skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
On the other other side of the coin, as I know myself to be physically unattractive and boring, if anyone approaches me at all, that's automatically suspicious behavior, whether I find their appearance to be pleasing or not. If an attractive person approaches me, that's a honeypot for sure. Or a crazy. Maybe so drunk that a trip to the hospital might be warranted. Perhaps they're soliciting donations for charity. Possibly someone triple-dog dared them to talk to me. I immediately wonder what the ulterior motive is.

That makes it easy to not be sexist. The probability of any sort of romantic relationship with any given stranger is effectively zero, therefore it doesn't matter what they are.

And I try not to inflict myself on others at parties. Or on the party venue. Or anywhere in public, really. If you think it's hard talking to an ugly bore, it's far worse being one. We can tell that you want us to go away. We're not oblivious to the repellent body language. We just have to ignore it sometimes, because otherwise we'd never get to talk to anybody.

Sorry for being creepy, or jerky, or whatever. From the lips of Lord Farquaad, we know that it's already rude enough being alive when no one wants you. So thanks for being polite enough to not just look disgusted and walk away when we start talking. Because that's a thing that actually happens.
I prefer to work for smaller companies because of the way work and responsibility are divided. At large companies I've worked for, work gets divided into much smaller chunks so each developer is working on a very small sliver of the total product. At a smaller company, your typically solving a smaller, more focused problem as a group, but also, you get a much bigger chunk of the work as a developer. It's easier to have ownership over a whole project. It's why the term "full-stack developer" is so common in the startup world and basically unused in the enterprise/corporate world. Of course all of this lies on a gradient of headcount vs. total workload so I'm sure there are great counter examples out there.
I am right-handed and wear my watch on my right wrist as well. I've never ran into any problems doing so, and manipulating buttons on different watches was never a problem either.
For money:

Work at whatever job meets your financial needs, everything else is gravy. This will be hardest at the start, but as you gain seniority, you'll have increasing freedom to work where you want. All things being equal, established companies will pay better. Save money, but don't take jobs you hate to save more money - it's not worth the equity.

For work:

If you know what you want to work on and can get a job in an established company, do that. Established companies are much more likely to actually have you work on what they hired you to work on. They are also much more likely to continue the project you were hired for. There are exceptions, but generally you will have much greater resources available to you. Your work may never see the light of day, or may only be used internally, but you'll walk away with a lot of experience on a specific area.

If you don't know what you want to work on or you like working a little bit on a lot of things, work for a startup. Especially for junior roles, there is enormous flex in terms of what you'll actually work on from day to day. This is not limited to programming, but includes all branches of tech work: architecting, service monitoring and setup, marketing, etc. The downside is that it can be hard for you to explain, in a substantive way, the amount of work you did during this time. The upside is that you learn a lot and get a feel for many things.

As for future options - startups will give you many shallow options, working at a big company will give you lucrative & focused options. If you work only in one area, understand that you are betting on that 'kind' of work to continue into the future. The more experience you have, the more value you have in that market. The value in that is entirely dependent on the value the market puts on your skills. You can often pivot, but it can be difficult. Keep that in mind when looking at future work.
I'm just the wrong guy to ask about this - I know how to limit (if not eliminate) vulnerabilities, at least in what I control.

It's harder to fix culture problems with tools than we might think, in general. Perhaps future generations will look at 'C' the same way we look at open-belt farm machinery. I can't say. But the sheer volume of incumbent 'C' code bases will be around for a while.
I actually have the Bostrom book, but just haven't found time to read it yet. But it is definitely in the queue!
I think the important distinction is that the author claims to be discussing the low-end or at least middle, but your example is in fact significantly-better-than-average.
The article's title is phrased in such a way that it implies gun deaths have increased to meet vehicular deaths. It's clickbait.

Suicides, homicides, and accidents all have different motives and circumstances. Further, suicides and homicides are often driven by mental illness, while accidemts are driven by not following precautions. They require different strategies to fix each problem, because they are three different problems.

Correlation between the existence of firearms and the presence of fireaems deaths is actually kind of obvious people cannot die of something that has not been invented yet. The real question is causality: Why do people get shot and killed? This is why the data in this article is useless--there is no control group. It does not show whether gun deaths are more frequent where firearms are legal, or more common where they have been outlawed. It merely shows that they exist.

