skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
2.5M passwords leaked from Xbox and Playstation piracy forums
Freelance is resume worthy.
Acquia Cloud Edge: Six Best Practices for Setup and Go-Live
Well given that the law specifically prohibits them from rescinding an offer if i dont want to opt out i gently remind them that if they try to pull any shit. Sometimes they'll just make the amend in the contract and that'll be the end of it, sometimes they want a reference for every single place i've worked at in the last 3 years (as a contractor thats probably about 20+ places), to which i tell them they'll get the standard 2 references and thats it, they also want verifications of every qualification i have, since i dont have a single qualification, only 12 years industry experience working for top names in the industry, that kinda solves itself.

Basically i dont stand for their shit, but i'm in a very privileged position of never once been desperate to accept a position, its always been very easy for me to find work. So if i need to walk away, i will. Its those who dont have this option and will agree to any terms put in front of them i feel sorry for.
Who will pay for sinking SF building?
I never worked through an agency. But when I was freelancing, yes. I refused to sign a bunch. For others I found the only way for people to listen was to have a lawyer involved.

Once my lawyer and their lawyer got to the point they talked directly, contract modifications and negotiation proceeded at a brisk pace.

But many companies were offended I didn't just blindly sign the contract. Even when they clearly contained clauses that were problematic.

I was also routinely handed contracts with clauses that would have forced me to violate other contracts if I signed both. For instance, one contract would require me to disclose anyone else I worked with over a 24 month period while another contract would prevent me from disclosing anything about an engagement. (I usually signed neither.)

Thankfully my main client's contract was eminently sensible, so I mostly worked with one amazing group of engineers for awhile.

Eventually some of the annoyances of freelancing made me come around to exploring a full time position. So I am in one of those now and enjoy it actually quite a bit.
Like I said the second answer applies to me personally. I often say this to convey my honesty and to plainly state that I have a minor weakness that is compensated by a superior strength.

If the job requires a math person to sit and code and not talk to non-technical people, then I am the wrong person for that job and both parties are better off if they hire someone else.
There isn't one because it doesn't need to be said.

It's also not true: the theory came out of questioning what would happen if you replaced one set of equations in the model with another, and whether that might make a more interesting (or accurate) model. It's simply expressed in informal language, but the formal (and completely sensible translation) is straightforward to anyone with the necessary background.

As for why experts would care, anywhere from dinner conversation (as is likely to be the case for myself; not a physics expert, but my company is, and Im curious of the answer) to it strikes a cord related to their work by giving them a new analogy, allowing them to bring more expertise to bear on the project.

For my professional work, some of the biggest influences have been questions by amateurs (and the subsequent trying to address them).

If it were actually such a useless idea, you'd have spent less time just refuting it than with your unnecessarily negative posts. Instead, you were negative for no clear reason (though, several uncharitable reasons might be inferred).

Please refrain from making such negative posts here. They make the community worse.
By being good at what you do, not by giving cute answers to retarded questions.
There is a fair bit of background with the diaeresis at the New Yorker [0].

[0] http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-curse-of-t...
It doesn't bring killer features for me personally, but I am looking forward to the Stream improvements and additions that made Streams in Java 8 feel so...half-assed.
When people are afraid to loose their jobs if they make an error you can be pretty sure they will do everything in their power to hide the fact that they made an error, which is the exact opposite of the behavior you want. To allow process improvements it must be absolutely clear that errors will not be punished, but used to help everyone to learn.
Links were posted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13535714

As expected, the AI is good at making technically correct decisions and "draining money" from a table by playing hands with sufficient data almost perfectly.

However, in decisive all-in situations with little information available, it supposedly wouldn't do so well, regardless of all the learning, but that's what it often comes down to.

>Nash Equilibrium is a strategy which ensures that the player who is using it will, at the very least, not fare worse than a player using any other strategy.

How do you make this work for situations that can cost you the game in one hand, with little information available? Without observing the opponent's behavior you can't, and for the AI that means it can be forced into making bad calls by playing aggressively, unless the game mode allows for avoiding such decisions, which was the case in this test.
I switched a long time ago from qwertz to de-ergo, I did not know dvorak at the time, but it was a very profound and interesting experience to see the wiring in the brain to change. After some years I changed from de-ergo to NEO[1] and I am still using it and will probably never look back. Having most of the important programming characters (\/{}*?()-:@) on the home row is the best thing that ever happened to me.

This is of course limited to the German language.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyboard_layout#Neo
At one time yes, but present day most don't consider philosophy a science. https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/philosophy-...
This is a poor analogy because the customer can turn a Godfather tape into a DVD at home. Or a DVD into a mp4. Or a mp4 into whatever the future holds and be able to watch it on newer equipment. If there's DRM its typically trivially broken or worked around via hdmi converters or even a basic analog output.

