skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Agree. If you compare to for example lawyers and doctors there is a highly structured, consistent (even consistent across different countries and cultures) route to achieving "made man" status (apologies for using a sexually biased term, but I couldn't think of a better one). This consistent structure, beyond university, is what's missing. This of course is hardly surprising in a field that is roughly 100X less mature.
Funny that you mention those three countries in one breath like that.
Science journals are really hard to consume for the general public

A lot of things are difficult to consume for the general public. Every day people "agree" to terms of service that they don't understand. We hire lawyers to interpret the law for us. Doctors interpret the medical knowledge for us and make decisions for us that have serious consequences for our health. And so on. It's a mystery to me why people think that science should be different. It's a complex subject matter and most people will never be able to understand result from Riemannian geometry, systems neuroscience, computational climate research, etc. Requiring that the general public can consume the results of science will produce a dumbed-down Mickey Mouse version of science. What a waste.
A : "we're delivering features"

B : Would you rather deliver features or make sure the platform that you're working on stays running ?

For the product/project itself, setup a continuous delivery pipeline. Allow (if possible) one pull request at a time. Let integration/load/benchmark tests prove that its not breaking anything. If the tests are broken, whoever breaks them gets to fix them. They're not in the team anymore? no problem. Whoever needs to push a change, need to make sure the pipeline is working.

Growing team needs direction. Set up tenants / guidelines / vision. Assign product owners that are responsible to customers/stakeholders.

Also, figure out why nobody cares. Is it lack of knowledge / best practices? Is it lack of interest? Is it not-my-job phenomenon ?
Do you know how long it takes to outsource workers? You might as well just train new one's in house. Most of the time these companies just want cheaper employees.
Heartharena.com Meltdown: Programmer/Owner vs. Algorithm Tuners
Negotiations between heartharena.com's owner and the two Hearthstone Arena experts he hired as contractors to tune the site's algorithm have broken down, and the contractors are leaving with nothing. This is very contentious because the algorithmists wanted equity (their original contract gave them 20% of profits), but the programmer refused, and now there's a flame war on reddit about basically the "worth" of programmers vs non-programmers and their work.

Algorithmist's post: https://np.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/3sj3a7/a_farewell_to_heartharena/

Programmer's reply: https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/3sjizj/in_response_to_the_farewell_post/
And yet I had gotten downvoted when I said that eventually there will be no privacy at all in cities, because it is too much of a problem. What can go wrong, will go wrong. You just have to wait for the first incident.
How can you call fighting to save their own damn asses only after they were attacked by Germany coming to Poland's aid?
implicit parameters of generic traits (aka the typeclass pattern) have everything to do with how Scala's generics can be used in more powerful ways than C#'s. And they are 100% tied to Scala's generics. Generic types in Scala can be used in implicit search kick off inductive generation of type-safe code.

If you literally just mean generics at runtime, they are no different than Java's, outside of support for specialization for primitive types.

> Perhaps the OP was referring to the type system instead?

Generics and the type system are pretty much the same thing? They only matter and have true power at compile time regardless of your language. So the fact that Scala's generics have absurd power at compile-time (way more than anything in C#) is 100% relevant.
I know how you feel man and I wish I could help you. Been talking with a former colleague of mine who blows most devs out of the water to apply to some jobs where he would be an amazing technical fit but it's hard to convince him to take the "humiliation".

I'm sorta the same..
Of course it is a lie.

There's a shortage of talent willing to work 80 hours a week and get paid for 20. There's a shortage of talent with 5 years of experience in technology that is 3 years old. There's a shortage of talent willing to jump through an absurd number of hoops in order to work for you.
This is an anti-pattern IMO and requires an import to opt-in (by the author, not the caller IIRC). Instead you'd use an implicit value class which should be zero overhead.

But that's just about the definition, not what it's doing which is no good. Anyone can abuse a lot of these features, which depending upon who you'd ask, is better flexibility than not having them at all.
I don't contest your math, but I think this suggests the experienced employee is under-priced.
But if a program keeps running with an invalid security certificate, what is the point of having the certificate at all? If the practice is 'let the program with an invalid cert run silently for 2 days', then you aren't gaining any security at all. Malware could do everything it needs in 48 hours.
If there were a talent shortage, the surest sign would be an increase in average wages after adjusting for inflation over the past 10 or 20 years. That would mean salaries would be significantly more than 23% higher than 2005 or 57% higher than in 1995 for approximately the same skill level.

That's not the case so I don't think there's a real shortage.
Security is of paramount importance however never at the cost of digitization.

Imagine two scenarios

1. Patient diagnosis delayed or incorrect, if doctors cannot view the blood reports for next 21 days or doctor makes mistake since he cannot process data like a computer would.

