skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Years ago I was flown out to Amazon to interview for them. I had like five interviews that day, all from different teams who were all asking questions that had nothing to do with the job I was applying for, never asking about my relevant experience. They were asking me CS questions and I had never gone to college. They asked about computer design - like, draw a diagram of a computer (I had never made a diagram before) and explain how the northbridge on the motherboard works (this was a while ago). Granted, I could have taught myself a lot of that, and I had a general idea about most of it, but they also just could have said "We are looking for someone who has the same skills and knowledge of a Computer Science graduate", and I probably wouldn't have gotten on the plane.

So perhaps a big part of the problem is figuring out what candidates you want to interview first. A lot of these questions are designed just to rule out people who aren't very logical or won't take the time to do it properly, and I understand that.

A manager once told me about a hire they had to fire on the first day. They did a lot of interviews remotely as he was in India. When they finally flew the guy in and put him in the chair, he was a different person. Literally. He had someone else do all the interviews for him so he could get in the door. Pretty weird that he thought they wouldn't notice, but people are that weird sometimes.

If you have too many hires to do, it sounds like you either need to outsource hiring, or build an internal hiring team that can do the technical interviews. This could be a semi-global or traveling team if you're often looking at non-local talent. Or they could do a lot of interviewing via webcam, perhaps with a second webcam shipped by Amazon (it's not like you don't have cheap shipping already) the user could point at their own screen for extra security.
They have, overwhelmingly. The problem is it's an anonymous platform and bans are irrelevant for most internet users today. This was all nicely summarized by John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory in 2004.
That's what I wrote. I didn't use the word "heavily" correctly.
The reason Amazon (and other large tech giants) are hiring so many people isn't because they are loosing good talent -- it's because the company is growing at such an aggressive rate that there are always new positions opening.
> They actively target, brigade (large group upvoting/downvoting), and intentionally troll other communities with their only goal being to fuck with people and overwhelmingly push their rhetoric.

[citation needed]

I'm there every day and I don't know about that, quite the opposite.

We don't link outside the sub, heck we are not even allowed to mention /r/politics in post titles under threat from Reddit admins. It is now know as /r/[redacted] for that reason.

EDIT: downvotes are not citations
Tank – A very high performance distributed log service
I don't really want to comment - but I'd just say to anyone (including the writer of this article) to imagine someone artificially limiting the impact of your favorite platform of free expression.
Hell just turn the mental corner and consider your arguments FOR net neutrality. Or try to recall your disappointment every time you read about some site being banned in China or Iran.

To China and Iran - facebook is a "disruptive community." To use reddit's language.

Its a sad moment in history that the people calling themselves liberals don't actually know what it means.
It could be a very performant transparent caching layer when combined with the fdw extension[1]. You can push down the true analytics queries down to Redshift, but cache the resultsets, rollups, facts tables, etc, in materialized views. Then have the full power of modern Postgres available for exposing your data warehouse. The more predictable performance and auto-scaling storage makes it much better than the standard RDS for that setup.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/join-amazon-redshift-a...
The question is: Does "stopping" the speech encourage or mitigate IRL behavior / action?

In addition, forcing ideas underground will likely strengthen the will and beliefs of the hardcore believers. That is, when you marginalize those who profess to be marginalized, you run the risk of enabling them.

Sucks being Reddit but it might actually be all for the better, as ugly as it is.
I think you're misreading this. I understand it to mean: "She didn't have the technical knowledge of the internals nor the past experience of doing such hacks to do this"
Calling people you disagree with "trolls" and dismissing censoring as just "trolling" is a poor attempt at an apology. And that's coming from someone who hates /r/the_donald.
Pardon, I should have been clearer - ban the subreddit.
Anyone have the text of this? The site is pay to read
How Power of Intention Can Improve Your Trading Results
> This immediately brings to mind the history of scientific racism, specifically with craniometry being used to 'prove' that certain races are inferior.

I can't imagine why...? That would be like seeing a freeway and instantly thinking of the Nazis.
> they should present evidence of such action and ban it!

How would they do that adequately without a public display of user activity?

> Applying rules with extremely heavy discrimination is never the way to manage a community.

It's less than ideal but when the targeted group seeks to ultimately control or destroy your platform then what you have is a cancer that will spread unless it's removed.
Was not familiar with the theory - I disagree with it. This site is a wonderful example of the opposite. My experience with reddit (6+ year old account, at this point) is that, just like in life, most people on reddit are fine. The illusion of toxicity comes from a large vocal minority.
Rapid and classical are totally different beasts. Rapid is more fun to watch in real time, but doesn't usually produce high quality games. On the other hand, classical can often be miserable to watch, but typically yields games worth of study for years to come.

