skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My company builds software applications for hospitals and healthcare providers. Across the board, we have stopped recommending Apple devices for solutions.

Some of our applications use the headphone jack to communicate with our apps (we take readings from an Ultrasound, for example). Without a headphone jack, this solution is dead in the water. The unknowns around how this will work on future iOS devices is too risky for us to invest in.

The app review process is brutal for project management. Our clients run studies and trials on our software and we need to be able to say to them "yes, your app will be on the store on this day". And if we need to make an update, I need to be able to say that the update will be available at a specific date. Submitting apps and patches into the Apple wormhole and praying it doesn't take two weeks to come out the other side is a huge risk for us.

We just sent 60 android phones to Africa for an HIV study. If these were iPhones, it would have cost close to $50,000 for the devices alone. But we picked up 60 Samsung Galaxy Cores for $100 a pop and they work perfectly (they stopped making Cores around the same time the iPhone 5 came out). Android devices seem to age much more gracefully than iOS devices. I feel much more confident advising a hospital to purchase 100 Android devices than I do iPads.
helm+projectile+avy+magit
You bring up an interesting example in special relativity. I am a physicist, and there isn't really a "proof" in the mathematical sense of special relativity. Googling it provides this quora answer:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-proof-for-Special-Relativi...

There is no proof of special relativity, we believe it because it makes experimentally verified predictions. Your example of limiting cases of special relativity is how I wish statistics texts were taught - it isn't based on the "proof" of special relativity. Of course I know when special relativity is applicable and when it isn't (when beta = v / c is close to one, special relativistic effects are important, and gamma = 1 / sqrt(1 - beta*beta) indicates how good the approximation is).

But I do agree that proofs are useful and needed, I think that complicated proofs could easily be placed in appendices and looked at after understanding why the theorem is relevant. Of course this is just my personal preference.
SV isn't complaining about a skills shortage.
Show import duties and taxes in your shopping cart
I've never been to BM, but I think there are many art/music festivals which you could go to that are more accessible and very similar themes and things happening burning man has, but on a smaller scale. I just attended my first "art/music" focused festival a few weeks ago. It had meditation/yoga/various educational workshops, artists displaying all different kinds of wares for sale, people trading and giving small things freely (think shared water, wristbands, food, trinket). There was a rock that had a sign, purposed to "give something, take something". The downsides were there too. Lots of people just there for the music/drugs/party aspect or whatever. There are probably 100's of alternatives to burning man - regional burns and music/art festivals, that are much more accessible to get to and experience. Most are 2-3 days long, and that is more like prepping for a regular camping trip than something the scale of burning man.
Does co-op not exist any more? This is what I did. After my freshman year at Virginia Tech, I alternated between working a semester and going to school a semester. There wasn an entire university office dedicated to this (co-op program). So, I never had any "time off" months from the day I started to the time I graduated. I worked at a software company in Blacksburg, I stuck with the same company the whole time. I made close to minimum wage, but I was a programmer. I was getting paid to do object-oriented design and implementation. It did take a little longer to graduate, but I had fewer student loans.

edit: and I had 5 job offers when I graduated
how realistic is this game's portrayal of circuit building?
He passed away a few decades ago, but was important in building the Connection Machine[1], and had an astute analysis of computer addiction[2].

One of the really impressive and astounding contributions of his, despite have no formal training on computer engineering:

Heavily edited excerpt:

"The router of the Connection Machine was the part of the hardware that allowed the processors to communicate. It was a complicated device; by comparison, the processors themselves were simple. Connecting a separate communication wire between each pair of processors was impractical since a million processors would require $10^{12]$ wires. Instead, we planned to connect the processors in a 20-dimensional hypercube so that each processor would only need to talk to 20 others directly. Because many processors had to communicate simultaneously, many messages would contend for the same wires. The router's job was to find a free path through this 20-dimensional traffic jam or, if it couldn't, to hold onto the message in a buffer until a path became free. Our question to Richard Feynman was whether we had allowed enough buffers for the router to operate efficiently.

"Richard began studying the router circuit diagrams as if they were objects of nature. He was willing to listen to explanations of how and why things worked, but fundamentally he preferred to figure out everything himself by simulating the action of each of the circuits with pencil and paper.

"By the end of that summer of 1983, Richard had completed his analysis of the behavior of the router, and much to our surprise and amusement, he presented his answer in the form of a set of partial differential equations. To a physicist this may seem natural, but to a computer designer, treating a set of boolean circuits as a continuous, differentiable system is a bit strange.

