skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I've just given up at this point.

Given up trying to understand Monads, or given up Haskell? I'm still confused by many monads, after years of Haskell programming; it hasn't stopped me getting stuff done.
Out of curiosity, how many companies have you worked at during that time period? My experience over the past 4 years as a developer and 7 years in the labor force has been that my biggest raises have always come either by switching jobs or by bringing an offer to my boss.
> The next thing will be people talking about how very few economists foresaw the issues with reverse home mortgages, or how no regulators foresaw the dangers of equity crowdfunding for non-accredited investors.

And some of the people writing those articles will inevitably be business journalists who spent the previous five years complaining about the regulations that remained and shilling for the crowdfunding companies...
How to Use Bitcoin to Play Decentralized Poker
Congress approves surveillance legislation tucked into budget package
Possibly? What's the ratio of what they pay compared to the rest of the residential property in the city limits?
I wasn't familiar with that until now, but I'll definitely give it a look.
>A few places, you could replace "free market" with "freedom of speech"

Interestingly, from a legal perspective free speech does go hand in hand with what the Court's call the market place of ideas[1] which generally should act like the free market.

"The marketplace of ideas is a rationale for freedom of expression based on an analogy to the economic concept of a free market. The "marketplace of ideas" holds that the truth will emerge from the competition of ideas in free, transparent public discourse."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketplace_of_ideas
The top senior engineer at Google, Facebook, and LinkedIn is not making $200k.

More than 10 years ago, my in-the-door offer as one member of a team of 5-6 senior developers at an east coast tech firm was higher than $200k.
> Hate to break it to you, but running a GTK2 app under KDE/KWin will still look inconsistent.

Certainly, but at least I can be sure that the inter-application[1] inconsistency in terms of overall window behavior/L&F is minimized (as far as practical) if the decorations are server-side.

... and that's a real win, at least from my perspective.

Others may place a higher value on the intra-application consistency of client-side decorations. Obviously, if, say, you're using KWin, but only GTK/Gnome apps you're probably going to prefer this option.

Thankfully, it seems that KWin[2] is going to allow both and is going to try to standardize a wayland protocol, so that users can choose what they want. Hopefully most Wayland clients will eventually respect this protocol -- we'll see.

EDIT: I should also just give a shout out to Mr. Gräßlin. He's been an incredible boon to KDE. (No affiliation, don't know him personally -- just a fan. Hopefully he'll read this!)

[1] For applications using different toolkits, obviously. Otherwise it doesn't really matter much except for misbehaving-application cases.

[2] http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2015/12/server-side-de...
Also, this has been MY career experience to this date. As I now run my own tech companies and have been hiring technical people for the last 7 years, I have anecdotally found this to hold true. The early to mid-career types that have only ever been at tiny companies or startups are really good at having a breadth of experience and an ability to move fast. The spent all my career with big company types have usually been pretty deep at something (a language, framework, tech niche) and are very used to processes. They're typically slower and have a need to encumber small things with bloat (process, tech, etc). Marrying these people together on a team has yielded me fantastic results in nearly every case. The big enterprise people feel like they've been released from a cage, and the scrappy startup types seem a little less feral, while providing an infectious get shit done attitude.
I had a Mac Pro under my desk for a while. If I had done that, I'd have third degree burns.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10758044 and marked it off-topic.
Disney is making a fortune and safeguarding its future by buying childhood
The Internet of Things Is Really Only About One Thing
Kelly Slater starts a company that makes waves
Yeah but if you listen to women's experiences, there clearly are distinct problems women in tech face.
C-t M-u C-M-S-y <year>

For those of you without Emacs experience.
The Future of Data Science
Right? Any time something in the economy goes wrong, people are quick to blame it on the free market. Greed is the problem, they say. If, in fact, that problem is caused by the government, then it is the fault of "corporations meddling with government." If it is clear that a handful of politicians caused the problem, then people call for "getting money out of politics." It's almost as if the government can do no wrong.

We live in such a highly regulated world that I can't help but chuckle when someone blames the "free market" for many of the problems of today.
Ketamine is an exciting experimental approach for depression (especially with suicidal thinking) and anhedonia.

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-03...

Researchers seem to be using an infusion of 5 mg per kg of body weight. That means you don't give a bunch of pills to a patient, which in itself helps a bit to reduce risk.

There's a bit of a web-based discussion here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b6zrpd1trk
previous discussion. They've come a long way https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6864339
Rents aren't as bad as the bay area (still awful) and the skytrain makes getting around easy. Most people just don't live in Vancouver proper.

