skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The countries don't pursue globalist agendas. Their corporations do. And they have benefited immensely because of that. The poor being helped is just a side-effect of that. In the end they care about profits, the side effects are irrelevant to them. It's just a peripheral side effect used for its marketing value, to turn the attention away from self-interest of the people negatively impacted.
Not a bad rebuttal, I have to agree that Zuckerberg is trying to position Facebook as the end all be all of social contact in the future. I don't think that's a good solution.

But in reference to this quote:

>The reason we find ourselves in this mess with ubiquitous surveillance, filter bubbles, and fake news (propaganda) is precisely due to the utter and complete destruction of the public sphere by an oligopoly of private infrastructure that poses as public space.

That's going a little far, filter bubbles and propaganda have existed since forever. The public sphere was never a panacea for these problems. Certainly with facebook and social media it's changed the whole landscape, and perhaps made it worse given what happened during the last election. But returning social interactions to the public sphere isn't going to entirely fix the dissemination of fake news or suddenly pop the filter bubbles we live in.

If social media were outlawed tomorrow it might weaken filter bubbles, but a suburban upper middle class republican from Kansas is still going to be getting way different info and building a much different world view than a barista in Brooklyn would.
You make it sound as if some other hiring method provides a guarantee.
1. My phone.
2. Websites (bbc.co.uk/news for a start).
3. Amazon.
4. I use eventbright for public things, email for private functions.
5. That isnt people. Thats the corporate facebook account. And it has never generated a real client, but has created much busywork and false leads.
Maybe it's not what they are looking for. Maybe it's only the easiest test, like looking for the keys under the lamp post. It could also be that this way of hiring people turned the company into a specific direction, more attention to the sw and less to the customers.
The media's sudden obsession starting Nov 10th is graphed here:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=fake%20news

Spikes like that don't happen by accident.
I agree that humans have intrinsic value, but I don't see how providing them with free food, shelter, and medical care follows from that presupposition. Would that not require other humans to provide those things for free? Are their lives not as intrinsically valuable, or are you comfortable with enslaving a portion of the population to ensure these needs are taken care of?
Wow you're lucky they even tell you in the interview that they were close. Google can take many weeks to get back to you, from what I've seen.
I'm not clear on why this was posted - just an attempt to get focus on a particularly annoying issue?

Or is it more about highlighting that a 10yo issue exists? (Something not uncommon in long-running projects w/ public trackers.)
Musk and Bezos both have access to the rocketry tech necessary to produce ballistic missiles, along with autonomous machines which are starting to rival the sort of things usually produced by DARPA. Meanwhile, Facebook is tinkering with the best ways to influence masses of people and journalism/propaganda channels.

So I'm not necessarily saying that we're living out a mashup between Shadowrun and that Simpsons episode where Homer starts working for a supervillain, but I'm also not ruling it out.
Where does it come from now?
You are only talking about recent history. Historically, the vast majority of humanity lived in abject poverty. I expect the vast majority of new jobs to be low skilled, low pay jobs like cleaning the robots. or gig economy where people are paid by the minute and screwed over by Uber like companies.
If you're the boss of the company, not having the budget for raises is a problem that none of these ideas address. None of them will paper over that issue or solve it. It's not that they're not nice perks, it's that coming up with these ideas looks like a way of avoiding work on the hard problem which is making money.

If you're not the boss, then not having money for raises is still an issue and working at an unprofitable company or a profitable company that does not value your team is less likely to be a long term solution (and if you are the boss, this is how some of your team will probably look at the world sooner or later if not already).

Good luck.
My first job out of school was at a company that was (at the time) famous for electronic test equipment. We found that our competitor's probes, developed in a relatively humid area, would trigger when an engineer so much as flicked a lighter in the same cubicle in our much drier climate.
Nah, it definitely wasn't.
The Bloomberg Startup Barometer
Yes, I completely agree with you that their recruiting system has a lot of false positives, but I was just clarify that algorithm questions are really IQ questions, which is as you rightly point out is a flawed proxy for predicting how well someone will perform in their role.
> The browser and OS vendors don't provide high quality APIs for this purpose

Which APIs should be provided by operating systems and/or browsers?

On Windows, browsers (at least Firefox) do provide an API for antivirus scanners, as can be seen by the pause after every download on slower machines with an antivirus scanner (which, the last time I saw it, explicitly mentioned "scanning for viruses" on the download status). On Linux, the operating system kernel provides the fanotify API, which was designed to allow an antivirus scanner to scan every newly created file. What other APIs do you believe should be added?
I've been a developer for 30 years, helped start a half dozen companies. Since college I've never written a single tree traversing algorithm, and would need to Google red-black tree to know what it is.