Show me data that indicates--beyond a shadow of a doubt--that states with looser gun laws have more firearms homicides than states with stricter gun laws. Then you will have won.
The median income for full time workers in the US is about 40k, not 30k. Also I don't personally know anyone who makes $250k cash comp, and I know people at google and facebook and a handful of other "big corps". I have a friend who's close tho, around $230k at google after 6 years. You can't count the appreciation of the stock on the RSUs
More like no more gentlemanly treatment just because they're a woman. A real gentleman will be gentlemanly to everyone.
I believe the inverse, I think most kids out of school should start at a (good) large company, they have the resources and framework to provide all kinds of career training you'd never get from startups or small companies. Mentors, leadership training, technical skills training, much bigger budgets, and a smaller group of tasks that someone is expected to perform. The pace is likely more deliberate, if not even boring, and that is good. As a newcomer you'll get a front row seat into what processes really work (code reviews, source control [yes, I still run into old/new people who don't use/believe in it], documentation, etc.) and you will be able to see how not having them can be detrimental in the future.

Starting off in a startup will lead to little support and a cowboy attitude, what the world needs more of is people who know when to cowboy, and cowboy with purpose rather than using 'just get shit done' as an excuse for a lack of standards and quality.
> Client-side decorations are a compile-time switch. What the hell.

See my other comment here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10759579

As a TWM user, I have no idea what you're arguing against. GTK-3 is prettier, more functional and normally more compact than GTK-2. On top of that, smooth scroll is a blessing and touch support was lovely for PDFs when I had a touch screen.
Looks like originally written by Jeremiah Dillon for Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/google-time-management_5...
Disclaimer: Twice your age and just getting warmed up.

So I'm being let go

Congratulations. Being let go can sometimes be a badge of honor. Anyone who has never been let go has never pushed the envelope enough.

After 10 years at my local newspaper

Wow, that's way too long for anyone, anywhere. Be glad that this is working out that way for you. It's not the 10 years at one place that's the problem, it's all the other stuff you missed by being in that shelter. Now's your chance to discover cool things you may have missed.

I'm nervous, scared, and somewhat excited.

Change "somewhat" to "very". You should be.

I'm competing with younger, new grads.

No, you're not and you shouldn't think of it that way. There's plenty to go around for everyone.

it will force me out of my comfort zone

Good! That's the best way to grow.

I'm a jack of all trades master of none.

So am I. And it's worked very, very well for me. We have too many specialists and not nearly enough people who can visualize the forest and the trees at the same time. They are the ones who make big things happen.

I've always taken that as an insult rather than a compliment.

Wrong. See above.

So HN, what advice do you have for a 30 year old who's about to embark on a new adventure?

Have fun. Stop worrying. Find something you love and give it a shot. At 30, you're still a baby and you have opportunities that you may not have in 5 or 10 years. This is a blessing in disguise. Treat it that way.
Too many people.
Ask HN: ICANN charges only 18¢ per domain name, why am I paying $10?
Purchasing a new domain name is second nature of a techie. But in this ear of disruption it's little odd that we didn't saw any major procedural changes in this field. Especially .com registry, which is owned and monopolized by Verisign.

Which things/laws are preventing us from solving this problem? In btw, kudos to Let's Encrypt for offering free SSL.
Nope, I interpret it as: 6193829 people reached the site before you, but had different values. Or: 2x6193830 people reached it, and one of the those had the same value as you...
How do I make a field “required”, like in Protocol Buffers?
This sounds great when you envision that big company as Amazon, Google, Microsoft or Facebook. It sounds less so when you envision that company as Oracle, eBay, Yahoo! or SAP. Some large companies are mostly going to teach you politics, byzantine process and spending money as a means of scaling bad software.

It's important to differentiate skills learned at big companies. Some are very useful, but others are coping mechanisms that have no place in a startup. Meanwhile, the scrappiness and well-rounded skill set learned at a startup will almost always have a place in larger businesses.

My own personal recommendation for early career workers would be to prefer the cream-of-the-crop mid and large companies where you'll get useful experience you can't find anywhere else, then prefer startups and leave the slower-moving and more dysfunctional larger companies as a last resort.
So now if we just square that, we get all evil in the world!
I consider it "impolite" (to put it politely) to treat adult women like they're children, so to me this is absolutely a kind of sexism we should get rid of.
> Is it sexism to make assumptions that are probabilistically correct?

Judging people based on group membership rather than individually on axis that are not essentially tied (even if they are correlated with) that group membership is prejudice; prejudiced based on sex is sexism. So, yes, making probabilistic assumptions based on sex and acting on them is, in many cases, sexism.

> ) For a woman I don't know, I buy her frozen yogurt. 2) For a man I don't know, I buy him pizza.

