skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's probably true... I've been wanting to buy an unlocked Sprint version of iPhone SE 64gb and have been monitoring all the stores through their website frequently. It's not been available for the last 2 weeks and they have extra protectional measures to make sure iPhone SEs make it safely to the store.
I downvoted you because your comment was off topic. The discussion is about the interview process for business application developers. That is a very different role than what you do.
Why do you link to gitter when you should actually like to the repos instead ?
I disagree. A different approach would be to say "Don't know what happened before, but moving forward Ted is accountable for A, Alice is accountable for B, etc". Knowing what happened before serves zero purpose except to shame. All that effectively matters is what happens from this point forward. You put a process in place this time, to monitor what Ted and Alice are doing. Next time, it's your fault when it breaks, because you were forewarned, and you should have known better. Next time, you know what happened, because you put controls in place.

Or just throw someone under the bus and keep repeating the same mistakes.
To some extent that's true but they still draw conclusions from inferring things from the architecture and graffiti and then they take that to make conclusive statements about what exactly was happening there and why.
This is the answer. Asp.net 1.1 was mostly designed for "drag'n'drop" pixel aligned "form" layouts. Optimised for VB6 devs. Definitely not webby.

It wasn't until Microsoft started with asp.net MVC that asp.net finally started going somewhere properly.

And that was ironically much closer to classic asp and "real" web programming than the initial versions of asp.net ever was.
That is a much nicer interpretation of the article. I didn't get that out of it, but after reading your comment, and re-reading the article, perhaps the archaeologist meant that, but the reporter failed to make that clear. I can certainly believe that.
Yes, period for digit separator is a thing in many countries, including Russia, we were taught that way in school [1]

It was a little bit inconvenient when I started programming, but nothing too major.

Interface for money and many other things is a solved problem: we have locale settings for that in operating systems and software that respects them, works just fine.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_mark#Examples_of_use
People find it acceptable to write more harshly than they'd speak face-to-face. I wonder if all 43 or whatever points would have come up if it was done side-by-side the developer.

Also, great negative PR for this company. This sort of discussion would also come off as much less arrogant/snarky face-to-face.
I guess that's one way of doing it, but you're dependent on the quality of said ruthless reviewers, and delivery of the message is separate from the message itself. Personally, I'm more of a "kill them with kindness" guy, so while my reviews would come off as soft by the article's definition, I'd argue that they're just as effective, and my teammates still want to have a beer with me at the end of the day, instead of walking away thinking I have a stick up my ass, which an email about ruthlessness wouldn't necessarily negate.
FBI used a Tor vulnerability to find child porn on suspect's computer
Project homepage: http://swiftexpress.io/

If it meets the guidelines, SwiftExpress might make a good "Show HN". Guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html
The comment was referring to CPU architectures.
Ask HN: Is my Forbes anti-adblocker circumvention really working?
From everything I read, the whole planet hates Forbes' anti-adblocker tech on its site. For me to "get around" it, I am using Firefox (currently at 46.0, on OS X 10.11.4) with uBlock Origin. I don't get any adblocker warnings here. (When using Safari with Adblock Plus and ClickToFlash, I do.)

So is the config I'm using on FF somehow outsmarting the Forbes' anti-adblocking, or is it actually letting the undesirables through? I'm not up enough on the details here to personally know.
Not sure if it's accurate, but it seems like these inane coding challenges are more common on the coasts. The only time I've experienced any of them was at an interview with Amazon (for an Email Deliverability Manager role, of all things...).

I've been tested on code, but it's never been these inane tidbits everyone went through getting their CompSci degree. Anecdotal, I know.
As an Information Engineer, you're totally right.

Almost in any interview I had, I been asked about CS stuff. Never anything related to my field.

I don't blame them. They ask about what they know and what they think it's important, even if it's not relevant to the position.
tl;dr: Email course + a live session Q&A to teach you how to build a simple iOS app that fetches gists from the GitHub API and displays them in a table view. JSON + networking + showing results in UI.

Sign up by May 4.

One of the authors here, AMA.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_sport
Going Beyond Docker Compose
One rad hard environment is detectors at particle accelerators/colliders. There are at least two problems:

1) You'd need a lot of lead to totally shield the equipment, like meters thick. Of course partial shielding reduces the radiation load but unless you can lower it to a negligible amount, you still need to have radiation tolerant code.

2) We generally want to minimize the amount of material in a particle detector, especially at layers nearest the collisions (where radiation is most intense). These inner layers (called trackers) are used to track light charged particles, while the outer layers (called calorimeters) are used to absorb and measure energy. So we need less material throughout to ensure we get good energy measurements by the time particles get to the calorimeter.