Watching computers is valuable to a point, but completely different from watching humans. The search space that humans can cover is much smaller, so the games end up being more positional, and easier to understand for a spectator. I wish that they would build a chess engine that emulated a human thought process so that it could be used as part of following a game in progress. The way they used the engine in the official world championship broadcast was frustrating. I don't care if white has a forced mate in 83 moves, I want to know how the position seems based on a shallower but more positional analysis.
This looks like it's gonna be a long, interesting read. I better save up my bathroom time...
This compiler sounds similar to me as the Ahead-of-Time (AoT) compiler currently shipped in Angular 2.
He changed statements against him by trolls of the_donald to say the_donald so it appeared they were insulting themselves.

Seems like a (mild) form of trolling to me.
> "Trolling the trolls" was language spez used.

In this case it would be appropriate to put quotation marks in the article title.
To help learn to use Git properly, start by making many frequent commits from the command line throughout the course of the day. I would say that an appropriate pace is about once every 30 minutes.

When you're done with the feature, then depending on your preference, you can either merge your branch into the master branch, or you can rebase your changes onto the master branch (my recommendation). In both approaches you may wish to squash your commits, so that you ship perhaps just one commit or fewer than your full set of working commits. Then you prepare the changes for code review and for pushing upstream.

The best way to learn about and become comfortable with a tool is to use it regularly. As you approach mastery it will become a swiss army knife. Frequent commits give you a lot of utility for the same reason that editor undo/redo buffer does, except it's persistent.

If you are worried about screwing things up by running the wrong git commands, then check out git's reflog feature, and how you can use `git reset --hard` to roll back changes via the reflog. Virtually every change you make to your local repository is versioned, and the reflog shows you that history and allows you to roll back.
I'm aware of all that. I'm speaking about the oddity/uniqueness of forcing a stalemate via en passant.
No, an in-person interviewer will not know the tabs on my browser or the programs running on my computer.

Also at an in-person interview, the interviewee has a symmetrical power relationship to the interviewer in that they can both observe on another. This practice slides the power relationship heavily toward the interviewer.

Furthermore, at an in-person interview, the information is not analyzed in an unspecified manner which further skews the power balance toward the large corporation.

Finally, at an in-person interview, the information is not digitally stored at an unspecified location for an unspecified time and transmitted to unspecified parties. Nor is it subject to unauthorized access by unspecified parties in unspecified countries due to unspecified security arrangements.
If this test was happening at their own premises on their own machines then sure. But if I personally had to do this on my own machine on my own premises without being notified beforehand? My response would have been "Please erase my details and never contact me again". My current employer has very strict privacy and confidentiality concerns which I respect. But a prospective employee who has no contract with me? They can kindly GTFO.
That's because history. 680x0 was dead, so PowerPC was intended to replace sometime in the mid 90s after Commodore became German (Escom/Amiga Technology).

Dave Haynie and a couple of others were asked to help design a new platform around Power as Amiga was dated. Escom had money issues almost immediately (of course) so it never happened and Escom went bust within a year.

Commodore UK's bid was planning HP RISC.
http://gizmodo.com/reddit-is-tearing-itself-apart-1789406294 has a decent summary of the problems over the past few months.

> Centipede Central is the chat Reddit is referring to—a chat room within the Slack-like Discord program ... its users have encouraged the harassment of other moderators, artificially inflated the vote count on posts, rigged off-Reddit polls, and posted John Podesta’s personal Netflix login information for the chat’s 1000+ members to use at will.
I agree with your reasoning, i think the alternative perspective is that traveling somewhere to interview is a significant time commitment on my part, and I might welcome alternative testing approaches where I don't have to fly somewhere until I'm reasonably confident I'm going to get an offer.
Like facebook maybe this is just them pivoting to countries like China and Iran?
I'm curious. What is your definition of "machine learning engineer"? Are you talking mostly feature engineering or something deeper. If so, what?
What's there? For the citation, ask any mod of a decently large non-pro-altright subreddit. I've personally witnessed it in several gaming subreddit (/r/hearthstone, /r/overwatch) but the mods pretty quickly crack down on it.
It's an IQ test.
No. I'm saying they have one cash cow and a shit load of mediocre products and complete failures. Take away that one Uber successful product and Google isn't all that exception. So making decisions based on an outlier is silly.