"Our discrete analysis said we needed seven buffers per chip; Feynman's equations suggested that we only needed five. We decided to play it safe and ignore Feynman.

"The decision to ignore Feynman's analysis was made in September, but by next spring we were up against a wall. The chips that we had designed were slightly too big to manufacture and the only way to solve the problem was to cut the number of buffers per chip back to five. Since Feynman's equations claimed we could do this safely, his unconventional methods of analysis started looking better and better to us. We decided to go ahead and make the chips with the smaller number of buffers.

"Fortunately, he was right. When we put together the chips the machine worked. The first program run on the machine in April of 1985 was Conway's game of Life."

1.http://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machine...

2.https://benjaminjcousins.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/richard-fe...
Managing Tech Job Stress When 9-5 Is Unrealistic
There are 49.75 states in the country that are not "Silicon Valley."
This is certainly a big turn-off for me. Why should I care about a platform apparently tailored for self-promoting celebrity gossip and low-content, high-drama flamewars?

Beyond that, I've never been able to make any sense out of their threading system; the only way I can figure out what is happening is if someone inside the mess writes an article explaining it and quoting the relevant comments. The actual feeds all seem to be incomprehensible mishmashes of quotes and references to people who aren't present. (I assume there's a view which makes it all hang together if you have an account and actually log in rather than simply browsing, but the fact that I can't really see what's inside the box means I have no motivation to get involved.)

Furthermore, getting too comfortable with a communications medium solely owned and controlled by a single company seems like a recipe for long-term disappointment.
The New Radicals said it well (http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/newradicals/jehovahmadethiswh...):

"So original in her black lipstick

Listening to some obscure band

But isn't she pissed at all the other non-conformists

who listen to that same obscure band"
Redis was largely built by one person, and was sponsored by Pivotal. I don't think this would have been attainable.
Amazing Dog Houses
Some employers would view this as unprofessional. Anywhere you would enjoy working views this positively.

1) The only reason it could come across as unprofessional is because it goes against the typical power dynamic where the company holds all the cards and the employees get what they can. Screw that.

2) It has been shown over and over that functioning teams are greater than the sum of their parts. If this is indeed a well functioning team then an employer who understands the dynamics of things would absolutely rather hire as a group and pay a premium for it. Typically in this case you would still interview each team member individually, but the ones that got through your normal process would be regrouped after that. You could pay a bonus based on how many of the original team get hired.

3) It's a rare opportunity to actually grab a whole team like this. For a company that is trying to ramp up a project quickly this is a great find.
If there was a real shortage, it wouldn't be a problem. The more a business needs labour, the more flexible the 'requirements'.
Just becomes something looks like a tomato, it doesn't make it one! In order to have nutritious produce, you need a lot more than just macro ingredients!
Why doesn't it become an Apache project?
> Silicon valley engineers tend to be fairly highly paid...

I mean, yes the worlds most pre-eminent software developer culture demands high prices.

What about the 98% (fake statistic) of American software developers who do not live in or around San Francisco ...?
I completely agree that there's nothing wrong with shopping the team, and that it's not unprofessional. However, answering questions and posting this without the consent of the headcount represented, isn't great either.

There are terms to our severance packages... While this post in itself doesn't violate any of those terms, it's a difficult time, and many of us, including myself, are still gathering our thoughts and planning next steps. I'm simply sensitive about having anyone represent us without first having our permission.
Thumbtack has had a lot of success with its pay-for-lead model. Reminds me of ServiceMagic before it transitioned to HomeAdvisor with an updated business model. (More detail in the pay-per-lead space: http://pocketsuite.io/leads-online)

Thumbtack does a great job matching up the first time client with a business in a concierge-type way -- I (the homeowner) say what services I need, then a few pros can reach out with quotes and pitch themselves. I get my choice of the litter!

Some clients like that way of discovering new pros. Other clients like to browse reviews in a Yelp type structure. Other clients like the On Demand type of convenience. Other clients like to search for discounts and deals similar to Groupon.

Thumbtack has made the lead model cool again - kudos to them.
Good questions. We could certainly build the features ourselves, one of the time constraints we're trying to battle is a self-imposed deadline to relaunch before the end of the year. We saw a large bump at the end of last year, before we had started working on telling anyone we exist, from users looking for interesting ways to do 365 Projects for New Year's resolutions. This year, knowing that's coming and a proven use case, we'd like to amplify that effect as much as possible.