In addition to using radiation hardened components, a lot of this is mitigated by doing as little computation as possible on the front-end readout electronics. Most of it is switched capacitor arrays, asics, and the occasional FPGA, which can be made fairly reliable since they're basically just responding to clock signals and measuring voltage (or something), and buffering these measurements. The raw data is then piped away from the detector at absurd bitrates to another part of the cavern (called the "counting room") that is much less radioactive and has lots of standard computers/electronics to do further processing.
Ok...I sort of saw reason to your first comment in regards to article after reading it, but I had to login and point out that this comment sounded hypocritical to me.

First "business" has no concept of "ethics". This is one of the classic market externalities which leads to non-pareto-optimal outcomes.

Second, the "culture" doesn't just reward "hyperbole and fraudulent misrepresentation of business success." If we take your statement at face value, there would be no venture capital firms because they would all be throwing away their money, without any return, until they ran out.

The unfortunate truth is that there _is_ money to be made with Silicon Valley type investment. There _are_ economic inefficiencies which lead to undesirable market outcomes, but it's not because venture capitalists are just throwing money away for _no_ reason.

And finally, Theranos appears (at least to me) to be an exception rather than a rule. And while I don't agree with everything the article says or the way it says it, I think there are a few important takeaways.

Theranos was able to get funding because of who they knew...it calls into question whether or not they would have been able to get funding (or the amount they did) if they had been just another start up _without_ connections. It documents the times Theranos was _denied_ funding by Silicon Valley venture capital when they tried to obtain funding the traditional way.

It also points out the disproportionate amount of media coverage they had and questions whether it had a contributory role to Theranos' rocket-like trajectory. Heck, I would bet many people who use/rely on our software have never heard of my start-up, we hardly get covered in the media. In general I think the start-ups that get large amounts of media coverage are exceptions to the general rule.

Anyway, sorry for the long comment, and I don't want to take away from the fact that there ARE problems with Silicon Valley and business regulation in America in general.
You saw "allowed" like it's a bad or unusual thing. Allowing is the way Google works.
But if you're an ancient man, what reason do you have for describing the color of the sky? Does it have any consequence on your life? Sure, it's always there and it's huge, but if the sky is blue... so what?

If it's green, you have a reason to say it's green. If it's black, you have a reason to say it's black. If it's blue... who cares? It's almost always blue, and it never indicates anything that you need to be concerned about. Kind of like an ancient, completely homogeneous society doesn't need a word to indicate the color of their skin. It's just skin colored. Until they meet another tribe with a different color of skin.

There are plenty of things we still don't have words for the color of. Steel comes to mind. We literally just call the color "steel" because steel is always the color of steel. It's not quite grey, it's not quite silver. And silver is colored silver without a distinct word for it. Because the only way we need to talk about the color of steel or silver or gold is when they're not colored like steel or silver or gold. Blued steel, rose gold, white gold, etc. But if it's colored gold, it's just gold. And if they sky is blue, it's just the sky.
I didn't mean that they would, just that light weight and performance get a lot of consideration in cycling so it can be expected that a product category will address them even if it isn't aimed at pros.
When you go on interviews you should be interviewing them as well. So for every question they ask you should ask them one as well. If they ask you to code up something them you should ask them to code up something to see if they qualify as a group of people you would like to work for. This might not go well at some companies which should be sign that you don't want to work for them.
Forget Your Desk (or Even the Beach), You Could Be Working on a Boat
Motorbike racing?
Books are tempting, they have glossy covers, they are about mastering a subject. All things which lure us into buying them with 1 click on Amazon.

But I learn way more if I find a problem I want to solve. Then, I find my way through countless online resources and it's so much more effective than reading a book from beginning to end (which I can't do anyway).

Just an example: when I got into JS Promises/Generators/Iterators/Async/Await I read more than 100 online sources. I read multiple articles about the same topic again and again just because I didn't like the example of one author or there was an interesting detail in the other version. Getting just one book, means just one author and yes I love it to dive into one book on the plane. But nowadays with the Internet books are overrated. I remember going through the book store when I was a kid and buying an Assembler book for my Commodore Amiga for incredible 60 bucks—this was my only resource to knowledge next to print publications, they were expensive and maybe these memories make books still valuable to us.

Another thing I recently realized: reading source codes of popular libs (my last one was Koa). Once you get used to it it's not just very helpful but it teaches you so much and often there is an underlying goal (you want to use a lib you want to fully understand).

