skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A linked list is probably literally the simplest data structure in all of CS. No, you'll probably never need to write one in real life because most modern languages come with one, but exactly because it's so simple and so ubiquitous, it speaks quite loudly about the level of abstraction at which you operate if you can't implement one quite quickly.
Something tells me that the bill for renting all those billboard sites is never going to be paid.
I don't know enough to know if the range you specify is right, but I agree that it is silly to say 10^-22 is a ridiculously small number. For one thing, when talking about the size of probabilities, we should talk about the size of the exponent. -22 is not a ridiculously small number.

People base the idea that there should be other life in the universe on the fact that life developed at least once, which is here on earth. The odds are it would happen either 0 times or many times, but not exactly once.

This argument is reasonable if there is one universe. Another scenario is that there is some god awful large number of universes (for round numbers let's say 10^1000 raised to the 10^10000 power, which would be a huge underestimate), and that most of these universes contain no life, because the odds of life developing are also very, very small. We ARE special in that we are viewing one of the small fraction of universes that has life, because if it didn't we wouldn't be viewing it. This allows for life to exist exactly once in our universe. There could also be universe where life developed independently more than once, but the odds of us being in that universe are very small relative to the odds of being in a universe with one life.

But how would there be many universes? Here is one possibility that is surely controversial. In quantum mechanics, things happen in parallel. Is that electron spin up or spin down? It is both, but the electron in one state is not influenced by the electron in the other state. Each exists wholly on its own. This is true whether you believe the Stockholm or the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. These two cases only differ when some special life form makes an observation, in which cases something very dramatic happens in the Stockholm interpretation (which is observationally indistinguishable from the "nothing different" that happens in the Many Worlds interpretation). If we think about the simplest form of life that can not make observations rather than looking for human-like life, the distinction between Stockholm and Many Worlds is mute. These parallel states of the system form our many universes, some that contain life and some that do not.
Or they're spending money on credit which they doubt they'll have to repay since they don't use their real name.
Some actual Ted Talks appear to be parody:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8znQZ1RUckg

Sad to say, that guy was my co-founder, of a startup we ran together for much of the era from 2002 to 2008.
I had a couple of cool personal projects, but what really impressed them was that I sent them a minimum viable product of what they were trying to build.

It was a music company so I put my hacky Perl skills to work and crawled youtube, songkick, musicbrainz and made a small music discovery website with cool features such as predicting the popularity of an artist based on social media metrics. I was like "I can do that look lol".

They called me for an interview, I showed them my notebook full of ML notes and they asked me to start on Monday.
I have tried for a while now, and I thought I could do both. But... (1) It is difficult on a personal level--for example last month SageMathCloud got hit by a major DDOS attack 15 minutes before I had to teach a class. I have family and though I love to work, there are only so many hours in a day. (2) There I am at a big old state university, and there are many complicated byzantine conflict of interest and IP rules, which have been a pain to navigate, and our university commercialization office isn't the best. (3) Investors greatly prefer that the person/company they are investing in is not just a side project for the person running it. All that said, the mathematics department at University of Washington is full of supportive faculty; I'm doing what I'm doing more for the people I want to hire than just for myself.
Erlang/OTP has a lot of unique features not available in any other environment and Elixir gives you the power of Erlang/OTP with much easier syntax. It's different not because they are trying to be cool, but because it's driven by the unique requirements that allow all those unique features.
It's not establishment double-think, and that claim itself is rather silly. I'm quite sympathetic to claims that we're too quick to dismiss people with mental illness, but when it comes to people living their lives in harmful ways based on delusions (which is common in the sovereign citizen movement), I'm all in for calling it mental illness, or something like that. People can believe whatever nutty things they want, I say, but once they put themselves (or loved ones, or whatever) in harm's way based on those beliefs, and don't change them when consequently harmed, well, what else do you want to call it? Delusional stupidity?
> Just because someone can't do exactly the type of program you're looking for, or in a particular way, doesn't mean they can't program. It only means they couldn't program what you asked in the way you asked. A fail for sure, but that doesn't always mean what you think.

Two relevant examples of this come to mind.

The first is that the author mentions recursion as a fundamental skill. While I agree, as a Python developer the vast majority of my experience with recursion is thinking "Oh, wait - I can't do that, I'll reach the stack limit". In fact I would go so far as to argue that for any language without proper tail recursion, recursion is almost certainly the wrong way to solve a problem.

The second is the oDesk Python proficiency exam. I took it on a whim a while back and failed. Many of the questions were about obscure parts of the Python standard library. I can't imagine many jobs requiring me to know how to parse email message archives without opening the docs, but apparently that's what they were looking for.
No, they can just have higher standards, since there's more interest in working there (due to the high pay).
Or AI learned of the off switch and executed the off switch on the file.
RazorSQL 7 Crack and Serial Keygen Free Download
A Clojure with the Rust politics would be interesting..
It's a somewhat common problem with Lisps specifically and dynamically typed languages in general.