There is a whole world of development that is OS specific, UI specific, shipping commercial applications. Shipping quickly is always a higher priority than performance, because adequate performance is usually trivial to implement with hash tables/arrays/linked lists.
It was our initial goal but we decided to proceed with smaller steps and that's why we've released this MVP.
> I don't think that they quite grasp or explain the enormity of it.

I believe they do. They just remember people (and we all should) that this was supposed to be the pinnacle of our society, and not it's darkest hour.
I believe it's about .026/GB-month so about $20-30/TB-month. My ultimate goal is to get some scripts going to push the least-accessed datasets into nearline which save me about, say, 30% on total cost.

I consider the total price I pay for cloud backups as a form of punishment for how poorly I manage my data ;) ZFS will let you go crazy and expand forever transparently but you should actually know what data you really need to back up...
Because some of those employees are database administrators and business analysts.

Because others are customer service reps.

Because how do you do a job without the data required to do a job?
Taking the Leap from 2D to 3D
Kinda BS, to be honest. The CEO of Canada Goose Jackets has full time protection. If you're worth a lot of money you need to be careful with your security.
People questioning his ability as a programmer are missing the point. He was approached by the recruiter/amazon, not the other way around.
So VS can do C/C++ compilation now. I wonder if they will extend VS to work with other higher-level languages like Ruby and Python (et. al.) ?

It would be nice to work from Windows but build for Linux that way, for other languages too.
And that attitude makes you part of the problem.
I think Norway and the way it's managed its sovereign wealth fund is a counter-example.

Governance can be done well.
I think that is most because a company with real paying clients (some very big) with a very expensive product, can't seem able to ship a simple but essential feature as this one. The wow factor here is mind blowing.

Comparing with Mozilla for instance, is a really long shot.
Interviewing only with your eventual manager is massively inefficient. Imagine I'm a hiring manager with one headcount available. Let's say Google gets about 5000 applications per day and hires 50 people per day, so I need to interview around 100 people to fill that spot. If two of those people meet my criteria, the extra ones get rejected anyway. Even more time is wasted than with the algorithm question approach (and honestly, stuff like tree traversal comes up all the time, even in client application code, so you might still get asked about it).
This is what has confused me for a long time, I interviewed at Flipkart an Indian ecommerce major (ex?) and their process was horrible. At the second round they asked us to implement a toc tac toe program, others didn't even have compilers, I had Python because it was a Linux machine, was rejected because "code contained bugs and didn't run", the third round was algorithms. I think these companies don't know how to hire that's why they are sticking to algorithms, in real life nobody is going to implement an algo from scratch, if I can learn Go in a week, learn how to write a webapp in 2-3 weeks when I have never written a webapp before why does it matter if I don't know how to implement some random algorithm?
My partner works at a recruitment company. Here's the thing: most recruiters are not very good at what they do and are only chasing placements. To get the most out of recruiters you need to be more pro-active, and find a recruiter or two who really understand your skill set and career ambitions. Build a relationship with them, and don't waste time with the other 90% of batch mailed crapshoots.
What I don't understand is that this person hasn't even had a Google interview... They literally say

"I won't accept an interview at Google because:
1. I had a bad interview at Amazon (???)
2. I read a story on HN about someone having a bad interview at Google

I'm sorry but that's an awful excuse. As you mention, Google works at an insane scale, and as foolproof as you try to make a process, there will always be a very small chance that it'll fail. Doesn't mean the whole process is bad.

And there's the whole bias that you'll only hear from horror stories and never from success stories.
Should people in those industries have access to the outside web on the computers that have even a smidge of access to data that must be kept private by law? I'd say "no" -- I can't think of a scenario in which a healthcare device needs access to Google or hacker news or whatever.

They could just use a whitelist and replace all CAs on the computer with a (set of?) private CA(s) that allow the user to do work on information that requires such security.
What percentage of the labour market in 1900 were doing jobs that don't exist anymore? In the 1920s the UK employed 2 million miners, yet nowadays we don't have 2 million unemployed mine workers on the dole campaigning to be let back down the pits so they can have their jobs back. Same goes for vast swathes of the employment landscape back then.

Instead we have vast swathes of people employed doing jobs that didn't exist back then and in many cases were unimaginable. Looking at the UK, many times more people do service sector jobs now that didn't exist back then than the entire population of 1900 Britain. Almost a million people work in the 'Creative and Media' sector alone.

You could argue that all those jobs could be done by AIs. Well, maybe, but I don't believe we'll have AIs capable of that for at least another 100 years. The last 50 years of AI research have barely even scratched the surface of the problem. So I believe the transition is going to be slow enough that we'll have several generations to adapt. It's not a problem we have to solve in 5 years or 10 or we're toast. Society is going to change so much, in ways that we can't anticipate, that trying to solve it now is futile.

