Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | blindriver's commentslogin

I don't understand why companies are abandoning DEI so quickly and so decisively. What happens if/when a Democrat president is elected that mandates DEI and ESG all over again, are they going to add them back into their core values as swiftly as they abandoned them?

At least companies like Coinbase made principled stances against forced DEI and employee activism earlier than everyone else. Doing it now seems weird because if it does become mandated again, they're going to look so phony.


It always was unprincipled: regardless of whether someone's a fan of DEI or not, these companies are short-sighted, profit-driven, and at best reactive to trends. The only reason any person thought otherwise is that they were either desperately looking for a victory or desperately looking for an enemy to be angry about.

Why is this even a question? Of course they would, they're just companies, they go chase profits and cannot have real values, don't anthropomorphise your lawnmower, yada yada yada.

>What happens if/when a Democrat president is elected that mandates DEI and ESG all over again

Mandates? There is this weird revisionist history that DEI was a Biden era invention that all these companies were forced to roll out in January 2021. These programs were simply the latest evolution of prolonged and steady cultural shifts. I remember attending events trying to promote diversity in the computer science department when I was in college 20+ years ago. Killing DEI isn't wiping out four years of progress, it's attempting to wipe out decades.


You mean decades of regression.

The obvious decline started around 2010; coincidentally also the era of the rise of SJW-ism and nontechnical derailing drama. Once the diversity quotas started appearing, the inevitable results were obvious.


Tech is arguably the way it is right now thanks to this nonsense. Diversity as practiced by the progressives is another word for "regression to the mean," which is why bootcampers were considered equivalent to computer science graduates, and vibe coders, senior software engineers. Selection for people at the tails of the distribution is discrimination, and therefore bigotry.

Programming doesn't require intelligence. Those with high IQ are not predisposed for knowledge work, nor are those with low IQ barred from it - IQ doesn't even exist, humans are all equitably fungible, and with the LLM you can identify with any career you want - no practice necessary.


Trump’s entire administration is all, 100% DEI hires, he is a DEI King (DEI by its pure definition is someone getting a job while many other people are more qualified for said job)

Is this a real question?

Until the advent of electricity, when it was nighttime, it was mostly pitch black dark, and there was nothing you can really do except go to sleep. These days you're up a lot longer and there are more distractions like work and social media to keep you up well into the night. If you ever go camping with no cell phone signal, you'll go to sleep much earlier as well and get a lot more sleep than modern living.


> Until the advent of electricity, when it was nighttime, it was mostly pitch black dark, and there was nothing you can really do except go to sleep.

Mfw torches and lanterns exist


Yes, but still... I agree that it seems likely that in preindustrial times, most people just went to bed at dark and got up at light. Depending on the season that might be 12 hours or more, so they possibly didn't actally sleep all that time, but they were probably just quietly in their homes/shelters even if they were awake.


MFW you believe torches and lanterns are as bright and ubiquitous as electric lights today.

I don't think you quite understand how expensive lighting was until the last 60 years.

One thing that wasn't mentioned is that the more APs you have, the worst off your life gets. That's because the way clients connect to a particular AP is done client-side and you have no control over it or visibility. So, no matter how you fiddle with it, your client may connect to the AP that is 40 feet away and on another floor rather than the one that is 10 feet away with a perfect line of sight. And you won't know why. This is the problem I had with my house and had to decrease the number of APs to get over better reliability and performance.

There's band steering. You absolutely do have control, if you opt to do so.

On openwrt, DAWN or usteer can both help your APs to get sounding maps from clients and to tell them which AP to join. Looking at the sounding maps is very fun data to see: highly tecommend! The settings aren't the world's greatest but they are pretty good starts! https://github.com/berlin-open-wireless-lab/DAWN https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/network/wifi/dawn

Multiple APs are really nice because you can turn down the AP power, ideally, as you add more stations. Unfortunately I don't think you can tell a client to be quieter though; someone's laptop can be at 200mW tearing the hell out of the spectrum when everyone else is nicely conversing at 10-20mW.


Band steering doesn't work great. Neither does minimum RSSI. It's completely client-dependent and it's a headache. The best solution is to always minimize the number of APs you have with as little overlap as possible because of how unpredictable client behavior is. Like I said I have a very bad problem with line of sight APs are ignored for further away APs, and no amount of fiddling is helping.