If you want to get people food that they want, you can just ask them. (And, in any case, context is probably more important than sex: IME, women are more likely to prefer pizza to froyo for a meal, and men are more likely to prefer froyo to pizza for a dessert; there're are very few contexts where "pizza" and "froyo" are comparable alternatives where sex would be the prime differentiator on how people would respond to them -- and elevating sex above more relevant decision criteria is a pretty strong indication of sexism.)
I tried that and got nothing.

The numbers and text are here: (http://cipherfoundation.org/older-ciphers/beale-papers/beale...) Credit to kencausey
Yep, the email still goes out every week.
Interesting. I was actually expecting a blank page.
Stop projecting your views and choices on everyone. I don't need or want a lot of privacy. I'm also not black, or gay, or a Muslim. I'm not politically active. As such, I could live a comfortable life and not run up against the limits of freedom even in a fairly repressive social and political environment.

I also manage to have some empathy, if only because it might serve me well someday. Try it. It's actually part of enlightened self-interest.
My bad. Go here instead: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10759510
We can't compete, a research lab and accelerator won't change the fact that our dollar is 3/4s the American dollar. I could move to the states, take the same salary, and get an instant 30% raise. That, coupled with the fact that our goods are 10-20% more expensive than the states and our housing prices are skyrocketing, you're just shooting yourself in the foot by staying here.
You know, if you use Docker for the right reasons, in the right way, it can be a real time saver.

I'm not really sold on the way Docker specifically tries to be fire-and-forget easy (it often succeeds in being silly and you have to work around it), but containers are good.

There's a lot of very useful software that just expects that it can do whatever it wants on a system, like install its own dependencies from git, run its own version of python etc.

You may want to run such software in production and it is an absolute maintenance nightmare if you install all the dependencies via package management. Upgrading starts with rebuilding and repackaging all dependencies. Not fun, and not a good use of time.

For such software, containers make it feasible to administer as somewhat manageable units: You create the Dockerfile or whatever to install the software you want, and run the resulting image on a host, and bring configuration in via puppet or something. Then, when you need to upgrade, you rebuild your image and deploy it on the host; rollbacks are trivial, as is scaling, or creating test environments.

You can of course achieve the same sort of thing with virtual machines providing you have good orchestration. However, often a deployment can consist of multiple software components that are separate units, but can (or must) share a single host.

I think so long as Linux containers don't actually offer real security, that's the niche where they are useful.
When I scrolled down and saw that derivatives were so large by an order of magnitude I was reminded of this awesome 2010 Oscar winning documentary that I only watched a couple of weeks ago:

Inside Job: https://archive.org/details/cpb20120505a

It's about how US executives created the financial crisis back in 2008 and is pretty relevant here. I'd well recommend watching it...some of the information provided is uniquely depressing and terrifying.
You're correct, but before Borland 'C' ( I think to directly compete with Microsoft ) much was done in Borland Pascal. Of course, much was done after as well.

I think the results of Apollo's decision speaks for itself. If something is an order of magnitude cheaper, it will propagate faster, whether it's objectively better or not.
Everyone is either saying go to a big corp or go to a startup as your first job.

What I usually tell new grads is: Get offers from both, and take the job that has the best potential person or people that you'll be able to learn from. There are a bunch of ways you can research this. Try asking people on the team to tell you who they've learned the most from in their career.

Do not take a job where you'll be a lone wolf. As a new grad your goal should be to find great people to work with and learn from them.

If you want to have a balanced career you should try both big corps and startups, but ordering doesn't matter.
Bitmapist: Analytics and Cohorts for Redis – Hacking and Gonzo
Great points. I can attest to the fact that low-latency Java code looks nothing like idiomatic Java. Ironically, the techniques for writing low latency Java are the same in Haskell (avoiding object creation, boxing, garbage collection, etc). High performance C and C++ are a league of their own with direct control over memory layout and alignment etc. Haskell has some amazing work on that front as well though: http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~dorchard/publ/icfp-2013-simd-vector...
Personally, I think it's the opposite. I wear my watch on the wrist of my dominant hand. I've never had a problem; in fact I think you are more likely to pay attention to it and not smack it into things.
> And yet we're conscious of something.

Prove it.

Susan Greenfield has a wonderfully challenging proposal for an implementation of consciousness. Paraphrasing from memory:

The entire functionality of consciousness is that, when the brain asks itself "Am I conscious?" the answer comes back "Yes". And it does nothing else.

