skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The OP wrote a blanket statement stating if you follow this specific path you become "rusty" and ultimately end up not being able to code. He then states this becomes an issue when architecting solutions.

To me this is clearly non-sense as someone who's followed this path (and know others who have as well). Being an architect allows me to see the big picture and move the organization in the right direction (as we see it), while still being able to get into the trenches with my developers when something arises or help is needed. Granted, this is different for large enterprises but for startups/small/mid sized businesses, yes, us architects still get our hands dirty (or else we're irrelevant).
I find these “shorter work weeks are just as effective” articles to be nonsense, at least for knowledge workers with some tactical discretion. I can imagine productivity at an assembly line job having a peak such that overworking grinds someone down to the point that they become a liability, but people that claim working nine hours in a day instead of eight gives no (or negative) additional benefit are either being disingenuous or just have terrible work habits. Even in menial jobs, it is sort of insulting – “Hey you, working three jobs to feed your family! Half of the time you are working is actually of negative value so you don’t deserve to be paid for it!”

If you only have seven good hours a day in you, does that mean the rest of the day that you spend with your family, reading, exercising at the gym, or whatever other virtuous activity you would be spending your time on, are all done poorly? No, it just means that focusing on a single thing for an extended period of time is challenging.

Whatever the grand strategy for success is, it gets broken down into lots of smaller tasks. When you hit a wall on one task, you could say “that’s it, I’m done for the day” and head home, or you could switch over to something else that has a different rhythm and get more accomplished. Even when you are clearly not at your peak, there is always plenty to do that doesn’t require your best, and it would actually be a waste to spend your best time on it. You can also “go to the gym” for your work by studying, exploring, and experimenting, spending more hours in service to the goal.

I think most people excited by these articles are confusing not being aligned with their job’s goals with questions of effectiveness. If you don’t want to work, and don’t really care about your work, less hours for the same pay sounds great! If you personally care about what you are doing, you don’t stop at 40 hours a week because you think it is optimal for the work, but rather because you are balancing it against something else that you find equally important. Which is fine.

Given two equally talented people, the one that pursues a goal obsessively, for well over 40 hours a week, is going to achieve more. They might be less happy and healthy, but I’m not even sure about that. Obsession can be rather fulfilling, although probably not across an entire lifetime.

This particular article does touch on a goal that isn’t usually explicitly stated: it would make the world “less unequal” if everyone was prevented from working longer hours. Yes, it would, but I am deeply appalled at the thought of trading away individual freedom of action and additional value in the world for that goal.
That is one area we really want to study, to see if there is any way we can benefit. We are sure it can monitor concussions, but to what extent is still to be determined.

However, we don't have funding at this point (partially because we want to avoid Luminosity's fate of being tied to growth), so we are just focusing on getting a fully developed product that some psychologists we are working with would use.
I tried to send you an email, but delivery failed.
I've already seen both sides.

Some low level people don't know how to do full-stack web development.
Some full-stack web development people have no idea about memory management and stuff.
etc...

You need all sorts of people to be productive.
That sounds good, at least, thanks for letting us know.
Could this not be solved by telling the candidate what you expect and then telling them that if they can't program to the expected level that they will be fired on the spot. Leave it to them to demonstrate that they can program before or after they are hired. If the candidate can then they will be happy to demonstrate after they start. Everybody is happy.
But these aren't examples so much as vague caricatures. The subject matter that LessWrong considers is certainly unusual, but that alone should not be enough to call it arbitrary, questionable or outlandish.
I have seen very workable open office spaces. The key seems to be room size. I consulted to Gateway Computer Company back in the 90's and I would work in their Poway, CA offices which were open office format. It actually wasn't bad there because the space was essentially a large warehouse with very high ceilings (more than a couple of storeys high as I recall). The nearby sound and noise wasn't directly reflected back and there were enough people that the general din was closer to a white noise.

In smaller spaces, however, I agree. Not good.
Ah, consumer testimonials. I pay very close attention to those. If I learn they're fake, I blacklist the business. If someone is willing to lie to people like that on their page, I don't want to have anything to do with them.
T-Mobile Is Flat Out Lying: It's Throttling Video Even Though It Says It's Not
Very nice! I hacked together something similar, but this is much better effort.
It means they don't have $50m. I'd say that shouldn't matter, we don't give the poor a discount on parking tickets either (actually, we usually make them more expensive).
Deadly Sins of Microservices
Indeed. BDR also doesn't even have that fault in general. Conflict handling happening in a row basis and not having any form of transaction are two very different pair of shoes.