2. The icu system got hacked on which someone's life depended.

I don't think you could choose one over the other.

A lot of the time, we trade off between convenience and security. However that is a prudent and deliberate choice.

What I see more and more happening is a reckless and inadvertent choice.

Martin Fowler presented this in his technical debt quadrant.
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TechnicalDebtQuadrant.html
I'm sorry, but what you're replying with is kind of the standard libertarian fantasy.

Shrink the reach of the federal government, and we'd be looking at rule by corporations, i.e. that don't answer to us not only in practice, but by design. How we know this? Weeelll, just look back a hundred years, when we had a significantly smaller federal government. Big businesses had far, far more power than they do now.

Libertarianism surely sounds good. That's part of its enduring appeal. But for real-life workings? Nah.

For anyone interested, this is a pretty good place to start unraveling the usual libertarian fare: http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html
Mozilla is hiring for the Rust team
Another southeasterner!

I just watched a tug come around an island in the app, then saw it out my window irl. Very cool!

I work with a lot of fishing vessels in the Gulf and Bering Sea; it is very cool to see a picture of the boat and get an idea of where they are hanging out.
Public subsidized? Government spending on schools is enough; maybe too much.

Tech can afford to train their workers, regardless.
Gambling (Prediction Markets) Can Save Science
So that specific company either doesn't hire, or hires for less compensation, if they can find it.

But that doesn't mean that there's a shortage of workers. It means that that company isn't paying the market rate and thus will pull the good old H1B trick.
Essentially it's a more integrated earned-income tax credit, where the government pays for X% of the employee's wages. All sorts of businesses could take advantage of this, from scaling startups who can't afford to be wrong about their hires as they grow rapidly, to restaurants that experience high turnover among line chefs and have to train new cooks from scratch.
This was one of my favorite lab assignments when I was at university. If I recall correctly this lab was run back to back with another really fun one out of the same book. The other had to do with modifying code to take advantage of some compiler optimizations. Loop unrolling, array layout, stuff like that.

allow me to brag a bit: I was the only one in my class to not set off the bomb!
Oh, for a second there I thought Assembly was shutting down: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_(demo_party)

This is some unicorn that just imploded.
Good ol' 100 Gbit transceivers. The ones I've used are JNP-QSFP-100G-SR4.

Takes a pair of fibers... and now you have some very high data rate switching ;-)
SBC mixes i.MX6 with FPGA for IoT and basestation duty
Do you really want to join a company after only 3 hours of conversations? Which company you join will have a huge impact on your future. You should do your due diligence as much as the hiring company does. Do I really want to spend the next few years of my life working alongside those people?

When we were a small startup (10-20 people), we'd take candidates who we are making offers to for dinner. It's not quite an interview. It's not quite social. But it gives both sides a little bit extra information.
Full-pass Scala compilation is slow, true. It takes my codebases at work a couple of minutes to compile currently. But

1) sbt incremental compilation is basically immediate. This facilitates tight feedback loops for running tests and using the repl

2) Scala's type system does so much more than fast-compiling languages (Go, Java, etc) that it's definitely worth it. What you lose in compile-time, you gain in speed to a correct and sound solution.
I completely agree with the title of this post, and agree with most of the points, but this problem is a lot bigger than breaking down cliques and social barriers, and developing mechanisms to get people experience.

The problem is that a bad hire is too expensive. What we need is a way to make it less expensive so hiring managers can take more risks.

I get a hundred emails a week from tech companies and head hunters who found some of my skills in a query in some database. I've sent resumes, had phone interviews, and taken technical tests.

But maybe 1 in 10,000 recruiter emails leads to a situation in which I feel a potential employer understands how "talented" I am.

Everything from skillset databases to bad recruiters, to arcane, useless technical interview questions makes me think we're doing this all wrong.

How many good jobs have good workers missed out on because everyone is so afraid of hiring the wrong person?
>Barriers To Entry

There's another group facing barriers to entry in the tech world: those without CS degrees. There are plenty of people without a CS degree who are talented, have natural aptitude, work hard, and can certainly program who get blasted during technical interviews trying to do the "CS fundamentals" dance. I have a ECE degree (with a focus in software), and while I looked for jobs it was and still is tough. And I don't mean OOP concepts or datastrucures. I mean trivia - whiteboard questions where the "correct" answer is Monte Carlo, or how to manipulate the call stack in C. 99% of entry-level jobs don't even get close to the depth of these concepts. I never learned them in school. I learned them on my own time, but only after flopping hard.

I know that knowledge of deeper concepts are important to becoming a well-rounded developer, but they're far from the skills needed to succeed in day-to-day development work. You can be an excellent developer and not know what P=NP even means. It's irrelevant.
Microcomplaints
Lots of companies do that, fwiw...though I agree that many companies may benefit from doing it more instead of blindly following the "big tech" whiteboard style.

