skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We're quite inspired by Kimono, and aim to be just as easy to use while handling use cases beyond scraping (e.g., fully automated form-filling, POST requests, etc.). One of the big feature requests we've been getting has been RSS feeds though, so we're definitely trying to get to full feature parity!
That would mean fewer HR jobs to go around, presumably.
Yes. From their GitHub readme:

Running as root: We advise against this. You can still listen on ports < 1024 using setcap like so: sudo setcap cap_net_bind_service=+ep ./caddy
Significantly?

Have any benchmarks to back that up?

Last time I benchmarked in the language I use most (C++) I couldn't get a difference distinguishable from my margin of error.
So in where is the market need where having too large of a network is a disadvantage? That's where you want to hit them.
That's true, but those who do have a good understanding of electronics still want better tools than Verilog.
> There is a deep semantic difference between TryParse and Parse

Sure, but I don't think that splitting every possibly-failing API call into throwing and non-throwing forms is the right way to express that difference, and a lot of the time it'll be a matter of context (meaning that the implementation can't magically do the right thing).

It's fairly easy to layer throwing behaviour on top of nonthrowing in a generic and efficient way (Rust's Option, Java's Optional etc), but the reverse is not true.

I must admit I'm losing track of what if anything we're in disagreement about, though...
I give coding interviews and I try to take the original concern (Questioner can't think fast enough or freezes) into account, but I can't really say with any certainty if I'm successful or not.

About 10 years ago, I gave a woman a coding interview question and her hands were literally shaking. She got through it, but I felt terrible because clearly she was the type of person who gets really nervous when under that type of pressure. She was very experienced and my discussions with her really seemed to indicate she learns quickly and would probably be a decent fit. The only reason we didn't hire her was I found another woman who was a better fit.

Since then, I've tried a lot of things. Lately, I've been putting the emphasis that we allocate some time to pair program. We simply get in a room to make something together and we may take turns with the keyboard. I actually go out of my way to tell people this is not a coding test, but rather a play date. I emphasize I don't expect them to know everything and I even half-joke I deduct points for not asking questions.

Some people have told me they really like this approach, the others haven't commented one way or the other, but I'm still skeptical about my method. Most seem to relax well enough, but there are always people who may be more than competent who simply don't manage to relax in a realtime environment.

Some people work like tortoises. They may appear slow, but the culminated effect of their very deliberate and careful decisions accumulates far better than a hare. I'm pretty sure my current process doesn't work in their favor, but I'm at a loss for better alternatives at this time.

I'd love to know what HN readers think. Do your interview processes penalize tortoises or other people who don't simply fit a mold? Do you have a good system that takes into account the diversity of people's talents?
Yes, it's unfortunate that "fake it 'til you make it" became such a popular meme in SV et. al.

There is value in that philosophy in some respects, but claiming that your medical tests are real and reliable when they are not most certainly does not fall under that particular umbrella.
That same team did the most remarkable (in my eyes) experiment with the same tribe too.

They basically controlled for everything, if you read the paper, except for the language used for colours, and showed how a colour that's incredibly distinct for us, is incredibly hard to distinguish for them and vice-versa.

Go here:
https://vimeo.com/120808489
You need to find the odd colour out in the rings at:
5:40 (easy for them, hard for us)
6:30 (so easy for us that it's hard to imagine it being hard for anybody)
Because no one can possibly get better at their jobs? Everyone just wants to hide away and quietly keep doing what they were originally hired for? And feedback has no value in helping people improve?

Seriously, I'm baffled by this attitude... yes, I love to hire smart people. And the smartest people? They realize they can learn stuff from other smart people, and that sometimes, those smart people are even their... gasp... managers. Worse, the really smart, driven people may even want to stretch or achieve career goals and don't want to just do the same thing forever! OMG!

Frankly, it's the folks who don't understand this that worry me the most. I've worked with my fair share of talent that believes they're the absolute best at everything they do, no one can possibly teach them anything new, and we should all just leave them alone to achieve greatness in solitude.

They're a nightmare.
I think you're missing large parts of Amazon's consumer-facing value.

First and foremost, they have Kindle. To a first approximation this means that "everyone" who reads ebooks uses part of their ecosystem (even people who mostly read on other platforms use Kindle for exclusives, past purchases, etc.). And that fortress has only grown with Comixology and Audible. All of which are still DRMed, so the platform lock-in is huge.

Second, I think you've missed the unique selling point of Prime Video. It's not just a crappy Netflix ripoff or an iTunes ripoff, it is the only platform that seamlessly integrates subscribed videos and purchased videos. So, for example, done with the free Season 1, but Season 2 is in the middle of its initial broadcast? You can catch up by buying the episodes you missed. Grumpy that something dropped out of Prime Video lineup? You can buy that too. And so on. My understanding is that this partially extends to add-on cable channels, but I haven't actually tried that.

Third, they have the same seamless subscription and purchased mix with digital music. That isn't as special as Prime Video because Google and Apple have that mix too and the triumph of DRM-free music makes platform-switching much less painful. To the extent that Amazon has a special advantage here (AutoRip), that does depend on the retail core.

I think you dramatically underestimate the advantages Amazon has. If Walmart et al go in for the kill, I would not like their odds.
The first thing I thought of when reading this article was genetic programming.

Is this a significant improvement over evolutionary computation methods? Has that been attempted in the past?
This is designed for at least semi-technical people, but it's really not that hard to give it a try for simple sites. Try watching the video, and shoot me an email at peter@wrapapi.com if you run into any issues!
There is. Carnegie-Mellon University's CERT. Here's the form for reporting a vulnerability.[1] For this kind of problem, select "Request Vulnerability Coordination Assistance". You can even do this anonymously.