As for why, there isn't enough upward pressure. Vancouver is at least getting a few of the big companies, but they really need to get some big tech in sucking up talent to drive some competition in salaries. Currently if people want money they head south, those who stay are in a market where they can't command the big salaries.
With regards to malloc, what is the benefit of "random (delayed) free"?
There are 20 metro areas in the US with a population over 3 million people.

What would it take to get the big players in tech, say, the 10 biggest companies by market cap or # of people employed, to open up satellite offices in all (or even half!) of those metros, employing, say, 100-500 people.

These companies all have satellite offices - some of them are even growing those satellite offices. Every one of these companies has offices in the bay area, Seattle, and NYC. Some have offices in Colorado, LA, Austin, and beyond. They've proven it can work - so why not double down on that strategy, instead of incurring the exponentially growing costs of keeping talent in the bay area?

This would be a huge win for all parties involved.

Employees get some choice over what climates and cultures they want to live in, and don't have to worry about family or other ties that keep them in a specific geographic reason.

Employers get access to talent that isn't willing to relocate to the bay area.

Employers and employees benefit from employees living in cities with real estate as cheap as 1/10th the cost of the bay area.

The nation as a whole benefits, because more cities get to reap some of the economic rewards these companies are producing, instead of watching it all concentrate in the wallets of landowners in California.
I can has redemption
You should try to read past the first sentence.

The simple fact is that few economists predicted a recession of that magnitude. Predicting a crash is very different than predicting a recession. And predicting a recession is very different than predicting the magnitude of that recession.

Nuance matters.

I'm glad you were able to foresee it, but there's always outsiders who foresee a collapse, so that data point just isn't terribly relevant.
I was recently made redundant. I had a 3 month notice period. In that time, I learnt Python and Django and built https://parsemail.org using it. I also set up https://hireme.grepular.com with a list of my skills.

The company who hired me were impressed at my skills list (after they'd questioned me on some of it to make sure I wasn't exagerating). They were also very happy to see a lot of very recent work on Github (parsemail.org). They ended up hiring me for a JavaScript role, even though that was far from the strongest thing on my CV, because they believed I could be effective.

So my recommendation is: Be pro-active. Build and learn stuff over the coming months. It will give you more confidence and stuff to talk about in interviews, and it will make you look good.
I've had good luck with Hacker News FWIW.
Veale is one of the widely recommended authors:
http://www.amazon.com/Stuart-R.-Veale/e/B001IOBOR0

specifically this book:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dst...
That this is currently the top comment reinforces the author's hypothesis that many software engineers underestimate how much they could make at a large company.

> 250k a year in 5 years at a big corporation, really?

Yes, really.

> Yea if you're lucky to work on a project/team higher-ups care about and are also willing to bust your ass working long hours to meet insane deadlines.

Nope, not true.

> So I think this article is spreading a myth that there is guaranteed piles of money to be made by working at Google, Facebook, Apple, etc.

Have you worked at Google, Facebook, or Apple for 5 years? If you do, and you're a decent programmer (not a rock star, but a solid contributor), you'll find there are guaranteed piles of money to be made.
Two way street... assuming the guy was legit and confident, he'd have other offers lined up, and your company may have been the loser.

I for one commend "whiteboard refusers."
From my understanding, they don't really recalibrate pay scales at the bigcos based on location.. but this is purely anecdotal evidence.
> Why?

Total guess, there isn't a critical mass of companies whose owners, executives and shareholders are missing out on billions in profit because they can't find enough sw engineers.

Said another way (a guess again), developers are not rare enough for current demand.
Elasticsearch and Lua
Knock, Knock: Introducing Do Not Disturb
2015 Retail Recap – #Infographic
You're exactly right. And it comes down to simple economic truths. If mass amounts of people could "easily" make 130k out of college on a path to 250k then the hundreds of thousands of programmers around the world would give up their ~$100k jobs and go do that. But they don't. Just look at glassdoor salary averages! It's right there in black and white! The sunny salary numbers he posits are, as you said, out of reach for most.

(It should be noted that I completely agree with the article's conclusion. I've come to feel that the EV of buying a startup lottery ticket is woefully lower than pg, sama or [insert vc/angel here] assert. If you can land a solid and interesting bigco job, that's probably your best bet.)
Trump Troll- troll friends with trump quotes
Animation of Nature paper: 450M cases of malaria averted by bednets
Consciousness covers wide ground.

Internal state is a necessary part of the machinery of consciousness, it one of the things one is conscious of.

McCarthy breaks consciousness down to some specifics which would be useful to robots and can be said to be useful partial descriptions of consciouness.