As a customer of a 32-bit app, I have no such power. I can't convert it to 64-bit. That's the problem.
I'd wonder a bit what enjoyment/passion that person gets from their work.

Why can't someone just be a professional who generates value?
Same goes for "where do you see yourself in [some amount of time]?" Is anyone ever truly honest in responding to that question, or is the intent to have the interviewee lie and pledge their long-term loyalty to a company that they don't even work for yet?
I still have quite a few of those smaller books printed on the graph paper. I had a lot more fun building circuits compared to seeing kids today stuck on mobile phone.
> This question, has make me failed on interview process on one of antivirus company

What was your answer? You'd have to bomb this question pretty badly for it to sink an interview.

I'd guess that you didn't get the job for some other reason, which could be in your control or not. You could have had a poor technical showing that day. You might have been so awesome they thought you'd seen all the questions before. The interviewers could have been having a bad day. They might have had multiple candidates and had to pick one. They might have suddenly instituted a hiring freeze. You might have seemed like a poor cultural fit. They might have been racist. The hiring manager might have left the company suddenly and they decided to close the req. There are at least a hundred reasons you might not get a job and you generally have no visibility into the real reason.
Bookkeeper for brilliant entrepreneur and exacting freelancer
Perhaps I'm missing something. Could you explain how the way he framed his questions was disagreeable to you? From my reading they were perfectly reasonable.
Oh it's total pretension, but there _is_ justification for this. The diaeresis separates out the second vowel. It's pronounced not "rehlect" but "re-elect".
Not sure if this is specifically related, but-

CTRL does not actually modify the character code sent from the keyboard. For letters, the same keycode (which maps to ASCII with a constant addition of 0x3D) is always sent. Another byte in the HID report contains bit flags for modifier keys (L/R CTRL, SHIFT, etc); the OS decides what happens after that.

Note that this holds under USB HID.
You're right; the delivery should definitely be tailored to the audience.

In the past, I've interviewed with some early stage startup founders and CTOs who are intimately familiar with the company's bottom line, and who appreciated simple, direct answers.

It's probably smart in most cases to reiterate the value you'll deliver. Working well with the rest is the team is absolutely part of that value.
Scott and Mark are great. Interesting note:

"Once Scott returned to the ground, the length of his telomeres returned to his pre-flight levels relatively quickly. "
Timeline of weekend events at SeaTac airport
Is that the minimum or maximum penalty? If that's the minimum, it is excessive. If that's merely the maximum, then for reference if you steal mail (also a federal offense), the maximum penalty is 5 years in prison and $250,000 which seems much worse to me. There has to be some deterrent to prevent unruly protesters from forcibly preventing people from getting to work and potentially being fired as a result.
If you are speaking of people manually inserting style attributes into their code then there's a point for the resistance to that. It's horrible in comparison to classes.

If you are speaking of JS framework dumping code into the style attribute on the fly then there's a smaller point for the resistance to that. There are features of CSS that are not available through the style attribute. Plus, it's just plain inefficient.
A Curriculum for Teaching Young Developers about Design
How to INCREASE CUSTOMER LOYALTY WITH THE HELP OF CHATBOT
I wonder if you wouldn't be justified in following up their question with your own of "Why should I choose to work for you?". Seems only fair that they should try and sell you on being part of their team as well.
Not so. It is rather that they were chosen for readability in a completely different context.

It is as if, having progressed to the point of writing BASIC, future programmers were free to modify many things in subsequent languages to add or modify features, but rarely could anything be removed. For example they had to continue using the existing set of keywords.

So you have the mother of all overloading problems, for example GOTO doesn't just jump to a line number anymore but can also call a function eg. GOTO[foo(bar="baz")]. Worse yet, foo isn't necessarily a function name, but might be a variable (in one of several scopes) containing the function name. And so on.

The Law has been compared to spaghetti code. This is incorrect. It is a spaghetti language. The code is often very straightforward, given the syntax it has to be expressed in). For example the convention of declaring a variable upon first use of the value (and with a reverse infix notation at that) to achieve indirection (eg. "...bla bla city street state, hereafter referred to as THE COMPANY" or "...yadda yadda in Appendix II, hereafter referred to as THE AGREEMENTS") is weird, but does make legal documents much easier to understand when disambiguated (no arguing which "they" is being referred to). Never mind that we as programmers would generally prefer those vars and values declared at the begining of the document outside the body of the text that uses them, it does work.
I'm a game-changer that can think outside the box. I bring forth a synergy that will leverage my ability to hit the ground running and go that extra mile. Pushing the envelope and reinforcing the company vision statement is what I'm all about. Goal setting and going after the low-hanging fruit is paramount to setting us up as a thought-leader and to pivot in a ruthless, competitive market. I understand that achieving this level of excellence is a byproduct of continuously moving the needle forward. Once the ducks are in a row, together we can unleash this unicorn to the world, and prove we are truly best of breed.