Here's the thing about the whiteboard coding interviews:

A) There's a huge false negative rate. I.E. a lot of good engineers get turned down because of a bad whiteboard exercise.

B) The "big tech" companies know this and do not care. They have people who want to work there lined up out the door. The whiteboard interview is setup to minimize false positives.

C) The above argument can possibly be made in favor of the pair programming/"do what you'll actually be doing" type of interview and with even less false negatives, but frankly those interviews are harder and more time consuming on the interviewer(s). Additionally, the whiteboard panel gives 5-6 people time to meet and speak with the candidate instead of 1-2 which helps to mitigate the effects of any personal biases that might be present.

Tl;Dr - the whiteboard interviews actually work well when you have a giant pool of potentials and only optimize for minimizing false positives.
I am now left to wonder if IBM Watson will soon follow suit. IBM is really a very well constructed consultancy company.. I wonder if they plan to keep their IP for Machine Learning proprietary or if they see an opportunity to get more people using their technology (it has the better marketing name right now) and sell their services to a larger audience. Time will tell, but it is a very interesting time indeed.
> Also, this is Finland a small, rich and homogenous country. Whether their model can be adapted [Japan] is to be seen.

Isn't Japan also a homogenous, small, rich country? Seems like an excellent place to try this, to me.

The only explanation I can think of is that you meant "small" as in their population, not geography.
This Korean Bodybuilder Is One of the Most Aesthetic Guy Out There
This article is decent, but it's missing the main component of the problem, which is that companies aren't willing to pay for the level of talent they are demanding, and instead will smile and offer "entry level" pay for a job that is not entry level. This problem occurs in broader audiences than the tech industry, of course.

They are using PR to communicate to the public that there is a shortage, but in reality there is only a shortage of labor in the sense that employers are not offering enough for skilled labor to attract the unicorns they want. The only "shortage" that appears in a highly competitive market with rich labor supply is due to picky employers unwilling to be aggressive with talent acquisition. Try offering a million bucks a year for any given dev job, I guarantee people will be quitting their day jobs to fill your "shortage". The point is that companies aren't willing to give to employees. The selfishness which embodies corporations chasing profit is the root problem here. The lack of training and mediocre wages that companies offer is a symptom of that same issue. Cue people bitching about how "hiring is so hard" when really they should be complaining about "training people is so hard"-- yeah, hiring the perfect unicorn for your machine is harder than investing in someone to make them what you want.

"In fact, I’ve come to believe the so-called “talent shortage” is a lie — the real shortage is of companies that are willing to invest in talented people."

I have been saying this for quite some time. Nobody is willing to accept that employees are capital purchases which require an up-front investment of capital in the form of training time and training infrastructure in order to make having them mutually profitable. Instead, they expect to unbox "interchangeable" employee labor for free, then provide a (calibrated to be a low-ball) salary once they have the labor they want in hand.
The INS moat protects the high salaries of US based developers.

There's more than enough talent, it's just waiting outside the gates of the coliseum.......
As the CEO of a company that focuses on developing our developers, I find this article very click-baity. We're currently trying to hire engineers in house and we have found a few interesting things:

1. Mid-level engineers (I consider 2-5 years of experience) are very hard to find.
2. Entry/Junior engineers are much easier to find, but finding good ones[1] is still difficult.
3. I suspect it is the shortage that has caused the following discrepancy in applications: 100% of Program Manager respondents include a well-thought out cover letter, less than half of our software developer candidates do the same. With a frantic hiring of software developers (i.e. shortage), you don't need to put in so much effort and still find something.

[1] We consider good software developer candidates someone in the area or willing to relocate, who is sharp at coding and who has done some independent work.

Someone else commented about not having time to do independent work. In life, you have time or money. Is there someone out there like the protagonist in "The Pursuit of Happyness"? Yeah, probably. But you can't tell me that's the case for 90% of engineering candidates. If you love what you do, you find a way -- in fact, wild horses couldn't keep you away from building something. </finding-a-job-in-software-advice>

It's not that there isn't a deep talent pool, it's just that the demand is deeper than the supply.
Developers are actively leaving the App Store - Panic pulled their popular Coda web development app & recommended customers switch to the version from their own site. The sandboxing requirements of the App Store made many of Coda's features impossible to implement in the App Store, plus Apple had to approve all updates & took a 30% cut (compared to about 2.6% for a direct credit card transaction).