The other piece of the puzzle is that we know we're pretty good at what we do but I'm a former theme park designer and that doesn't necessarily translate to UI and graphics 1:1 so it would be nice to bring someone in to up our design game there, likely on a short-term contract.

And finally, we'd be learning a completely new skill to rebuild the backend and get us off Parse by the end of January when they fold. There are bandaids available for that situation but if we're going to go through the time and expense, we'd prefer to do it right.

So ultimately, my original question plays into your last question, "Why would an investor want to invest unless they believed you were at excellent growth?" I'm hoping the answer is something like, "because these other metrics and circumstances point to a high enough likelihood of excellent growth being right around the corner." But I don't know if that's how the funding market thinks right now even if I can convince someone to believe that to be the truth as much as I believe it to be, so I'm hoping to gain a little insight there.
Thank you, this is by far the most insightful comment on this thread.

The peace agreements are imperfect and generate impunity, but it is the best possible tradeoff in exchange for long term wellbeing in the country, and Santos has successfully understood and negotiated under this premise, even though it has meant some huge compromises on his and the government's part. This is why he truly deserves the Nobel peace prize.

Unfortunately the opposition manipulated and lied about the contents of the 297 pages peace agreements (which the director of the opposition party openly recognized and for which he will probably go to jail for), and spread baseless claims that old people would lose their pensions, that communism would take over power and private property would be eliminated, which ultimately ended up in them winning the plebiscite.

But even after this big reversal Santos has not renounced to the presidency and is now negotiating with the opposition to see what modifications need to be done so that a peace deal with the guerrilla can finally be closed, coming to a 60 year division.
Most math textbooks focus too much on proofs, as does this book.

My problem with (most) maths texts isn't the proofs in and of themselves, it's just that they make so many assumptions about what you already know, and don't always state those assumptions clearly. And then too many maths texts, to me, fail to include enough expository text to explain the math and provide more of an intuition around what's going on.

That said, I also agree with you that more examples in terms of applications would be nice. Learning really abstract stuff in isolation is OK, but it's always nice to have a few (or more than a few) examples of how to apply the technique to something concrete.
Thats interesting, any unemployed CS-Graduate from the UK here? Is it the lack of opportunities or the wrong opportunities that keep you from getting a job? What do you do to improve the situation?
This is why 'final' was a better keyword and 'const' should have been reserved for primitive types only!
Most effective social learning strategy depends on social network structure
Frat parties are the least compelling cultural experience I could possibly imagine. But Burning Man has changed my life (for the better) and given me some of the greatest boosts of inspiration and self-love and purpose I've ever known. I'm still deeply thankful for my first introduction to that community in 2013. I'm still a slightly different person as a result of it.

The feeling of "I'm not cool enough for Burning Man" makes 100% sense. I know many people who have keenly felt that. I've felt it myself off and on. If you let yourself fall into the wrong mindset it can definitely bring you down.

But some of my greatest inspiration from Burning Man comes from having learned how not to give into those insecurities, and to have let myself see with open eyes the supportive community that really is there and shows authentic enthusiasm for you just because you're you: no matter how uncool, introverted, shy, awkward, or whatever other non-sexy self-label you apply to yourself.

One of the greatest strengths of Burning Man's community at its best (in my opinion) is offering such unique support for people proudly being whoever they are. Even if they're uncool. Especially if they're uncool. You are loved and accepted simply because of who you are.

Yes, this sounds like hippie nonsense. Yes, it's not universally practiced and there are elements that don't buy into it. It's definitely not a walk in the park. But that magic is really there. I felt it through some combination of dumb luck and personal openness to the world and I'm deeply thankful to have found it.

Maybe your path can help you find that too, maybe not. I'm lucky to have found some amazing personal community there that continues to support me even in my weaker moments. But I assure you, as best as I'm able as random words here on a computer screen, that you could be a deeper fit in that community than you may realize. Maybe you'll never go there (and I'd be the last to judge you if you don't). But if so, it's not because you're not cool enough for the party.
This article is about the UK software development market, which is significantly different from that of the US.
During preview, Microsoft Stream and Office 365 Video will co-exist. We will integrate Microsoft Stream into Office 365 to offer one video solution for businesses – whether they use Office 365 or not.

See here for more details - https://stream.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/microsoft-stream-and...
You're totally right but then people are faced with the possibility of an increasing number of code monkeys graduating from college every year.