Because the bottom-level operations won't let you do things that are completely idiotic, everything is "safe", so maintaining the sanctity[1] of higher level abstractions sometimes gets lost in the shuffle.

I once wrote a blog post about related issues.[2]

[1] Ok, so there are lots of terms with just slightly the wrong meanings. I came up with a new one. Sue me.

[2] http://maniagnosis.crsr.net/2011/06/some-lisp-suggestions.ht...
The post is talking about people who cannot implement fizzbuzz. I think you're safe.
It's hard, man. I think most people who call themselves programmers could write some simple programs or tinker together a really simple app that was fragile and buggy. To do programming _right_, where your software has real impact on people's lives and you can't afford to kinda sorta get it right...that's not something most people have in them. And there are levels to this. I've worked alongside people whose code made me recoil in horror. It's like watching a toddler skipping merrily through a minefield, just no clue how careless they're being. On the other hand, I've worked with others who pointed out things I've done or an approach I was considering, and I've had to blush when they pointed out how I was sprinting headlong into a world of error...but their filter for bad logic was so fine and accurate that many other people wouldn't have thought twice about the work in question. Computers are machines, they're cold and unfeeling and they won't meet you half way...either you've codified your logic and presented it to the computer perfectly, or you lose. In other words, the best programmers may not have to be cold or mechanical in personality, but without fail they can wield logic with mechanical precision--as much as human beings are capable of, anyways. I'm not sure we know exactly what we're asking when we're trying to find the meat bodies who best interface with machines.
Could you elaborate why? (Haven't done much C) - Is the point of view that it is the languages job to prevent the programmer from relying on uncertainties?
Thanks for the corrections. There are many reasons to dislike X, but sounds like speed isn't one.
No, you are taking "great" out of context.

It is great that you can safely take a nap in a public space without fear of being robbed or worse (as one would have to fear outside Japan), without having police called on you, and with general public acceptance of such action.

Nobody will think you're a bum or a mad or look at you funny. Try that somewhere else and let's see what happens!

Japanese corporate culture is terrible and that is sad. I don't have an answer to that.
Their software isn't even usually that complicated (I used to work at D. E. Shaw). It's all just translating their models into code.

They just only want STEM Ph.D.s because it makes it easier to justify the ~2+20 fees they charge even when they have a bad year.
FYI, your blog is broken: http://blog.touchingbase.io/. I get a "Error establishing a database connection" message when trying to visit that URL.
The light square box would make the most sense.
You're right to question this, as TrustZone isn't equivalent to Intel ME.

To explain further, here's a comment I made about this before...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11290069
Is there a problem with operating at that level of abstraction? Are we here to serve our egos, or business needs?

I'm sure I could implement one, but it'd require googling. If that ever kept me from a position, they could gladly keep it.
The work of a tenured professor is more than 20% time. A normal teaching load is 4-5 classes a year, plus significant committee work, student advising, etc. It takes an enormous amount of time. And it can be awesome, fun, and many of my colleagues love doing it. But it doesn't result in creating a free open source alternative to Mathematica.
Yeah, I know what ASICs are, I just hadn't heard of large companies getting their own IP inserted into Intel's chips for their own use.
This is great!

What will be the source of revenue? Dual-license? Support?
In Java, you can have:

class Set<A> { public Set<A> union(Collection<A> c) { ... } }

class SortedSet<A> extends Set<A> {
@Override public SortedSet<A> union(Collection<A> c) { ... }
}

In other words, the more specific type overrides the operations of the more general type into more specialised operations.
If you don't know the modulo operator, your claim to be a good programmer is rather suspect, so that's probably OK.
Does it make me a math nerd if I point out that accepting 0.05% of applications would mean rejecting 1,999 out of 2,000?

TL;DR: I think you mean 0.5%
Thanks, please check my profile.
A linked list is so simple that you should know how to implement one off the top of your head.

It's literally:

struct list_node {
struct list_node *next;
...
};

There, you know how linked lists work :)
I would be "impressed" with your productivity if you write an authentication, message and notification system from scratch over twice, and each time takes over 40 hours.
My experience isn't 199 out of 200 but it's still like 7 out of 8. I ran my own company, we started interviewing people for programming positions. They'd show up for the interview and an hour into the interview we'd figure out they can't program. It wasted our time.