The totality of consciousness in ourselves seems greater by some indefinable essentialism - this is not the part of consciousness McCarthy is interested in for robotics.

After all the article title clearly states this is about 'their' (the robots) mental state not 'ours'.
It's probably more accurate to state that those economists who make policy didn't see it coming... the economists that matter.

http://www.forbes.com/2007/05/17/bernanke-subprime-speech-ma...

Of course, the economy nearly collapsed a year after that speech.

That's the great conceit of central banking, that a small committee of "learned professionals" can predict the future and claim to divine the actions of billions of market transactions.
Martin Shkreli Resigns from Turing Pharmaceuticals
When you say "security critical" are you thinking specifically of stuff like crypto timing attacks? I think aside from those sorts of concerns haskell is an excellent choice for security-critical code.
The subreddit was made after the guardian piece was published.
This makes me nervous. Ketamine has major issues with bladder damage when taken repetitively.

Possibly with a low enough dosage this would be manageable, but speaking from experience from watching people that have been on the wrong end of the stick with this one. it can do some really serious long term damage in that department.
Thanks for clarifying.

I suppose it's more accurate to say that while OpenBSD doesn't kill processes outright, it maintains an environment where poor quality software will more likely crash than do harm.

The source of login(1) for anyone interested <http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/login/>.
So sleazy geocaching?
Came here to say the same thing. The Austrian-school economists were screaming at the top of their lungs: https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Austrian_predictions
I think the US prohibitions, first the alcohol in the past, and the current drug prohibition, pretty resoundingly answer that restricting freedom (in this way) results in very damaging outcomes.
Are you being serious? That's exactly what's being implied. Which part of tangentially involved in tech juxtaposed with unlike women with Math, CS, or EE degrees would lead you to read that differently?
When I say I'm "thinking out loud" what I mean is, the exact words I used may not reflect the underlying point I was getting at, because it was fuzzy in my head when I first started thinking about it. Reading all of these responses, it's clear that most people are responding to something different than the issue I really meant to raise. Fair enough, that's my fault for not being clearer. But that's the value in a discussion, so this whole exercise has been productive (for me at least).

These are basic questions, the answers are known, published, and the article even mentions exactly where you can find them.

I've read and re-read TFA and I don't find that it addresses the issue I'm thinking about. It's not so much asking "are we the smartest possible creature", or even asking if we're close to that. It's also not about asking whether or not it's possible for a super-AGI to be smarter than humans.

The issue I was trying to raise is more of "given how smart humans are (whatever that mean) and given whatever the limit is for how smart a hypothetical super-AGI can be, does the analogy between a super-AGI and a nuclear bomb hold? That is, does a super-AGI really represent an existential threat?"

And again, I'm not taking a side on this either way. I honestly haven't spent enough time thinking about it. I will say this though... what I've read on the topic so far (and I haven't yet gotten to Bostrom's book, to be fair) doesn't convince me that this is a settled question. Maybe after I finish Superintelligence I'll feel differently though. I have it on my shelf waiting to be read anyway, so maybe I'll bump it up the priority list a bit and read it over the holiday.
I personally know someone that went from 130k to over 1 million in 7.5 years at a large 20,000+ person non valley company. Skills, luck, negotiation, and HR will get ignored.
Show HN: Business Rule – Automatic AssignedTo as per Lead Source
What gobsmacking arrogance. Who do you suggest does the assessing of 'mistakes' and 'teaching' thereof? http://www.amazon.com/Intellectuals-Society-Revised-Expanded...: as one review puts it - Thomas Sowell - gets right to the warped mindset of the elite intellectual. It should be a must read for every high school senior in the country.
RxJS has a steep learning curve and is quite hard to really understand beyond basic examples that fit on a presentation slide.
It might be a great tool for really smart developers, but I wouldn't share any large RxJS code in a developer team where all developers are not at least 200% geniuses.

The whole thing reminds me of C++ years ago, where the language allowed for really smart and efficient coding style, but many less skilled developers at the time had problems with deep understanding of templates, operator overloading, multiple inheritance, various constructors and such. Pragmatic companies (e.g. Mozilla) thus decided to ban all the advanced features and stick just to basic ones so that the code would be maintainable.

I think RxJS is facing similar fate. I've spent quite some time learning it and I think it is one of the more complex paradigms on the market today. In addition there isn't much useful documentation. Feel free to check stack overflow and find out about the struggles people are going through tying to extend basic examples (e.g. google for rxjs mousedrag).
That's an incredibly empathetic approach to interviewing, I'll try to keep that method in mind. I tend to be overly critical to a fault.