Then the question becomes, how do you keep your job year after year when the number of code monkeys just keep on increasing. Some of them are shitty but a lot aren't.
try a statistics class and a linear algebra class from coursera.
I used Flickr for a long time but moved to 500px as the whole site is just significantly better than Flickr. So no not anymore I guess. Why would I use Yahoo for anything?
a large structured organization would be a clean, formal way for companies to donate money and support to the project
Judge on a single sample, do you ? :) That's a fairly strong statement based on a fairly small dataset :(
But yeah, our heuristics to ignore some content (e.g. websites screenshots) sometimes trip on real pictures. There's still a lot of room for improvement :)
Very unrealistic; they left out the part where you have to read a few dozen different specification sheets and reference manuals, only to discover that the parts aren't compatible.

In reality, circuits are built by making a schematic drawing, then laying out the circuit; many different decisions have to be made, and each of those steps takes days or weeks. In addition, you are probably prototyping important parts of the circuit while doing the schematic or layout; these early tests may be with physical hardware or in some simulation software. Spice simulators are more like an IDE than a video game, but they are very limited.
Hmmm, I guess my takeaway from that is that it had to look like C, and that iron constraint combined with the time pressure to mean that good features from Scheme were left out, not that implementing JavaScript rather than Scheme was due to time pressure.
that's because Keegan can be witty and a bit harsh at times :) but yeah now that you say it I can imagine some creepy memes with him xD
I always get a eerie feeling for people who excessively stress on formalism. It almost goes to the point where I feel they wouldn't want to share their knowledge or intuition.
I'd say it'd be plenty. You could get away without this book but for new applications or research level work with private datasets a company would really want someone that knows what's in this book.
This is an old post about the experience for those interested: http://www.catonmat.net/blog/my-job-interview-at-google/
You are comparing apples to oranges. The SF number is a "point in time count", so on that particular day there were 7500 homeless people. The Chattanooga # you are referencing is "how many people were homeless at any point in the year". Given how many people are temporarily homeless, I'm sure any point in time survey of Chattanooga would show a dramatically smaller number. I don't know if it's better or worse than SF, but comparing those two numbers is basically meaningless.
A good article that makes valid points about the difficulties of keeping up in rapidly-changing fields. Since I'm "old", and have a foot in the worlds of medicine and programming, it's apparent to me there's not that much difference in the "aging curve" in these occupations.

The parallels include the explosion of new knowledge, or at least variations on the old knowledge, that a practitioner needs to keep up with. In programming it's languages and frameworks, in medicine it's discoveries (basic science), new drugs and techniques, and aspects of the regulatory environment. In either case a few years out of school/training it becomes daunting to keep up.

I should add here a particular peeve, the proliferation of abbreviations and acronyms is way out of control. It's nearly impossible to read an article without encountering an avalanche of incomprehensible ABBRs. What's worse, the same ABBR is often used to mean entirely different things one article to the next. Cross-field usage is a naturally incongruous extension of the confusion, though at times it's humorous.

What the article doesn't emphasize is the blizzard of details to keep up with is just one part of the experience. As years in the trenches becomes decades the value of "time in grade" becomes evident. The ability to size up the demands of a complex problem, to have a clear idea of where to enter the path of its management, and calm assurance growing out of having been down the road before are all won only by virtue of real experience.

Having done what I have for 40 years, it took me only 33 years to realize I didn't know what I was doing, and that's when I got really good at it. Therein is an essential wisdom that time and effort alone confer, and can't be gained in any other way.
Stem crisis or stem surplus yes and yes
> There are tons of programming tasks that require coding literacy but do not require even knowing what a linked list is

I think people are assuming that I force the candidate to do this in C or something and munge about with next pointers and sentinel nodes. They're free to do so if they'd like, but usually they have a pretty high degree of control over what language they use and in this problem, what data structure it starts in (including arrays). As mentioned upthread, that means the problem literally reduces to something like loops, iteration, conditionals, collections. These abstractions are fundamental enough that again, any reasonable definition of coding includes them. Physics PhDs writing simulations occasionally have to deal with more than one particle (or whatever), and if they have no clue how to "do X for every Y", they won't get very far.

This isn't just hypothetical for me: I've interviewed PhDs (including non-CS ones), and pretty much all of them blew past this first filter. I've worked with people whose only prior programming experience was during their math PhD, and they generally were pretty great at programming (and pretty horrible at engineering). The latter is easy to teach (this guy became one of my best engineers) but the former is much more fundamental, much harder to teach, and generally something you want at time of hire.
This seems like a reasonable and constructive question and not one I was expecting to be downvoted. Care to leave a response with your vote?