Cue eye-twitch...
If you could point to one simple example of this it works be awesome! I've used org-babel but in a very fragmented way. My sessions were separated from each other and I did not use multiple languages on the same data
If you are editing files inside a package, you can generate a tags file for definitions inside that package.

More useful, IMHO, is the general solution of jumping to the definition that would be resolved by the python interpreter, regardless of location. For that, the key binding will depend on the plugin. For `jedi-vim`, you use `<leader>d` [0].

Incidentally, if you're new to using VIM as a python IDE, also note the value of `jedi-vim` providing Python docstrings via the standard VIM keybinding `K`. This is also mentioned in [0].

[0] https://github.com/davidhalter/jedi-vim#features
Yes, RSUs are cash, but only when they vest. The way I see it, RSUs for those companies are more like guaranteed raises than current compensation. So it might be more accurate to say that a rock-bottom offer from such a company guarantees you will rise to $160k/year total compensation within four years, but the total compensation in your starting year will probably be less than $130k.
This is why I have private bacon reserves.

Not joking, I have a deep freeze full of pork belly. Buying from your local farmer has perks beyond being trendy. Don't think for a minute that the quality of factory ham isn't suffering in this production rush.
Why advertising something like I have been working on this project for the last 5 years would benefit me in any way?

They could guess that I didn't create it in the last two weeks, but then good luck proving it in court.

I have much better relationship with my employer now, If I hadn't I would quit tomorrow.
Reminded me of the theory that early humans ate tons of psychedelic fungus and that is what helped us create the neural pathways towards sentience. (if you think we are sentient now that is)

Between that, and the cannabis receptors in our brains, perhaps we're not supposed to be sober.

Maybe everything is going to shit in the world because we as a species are going through a collective withdrawal from the substances that made us in the first place.

Edit: I think this is the documentary that I saw that referenced weaker beer. http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition/watch-video/#id=2082...
If anyone is looking for a work antidote, here is some philosophy http://www.generation-online.org/p/fp_bifo5.htm
Uh, no, more than enough to make it remotely unfeasible. There are tons of variations of the letters in "google" and with all its permutations + all the TLDs, I wouldn't be surprised if there's at least a few million domains. With all the new TLDs as well which are extremely pricey, the costs for this aren't a joke.

And don't forget that there's an endless amount of misspellings and word variations (googleapps.com, ...).
I understand the implications but at the same time simply whiling away time unproductively has to take both a mental and physical toll. The companies are essentially saying "we don't need you/want you, but we're obliged to keep you, even though we'd rather not". How can you even socialize with productive workers who likely see you as a kind of parasite (parasites having currency in Japan as people who mot only don't contribute but take away).
Ask HN: How much does a master's degree matter, in addition to a bachelor's?
I'm curious as to whether I should spend another year in school.

1. Will getting a master's degree improve my job prospects, both in terms of hiring and of salary?

2. Will spending another year learning about more topics help me on the job and in my own endeavors, or is it better to learn in the industry? e.g. take a course on machine learning for a master's, or self-realization about the subject while working on a machine learning project?
Every browser supports @supports. If the browser doesn't know what @supports is, it ignores the entire block.
PyPy seems to be the one real contender for fast Python. ZipPy was super interesting academic work but unfortunately does not seem to be going anywhere.

I am not surprised that a silicon valley company stopped sponsoring this. 3 years of silicon valley salary is quite an investment in small gains of CPU perf.

Look at the Ruby sphere, where competitive implementations have taken millions in man hours and still most run on MRI.

The Oracle Labs Truffle approach and the PyPy RPython ones seem to be the only way to deliver a compatible, fast language implementation at a cost that a community and or enterprise can bear.

Both Truffle and PyPy are long running projects, but both offered more than just faster CPU times. i.e. see related work on accelerating SQL using RPython and most likely behind closed doors for Truffle.

Truffle also has a sane compatibility story for Ruby and similar ZipPy would have offered it for Python.
If someone asking questions like that, which directly affect their personal wellbeing, is "a handful" to you, then that says a LOT about who you, dqv, are, as a person.
Darn, I thought they were preparing to give degrees to AIs.
I mean, feel free to explain why. It's more interesting to have a conversation.
Bearing in mind (this part's tough to come to terms with for anyone raised to value honesty) that zero of those things need to be true—they just need to be what will get you the job, and they need to be said convincingly-enough for the person interviewing to accept what you've said (depending on the situation they may not even need to believe you—interviews are weird).