Books are not bad and for getting into something entirely new there are maybe the best start because in the moment you buy them you commit yourself to learn something from beginning to end. That's good and sometimes really necessary to fully comprehend new languages for example.
I'm assuming 'burntsushi is familiar with that line of argument, and disagrees about the philosophical meaning of "perpetual freedom of users" here. :) I think it's disingenuous to claim that someone doesn't care about freedom when they care about it under a different worldview (and also disingenuous, on the other side, to respond as if your worldview was the only one.) You both know what copyleft is and that some people prefer simple permissive licenses, I'm pretty sure.
Helmets and Apparel Store – Home Page
He posts a link to his github page, ffs! Sure, he could've modified that, but that just sounds incredibly silly, considering how open he is about everything else: https://github.com/sahat

I spend maybe four hours per coding in a moderately complex domain where I have zero need to know how to write a bfs. To ask someone to do it, then to ding them on it is just self-masturbatory behavior.
I do not think junior people realize what senior people see when they look at your GitHub work. Without exception, the crappier the oeurve the more the candidate wants me to look at his or her GitHub.

Read a single user's Tweets going back a month and even your best friend starts to look a little nuts. Do it with their git history and you'll sometimes get a very different impression of their work habits, too.

In my experience, these services tend to make people look worse, not better. But I can't always give the benefit of the doubt when I'm making a critical hiring decision.
God, how insufferable. "Our code reviews are so ruthless because our clients (and by extension, us) are so much better than everyone else!" But apparently we can't write a bot or a pre-commit hook to re-order imports so instead we'll write some non-sensical in-house jargon (because typing out the full explanation is too much effort, even though we are the best of the best because our clients are so excellent and demanding). But don't worry, we'll write a 2 page email to explain this jargon.
But they have no reason to hide it, as in the frame can be in a shape giving more room or at least making it easier to access for maintance without "breaking" the aesthetics of whole.
Sounds like a fine way to lose your teeth.
Why It’s Hard to Recognize the Unlikely
When I hired a plumber for my heating firm, I put her through a hazing interview, tested her knowledge of Maxwell relations and thermodynamic equations.
Oh wait, no I didn't. As she has been a plumber for years, so we recognised her skill and experience and cut to the chase.

When I hired a programmer for our doomed to die VC life support funded fart of a project, we put her through numerous rounds of comp sci bingo and algorithm hell. Why? Not sure. Everyone else does. I mean, hiring in IT is shit, why should we break from the industry norm? Why should we want to care about the candidates? Right? I mean if Google can do it...
As a team, decide how much you care. Some teams won't care much at all, and will follow a "hey as long as it works" attitude. Other teams will be deeply interested in making their code as good as it could be, and will want comments about doing things more cleanly or elegantly and will view PR review as a chance to learn and improve.

As long as everyone's on the same page, and sharing the same attitude, that drive to improve will come across as a positive thing rather than a jerk move. But if you're the one person with that attitude on a team of good-enoughers, yeah, not so much.
Hey, everyone! I'm Josh Brown and I co-created this course. I'd love to answer any questions you have about how it works -- or about REST & JSON in Swift in general.

Here's one of our most common questions so far:

> What medium is this course in? Youtube? PDFs that I can read through?

The lessons come via email, and we're going to have a Live Q&A chat on GrokSwift.com towards the end of the course.

We've put a lot into this, and we hope you love it!
Those guys have already kind of maxed out their authority. Anyway, they're more like the high priests in this analogy.

What about the high school senior who's looking to be the next student body president, or the mid level manager looking to be promoted into the executive layer?

Build status. Increase your level of authority.
Hrm. Musicians play because they enjoy it. Know many a people who, despite or regardless of success, will play just for the enjoyment of it.

Programming is similar. You hear the stories about how some tech founders focused their energy on programming, it took off and they dropped out of wherever.

I'd argue that for every one of those, there are scores of people who do it just for fun like they did, get nowhere but do it anyway because they like it. Just like there are scores of guitarists for your Clapton, Hendrix, etc.

Open source contributions to me look a lot like people, for the most part, enjoying themselves and getting better at a hobby.
I'm as huge a fan of USB-C as anyone, but this is simply not a good idea
I agree that the design of the nation's site is better/more modern. However, when I landed on the site, I was able to read the first sentence before a modal subscription form popped up. I clicked the little x button in the top right of that modal, and it did a full page load redirecting me to an article about hillary clinton, and then popped the subscription modal again.

I clicked the x button again and it did the same fucking thing, so I gave them the email address go.fuck.yourself@gmail.com, found the article I was trying to read and noticed that it was sourced from the link I dropped above. That page loaded quickly and showed me what I wanted to see, the content.

/rant
Intelligent? Brainless slime can 'learn': study
I wonder what the percentage is for "actual" issues?

I see a lot of support & pilot error questions.
I know of someone who quit his day job, then spent several months studying algorithms, the books about passing Google-style interviews, memorized everything, practised interviews a lot. Then he sent his carefully-crafted resume, scheduled several interviews and flew to San Francisco.