She wrote a short book called 'Consciousness' about it, which I enjoyed. Such a refreshingly naughty idea.
I use Qt5 extensively and these are the things I don't like (mostly QML-specific):

* It's HUGE. A "hello world" QML program is like 50 MB. You can get it down to about 20 MB is you use a custom Unicode library build (there is a 20 MB DLL which just contains Unicode data).

* The QML compiler is only in the commercial version. I know there is a third party open source version, but that is too much hassle. And yeah maybe I should pay, but hey!

* Lots of things still are impossible with QML. There's no decent basic text widget (e.g. for a log output).

* You can make custom QML widgets, but they can't render text. Kind of limiting!

* I don't think the basic premise of QML works that well. There is such a big difference between C++ types and QML types most of your code ends up dealing with the mapping. Especially lists of things are very hard to get right (and the documentation doesn't really point you to the "right" solution - which is to subclass QAbstractListModel if you were wondering).

* QML seems very hacky and javascripty - it doesn't scale well. Especially scopes and id's.

* Some QML things are weirdly hard, for example

- Rich tooltips

- Adding padding around list items

- Doing anything with the rich text widget.

That said, I still really like it. I'd just like it more if they:

1. Reduce the size.

2. Redo QML (again!). I'd be even ok with a custom language. It can be similar to Javascript, but it should support the native C++ Qt types (and custom ones) much easier.
> No, I refuse to buy lottery tickets.

"Who Dares Wins"

Like it or not, but there are no guaranteed outcomes in pretty much anything. Only when you're paying for a lunch in a caffe it's sort of guaranteed that you'll get your calories.

When you're paying for tuition you're only getting a chance to learn something, and now it's entirely up to you to use this chance (and still fail even by trying as hard as you can).

> Smart consumers don't spend £9,000 a year on lottery tickets.

Exactly. Smart consumers will first exhaust all the other options, and, most importantly, will gauge their chance to succeed in this race first before joining it.

> the universal desire for a degree from an accredited college

This is a myth. Stop spreading it.

> And in the Information Age, I have plenty of "access to an infrastructure" outside of the university walls.

Use it first. Go to the university only when all the other routes are exhausted. Otherwise universities are full of random people who do not really belong there.

> There is not a single thing I learned academically from my pricey MIT degree that I could not have learned by reading textbooks and websites on my own.

It means that you failed miserably. Congratulations. You had a priceless opportunity to extort the knowledge from some of the best, most bleeding-edge researchers, who had hours of their precious time allocated for you alone.

But instead you did everything by the book, did your assignments, read your textbooks, attended your lectures - exactly the most stupid kind of stuff to do in any university, not just MIT.

Btw., I failed too, far too often I'm reading an obituary for a top scientist and realising that years ago I lost a unique opportunity to interrogate him thoroughly.
How can we ever figure out whether a computer experiences things remotely the way we do? Especially when we know how it works?
[citation needed]. This is pure personal taste (and has nothing to do with C vs. any other language, unless by "C" you mean K&R era)
Well there are two possibilities. You can work a job for 10 years but if you learned the duties of the job in 6 months and just went on auto-pilot for the next 9.5 you're gonna be in the same boat as new grads. On the other hand if you learned and advanced in your field over those 10 years, then yes you will be looking for higher level jobs than entry-level code monkey jobs.
Yeah, as if it hasn't been obvious that the DNC wants nothing more than to give Hillary the nomination outright and that they see Sanders as just a nuisance to their agenda.
I'm curious how accurate a source like: http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_resul...

Because, if rent and utilities are 40% average higher here and you make 30% more by moving, it may not be as big of a raise as you think.
That's my understanding as well. I haven't looked deep enough into the QPA stuff to understand it.
I think it's important to remember that HN seems to focus on the experience of the 95th percentile developer (which is not to say that you are not one of those). The numbers in this blog post are well beyond the reach of even a 75th percentile developer. The GAFAs and YC startups of the world aren't even going to interview a 75th percentile developer let alone hire and compensate him or her at those levels.

If you look at Dan Luu's resume and writing, it's reasonable to assume that he's well beyond the 95th percentile himself, so those numbers are very likely attainable for him.
you won't last 10 minutes in the modern web job market unless you're willing to take $15/hour.

pump gas.
Functionally unlimited, not mathematically infinite. No human has the time to meaningfully evaluate all of them.

And I think their responsibility is the conditions under which they were given broadcast licenses in the first place. Something about serving the public good.
Do you use evil-mode? I went the opposite direction (Emacs -> vim -> now kak[1]), and I find non-modal editing quite frustrating now.

1: https://github.com/mawww/kakoune