proveanegative

I meant Erlang/OTP.

This looks nice enough as it is but what I think Go needs now is a more direct OTP clone suitable for new projects. If GoWork grew into that it could very well eat into Erlang's market share. Many people want their distributed systems language statically typed and fast. With Erlang you have the prospect of having to rewrite parts of your applications in C for speed looming menacingly on the horizon at all times. (Edit: I rewrote the last sentence to be more clear.)

A disclaimer may be appropriate here: I am aware of the limitations preventing one from reimplementing the entire OTP in Go. I still think that what you could get would be "close enough" with a few code guidelines (or a purpose-built static analyzer).

This is one example I had in mind when I made this thread; the issue that the grandparent mentions is another. I have seen a similar scenario play out with a few smaller projects' repositories but I am reluctant to mention them.

There is also good-natured but meaningless noise like https://github.com/gogits/gogs/issues/5. I believe this kind of support, while flattering at first, ultimately puts undue pressure on the volunteer contributor. On the plus side, the comments come from people using the project.

Perhaps GitHub was wrong to get rid of the upvote button on issues unconditionally. Having the option to enable it would probably have helped the Gogs case.

Clickable links:

http://nonwhiteheterosexualmalelicense.org/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9862362

Indeed. Sarcasm is still as hard as ever to detect in the web.

If it didn't what would the meaning of citizenship be?

I agree with the general sentiment of your blog post but one claim caught my attention as not justified when it should be:

>Just as people’s salary is not an acceptable topic of conversation amongst colleagues I think negative opinions about clients should be similarly off limit for casual conversations.

The badmouthing of the client can get out of hand and become detrimental to your relationship with them. I have seen this happen. That employees shouldn't discuss their salaries is a piece of accepted wisdom but does experience support it? Personally, I can't say it does, but then again, it is such a rare freak occurrence you can hardly discern any trends. I suppose that under the conditions of a strong general taboo on it people talking about how much they make may already signal trouble; does it, however, create trouble where the taboo is weaker (e.g., in Europe)?

I am not urging to abandon the taboo on discussing your salary simply because I can't find a good reason for it but I would like to understand how it came about and whether the conditions that created it still apply.

WitchHammer.io

When you are in the mood for righteous indignation head over to WitchHammer to find people popular on social networks who have said things you wouldn't like. Filter the potential witches ("whiches" in the local lingo) by their popularity (the number of friends, followers or subscribers they have), the known witch friends they have, the ideologies they have defied, their state and employer. Vote on a witch to initiate a hunt. See the trending hunts. Earn karma by hunting witches with a connected social network account (a point for every message directed at the witch and for each upvote your message gets on WitchHammer). Became the top hunter of the week to have your profile featured!

Monetization strategy: sponsored hunts.

That is not old fashioned at all. What systems to get people to work do not rely on coercion? Even nature, which got us to work on the first place, did so by coercion.

The only way we can make a society more accommodating is to change the type of coercion to a more gentle one. I.e., instead of working to avoid starvation and being eaten by wild animals people now work to avoid going into debt, losing their preferred place to live and having to rely on food stamps (at least in the US). In a society with basic income they would be coerced to work though social pressure and the desire to have nice things. (Edit: The latter may seem like an intrinsic motivation but in a society with advertising it is one that is actively generated. Advertising may actually gain a new, vital role in getting people to work if a basic income program is implemented.)

If you are looking for a place to start try What if there's no such thing as chaotic good? (http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/05/what-if...). It is a short and fairly standalone post that well shows Moldbug's most major line of thought and writing style.

I would love to hear answers to the same question from operations and reliability engineering people.

If you have worked in both development and operations positions would you say that operations is harder to stay in?

Your jab against monarchy is unwarranted. A hereditary monarch who is recognized as legitimate has better incentives than a garden variety military dictator.

yetanotheracc's comment does not say whether his or her employers behaved like children. If they did you'd expect it to be mentioned.