What we need to do is focus on the actual problems before us as they occur in the real world. There are enough of them, after all. Maybe Basic Income can be beneficial, even today with near-full employment by historic standards. I'm hopeful. But I'm skeptical that were anywhere near an automation-lead employment crisis. After all the world just absorbed adding a Billion Chinese people to the global work force pretty well.
How Immigrants Are Helping to Rebuild Rust Belt Economies
Thanks for the info. Didn't try the WSL yet. Was afraid to break the workflows which are already working.

Planning to give WSL a shot soon.
> There is no point in giving me binary-tree-traversing questions; I don't know those answers and will never be interested in learning them.

I'm with him up until "never be interested...", thats a piss poor attitude. I've never needed to know big-o complexities for work, and I've only scraped the surface of needing/using various data structures, so I get annoyed at some of the heap/tree trivia questions as well. But if I were in a situation at work where I needed a tree, of course I'd stop coding and read up on how binary trees work and use them for my benefit.
JavaScript Unary Operators: Simple and Useful
How to Create a Multimedia Footer Form for Your Website
You've hit on a truth here. Most of the jobs available through recruiters are what I like to call "dog jobs". The ones that aren't filled internally and don't instantly get a line of top candidates because they are so good or pay so well--the ones that NEED someone to sell them. Those are the jobs that are available on job boards and that recruiters and are trying to fill--not the awesome ones.

Think about it like the real estate market (in normal markets, not Silicon Valley). Some houses sell before they even hit the market. A few also sell after the realtor does a few private showings. The rest are the "dog properties" that go on the MLS and need heavy marketing to sell.
"The Lost Viking" also appears as a game-in-a-game. It's an arcade console in the bar on the Hyperion. It is a playable 2D scrolling shooter that features a Viking (the SC2 unit) shooting through waves of pattern based enemies.
Not unless you're interested in work permits.

What media are you referring to?

This is literally the Swedish equivalent of the USCIS. If you rather listen to your preferred outlet reporting otherwise, then bias is certainly at large.
Thanks for pointing this out. The parent comment suddenly makes sense.
I would counter if the bug has been there for 10 years, and they still have plenty paying customers, it is hardly an "essential feature"
Again, this is not accurate.

1. Developers are lazy. This includes addon developers. Until there is a concrete time that their existing code will stop working, there's little incentive for them to bother rewriting their code.

2. For extensions which require non-existent WebExtensions APIs, there is nothing they can do but hope and pray that Mozilla will deign to make such APIs to enable them to rewrite their whole codebase to use them. If Mozilla declines, then the addon author can do nothing except watch their extension die.

It is not a matter of addon authors not believing Mozilla. The ball is in Mozilla's court to follow through and enable the extension authors.

Now Mozilla has set themselves an arbitrary deadline to disable XUL, using the excuse that e10s and other XUL-breaking stuff will arrive on that deadline--which is another arbitrary deadline that they set. Is there a term for this kind of internal self-buck-passing?
That reply has a lot of worth to it. I very nearly worked for Yahoo many years ago and was very excited about it, but it fell apart at the last minute. In the end, what should have been my big red flag is how evasive they were every time I asked to talk to someone specifically from my team. I was given offers from multiple specific teams and had to choose one before I was given the details of the offer (i.e. salary and other benefits), so I had assumed there was a specific team. In the end their turned out to be a massive disconnect between my qualifications and what they were going to have me do. I really didn't appreciate it, especially after I had tried so hard to do more specific preparation from my end. Now I look at this standard reply and I think its genius. I'll go the extra mile for my employer but if they're that impersonal right off the bat it's probably not a good match. Sure, they're running at scale and maybe anything more isn't practical, but clearly it's not for me.
>The gigantic wall of AI/Automation is unavoidable

Well, we've had the automated IT-based office for decades and the cries of everyone losing their jobs didn't really happen, not the paperless office.

I certainly see AI changing things, but these hysterical futurist articles tend to lean more pie-in-the-sky techies than managerial types. Managers and executives know that employment, today, is a mostly a fiction. A lot of what drives employment could be automated right now, but isn't for political reasons. Not the least of which is internal company politics on having as many direct reports under you as the threat of becoming a 'small' department means becoming eliminated by outsourcing or in-sourced/absorbed by another department or simply a loss of prestige. The idea that employment numbers are purely meritoriousness is fairly questionable. Its bureaucratic and political primarily.