It's not that they have to be false, but in the vast majority of all successful interviews ever where these things were asserted, some or all of them were. If they're not true and you're not willing to lie about them, it's typically not worth interviewing.
That's commendable. I suggest that what you're seeing is also susceptible to perception bias. Regardless, HN is a place for civil and constructive discussion. However close-minded or obstinate we may believe others to be, it's counterproductive to express or engage on the assumption that they're unreasonable or irrational.
What gives you the right to smoke near people who arent smokers.
It's a standard clause, but depending on jurisdiction it's at least partially invalid anyway.
He still admires her, I think simply for her hard work. The praise hasn't stopped coming.
This question is your friend.

Don't view it as an "ok, so you did fine I guess, but you better justify your existence now and play mind games" type of thing. Instead, view it as an opportunity to end the interview with your best foot forward. Use it as an excuse to do three things.

1: Summarize what went particularly well in the interview. Your interview was probably not perfect, and this question lets you refresh the good parts in your interviewers' minds right before leaving.

2: Talk about why you think this job is something that you would enjoy. Your most valuable asset to this company is your enthusiasm. It's excited and enthused employees that drive the workplace.

3: Bring up stuff that you wish they had asked you but that didn't come up. Did you make something cool a while ago that showcases your skills, but it never came up in conversation? Now is the perfect time to show it off.
> This question, has made me failed on interview process... I cannot move on.

You MUST move on. It's an asenine question, the sign of a poor interviewer. And it's impossible to know for certain that your answer was the deciding factor why you did not get the job.

Suggest replying with a question-- "Are there any areas lacking in my background or skill sets that you are concerned about or possibly feel isn't a good match for your team?"

This helps foster more dialog-- probe for any perceived negatives and then address those concerns.

Everyday big companies screw-up recruiting, missing-out on otherwise very qualified, even brilliant talent. Here's a take on Googles process > https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-02/book-revi...
Soft Robots Can Keep a Pig's Heart Pumping. Humans Are Next
In my experience, it's very unusual for a company to simply state that it won't talk about it at all.

I get one of these two patterns:

1. "Oh, okay, we see your point. We'll cross out clauses X and Y."

2. "Oh, thank you, we'll take this very seriously. Now we will have people talk at you for hours about why you can trust us and everyone else here was dumb enough to sign up."
Besides that, you're endangering the contractness of your contract if the other party cannot negotiate any of its terms, and indicates any confusion over just what it is he or she may be agreeing to--especially if they express their confusion in a document that can later be produced in court.

If I were to sign that "contract", I would certainly send the other party a written "signing statement" that interprets all possibly ambiguous clauses in my favor, and mentions that I received no valuable consideration for signing it. If you can't tell me what the contract means, I'll tell you what I thought it meant, and that will be what you can enforce. If you won't pay a lawyer to answer my questions before the fact, you can certainly pay one to determine the implications of my letter for you after the fact.

If I were a judge (and I'm not even a lawyer, but I can still role-play), refusing to even answer questions about the contract demonstrates a lack of equity, and I'd take that as potential grounds to dismiss any claims against the person who asked them, that may have been based upon the document they signed, which they were completely unable to negotiate, and likely received no valuable consideration for. If someone asks, "does this mean you can claim ownership over X?", you don't answer definitively, and then you later claim in court that you own X, that's bullshit, pure and simple. If the other party did not understand that to be the case at the time they signed, it is unenforceable.

If I were the defendant, I think I would also try to paint that refusal as an unwillingness to pay for some professional legal counsel at an appropriate time, rather than asking a judge to clean up their mess long after the fact. Everyone hates it when they get snubbed by someone, and then that person later comes asking for a favor. Referring legal questions to legal counsel is simply a cost of doing business. If you can't pay that cost, and try to shift it to the public legal system, how do you justify the rest of your business?
The article mentions that the framework avoids creating python datastructure (e.g. A dictionary to read HTTP headers) to improve benchmark performance. It's a clever trick, but I am unconvinced that A less-than-simple application will demonstrate performance anywhere close to what was claimed in the article.
For the purposes of screen readers, it is suggested to use <em> over <i>. What bugs me is the recent usage of <i> as an icon holder.
Ask HN: Who is hiring? (February 2017)
Please lead with the location of the position and include the keywords
REMOTE, INTERNS and/or VISA when the corresponding sort of candidate is welcome.
When remote work is not an option, please include ONSITE. A one-sentence summary of
your interview process would also be helpful.

Submitters: please only post if you personally are part of the hiring company—no
recruiting firms or job boards.

Readers: please only email submitters if you personally are interested in the
job—no recruiters or sales calls.

You can also use kristopolous' console script to search the thread:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10313519.