FWIW: I'm not particularly happy about the name either. But we fought over names so long that agreeing on something subpar was better than not having the feature. It was originally named changeset extraction. Not sure if that'd have been better.
I have something of a litmus test for companies where I just assume any company that advertises a lot via "live reads" on radio/podcasts is not to be trusted. Lumosity, LifeLock, etc.

There are outliers for which I wouldn't quite say "not to be trusted" like Dollar Shave Club and Blue Apron, but even in those cases you are, IMO, overpaying for a vanishingly small amount of convenience.

I think it holds up pretty well though that putting a lot of effort into advertising via "live reads" on radio and podcasts is a negative indicator as to how much you can trust a company.
> being a good bayesian

This is exactly what weirds people out about LessWrong folk. They talk about a tool as if it's a religion.
If the Linode Manager database only stores the hash, how would they know the password?

How did you find out about the illicit login?
C# will have free native compilation soon.[1]

[1] http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ExploringTheNewNETDotnetComman...
That's not really fair. Some people enjoy working like that, some people find that the salary they are making (and enjoying) require those kind of hours, etc.
Even if he had one, having "a neuroscience PhD" isn't even close to enough experience necessary to fulfill the expectations of running a robust, legal and ethical medical technology company.

Lumosity seems like one of those companies that bit off more than it could chew. Then, to fulfill investor expectations, they started to engage in shady and unethical sales practices.
Look for CIA's MK-Ultra, here:
http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2012/09/mk-ultraviolence/
And here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Ewen_Cameron
The Strain of Always Being on Call
The current structure and distribution of wealth is not meritocratic however. Whenever there is any talk of fixing the system, people want to start from the current level and declare things a meritocracy, without touching the gains anyone got from an non-level playing field before hand.

This is like saying "ok, there was a bug in World of Warcraft, that allowed a bunch of sophisticated people to level up unfairly. We've now fixed the bug, and the same is meritocratic now. However, we will not be taxing or nerfing any of the items that got duped or hacked by those who took advantage of the game flaws previously."

Saying you can't draw a line or make a definition is a fallacy. As a society, we can draw any lines we want, and what is just or ethical is defined by society. Imagine we didn't have any speed limits, would your argument be "it is impossible to define an appropriate speed limit, since the right speed limit varies by road condition, traffic, weather, etc. Is it 60 mph, or 62.49 mph? Since we can't come up with a scientific rule for this that holds, we may as well have no limit."

I'd go further and said the idea of defining the concept of "saying whatever they own and made justly" is flawed. What startup founder hasn't benefited from positive externality of others? If you invent a new drug, that is based on an insight you had reading a university journal, from a publicly financed university research center, and you make $1 billion on this insight, even though 95% of the hardc work was done by research scientists publishing openly, do you deserve to pocket this entire $1 billion while everyone else shoulders the burden of paying for the public research?

Is it too hard to just ask people not to be greedy douchebags who try to defend their earnings from a lottery ticket with libertarian philosophy, and just accept that success in this society, especially entrepreneurial success, is a complex function of many variables, only one of which is hard work, or intelligence, or coding skill? And that there are other huge pieces: your social network, your friends, where you were born, timing and plain old luck, and that it would be better to encourage a continuance of this lottery game, if more people had the resources to do it, and a social safety net to tolerate failure?

As Warren Buffet said (paraphrased), an entrepreneur isn't going to stop trying to get rich because of a 10 or 20% hike in marginal or capital gains taxes. That's absurd.

People will stop trying to get rich, if they don't have family with savings or capital to fall back on, and in which a failure will leave them destitute and broken.
Who did you use instead?
The key to Apple Music is recommending playlists, not songs
I don't think the intention is to run this test for "an extended period of time." You want to gather enough data for it to be significant and then move on to the next price you're testing.

But, it's a very good question about starting high or low. The common wisdom is to always price high and then move lower. I've seen this work well for sales by being able to offer a discount to close a deal. There's also the perception that expensive = high quality. The only real way to know for sure, however, would be to duplicate the test and go high-to-low on one and low-to-high on the other.
A musical tribute to the infamous jerks of 2015
I doubt it, and it wouldn't matter if someone got a copy because it would likely be hard to understand without their software to convert the refs in the transactions with actual data.

What makes you think they would accept some block added by an unapproved entity? And what would it matter if they did if the block didn't contain valid transactions it would be rejected and if it did include valid transactions than it would be no different from any other block on the chain. The ability to add A block doesn't matter in blockchains. The ability to create a longer chain that is accepted does and it's quite easy to avoid that possibility in private chains.

It isn't a security flaw at all.
No, the law only brought the 17% of change. The law change is binary and sudden, but the change in culture brought all the rest, gradually, year after year, before law and after.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.en....
Is Your Business Model Ready to Launch?
If they've been more compromised than something like a simple SQL injection vulnerability, it could be something like added code to log passwords or post them off somewhere else.
Love the clarity of this question.
During the Great Depression most people were smart enough to know that reducing hours, without reducing pay, was a good strategy for lowering unemployment.