THAT is what I'm saying :)
I understand that the goal is to stop cheaters. That's an admirable goal, and a perfectly legit one. However it's the completely wrong way to do it and sends a very strong message to anyone applying that "our company, for any reason that serves our interest, expect you to be compliant, to give up your personal privacy, and to submit to our invasive internal processes whenever we feel it's necessary. Expect more."

Asking this of you, before you're even working for them is presumptive and not a good sign that this is a place you're going to want to be. It's basically a huge flashing "We Fuck Our Employees!" right there on your job application.
Well, it's GPL licensed which means they'd have to provide source code to anyone they give the software to. The only question is whether they're aloud to distribute it to anyone outside of their company.
just in case:

https://web.archive.org/web/20161201024953/https://rajk.me/a...
Unless I grossly misread your problem--which I may have!--it seems like you're trying to handle authentication and accounts on the docker instance.

What's wrong with using ye olde Kerberos and LDAP to accomplish this exactly?
The last time I screened with Amazon, they wanted me to have a notebook handy, write down the code in the notebook with a pencil, and read it back to them over the phone. That's just how they roll there so unless you can implement linked lists, sorts and the like from memory, don't work for Amazon.
Ask HN: What cloud security practices should you do, but don't?
For example, you should run vulnerability scans on your infrastructure, but don't. Perhaps your company doesn't have vulnerability disclosure policy, but should.

Why not?
HN isn't really. Take any thread which talks politics and you'll notice it gets flagged, removed very quickly. HN works because it's heavily moderated. It's the equivalent of "No politics discussion!" instilled by many American families over this Thanksgiving.

Even with the tech topics: Try talking about the positives of PHP and you'll also see this community has a lot of hostility beneath the surface.
I'd be curious to know how successful self learning is in different fields. HN represents the survivors. Maybe I could have learned math on my own, but I'm not sure I would have wanted to perform that experiment on myself, given my level of motivation and persistence at the time. I saw no good reason to let myself be punished for my character flaws.

Perhaps in any field, you get past a "learning how to learn" stage, so the early learning prepares you for independent learning later on. I'm at a stage in music where I can advance my abilities pretty well on my own, having developed the foundation of a correct physical approach to the instrument from a teacher.
They will probably fly you out after this, for another stage of the interview. But at the "FizzBuzz stage", they do really need to make sure that the person answering the question is the same person they're later flying out. There are a surprisingly large number of college students who've gotten used to "paying for grades", who attempt things like that.
Amazon - just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do something.

Not to mention... this is just the interview. Imagine what it must be like for the people who actually work there.
Calling part of their user base trolls is just dehumanization, making them seem less than human and hence not worthy of fair treatment.
I couldn't have said it better myself. I had my finger on your exact objection to the author of the article but couldn't articulate them well. Respect to you.

The author lost me the moment he introduced the "paradox" of a writer thinking the societal systems are inefficient but they would dial 911 as soon as there's trouble. So...

(1) Both things are not mutually exclusive at all. Nobody is expert in everything.

(2) What does this guy think the writer should do? Grab a kitchen knife and go be a hero? Outside the USA you can get jailed for assaulting a burglar. He should do some net reading because I suspect him of being too USA-centric.

(3) You can write about heroes while fully realizing you're not one. Takes culture and education to do, and it's very far from impossible. Example: the writers of Spiderman whom the author likes aren't superheroes themselves yet they portrayed the superhero quite well.

The whole thing is written in a way that somehow makes you feel the author is salty and strongly dislikes people who criticize the current public systems. "Be respectful for the work previous generations have put for your future, you ungrateful whippersnappers!", that's how he sounds to me.

I'll admit he makes several good points (like the horror "plots" which were probably already beaten to death as far back as the 1950s) but there are parts of his article I find to be very biased.
Stop Calling People “Low Information Voters”
While one of the benefits of an arena allocator is to be able to deallocate everything at once, it's not that unusual to have an arena allocator that you can deallocate from "early" if needed.
Never mind self-regulation, what he described is outright illegal. In most countries, so is not reporting them to the police once you know about it.
What's wrong with it is that real programmers constantly use whatever means possible to get the answer to questions as fast as possible. What they describe as "cheating" is what real programmers do all day long.

Unless you are working with a really small API surface then it is unlikely that a programmer is going to have much of the API memorized than the ones he uses on a daily basis. And with people radically changing their stacks every few years it is unreasonable to expect it.