So, we changed our strategy and started using a couple of fizzbuzz like questions. The moment they walked in the door we'd hand them the test, a pencil, sit them down at a desk and say "take as long as you want". Then we'd go back to work. When they finished we'd look. If they couldn't pass the test we'd kindly show them the door. If they could then the real interview started.

I guess I don't see how any one who can truely program couldn't answer fizzbuzz or any similarly simple non-puzzle question. How simple would it have to be before you'd decide they can't do it. If you asked them to make "Hello World" in the language of their choice and they couldn't do it would you give them the benefit of the doubt or show them the door?

Also I wouldn't put inverting a binary tree at the same level of fizzbuzz. Fizzbuzz is literally 1 to 6 lines of code depending on your coding style. It's 1 step past "write a loop that counts from 1 to 100". If they can't write a simple loop and check for 2 conditions (or 3 if you think it's 3) they can't code. Really. They can't
4.45M Tesla shares trade ever day. You could liquidate $300m in Tesla stock at less than one day's average volume.
Law of Conservation of Complexity
Bluetooth 5 will have 4x speed and 2x the range compared to v4.2
Believing it when you first hear it is one thing. That could be related to education. Persisting in the belief while fending off any criticism as conspiracy, that is delusional.

(I.e. refusing to be educated must either be delusion or stupidity or both)
Paper sent.
Yep - I fixed the typo.
Wouldn't CAPTCHA be useless against a sufficiently smart AI?
Oops, agreed
There is neo for German, which has English and programming as secondary targets. I've been using it for a few years now and I love it.
Where have you ever had to use the modulo operator in your programming career, especially on the web side of things?

Outside of challenges where it's almost required (FizzBuzz), the only thing that I can think of that I've ever used modulo for is to set an upper limit on random numbers. I can probably count the number of times I've needed to do that on one hand and for every one of those I've used several hundred other math functions like abs, floor & trig functions.

I don't really do a lot of math in my code anyway.

It's one of those things I see how to do in the language when I'm first learning the syntax and then move on.
I agree with the usefulness of it, particularly if the distinction is that psychological problems can be mitigated or cured through learning and dedication, while physical problems cannot, and require drugs or alterations to the body.

The line may be hard to draw, but we are probably better off trying to draw it so that we don't take too many unnecessary drugs or have invasive surgeries when there are other solutions...
I don't mean a single word prompt, I mean you can only use the single word or phrase as dialog and have to perform a scene (also randomly provided) with other actors. Bob gets "roses," Jill gets "fire," and a third person has unrestricted dialog... now do a scene where Jill is a salesperson getting ready for pitch to a big client.

The word salad you're describing would be no more difficult than having a scene where actors have to speak gibberish (faux Klingon or something)... which coincidentally isn't unlike another improv exercise where one person has to convey a message given to them by the director to other actors but must talk gibberish or just use a single vowel sound.
[Sliding off topic - going deeper into the Google experience]
Google+, and Google services in general, have become unintuitive and almost hostile to users in the past few years.

I find it difficult to even navigate around in Google+ to get certain things done. Google Docs and stuff - same story - there's not even a sign in button that's visible when one visits the homepage(which I usually go to by typing docs.google.com). You look at some pretty pictures and blurb and then click on something and then get a new tab to open and then you may login.

The days of the Google founders counting the "weight of the homepage" (in number of words for google.com), page load speed and simplicity are long gone from other apps.

I like the Google+ posts layout and font sizes better than Facebook. IMO, Facebook looks like a decade old web application built for IE 6. But getting things done and moving around is a huge pain in Google+. The same is much easier to do in Facebook (this could also partially be because I've used Facebook for longer).

If someone in the Google+ team reads this, I'd love to rant and provide examples if you're willing to consider changes.
That's what I came up with in my head, but my issue is, in an interview I'd not be confident with that kind of an answer. I've never done that before, I've never had a reason to do that before. I've contributed to Rails, graphing libraries, written docs for complex JS projects, implemented caching solutions, written authentication and authorization backends- but this here is like asking an architect to cut down a tree.

Sure, he can figure it out, but he's gonna look stupid for the first few minutes.
Purely hypothetical: where N is the fewest number of bits for a successful virus.

There could be 10 different ways to make a virus N bits long. There could be 1000 ways to do it in N+1 bits, and a billion ways in N+2.

The relationship between how many possible successful viruses exist to number of bits doesn't have to scale by any obvious pattern.
Oh geeze. Yup. I even read the Twitter follow-up. Too late to edit, though
Latest+Review+&+News+For:+Let+Us+Close,+Elite+Networkers,+O2+and+TheWorldwide
I don't know about nina, but I personally see trademark as the only "valid" one of the three forms of IP (precisely because of rivalrousness). On the other hand, there are always things which challenge me: David Tran does not trademark Sriracha.
And yet, many believe that the best way to reduce traffic jams is to accelerate as slowly as possible, brake as softly as possible, and leave as large of a gap in front of them as other drivers will allow.