Of course, capitalists tend to dislike the idea of lowering hours this way. For them, it amounts to a reduction in profit.

If hours are lowered, capitalists will presumably then invest to improve productivity so that the same output can be produced in fewer hours. When they succeed, their rate of profit improves.

Increased productivity without vast new markets opening up means that, in turn, unemployment will again rise.

So there is a virtuous cycle: Cut the work week without cutting wages. Wait for productivity to catch up. Cut the work week again.

If we had an aggressive policy of cutting hours whenever unemployment is too high, and we do this across the board for all sectors, perhaps before long farms will be more fully worked by robots, and so on.

The author of the article wrote: "John Maynard Keynes predicted in the 1930s that by about now, we would all be working a mere 15 hours a week."

Keynes did but it was Marx and Engels who predicted in the 19th century that we'd have to fight for hours reduction every step of the way.
Or you can just browse the web in lynx or w3 mode in emacs.
If the Linode Manager database only stores the hash, how would they know the password?

Weak password? Weak hashing algorithm?
The author makes no mention of the word "eleventh". "January eleven" and "January eleventh" do occur. The contribution is minor, but everything counts.

In English, we also say "11th of January" not only "January 11th".

ngrams comparison:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=11th+of+Januar...

This usage was more popular until around 1860, then it declined.

The "n-th of Month" syntactic variation deserves a spot in the analysis, yet I see no mention of it.
Honestly, it doesn't seem to work particularly well. It seems like the kind of thing they could just reimplement without fear of "breaking" anything, since there isn't really anything to break.

A much simpler algorithm would probably be preferred by many users anyway.
https://greatscottgadgets.com/hackrf/
> In the next couple of years, we're probably going to see companies like Nootrobox, Stemcentrx, and Theranos go belly up, after which investor interest in the healthcare industry will dry up, just as it did in the energy industry after the late 2000s.

More likely, what will happen is the the BS artists that smell money will go away (and their financiers) leaving the field again to those that were active there before a few high profile exits brought the smell of blood.
We're in the process of adding more context by adding search, maps, and categories. In regards to 'utility' - it will enable you to connect with others that are focused and creating something similar to what you are doing.

This has the potential to help both individuals move forward.
I guess people get scarred both ways. I've certainly been on 20+ hour interview processes that have left me with an awful offer at the end which I just could not take.

Personally, I've never been a part of a company where the code test isn't:

1) Short (1 hour)
2) On their own time
3) A real problem (algorithms are OK in my mind as long as you help them with the core problem)

I do not expect everyone to know every algorithm... I guess it is kinda weird if you do not know Dijkstra's algorithm, but I only think it is weird because the courses I took focused heavily on it and similar algorithms.

But, do I want you to know all the same stuff I know? No, definitely not. I don't want 2 of me I want me and someone else that works well with me but ultimately has their own ideas.
You can easily seed your PRNG with a cryptographic entropy source which can certainly provide enough entropy.

But in reality you don't care. You could seed the PRNG with the current system time in nanoseconds or something, and every game you'll ever play is different. Even if the PRNG has limited state, you'll never notice it as a human player.
It is about your skill set, not your title. I have met architects who were unbelievable coders. And ones who were nightmares. But every good architect that I know was also a good programmer. They might or might not actually spend much time programming, but they clearly could do it.

My understanding of the reason is that a good architect needs to be able to mentally connect every level from abstract architecture down to actual code. If you can't, then you'll eventually absorb ideas that sound good but don't really work in practice. (A random example that I dealt with was someone who didn't understand the latency added by sequential RPC round trips. And that the latency gets worse if you're making the mistake of using XML as your on the wire format...) And the failure of said ideas can always be attributed to programmers having screwed up your brilliant architecture.

For the record, this observation about architects is not original to me. I spent a year at Google, and in interview training we were clearly told that Google does not have a position for a non-coding architect. This is not to say that Google does not have positions for architects. http://research.google.com/pubs/jeff.html certainly wears the architect hat well, and is behind the design of large chunks of fundamental Google infrastructure. See http://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.co... for an example of his showing that skillset off. But they have to code. Which Jeff does. A lot.
(Linode Employee) Already got it covered, we are sending out an email to everyone in batches, but pushed out the blog first since it can be seen by everyone right away.
Sounds great, there's obviously a huge market for this.

Just don't be seduced by the dark side. Be honest with how accurate your tools are. The results will speak for themselves.
There is a difference between "demonstrate that you can program" and "waste X hours on busywork".
Nice reference, thanks for sharing.
Early Life Adversity, Individual Decision Making and Collective Outcomes
Acknowledged. I'll fix it up tonight, thanks! Cross-browser mouse events have been the biggest hassle.
They can cut through an SUV (Audi, if I'm not mistaken) engine block, though. I saw it on Matrix Revolutions.
Someone did! There's an editor for Emacs called Rudel that's supposed to work with the Gobby protocol. I've never gotten it working.
Good point - I edited that sentence to say 'SV investor' instead. There were, are, and always will be people outside of the technobubble innovating in fields like healthcare and energy, they just won't get plastered on magazine covers and fêted by the Twitterati.
Even worse, with partial evaluation or escape analysis it might still be non allocating to use a substring call today.

So the thing about advanced compilers in the java world is that they use defined behaviour(results) to do optimisations. And the best optimisations are about not doing work you can avoid. i.e. if you can avoid doing an allocation at all because the (sub)string you just created is only used locally, the object might not be allocated at all (heap|stack) but just registers are reassigned with temporary values needed to calculate the function.
So its already common to have O(n) semantics turn into O(1) or even better O(0) ;).

In the java world results are specced, not how you need to get them. (Exceptions to this rule exist).
It's one thing to say that there are independent studies that demonstrate the validity of your interventions, but it's another to say that there is a current ecology of research and researchers that support your intervention.

Can you make that stronger claim? Is there a review article that we can Google?
I feel compelled to mention- while staying in Japan I discovered buckwheat hull pillows, which have not made me smarter but are very comfortable and nice in the summer.
Xamarin.
"If you make something idiot proof, someone will just make a better idiot."
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10844306.
I am not a lawyer, but I thought the defence was if you can show that the screening criteria correlated with on the job performance it is OK. No matter what you think of protected groups using a criteria that does not correlate with performance is not very smart anyway.
We moved the blog to medium about a month ago. Since writing this, we've tested a bunch of new things, and now have about 20% better precision on the quiz (20% increase in the percentage that we predict will pass and go on to pass). There are some other interesting results (one is that easy programming problems are about as effective at screening as hard programming problems). I'll be writing more about this, with the new data/results in the next few months.
I have seen a proposal to make the cost of tickets based on value of the car. The thinking is that a person with an Audi is not at all disturbed by paying a $20 parking fine, so it isn't an incentive. It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how hard it would be to implement.
The worst that can happen to a good small company is that some overhyped and overfunded 'start-up' enters the field and spoils the trust built slowly and over a long time between the consumers and the suppliers of goods and services.

This is unfortunately not rare at all and the 'hotter' a market seems the more of these BS artists will enter. In the end you have the same product and the same relationship with your customers but you're going to end up spending a lot of time differentiating yourself from the snake oil peddlers and the damage they can do is very real.

Good companies have gone under in the wake of the scandals triggered by the fakers. Playing a long game while your field is being torn up by people playing a short game is extremely frustrating.
Down mods for this?

More information allows for better reasoning. Repeating the same test and also doing a "more independent" test are the minimum next two things you should do given a positive result on a single test.
To understand the experience of LSD, I recommend "The New Alchemy" by Alan Watts.

http://www.psychedelic-library.org/alchemy.htm
I wouldn't be so sure. It's not like most publishers have much of a choice. Unless you have your own Steam-like service (and sometimes, even if you do) you almost don't even have a choice. I'm pretty sure Valve knows this, and takes advantage of it.

In other words, Valve holds all the cards in the majority of negotiations.
Here is a quick comparison table I made for myself just yesterday.
The purpose was to get an overview what is currently possible
for what money. It most probably has errors but
the sources are mentioned, so you can check for yourself.
It's just the devices I stumbled upon, there are probably others.

Source	Device	Price	Max.	Bandwidth Resolution
Name	EUR	GHz	MHz bit
1	rtl-sdr	20	2	2	8
2	rad1o	200	4	20	8
3	hackrf	400	6	20	8
4	bladeRF	400	4	28	12
5	usrp	700	6	60	12/14
6	warp	7000	5	170	14

1 http://sdr.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/rtl-sdr

2 https://rad1o.badge.events.ccc.de/

3 http://greatscottgadgets.com/hackrf/

4 http://www.nuand.com/

5 http://www.ettus.com/

6 http://warpproject.org/trac/wiki/about

Other sources I used:

http://www.eetutorial.net/sdr-showdown-hackrf-vs-bladerf-vs-...

https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7153-rad1o

https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7119-building_and_breaking_wirel...

EDIT: The videos just mention devices and that's where I got the ideas for what people are actually using. They don't contain any device comparisons or anything like that.
Improve Your Website Traffic with Content Marketing