They say after they left the App Store, their revenue went up 44%:

https://www.panic.com/blog/the-2014-panic-report/

"I was pretty nervous to be pulling Coda from the Mac App Store. But when we finally did it, I felt an incredible, almost indescribable sense of relief — mostly because as we began to wrap up bug fix releases, we were able to immediately post them to our customers within minutes of qualifying them. My god. That’s how it should be. There’s just no other way to put it — that’s how you treat your customers well, by reacting quickly and having total control over your destiny. To not be beholden to someone else to do our job feels just fantastic. (Also to not pay someone 30% in exchange for frequent stress is a fine deal.)"
You're right, I am sorry.
I remember this tutorial fondly from the days of Win32:

http://entropy.soldierx.com/~kayin/archive/Tutorials%20-%20b...
I've had conversations with various people about startups to "solve hiring". Thing is, I don't think it's solvable any more than another engineer's trap: fixing online dating.

People are involved and whether or not someone will work out is no more deterministic than figuring out if two people dating would result in a long term relationship.

The biggest problem with coding whiteboard problems is engineers fall into the trap of thinking the problem needs to be hard, which actually reduces the value of the test.

A coding test is simply to weed out idiots. That's why FizzBuzz is a simple problem. It's a negative filter. Acing such an easy test doesn't mean you'll be an awesome engineer but failing an easy problem almost certainly means you won't be an awesome engineer. Substitute with a hard problem and a pass signal doesn't get much better but a fail signal gets far noisier and you're going to get an awful lot more false negatives.
There's not enough tech workers, everyone learn tech!!

There's too many tech workers, we're all screwed!!

Yawn.
Apple TV with React Native
There is no tech labor shortage.

No study, other than those sponsored by the industry, has ever shown a shortage.

Wages, both for new graduates and established professionals, have been stable in the engineering and programming fields. Starting salaries for new computer science graduates were up about 3% in Spring 2011, according to NACE; a 2011 DICE report, in spite of claiming a shortage, concedes that overall tech salaries are up 1%; a San Jose Mercury News article in July 2011 reports a strong job market in Silicon Valley, but also states that wages are up only 3% since 2009. None of these figures indicates a labor shortage.

A 2007 Urban Institute study found that the universities are producing more than enough graduates at the bachelor's level in STEM.

Figures for students graduating with computer science degrees cannot be used to determine whether we have a shortage of people qualified for computer science jobs. Most people in the computer field, including those in software development, have their degrees in fields other than computer science.

In 2012 congressional testimony, Texas Instruments admitted that they have plenty of American engineering job applicants at the bachelor's level.

[ http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/h1b10min.html ]
I don't see how is this an alternative to CT or MRI. It is more likely analogous with regard to the principle of imaging, not an alternative.
I think the success of MySQL is due to there being fewer options for a period of time (the "dot.com boom"), and thus it became a popular choice to avoid commercial RDBMS costs.

I'm no MySQL fan when things like PostgreSQL are an option, but its probably more sane than some other currently popular choices.
"Richer person already gives more to the society than the poor one"

Richer person also received orders of magnitude more from society than the poor one.

"taxing the rich guy with higher taxes is just a way of making them guilty because they made it. "

It is not, at least to a sane person. If you're the type of person that believes that saying "Happy Holidays" is persecuting Christians, then you might think that.

"It makes you wonder, what you did wrong?"

No, it doesn't. Not at all.
Node: List all connected drives in your computer, in all major operating systems
Here's an archived link to their FAQ:

https://archive.is/20150520215548/https://assembly.com/help/...

In case the above's contents are lost to the ravages of entropic bitrot, here's the first paragraph:

"How does Assembly work?

Assembly enables products--from software and hardware, to
online communities--to be built like open source projects.
Contributors earn a part of a product (in App Coins) when
they complete a bounty made by that product's core team."

Edit: FAQ also found in Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20150319201513/https://assembly....
Here's an example. At my job, we make heavy use of scalaz Disjunctions and Validations along with Applicative/Monadic combinators to handle errors. Everyone on the team is capable of writing and modifying error-handling logic that uses these tools, even though not every developer has a strong working. understanding of what an Applicative or Monad is.
Apprenticeships aren't a good answer either, though. They create too much of a caste system, and are very restricting. What if at 18 I don't actually know what I want to do? If I join an apprenticeship I'm learning one thing. What if I don't like that one thing? What if I get 5 years into an apprenticeship and realize I can't get to the level I want to be at? I have to start over from zero in another field?

I don't like the college system we have now, but switching to the extreme of apprenticeship is definitely not a good answer. Right now I'm an engineer, but with my rounded education, if I don't like it, I can go and switch to a myriad of other fields that I'm educated enough for.

The world already had apprenticeship systems, and it's not some magical system we forgot about. Apprenticeships lead to weird power dynamics that aren't very good for the individual, such as being indentured to your employer for providing the training.

The main problem I see with our education system is that it's inefficient, and growing too large and slow to keep up with modern needs. This doesn't mean a well-rounded education is a problem though.