Normal drivers, unaware of the above, will generally also stop and go slowly in traffic jams.

My personal pet peeve is when there is a reason for a slowdown (emergency vehicle, crash, etc) and drivers slow down further to look at it, unaware that they're are then currently causing the jam they just waited in.
>Does it bother anyone else that whenever someone comes up with a strange or weird, non-mainstream idea, their mental health is immediately called into question

Broadly speaking, yes. Yes it does. Which is why - knowing this particular response was inevitable - I thought long and hard about answering in the affirmative. There's no bigotry involved here, I've been down this particular rabbit hole for a good old look. The MH (note 'health' not 'illness') issue is nothing to do with the idea per se but with a set of behaviours that exhibit a dissociation between action and consequence and can lead to harm.
Our "business model" is to keep costs as low as possible and sell merchandise. We will never charge for our curriculum.

We have turned down all offers of funding specifically to avoid a situation where an investor could try and force us to do otherwise. We will remain free and open source.
I'm not a Ruby user, but its dynamic OO nature reminds me of the Smalltalk and Self tradition, and those languages certainly do stick to a "beautiful philosophy", something like 'it's method calls all the way down'.

Other beautiful philosophies include:

- Logic programming. Although Prolog strayed from the path in the name of efficiency, approaches like minikanren seem more "philosophically pure".

- Term rewriting. I've only used it in the form of Maude, but Pure looks like a more practical implementation.

- Proof assistants. The (tongue in cheek) philosophy is something like "once it compiles, we don't even need to run it". Agda is probably the most "pure" example which is still maintained. Less elegant examples are Coq, which uses imperative metaprogramming, and Idris which has no qualms with switching off checks in the name of pragmatism.
> Division of labor and specialization is [sic] almost always economically efficient. Litigation finance is just the embodiment of that concept applied to litigation.

I'd be more comfortable with your economic-efficiency argument if there were more economic certainty in the process by which damages awards are arrived at --- especially in situations such as the Gawker case. I didn't see or hear any of the damages evidence, but it seems strange that the jurors concluded that Hulk Hogan really suffered $115 million in damages. As I know you're aware, it's not uncommon for lay jurors to do a version of baseball arbitration, choosing the analysis of one side's damages expert over that of the other --- and of course the opinion of neither expert is entirely unmotivated.
By the way, another way to get financial support for an open source project is to sell a short tutorial book. For example, the creator of Laravel did this on Leanpub (disclosure: I'm a co-founder of Leanpub) and did pretty well: https://leanpub.com/laravel is #7 in lifetime earnings on Leanpub. (Also, one of the core contributors on Laravel has done even better: https://leanpub.com/codebright is #2 in lifetime earnings on Leanpub.) Similarly, the creator of Trailblazer is doing pretty well recently with his Leanpub book: https://leanpub.com/trailblazer is #9 in revenue over the past week.

Anyway, my point is that even if you're in a niche, if you are the clear expert in that niche (say if you created the framework, or in your case, the software), then a book may be one worthwhile component of a monetization strategy. If you can sell a $30 book to 4000 people, you can earn some decent money. (The royalties on a $30 book on Leanpub are $26.50, so multiplying by 4000 results in over $100K.)
Yeah. Between LeCunn and the Google experiment a lot of things happened

Not to mention the use of ReLu and understanding of the Vanishing Gradient issue
So is the business model likely to be similar to that of RStudio where organisations can buy an annual 'commercial licence' to support the project (in addition to the GPLed version being freely available as mentioned below)?
Amazing story. Here's a shot of me and my wife next to that moss-covered elephant on Mount Kulen from 2004.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r4ebityp95a8ppm/PICT0481.jpg?dl=0

To get there, we rode through the jungle on the backs of motorbikes driven by former Khmer Rouge soldiers. When my driver told our guide that I was squeezing him too hard, I apologized profusely, even though I was afraid I would fall off.

Incredible to think that there's a whole city underneath, although not surprising given the post-apocalyptic feel to wondering through these ruins in the jungle.
I never got to know the early UML. I get its value, large project, intangible potential and actual mess, need to abstract over diabolic languages like c++. I went into it around UML 2.x, just when XML was peaking too. The enterprise era.
Different people have different boxes.
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/contrib/miller/9pi.img.gz

Is the image for the Rasperry Pi. Is said to be working with Pi 0/1/2.

Has be a quite frustrating experience for me. I recommend to run it on qemu or virtual box. 9vx is the coolest way to run plan 9 (it's thin virtualisation layer that allows access to the host) but it does not seem to work 9front.