It worked. He's working at a top company for several times his former salary, he had several competing offers with HUGE bonuses and equity offers.

However, I don't know if I have the commitment to do that, and I'm not sure if everyone SHOULD have to do that.
Babel is a program which compiles a newer version of JS into an older version, so that you can use the new version on platforms that don't support it yet. I can't tell if you're aware of what it is.
fwiw, TypeScript -> Babel is doable, if painful. I have it set up in my repo here: https://github.com/thomasboyt/manygolf

I agree that Flow currently the superior type system (and, unlike TypeScript, not a complete nightmare to set up if you're wanting to use Babel/Webpack instead of manually running file builds through your editor like it's 2002), but TypeScript has significantly more momentum behind it making it a much more practical solution for basically anyone who doesn't currently work at Facebook. There are also several exciting new features coming to the type system that brings it closer to parity with Flow:

Non-nullable types: https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/pull/7140

Control flow type analysis: https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/pull/8010

I wish TypeScript tried to better-integrate with the greater JavaScript ecosystem and stop acting as a language of its own. Thankfully, the "es6" target gets it pretty close (I think it still compiles some es7 features, meaning you can't have Babel handle everything yet), and the non-standard module syntax seems to be a thing of the past.

I hope the gap can be bridged between the TypeScript and Babel communities, so that TypeScript can one day be shipped as a Babel transform, same as Flow.
And compiling in a debug mode also results in huge recompile times. Is it such a problem?

There is no big difference between building with contracts and logs on (log level is selected dynamically, no need to recompile) and building with debug symbols/suppressed optimisations.
They should install Bluetooth sniffers before steep sections, it would be cool to see a little ping on the radio and then watch one of the racers magically pull ahead.
Show HN: Sleepbus
The being able to generate more power than it uses is a problem for nuclear fusion reactors.

The problem with modern nuclear reactor designs is that they're just that, designs. Great ideas people in comment sections love to mentally masturbate about. In reality almost all nuclear reactors are decades old.

Politics alone ensure nuclear reactors with the exception of maybe fusion (which will be way too late for climate change) will never get off the ground. In the meantime renewables, solar especially, get cheaper and more efficient every day, not designs but actual installations.
> the culture of developers tends to the view that something which has
> always worked in every important implementation should be allowed and
> continue to work in new implementations

Yes, and X3J11 stated as its first guiding principle,

> Existing code is important, existing implementations are not.

But then they committed the original sin against “simple C” by inventing ‘volatile’, breaking systems code written when p[0]=x was expected to write to location p. Unlike ‘const’, with which the programmer grants additional license to the compiler, C89 granted the non-‘volatile’ license to the compiler by default. In retrospect, I think C would have been better off retaining do-what-I-wrote as the default, and requiring the programmer to grant the compiler license to do otherwise. C already had the ‘register’ keyword to indicate that a variable should be compiled for speed and need not be literally preserved according to a naïve reading of the code.
>Has a misdiagnosis and resulting fall-out actually been tracked down?

In the VC system - certainly.

When you have startups offering a real service with real profitability struggling to find cash for expansion, while some well-connected placeholder who is incompetent at best and fraudulent at worst ambles in and gets $400m for hype and promises, a "PR shitstorm" is the least of everyone's worries.

It's good that some people weren't convinced. But enough people were convinced for $400m to change hands.

That's really not a good result for a system that likes to pretend it's good at making smart choices about funding.
Indeed. You would think that someone who is smart, capable, and clearly determined early on (as in pre-Google interview) that many potential employers would ask algorithm questions.... Would, you know, study up on some algorithms?

It probably isn't the "right" way for programming interviews, but once you identify the rules of the game, it behooves you to play the game accordingly, no?
Rail suffers a lot from inflexibility and the massive redundancy required to survive the occasional track maintenance. Trailer-on-railroad does not really improve on that. A true logistics moonshot would have to go all the way to "roadgoing, powered railcars" that could platoon on that double-track and maybe opt into some form of power delivery (overhead line?) where available, switching on the fly between rubber/air and steel wheelsets as required.

The beauty of this expensive approach is that it would not only obviate waiting for a train going in the right direction and the requirement for mode switching terminals (those are just the fair weather sailing benefits), but also eliminate the inherent fragility of highly interdependent railroad schedules. Where conventional rail quickly breaks down completely, road can gracefully degrade towards a massive traffic jam slowly grinding forward on some dirt road fallback route.
Bug fixing and handling bug reports the right way
In this articles terms, I'm ruthless when doing code reviews. I do it because

* We have a code style to follow, and if we don't we might as well not have it.

* It ups the game from the developers, they double check their code before checkin, and believe it or not, they catch more errors this way.

* It have created an environment where we can openly talk about interative improvements.
Ant Financial’s Different Breed of Unicorn