being used to mean "supporter of democracy".

I don't think you aren't an American if you aren't a supporter of democracy, per se, but I do think the principle is a fairly core tenet of what it is, or at least is supposed to be, to be "American". I would be unsurprised if other people said you were un-American for feeling this way.

So the company I'm at does an excellent job on this, in my view.

But!

Other than being well tested and understandable, code quality is defined as being aligned with whatever our internal standards happen to be and being well suited to purpose. If you showed up with a big refactoring cl, you'd have to be pretty darn convincing that this was enough better than what we had before to justify the change costs.

Code quality is definitely important, but I think there is sometimes a tendency to treat it as holy and not subject to pragmatism. A given amount of code quality is only worth it if it's worth it, and that can be subjective and situation dependent.

I guess I would not see the ads, since I would refuse the qr code option. I don't bring my phone into a restaurant.

In general I don't think I'd find a digital menu with ads all that much more objectionable than one without, I'm pretty desensitized to digital ads at this point.

I guess I'd say "I" wouldn't exist if I was a bug.

I'm lucky that I exist at all, but on the other hand if I didn't exist I probably wouldn't know or care.

I guess without more information on what exactly not existing looks like in practice it's hard to say, though. I imagine some religious groups have a more precise answer they'd offer in terms of what not existing means.

For what it's worth, I always knock a star or two off my review for a restaurant if they won't give me a paper menu. It's fine if they lead with the qr code but I want to at least be able to ask for a physical one.

This thread might get shut down for being political, but id be interested to hear hns opinions on the topic. I have no idea what to think and am not really sure I can trust e.g. CNN to give me a nuanced view.

Edit to more directly prod discussion: do you think this will actually happen? On what scale? And if it does, what might the impact be? Will I actually care a few years from now?

Go for it imo. The set of people who are successful hiring managers and the set of people who look at a resume and throw it out because they have a moral problem with a former employer probably isn't literally disjoint, but I'd bet it's pretty close.

From everything I've heard talking to fb'ers it's still a fun place to work, comp is good, and there are interesting problems to solve.

It's a little facetious, but it did put a smile on my face. It has a certain ring of truishness

On a certain level I might agree.

On the other hand, I think it's a reasonable point that if we disagree with him, go find the parameter he's chosen wrongly or forgotten, since it must exist somewhere if he's wrong.

On the third hand, that's probably unfairly much to ask of your audience, since it requires auditing work that took a year.

Well, except that the cost affects how much people are willing to pay, because if people are not willing to pay more then the cost then there won't be enough supply -> it will cost more -> people will either pay more or go without.

I guess in the perfect magical world where the algorithm detected "suitability for humans for the given query" then if gpt-3 spat out a bunch of stuff and it ranked highly, it would mean this wasn't really spam, because it was useful to humans, even if it was generated in a spammy way.

I guess if you thought that all a computer could do was remind people of facts then it would make sense to be skeptical, but I'm not sure how you've concluded that.

At a minimum, a computer can play many games better than a human, automatically sort vast troves of information and serve results from queries, kind-of-drive a car, detect images which contain cancer, etc.

Aside from other points, more neurons might be better "all else equal", but there are differences between our brain and an elephant's beyond just neuron count.

It's like how just getting a bigger faster computer can help with your problem, but its less powerful than a new more efficient algorithm on the same computer.

I don't like that it doesn't understand that the equation doesn't change if I move stuff.

I had x+y+x=z and it won't accept y+x+x or x+x+y

It's true, although the fact that musk personally said it is still relevant in the sense that he is for whatever reason a major mouthpiece in the crypto space that some people seem to respect.

They need to figure out their shit with regards to randomly cancelling every other flight and refusing to compensate me first.

Yeah, I'm not certain of the year but yeah.

Edit: no, she was 88.

From brown? Afaiu that was the main program.

Hey, my mother was in almost exactly the same situation and has been talking to people about it. They should get in touch, although I'm not sure how to do that.

Remote learning may not be perfect, but to the extent we truly need to "end all snow days", it seems like it should be sufficient, no?

It's gem after gem after gem, this is brilliant

And 40% code coverage lol

Right, but it doesn't seem like a very good estimate and their whole argument hinges on it.

Someone did a TI something and it seemed to basically work fine as far as I remember.

I still don't think they deserve the 30%, but it's interesting that there doesn't seem to be any concern in that direction mentioned here. They mention in passing that the 30% may be a concern for partners but they seem basically unfased by it and don't mentioned that it might not be reasonable.

Just a note: I agree that spending millions fighting unions is strong evidence unions are bad for the company. It's not necessarily obvious this means unions are good for the employees.

Meh, I don't think I agree that they don't taste just as good (at least some of them). Really feels like it's just marketing.

Would be curious to here a law-person speculate even if it's just a guess.

I think it's still open source, it's just not free right?

I agree, and I think this mistake is at the root of most of what are (at least to my biased point of view) the big mistakes made by go. Syntactical niceties and simplicity / obviousness are sometimes a tradeoff, but go 1.0 felt like the designers just folded their arms and refused to consider any niceness. I still don't understand why anyone would use go when there are so many better choices, but at least they're fixing some stuff now :)

Imo part of the joy of hn is that this isn't actually true. Obviously not everyone knows what they are talking about, but some of the people who really do have serious knowledge on any given topic are on hn, and the average person here is at least slightly less likely to think they have knowledge when in fact they don't.