Also, people copy/paste/tweak things from StackOverflow all the time. Disabling clipboard is unreasonable for that reason.

What a programmer can do using only things completely in their head is quite different than what programmers do in reality. Programmers are constantly looking up things they don't know throughout the entire day.

Keep in mind too that online tests are for screening, not a complete interview. You bring people in after that and do several rounds of interviews. Under that circumstance having a friend next to you or supplying you the answers doesn't really get you far if you know you have to do similar tests once you get into the office. There's isn't a lot of incentive to cheat.

The bigger concern is that this is a red flag about the work environment / culture. If I saw that I wouldn't go anywhere near it as well. In fact I deliberately put things in resume that some companies might find objectionable in order to purposely weed out with such cultures.
And if the President was selected by popular vote, that would mean something.
I wonder how many comments per thread like this are typed and then abandoned by people saying "It just isn't worth it."
This is a good time to mention the https://archive.is/9RFIp fiasco (I think there is another example just after she left Reddit). I am thinking of Yishan-style CEOs seriously now, including in public companies too. As another example, here on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11666857
Nielsen estimates ESPN lost 555,000 subscribers during the last month
There were a lot of comments whos only content was "fuck u/spez". I saw quite a few and I don't subscribe to the donald. This is obviously not constructive commenting, its just plain abuse. If you insult the donald mods you'll be instantly banned (from the subreddit), so it's not like the subreddit should find banning users for abuse strange.
US corporations have a multi-hundred year history of using thinly veiled proxies for race as part of their hiring practices. This continues to this day, including in the tech industry.

It's not exactly that far fetched to think that someone might someday think it's a good idea to start applying some of those new AI APIs to the candidate interview videos just to see what happens. In fact given enough time and enough departments/companies, it frankly seems more likely than not.

Especially given that we already have AI scouring GitHub looking for people to recruit. Assuming it's not already happening, it seems unlikely that there won't be startups applying AI to hiring interview videos within the next couple years.
I don't care either way--I was just pointing out that they didn't choose the name
reddit does not owe alt-right assholes a zero-dollar platform to have a free forum.

If alt right people want to run their own web forum they are more than welcome to find sufficient technical clue to rent a $250/mo dedicated server and install some http/https based forum software on it.

people cry "censorship", but it's a private company, and if you're paying $0 they don't owe you anything. Set up your own system if you don't like what their management is doing. You'd think that ultra right wingers, of all people, would appreciate the irony of depending on somebody else's free forum because they're too lazy, incompetent or feckless to do it themselves.
> It's worth noting that these are Proctorio's (https://proctorio.com/) restrictions; they're just a third-party company that Amazon is using to administer the test.

If Amazon has chosen to use use Proctorio, with an understanding of how it operates, then it's very much Amazon's restrictions.
This is fucking psychotic, I will never work for Amazon.
That is what they do nominally. But for existing data, it falls flat. Hard.

Again, an example is easiest. (Will also shed light on if I am actually doing something wrong. Entirely in the realm of plausible.)

So, you have a file share with your data, scoped to user "cheez". You can ssh to machine "remote" and see this data. You can copy this data over to your machine, call it "local" and it will still be scoped to your user, "cheez". This is great, as you don't have to worry about someone else accidentally getting access to it.

However, you decide to use "container A" to run some analysis on this data. The folks that setup "container A" did so using the username "container". You mount your data on a volume to "/my/data". You check, and the container can now see it, but user "container" does not have permission to do anything with it.

You have plenty of options at this point. You can give public permissions to see the data in the directory. You can launch ssh from in the container and copy the data in. (Note that this way will have the data in the container as belonging to "container" which will make similar concerns on egress.)

You can also run the container as "root" which will clearly have permission. However, recognize the concerns with this approach, as this also gives you permission to see any other file in that directory that "cheez" wouldn't normally have permission to see.

You can also recreate the container such that "cheez" is the user that is created in the container. This sounds great, but redoing the entire setup of the image has a few problems. Not to mention the security implications this has, since you could also recreate the image with the user of your boss and circumvent some other security measures of your machine.

Now, if your container doesn't set anything up in userspace (defined as "not root") until launch of the container, much of this concern goes away. Not all of it, I believe, but most. However, anything that you want to run "in the container" using your identity from "out of the container" seems to fall into this trap. It is subtle, but gets in the way of a lot of use cases.
That's understandable. I wouldn't worry about it other than that it made it superficially look like they were related.