The larger issue is, how much will this change things from the norm from a reasonable perspective. We can't automate most things and that probably means a certain class of jobs will be threatened but most will be fine. So even if that doubles or triples unemployment, that means we have unemployment rates closer to European economies or perhaps higher, but still doable without a radical restructuring of our economy. The futurist dream of 100% unemployment in ten years and everyone on UBI simply isn't happening.

My worry is that we'd probably need a very liberal government to handle this as it will put it quite the load on welfare, but currently the US has a radical conservative administration as well as a conservative congress, which means the political fight to raise taxes and expand welfare for displaced workers is going to be tough or impossible. The problem is that angry voters put in isolationists and those who they perceive have and can build wealth, but those types of people are often very anti-social services and very anti-welfare. So the voters took a big gamble. They think the Trump admin will 'fix' jobs. Jobs that are destined to go away. But if he fails, and he probably will, then they will lack the social safety net to fall back on. Those in vulnerable industries, often in rural and less urbanized communities, simply voted the wrong way and most likely will be punished economically for it.
People might not be angels, but they aren't devils either.

The way I see it, left doesn't want people to have power. So it limits politician's power. And then, the financial/corporate interest seize all powers, and use it as they will.
To add to this, the which-loop-in-one-line-of-code is not self-documenting, which is important for data/ML in particular when others need to verify your code.
Paydown Charts Are Confusing, Here’s How We Made Ours Better
my point was more along the lines that even if you need to figure out cool algorithms as part of your job, interviews as they are now don't seem to be not testing for that, but more for "can you rote learn these specific algorithms".

I think some of this was why some time ago there was a way of interviews with "off the wall" questions, but those seemed to be fairly vilified so I guess that's why they aren't as common now, but personally I would get more of an understanding in how somebody thinks by giving them an unexpected question than by asking them something they could've studied for.
> Capitalism will destroy capitalism as we know it.

Capitalism will not destroy itself. Capitalism will reach its conclusion. We should let it. Herald the dawn of the new age.
So you gave another thought. Maybe mass media outlets have always been dubious, but only now with technology and computer literacy we are able to escape them.

... Some will be less quality others wont but essentially they are different.
They don't all follow the same mass media tune, they can be more specialized, less bureaucratic, closer to the source, hold several articles by known independent journalists, journalists will do it out of interest and not because "we need more Trump news!". This also bring disadvantages sometimes, but diversity is key to evolution.

I'm no investigative journalist and this is a comment section. But you can Google "mass media trust" and see that most sources reflect the obvious distrust on mass media. Looking for alternatives is only the next logical step. Or do you have any hard evidence that people will just sit by?
Do you seriously only see a person's value as the amount of dollars that can be extracted from their labor?
It's hard to say "looking presidential" isn't related to race or gender when ~98% of presidents have been white men (assuming you're talking about the United States president!)
Disclaimer: I have interviewed-trained twice at Google but I don't like the process for interviews. Athough I work there, My opinions have nothing to do with Google, just my own.

I think the process selects well for new grads who have recently completed algorithm courses.

I think the process selects well for people who are comfortable with doing work on a whiteboard.

I think the process selects well for people who are motivated enough to work at Google that they read and study books like you mentioned for weeks, and do a bunch of practice self-study interviews before coming.

Whether that set of people overlaps significantly with what makes a company do well -- I don't know. I'm not sure.

But I am pretty sure that the reverse assumption, that people who don't pass those bars are not good canddates, is an arrogant position that only a company of Google's standing and size can/should get away with.

What I don't get is the trend of small companies, startups, and the like, copying this interview process. It is entirely not a match nor a way to find the kind of motivated, culture-fitting, creative people you need in a smaller company.
What would a fact checker say about Iraq & WMDs prior to the US invasion?
PaaSTA: An open, distributed platform as a service by Yelp
In regards to 4: if you use ES6+ modules and Webpack 2 (or rollup), you can import only the the stuff you need from lodash.

That said, my experience is that in some cases you still end up with a bunch more code than expected because of internal dependencies, but perhaps that code would've been necessary anyways.
And you can download the original for free, along with a couple of other Blizzard classics: https://us.battle.net/account/download/?show=classic
Expanding fact checking at Google?

Fine.

DuckDuckGo[1] it is for me, then.

[1] https://duckduckgo.com/about
Why I Don’t Talk to Google Recruiters?

Because they know already everything about me. And you. And all of us.
DARPA is a funding agency, the only thing they produce are power points. They fund labs and companies that make things. The people that own those labs have this same power too but since they're not as cool as Bezos I guess we don't talk about them?
This is the great thing about a JIT though. When someone installs a timing interrupt you can switch to different code that checks the timer frequently enough for hit the target.
That's doubtful. My understanding is that most bodies outside of the special pentagon task force established by the WH at the time were skeptical.