How do you phrase or bring up your praise/concerns?
Little Bites of Cocoa #150: Standardizing Network Abstractions with Moya
> Landlords would be foolish to raise rents just because one employer is giving a housing incentive.

Landlords would be foolish not to capture the highest rent would-be renters are willing to pay; the subsidy increases that, so landords would be foolish not to react to it.
My take home in Seattle is ~2.3 times what I made in BC. That's not including stock and bonuses either.

Granted my rent has gone up by a factor of 3.5, but after paying rent I've still got double the money leftover. Other things are cheaper too.

Now of course there is a couple years experience vs when I was in BC, but I would still probably be close to double.
The best approximation of an answer to that question I can find is "virtually every large non-startup tech company in the valley that isn't Cisco".
> I just can't get past the very first sentence. First, it ignores the realities of both economists and financial insiders who made attempts to blow the lid off of the ARM/toxic loan schemes - not unlike pre-Snowden whistle blowers who were equally ignored and erased from history.

The fact they were effectively silenced and ignored is largely because they were few in number.

The vast majority didn't foresee the scale of the disaster.

> Second, even as a 17 year old kid, in 2001, I wrote an economics paper about the impending housing collapse - only I was guessing 2005 not 2008 - based on ARM's; 103% financing with 0% down; and stated income.

If you can demonstrate this for a significant number of recessions [e.g. 5+], its relevant.

I pulled my money out in May of 2007 because I was pretty sure something was going to happen and threw it back in to basically double it...doesn't mean I believe it was abundantly obvious to everyone. The mere fact I could do that demonstrates it wasn't obvious.

The simple fact is, whenever there is a crisis, there is going to be a minority of Doomsayers who predicted correctly. However, the fact the majority was oblivious implies it was non-obvious and possibly chance that a specific Doomsayer was, ultimately, correct in his/her prediction for reasons beyond random chance.
I've been planning to read Superintelligence for a while anyway, so I think I'll move it up the list a bit in response to all this discussion. I'm on vacation once I check out of here today, until the second week of Jan, so I'll probably read it over the holiday.
Anybody care to tell why coldtea was downvoted?

I don't care about stupid points, and these are not mine either but why downvote for no apparent reason?
People are very definitely working to increase the available land by getting us to other planets. That means we can grow our way out of it, although it remains to be seen if we actually will.
Then there is a selection bias: only those who manage to make it to the 200k level stay long enough, the others (the large majority) understand after a few years that their present company is not gonna promote them to that level and try to find greener pastures.
> Along with inestimable human livelihood and wealth, the free market creates various possibilities to foolishly harm oneself.

As opposed to the ability for the state to foolishly harm us? Sure, a free market allows humans to be human and make mistakes, but allowing others to take your freedom in the interest of self-preservation is a fool's compromise.

Certainly, you raise great philosophical questions though. One of my favorite thought experiments is to imagine how many things done by the government today could be accomplished without the government. I don't mean obvious things like the postal service, I mean fundamental services like road building and a court system. I plan to read David Friedman's book soon on this topic, called "Legal Systems Very Different From Ours":

http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Course_Pages/legal_sy...
> Perceptive readers will note that 100 does not actually show up on a d100 or rand(100).

I was just perceptive enough to notice, that, copy the entire table into a comment and pontificate on it, then notice that I missed the sentence in question immediately after commenting, and delete it 3 seconds after posting it. :/
Normally you're right that no net exposure implies no risk. However, you've completely forgotten the financial crisis? Counterparty risk can completely destroy the idea of "all positions are offset". If I buy a derivative and then re-sell it for a profit, that's fine until the people I bought it from suddenly go under, and now my position is not protected anymore!
>Come back with a book that examines actual free markets and we'll talk.

Do you have any examples of "actual" free markets?
They probably scrape Google. Willing to bet there is no deal. Google would never agree to such a thing. Even paying $XXXXX a month isn't worth it to them.
Changed now. Submitted title was "Facebook, Google, Twitter agree to delete anti-immigrant comments: Germany".

There's probably no way to make this title neutral so we might as well stick with the original even though people object to it.
Have a portfolio.
This is your take home pay? So after taxes?
Of course most devs don't make it to senior, but even fewer devs cash out significantly from startups. I think that's the point they're trying to make.

i.e Say there are two groups of 100 engineers of equal average ability. One goes into megacorps and the others do startups. Which group will have earned more as a whole after 5 years? 10 years?
> "hellish place like NY"

As opposed to what kind of place in Canada? NY was pretty awesome the last time I visited.