> The purpose of flagging is to indicate that a story does not belong on HN. Frivolous flagging—e.g. flagging a story that's clearly on-topic by the site guidelines just because one personally dislikes it—eventually gets an account's flagging privileges taken away. But there's a new 'hide' link for people to click if they'd just like not to see a story.
This story seems to very much belong on HN. Just because the statement is opinionated and some users don't like it, it doesn't mean that we can't debate about its merits.
Sorry but that's not how it has been over the last 5-10 years in most parts of academia.
I've been explicitly told "WE WILL HIRE A XYZ BECAUSE THAT WILL IMPROVE OUR US NEWS RANKING, AND ONLY THAT. BUT DON'T SAY IT OUT LOUD B/C IT'S NOT VERY LEGAL."
Beyond that, when I'm mentoring pre-phds that are preparing their applications, something I need to very carefully explain if they are white males (I'm a minority but I'm a male, fyi) is that they will have to do much better on the exams and predoc research than most of their peers in order to have the same success.
Now, everyone does their DEI incantations. Everyone puts their pronouns in their emails, their pronunciation link at the end of their signature (so they don't get mispronounced), and we participate in many alliship programs in coordination with our DEI leaders. But I doubt people really believe any of this, instead of mostly being in fear of getting fired or at the very least reprimanded. My ex-soviet colleagues joke that this is even worse than in the Soviet era, because back then you could at least joke in private about the speech being BS, but nowadays anyone would snitch on you.
It's a bit more nuanced. Before, a lot of people on a one-to-one told me how BS most of DEI is. But now, folks feel a bit more free to speak; complain against DEI even in public places or in front of others.
It feels like Soviet Union in the 60s vs in '89 where you knew the wall was falling sooner rather than later.
For me the problem is not just that searching on Google is bad, but that sometimes it COMPLETELY hides exactly what I'm looking, for no good reason.
For instance, I wrote an R ggplot2 package called "fedplot" (following the convention of calling the package for the figure style it replicates, as in "bbplot" for BBC-style charts).
Try searching for it on Google: "github" "fedplot" doesn't get you anywhere. Meanwhile, every other search engine gives you exactly what you want if you just type "fedplot". I even tried to add the relevant websites through google's suggested tools, and nothing happened :|
I don't know what customization or personalization is going on in your search compared to mine, but I followed GPs directions and posted my results. Searching today (this time not in Incognito and with extensions turned on in Firefox), I see the correct result as number 1 on google.com, so one better than last time.
I'm on the same boat. My neato is already a bit old (needs new battery and I had to replace a broken belt) but I've been procastinating in finding a replacement as there's just so many options, most of which suck.
In that imgur plot see it ending in 2022, and crime has barely bulged after exploding in 2020-21, where there was the largest increase in the entire time series.
We are basically back to 1995 homicide levels which is insane
> after exploding in 2020-21, where there was the largest increase in the entire time series.
The IMGUR link includes the text:
Due to the full transition to NIRBS and the lack of data for agencies that are not fully transitioned, the 2021 data year cannot be added to the 5-, 10- or 20- year trend presentations that are based in traditional methodologies used
That's a giant flashing warning sign to data nerds everywhere that some change in the gathering | reporting of data took place exactly right when things "exploded".
The question remains, did crime (actual homicide numbers) really explode or did national reporting of homicide numbers suddenly improve | include backlogs | etc?
> We are basically back to 1995 homicide levels ..
These are absolute numbers .. and the US population has grown in 25 years, given the change in national reporting the per capita homicides rates may be more stable than the graph indicates.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12173836
This story seems to very much belong on HN. Just because the statement is opinionated and some users don't like it, it doesn't mean that we can't debate about its merits.