This runs contrary imo to a lot of people's experience with for example Google Mesh, which is a product that I dare say works quite well for most people & most devices.

Agreed that signals like RSSI are device dependent. And open source software like DAWN is not the best at adjusting to this automatically. But in principle, most devices will give your AP a sounding map on request, and most clients will obey instruction to move to a different AP. Even really bad devices have generally worked ok for me at this.

The counter advice if use the minimum number of APs leaves pretty large zones of bad reception, and still already accepts the problem of roaming for many people. It's my hope that open source et al get better, get more competitive with what is clearly possible, especially given that we seem so well positioned to have control that could make good decisions here. To give up, when we have so much rich data & options, does not tempt me.


My experience with DAWN wasn't great. Some of my clients don't like the extensions you need, so I had to go back to no roaming extensions and just hoping clients make good decisions and tuning ap power levels to help.

Might try it again though, I'd love for it to work. And I was also dealing with some baseline wifi instability that I think firmware updates has resolved.


If a device can still hear a farther away AP at say -62 dBm it’s not going to start searching. Searching has a cost in lower speeds and higher latency due time spent tuning to other channels. It’s only done if the current signal weakens. Decrease AP transmit power until each room only has one AP signal at -67dBm or louder. https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/wi-fi-roaming-sup... Intel Wi-Fi cards have a roaming aggressiveness setting.

From what I hear, Macs are stickier and Windows clients more promiscuous. So a Mac will stick with an AP further out when you have one near, on the other hand a Windows client can go back and forth between APs -which can sometimes be a problem too.

I've been playing this game since the mid 1980s since it was called Hack. I've only ascended twice, the last time being last year, and it required a heavy amount of cheating/saving.

I guess the rest of this weekend is already accounted for.


So, if I'm reading this properly the honor killings predicated by Muslims is the fault of white people?


The rest of the argument is also quite weird. Christianity, as practiced in medieval–early modern Europe, also had diverged quite far from what was in the NT, so does it automatically absolve it from all the unpleasant stuff done in its name? If anything, it's kinda the opposite, right?


Same thing with engagement rings, it's just a stupid fake tradition created by DeBoers in the 1950s that costs an inordinate amount of money for nothing.

I really hope that lab grown diamonds puts that entire industry out of business.


Lab corundum is where it's at. Almost as hard as diamond (Mohs 9), but much less prone to cracking than diamond. It's available in tons of colors (most famous are blue and red -- sapphires and rubies). Lab-grown is so much better than natural that the way they identify natural is by looking for imperfections that lab versions don't have.

Oh, and diamonds burn while aluminum oxide does not.

There's no need to go broke when you can buy a superior product for less money.


I definitely think sapphire is the best gemstone for rings given the huge variety of colors and reasonable synthetic rough prices. My only gripe is that green shades that look nice are hard to find in synthetics.


Don't tell this to Trayvon Martin, who was gunned down by a neighborhood watch zealot, because he looked "suspicious" because he was wearing a hoodie.


I need you to reread my comment, and then paraphrase what you think I said, for me. Cause I don't get how this is someone's response to my comment in a million years unless it's like intentional rage bait, or something.


Anyone who has access to Satoshi's account is worth $100B. If Satoshi were still alive some of the BTC would have been moved at least a little but they haven't.

Whoever Satoshi was is now dead.


There was no guarantee that Bitcoin would take off. It may be tough to imagine looking back in retrospect but, in another world, Bitcoin could have turned out to have been another digital currency with limited value. Many people lost their keys in the early days when Bitcoin was worthless. It's not unreasonable to think the same wouldn't have happened to Satoshi. He may have also thrown them away on purpose.


It's okay. I'm pretty sure after 40+ years of using Microsoft products I'm going to switch fully to Linux and MacOS. I'm tired of fighting against Microsoft even though I am a long time (and mostly happy) user of Windows. But whatever is going on in the last few years, especially Recall, has made it dangerous in my opinion to keeping Windows. So as they become and more draconian it only makes my decision easier and easier. I've had Macs and Macbooks for a while now but I bought the latest Macbook Pro and I'm very very happy with it, despite Glass (I barely notice any differences from the previous version).


What is the calculation? And how can you calculate it 10 decimal points?


There's a little explained if you hit the (?) at the bottom. They are taking the monthly inflation value and calculate it per tick.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: