skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It happens -- mostly with executives who have the authority and wherewithal to make a quick decision.

There three basic criteria in making the hiring decision, a variation of Strengths, Motivation, & Fit.

- Can they do the job?

- Will they do the job?

- Can you live with them?

On this subject, George Bradt is particularly good> http://www.forbes.com/sites/georgebradt/2011/04/27/top-execu...
The primary banker of the US government is the organized society living in North America.
You need the language functionality of casting anyway, no? Best that there's one and only one way to step around the type system.
Co-Founder of Brightwork here. This is great and would echo this sentiment.
If they can jail someone for not decrypting data, what stops law enforcement from piping /dev/random into kiddie_porn.tc and getting some 'expert' to 'guess' that it contains illegal images as an excuse to jail some inconvenient individual forever?
The ability to interview will only get you so far though.

At that rate he would be a colleague of mine, and I wonder if he would actually bring anything to that table.

I have worked with plenty of people who come from non-tech backgrounds and are phenomenally productive, and he may be one of those people.

Either way I would pay to be a fly on the wall during his 3-month review.
What laws are you talking about re sex trafficking?
> It doesn't impact destructuring at all because destructuring lines start with let

That's just not true. You can have destructuring assignments, not just declarations: `[a, b] = [b, a];` is perfectly legal ES2015.
I think 'crank' may be overstating it. His PhD is from MIT, and he's been a full professor at UC Irvine for 25+ years, publishing pretty continuously.

While that certainly doesn't mean he's right -- plenty of people accept that Penrose is a genius who is wrong about certain ideas. I think dismissing this guy as a crank is not the best way to disagree.
This means that anyone who uses freenet can have a warrant against them. I would attack the warrant itself. From what I remember about freenet (it's been many years since I looked into it), plausible deniability is given because each node is requesting keys that another node requested. For instance, if node A wants file X, then A will request X from B, C, and D, who will in turn request it from more nodes, and no one knows who the original requester was. So every person on freenet is holding a cache of data that other nodes have requested, and has no idea what was requested, and are themselves requesting files on behalf of other nodes which they have no idea about.

In summary, if you are on freenet, you are not only requesting your own files, but files on behalf of others, some of which could potentially be illegal material.

If being on freenet and requesting a key (even for someone else) is enough to get a warrant, all people using freenet from a traceable IP should immediately get off freenet.

I don't know anyone who uses it, I thought tor superseded it, but this sets a very dangerous precedent. The defense should be reaching out to a computer scientist who can explain the fundamentals to the court.
My guess would be in data found on unencrypted drives that reference files on the encrypted drive. For example, you might have filenames that hint at child pornography in metadata (itunes, WMP, etc.) or CLI history.

Sure, the file might be unfortunately named, but, in this case maybe it was enough evidence to hold him?
That's probably because you're thinking too much about traditional controls.
If that is the case was the universe once finite and then went infinite during the early (big bang) expansion? I don't understand how something could have expanded if it was always infinite in size. I'm not even sure the concept of expansion even makes sense. What is infinite + 1? It's just infinite. It seems more like the expansion is a distribution of internal things.
Ok, so I'm advocating forcing users to always use match directly if they want to do that. That helps ensure unsafe code looks unsafe.
Of course it's a good thing. Cyber criminals can purchase TF2 without having to use Paypal or a credit card now!
And actually find people willing to fund you.
Sure, but aimbots aren't as much of a problem if they have to aim like humans - which you can enforce. You can buy some advantage like this, yes, but not much if it's implemented correctly. Additionally if you can't detect a player behind you for example, you're still dead, doesn't matter if you aimbot or not. "World class player" perhaps, but only if your bot can really play as well as a human within the confines of the game - knowing which corners to check, knowing when to look behind you, where to be aimed at a given time, etc. Your bot needs to be a hell of a lot smarter than a bot that's just given all the data and has to do basic trigonometry to aim at their head - your bot has to think a lot more like a human and may even underperform many humans.

Ultimately no matter what you do, some small percentage of your players will cheat. Every major game on the market has paid cheats which fully bypass the protections available for it. It's better if those cheats can only buy them a little than buy them a lot. It's not worth investing a lot of effort in more than basic cheat protection, it is worth investing it in handling as much as you can server side and exposing as much as you can client side as that is something cheaters can't game.
So 3 months of training and 6 months of memorizing algorithms.
That's worth 130K + 25k signing bonus(let's leave RSU aside)?!
The guy never built a real production system, never shipped a product, wasn't an online tech celebrity, nothing.
Something is very wrong here.
This is very interesting. I'm all about avoiding monotonous, boring, and time-consuming exercise. At the risk of getting a small dopamine high by telling you about my plans and then not actually doing it, I'm going to try to make a new daily habit of stretching and then jumping around my house and doing burpees for 1 or 2 minutes at the beginning of the day.

I've also been regularly using the Calm.com app for meditation practice. (It's less an app and more just a recorded voice walking you through some guided meditation.) But it's been really good, and I feel like it's having a positive effect on my day.

I should also try to keep doing a few minutes on Duolingo. But man, forming habits is hard.
Your detailed focus misses the big picture. You could easily be read as conveying that Hopper didn't invent the compiler and compilation. This is not correct.

Hopper both invented the concept of compiler and wrote the 1st one. In 1952 Hopper's A_0 compiler transformative to the prevailing wisdom that computers were only programmable arithmatical tabulators. Hopper (like Lovelace) envisaged meta-programming, that numbers could represent algebras & transform code itself, i.e. compile.

So she rightly deserves the accolade. Assembly language was 1955 so Hopper wins. Plankalkül was unpublished & before general purpose programmable computers (ENIAC) were built so irrelevant.

A_0 was the first working program to transform source code to binary program and distinguish between the two. Before that 1s and 0s were entered by programmers punching cards so neither is that article assertion incorrect.

Times, roles & meanings were different then. Programmers were not allowed near computers but submitted punch cards to Operators. Computer still meant automated calculator, usually a person. Program was programme and not a verb yet.

Correct to say that then all that was needed was a linker and that at today's scale a linker not the whole of compilation, but still a vital part.

Hopper also used her position to lobby succesfully for her idea and create standards for machine independent languages that became COBOL, on which banking still runs today. She had the idea, the 1st implementation & made it a success.

That she coined the term bug to communicate all types of errors & faults to superiors is still transformative today.

Using computer in the old sense of calculator, not its contempory sense of general purpose computer is also too narrow, why not just say Abacus rather than Antikythera ?

Your point [2] is interesting but irrelevant, Plankalkül was unpublished, it was a tool of thought not a computer program.
I am a current undergrad student, so here's my understanding of the subject. There are some basic fundamental classes that are pretty consistent across the board. You'll start with some introductory classes that cover the basics of programming, such as loops, if/then/else statements and maybe basic OOP. You'll have some level of Computer Architecture course(s) where you learn the basic structure of a computer. Things like CPU pipe-lining, memory, branch prediction, assembly programming and other things. You cover basic algorithms and data structures. Things like lists, queues, stacks, as well as different sorting algorithms, graph algorithms, and basic algorithm design principles such as Dynamic Programming and Divide and Conquer. Most programs also have some introduction to automata and computability. Finally, you probably will have something courses on things like Operating Systems.

I've noticed that some places then separate Computer Science from Software Engineering. I think this is a good idea as "Computer Science" becomes more and more synonymous with programming in general.

As far as mathematics is concerned, we take calculus, linear algebra, discrete Math, probability and statistics.

Other than this, the rest of your time is mostly filled with electives of your choice depending on your interest area. I have several extra math courses planned as well as some software design and a programming languages course.

Obviously it varies a lot from program to program, but this is what I've noticed. For what it's worth, I'm a student at the University of Houston, and I also read up on the programs of some bigger name schools such as MIT, University of Texas, and Rice.
Thank you, that was fantastic! :) Classic South Park. Direct but with lots of truth in there.
It's briefly mentioned in the article but I don't think ya'll realize Haseeb is a (in)famous ex-poker player. He made high quality training videos, and did very, very well in poker. He was also at one time Daniel Cates's (junglemans) roommate (and life coach? lol) who is probably one of the strongest poker players in the world.

All these other things were for sure the real factors into the negotiation/hiring. The bootcamp meant almost nothing (besides the 6m+ experience showing he could train people to code like he's proven he could train people in poker).
> As a compromise I've seen some libraries offer weeded books for very cheap or even give them away for free, which seems like a good way to please both sides.

Another option might be to try putting them on the "library book sale" shelf for ultra cheap... if that's legal.
Another article : http://thehustle.co/why-wework-is-worth-so-much

Quote : "Boston Properties, the largest publicly-traded office real estate company, owns 47 million square feet of office space and has a market cap of $18B. The company has real, tangible, assets and is valued only slightly more than WeWork who’s renting a total of 80 offices."
could this be easily done without using boost?
I think everyone who regards this post's title as clickbait need to have their eyes checked.

It clearly says, the benefits of "x" DURING exercise. In other words, incorporating this one minute superblast into your already active session will lead to the benefit.

Sheesh!
No. Having a lack of buttons means controls for games designed with buttons in mind would be terrible.

Look to those games for inspiration, but the games made need to first and foremost embrace the touchscreen, rather than attempt to emulate traditional controls.
>You need to have a valid payment method. I'm not sure how better to explain this... a credit card or paypal account etc. It's validated when the payment clears. Both of these have strong identity data linked to them.

No, paypal doesn't do ANY identity verification for customers beyond fraud scoring and AVS.

For cards, you can just get a prepaid. And most cards outside of the US don't even support AVS, so there's no way for valve to validate any of the information you give them besides the PAN and CVV.

>KYC (Know your customer) / AML (Anti Money Laundering) compliance means validating the identities of those you do business with. That means, using Steam to launder money isn't possible. This should be pretty obvious.

I don't think Valve is covered (or considers themselves to be covered) by either of those, and they certainly don't appear to be doing any of the typical KYC stuff.
I get suspicious when some proof is so complex it must be mediated by an expert. I think the burden is on the prover to make their case, rather than on the audience to understand the case.
We definitely observed such drops that we attributed to presumably internal ELB scaling activity, but they happen so occasionally that for the moment they haven't been a real issue, as opposed to this one described in the article which happened consistently at every deployment in our test environment.
Genuinely curious: Don't famous/extremely-good poker players make a ton of money playing the game? How does 200k/year compare to the kind of money this guy could have made if he remained in Poker?
To me a good game is an experience to immerse myself in, and for some reason I have never managed to do so on portable devices such as mobile phones.

I played my first videogames on an Atari 2600. I remember Defender, Space Invaders, Night Driver, Pac Man, Adventure and River Raid. Then Super Mario Bros, Zelda, Battle City, and a multitude of titles on those '1000 games' Japanese cartridges with physical switches on NES and later SNES, many of these in [black and white][1]!

The SNES was my last console. My parents gave me a 386 PC-XT where I played a [version of Space War][2], Sopwith, Rogue, Falcon 1.0, Double Dragon 2, Sim City 2000 and Doom. On later computers I played Daggerfall, XCOM, TIE Fighter, System Shock, Thief, Subspace, Grand Theft Auto, Jagged Alliance, Far Cry 2.

Presently I'm enjoying Elite: Dangerous and Metal Gear Solid V on a Macbook Pro.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAL-M

[2]: http://hypertexthero.com/logbook/2006/06/spacewar/

(Edited for formatting.)
I don't think I've ever been this paranoid around privacy in my life for a couple personal and interesting reasons.

-I disclosed a major security failure at comcast yesterday. It was surprisingly effectively handled and fixed, but in the process I tweeted their CISO after not being able to find any contact for her or even their security team (their security team told me they're going try to fix process this now). She blocked my twitter account the next day, but followed/unfollowed me sometime much later in the day. I can't help shake a weird feeling from that on so many levels. https://imgur.com/ghT0t8o

-Suin' the mayor of Chicago next week for his phone records after struggling to go through FOIA for about a year and a half. In the process, they were willing to disclose phone numbers of non-government phones to me with the last four digits redacted. They won't give me government owned phone numbers dialed for "privacy concerns" (HAH). FOIA specifically mentions that their privacy shouldn't be considered for redaction/non-disclosure. Lots of other things and I'd like to write something up on it after it's all done, but I can't help shake a visceral paranoia when I walk outside or do internets at the moment.

I'm not going to let that paranoia turn into meekness, though, and if anything, it's made me much more open about my concerns and has even thrown me deeper into these rabbit holes. I've had lawyers, friends and family ask me I'm afraid that something bad will happen, and the answer is mostly "yes, but it's just a fear for the unknown and not for my life, etc". Being open about it seems to reduce that fear.
Venezuela Doesn't Have Enough Money to Pay for Its Money
Yeah, this is very little difference here between the seizure laws enforcement uses to steal money from citizens. They can make any claim they want and you are forced to prove otherwise while they have no requirement to prove guilt
I posted this on the blog but I'm copying it here because I have to wait for approval on the blog.

If you didn't know, Clojure's dispatch mechanism is based on the Common Lisp library, filtered functions[0], which is described in this paper[1].

[0] https://github.com/pcostanza/filtered-functions

[1] http://www.p-cos.net/documents/filtered-dispatch.pdf
The submitted title seems rather more accurate, given that there's no evidence the drone in question existed and there never was. The BBC's title and reporting suffers from the usual unwillingness to admit they were wrong.
I would also assume that a lot of us barely exercise at all. (Myself included.) For people like us, jumping around and doing burpees for 1 minute every morning might seem something that's achievable, and could be a very positive thing.
I'm completely with you on this one. Downvoters have their hopes too low clearly.
You can too if you have access to a "web-browser".

His PhD is from MIT, and he's been a full professor at UC Irvine for 25+ years, publishing pretty continuously. Lots of papers online.
Hm, after re-reading a couple times, I think I merely misinterpreted how you said "OCaml supports parametric polymorphism" and "Haskell supports ad-hoc polymorphism." Based on your wording I thought you were saying that Haskell only supports ad-hoc polymorphism and OCaml only supports parametric polymorphism. Surely there was something in my head at 2am that made me think you were off in your description, but I don't know what it was. Sorry! I would edit it if I could.

EDIT: I think the line that stood out to me as being odd was "That's why OCaml has more than one print function, and why it has integer and floating point versions of operators like + and *." which was after you explained what parametric polymorphism was. So my interpretation was "OCaml supports parametric polymorphism, which is why there are multiple addition functions for different types." Of course, the real reason isn't due to supporting parametric polymorphism, but specifically because OCaml lacks support for ad-hoc polymorphism.

Interestingly, OCaml does have sort of pseudo-ad-hoc polymorphic implementations for comparison operators.

val (<) : 'a -> 'a -> bool = <fun>

But this is a wonderfully hacky implementation.
I find it less and less likely that Bitcoin will be replaced given the amount of investment (both time and money) put into the system. If Bitcoin was remaining stagnant, I'd be pessimistic as well, but there are a multitude of improvements that will be deployed over the course of the next year.
And just imagine doing it with property which often costs ten to one hundred times as much as a vehicle! A sort of AirBnB for houses, if you will...

Just think of the unbelievable number of ways that could go wrong:

Renters could mess up a house in any number of ways, from making a mess with food and drink, to damaging parts of the interior, to having accidents and causing serious damage. Are owners expected to do a full damage assessment pre/post every rental? Nobody will accept any liability otherwise.

That's overlooking any "party like a rock-star" issues which can ruin the contents.

Think of all the nefarious activity a renter could get up to. Domestic abuse, public order offences. Drug dealing or trafficking. Congratulations, your address is now on a watchlist.

Imagine the disputes over how much electricity has been used, or how much milk is left in the fridge. Let alone what type of milk a renter puts in there.

There's no way any ordinary insurance policy would cover this kind of scheme. Your premiums can, and should, skyrocket.

Then contemplate the practicalities of all this. A renter will have to travel from their home to the location of the property, then presumably return home. If that requires payment for transport, who pays?

Don't get me wrong; I can't wait for the future where nobody owns a home and we all live in autonomous coffin hotels that are efficiently utilized, monitored and cleaned automatically as needed. But this halfway house is a nightmare.

TL;DR: The concept of renting property to third parties has existed for a long time, and the problems are well understood.
The article mentions that the EFF is involved.

http://arstechnica.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/effamicu...
They are in absolutely no way protected from competition. Their competition includes going outside, reading a book, etc. Not to mention the plenty of other content producers out there.

Protected from competition? Are you kidding me?
but what games did he play ?
Author here. The library itself (stackless_coroutine.hpp) has no dependencies other than C++14, and you can easily use it in any C++14 project with any async library.

For writing an interesting example, I wanted to do an example of how the library can simplify async network code. A widely used async C++ library is Boost.Asio, so that is what I used for the example.

TLDR: The library itself has no dependency on Boost. Boost.Asio was just used for the example.
If he's not charged with anything, then why do they need to know what's on his encrypted drives (which he may or may not be able to access anyway).
> an organism tuned to fitness might see small and large quantities of some resource as, say, red, to indicate low fitness, whereas they might see intermediate quantities as green, to indicate high fitness. Its perceptions will be tuned to fitness, but not to truth. It won’t see any distinction between small and large—it only sees red—even though such a distinction exists in reality.

But, what about the fact that, we, as human thinkers, are _aware_ that this is what's going on in our own perception?

Doesn't that give us an ability to both imagine a model of reality beyond our perception and also to test that model?
Yeah. People are using it.

-- For starters, Watson has taken residence at three of the top cancers hospitals in the US -- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and the Mayo Clinic -- where it helps with cancer research and patient care.

-- In Australia, the company ANZ Global Wealth is focused on the latter. The company uses the Watson Engagement Advisor Tool, an NLP SaaS offering, to observe and field customer questions. Similarly, DBS bank in Singapore uses Watson to ensure the proper advice and experience for customers of its wealth management business.

etc etc. -- http://www.zdnet.com/article/ibm-watson-what-are-companies-u...
Last updated August 2015
The orthodox explanation is that with individuals, it is very difficult to distinguish between consumption and expenses incurred for the purposes of producing income. A business entity gets to deduct everything necessary to its upkeep because it exists solely for the purpose of producing income. A person, on the other hand, does not. Some part of what you spend on housing is attributable to your need to be near work, etc, but you have an interest in securing shelter for reasons that have nothing to do with your work.

As a practical matter, individuals do mostly get to offset the costs of producing income. Individuals who own houses effectively get to deduct the cost of housing through the mortgage interest deduction. Individuals who don't own their own house probably don't itemize either, and get the standard deduction. At $12,000 for a family, it probably a reasonable proxy for the component of living expenses attributable to the need to work to produce income.

There are some obvious gaps, child care being the main one, which is almost entirely attributable to working rather than consumptive.
FYI, the IIHS small overlap frontal test, which I personally consider as the "hardest" test today, is done at 40mph. By that saying, a crash in the city can be worse than the test result.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance_Institute_for_Highwa...