This way to leave is expensive to the employer in terms of the time lost before they realize you will not communicate again and a replacement must be found. Why did you choose to not communicate with them that you quit beforehand? I am genuinely curious because I have witnessed people quitting by suddenly ceasing all communication before and I completely fail to understand it. Note that this is not mutually exclusive with blacklisting their email address and changing your phone number.

This does answer my question in a very satisfactory way.

Since you mention Ferguson, the theory I currently hold is that tensions between the police and the policed are, in practice, inevitable if the two differ in race, ethnicity, language or religion. Through their sheer visibility these differences have more weight than any difference that otherwise exists between the government and those it governs. The only plausible way to resolve this tension that I see is by ensuring the police force of a community is recruited from that community and represents its ethnic and cultural makeup.

Quite so. Although I was already familiar with some of the material you link to I think I understand your position better now.

One thing that is still unclear to me is how the government should work from stories. If you mean a write-your-congressperson kind of approach I am very sympathetic to that. However, nearly all other means of aggregating stories I think are prone to distortion by the middleman is involved (not necessarily deliberate).

>those of us who are for historical reasons unfairly advantaged should work especially hard at listening to people who aren't

I see. Thanks for the explanation.

If you don't mind I have a follow-up question -- actually two related ones. The approach you are suggesting is essentially about ethics and epistemology at an individual level. What I wonder is, how, if at all, should it extrapolate to government action? I.e., to what degree should government decisions about aiding people who are at a disadvantage be informed by listening to them versus dispassionate observation and statistics?

I ask because "listening" is inherently hard to "scale" to a national level in a large nation. In a Western liberal democracy the usual answer on how to do this seems to be "voting." In practice besides voting the supposed public voice of any disadvantaged group is also shaped by self-appointed spokesmen for the disadvantaged, typically journalists and academics. Personally, I have little faith in either doing more good than harm.

My second question is, how should it be determined who is considered advantaged and who is considered disadvantaged?

Would it be fair to summarize your position as "facts about the lives of people who are substantially different from us are difficult to obtain; therefore, we should defer to their personal experiences"? If not, could you correct this summary?

With the principle of charity in mind I'd interpret Red_Tarsius's comment as saying "$182,000 don't make for a life changing hustle under B's circumstances", not "$182,000 don't make for a life changing hustle for anyone".

Surely some internal Google projects were developed alongside Go in the language.

I think your comment is symptomatic of the general disregard for genetics and its impact on the individual life that we have today.

Obesity appears to be highly heritable. For this reason a careful balance must be struck between encouraging people to control their weight and not blaming them for have been dealt worse cards than their naturally slim neighbors (until we have a cure).

I am looking forward to commercially successful apps on Firefox OS.

Three months ago I asked HN if anyone had one but got not answers (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8798922).

You are right. I take back my comment.

[retracted due to a misleading argument from analogy]

Whether a basic income or even a basic job program is plausible under the current conditions in the US is very debatable (you can find yummyfajitas' criticism here on HN).

What I had in mind with my final remark is more about the future, i.e., "how to handle things when the machines take over".

I think the popular conceptualization of economic inequality (effectively, "inequality is suffering") is misleading because it doesn't take marginal utility into account.

What I mean is, take the pizza-dividing example and suppose we have doubled the pizza. The inequality (expressed as the ratio of pizza owned to the available total) would stay the same but those with the smallest part of the divide would be noticeably less hungry than before.

In a world of plenty inequality would not mean suffering. More realistically, inequality would not mean (nearly as much) suffering in a world where a minimum slice of pizza was the birthright of a citizen.

Edit: This line of thinking is seriously flawed when applied to the real world. See drabiega's comment for why. metaphorm mentions some examples of where competitive costs may apply.

Have you tried contacting Dev Bootcamp for comment?

Did you stop using Python and Perl for performance reasons?

>At the moment, F1 has little diversity and lots of restricting regulations.

What would Formula 1 look like today with no restrictions beyond basic driver safety?

Yes, working professionals are the core audience. Some of the topics that are discussed there like resumes and interviewing can be useful for students looking to be hired but not so much for those wondering what to major in.

For students there is also http://academia.stackexchange.com/ that deals with the immediate problems they face.