The report isn't public yet, but it's on record. You've reported it to the organization funded by Homeland Security to take such reports. In 45 days, CERT will disclose it to the public.[2]
CERT may contact the bank themselves. If you do, you can cite the CVE vulnerability number they give you. This gives you some advantages when talking to a bank. "Have your technical people contact Homeland Security's US-CERT at (888) 282-0870 regarding CVE-NNNN" will usually deal with a bank's people. They can't make the problem disappear.

[1] https://vulcoord.cert.org/VulReport/
[2] http://www.cert.org/vulnerability-analysis/vul-disclosure.cf...
Walmart has a third-party reselling program now too, and they recently acquired Jet.com, which also has one. Most big online retailers are getting one because it's very lucrative.

FBA is not unique, it's just the best known. Amazon's laxness is coming back to bite them, as more and more stories proliferate about the receipt of counterfeit Chinese goods from "official" Amazon inventory (due to commingling).

At some point, and they're already working on getting there with their opt-in brand controls, Amazon going to be as restricted as other retail outlets. Legal intricacies around trademarks, warranties, merchantability, and the meaning of a "New" product make it risky to allow any "unauthorized" distributors for anything that people would want to buy.
I'm an artist, mystic, and all-around fringe thinker. and I feel fine about having a cautiously qualified opinion.
That's a valid question, but I think that people would do the things that interest them. After earning 1.5 million in a year, what would be wrong with not working?
And the validity of an NDA is blatantly obvious to any person who can read?
> Flying is a lot more complicated than driving. “With a car, you have many fewer axes of control,” Tilleman says. “We already lose 30,000 people a year in automotive accidents and you’re only having to worry about two basic things: Is the car going forward and does it turn left or right?”

This has been my take. We drive poorly enough as it is in two dimensions. Adding a third dimension seems like an awful idea. I don't know if it will ever come to fruition. Personally, I don't think it should.
"the best schools are free where I come from" generally implies living in one of civil law jurisdictions, where many legal principles are quite opposite from USA.

A good bunch of things taught in a contract law class are subtly wrong even for a very similar neighbouring country (in EU it's now getting a bit better because of harmonization efforts) but common vs civil law changes pretty much everything.

And a semester in contract law is not really much expertise - any MBA with a semester in USA contract law would have much more relevant expertise than us Europeans talking.
How about the National Institute of Standards and Technology? My impression is that they are less interested in offense compared to the NSA, and more serious than possible private entities like PCI.
What a neat project. I've wondered about the robots for that album, cool stuff.
Another simple problem that's solved: Auto scaling of stateless services across thousands of machines, in multiple datacenter and cloud providers all around the world.

https://www.nomadproject.io/

There are also kubernetes and mesosphere to do similar thing, but they are harder to use, you can't learn them over a week end.
A good start would be talking with them like they were professionals: asking for advice, listening to their answers, debating their answers if you disagree so they have a chance to respond and possibly change your mind. Or, you could just have them jump through hoops and do tricks like trained monkeys.

Depends on what you're looking for.
People just don't realize there is such a thing as auto-rotation.
What's happening with downward-pointing fan-based flight? There were a couple of interesting prototypes, a few years ago, and then relative silence in the techie headlines I scan.

Kind of like a giant drone. You can have some redundancy. You can have an emergency chute for the vehicle -- some small planes are beginning to carry these.

As with autos, I see the future of personal transportation in the U.S. as being electric. We're not at the end of onboarding power capacity into vehicles. Electric motors can provide sufficient drive. As renewable / next-generation energy grows, grid capacity is going to expand while prices hold or drop. Past a point, when the power gets cheap enough, you can sacrifice some power efficiency of the transportation for convenience and other factors. Let me cite "time efficiency" as something highly valued.

I see this extending to personal flight vehicles. Although I agree with other posters that, particularly en masse, automated flight controls are probably going to be necessary/mandatory much of the time.

Also, noise control. I don't want some dude's Harley quad-coptor roaring over my house.

P.S. If batteries can't meet all needs, there is still fuel-cell technology. Although, currently, batteries seem to be running away with the market. (Sorry for the unintended pun, there.)
This was a really interesting project to explore. The videos were well-produced and whet my appetite for playing with this a bit.

It's probably something I can do more cheaply with an Arduino, assuming I don't count the value of my time.
We also have these magical devices called blenders, invented many decades ago, and available for $20 or so. Toss in your preferred mix of fruit, juice, ice cream etc, and hit BLEND.

This product is solving what problem exactly? I had to ask if this was satire, but sadly it is an example of how some people in the tech industry are so helpless they can't even seem to manage feeding themselves.
Truth

Well said and agreed
> That means having experts go over every inch of your flying car regularly, and that means a lot of money.

Automated car inspections with robotic X-ray scans every 3000 miles of flight? A JiffyInspect on every street corner?
To put it bluntly, yes, you are naive. That's OK though, there are plenty of successful businesses that are started from that place. You should do what you would do in any business situation - get multiple quotes and offers, and compare. Interview multiple candidates, and developers, and rely on your intuition.
Good developers tend to be clear in their requirements, have a good grasp on technologies, and can consider other technologies for their benefits or flaws.
You don't need to 'run away' from anyone because they suggest one thing over another - just make sure that you are talking to an engineer who has had some experience, and doesn't recommend a 'one size fits all' solution. Then again, expect to pay a lot for a good engineer.

It's ok if your system is a bit crap if it gets the job done, and you make business. Grow the business, and fix it later.
I think there's a business opportunity here. Imagine something like ETS's system for administering the GRE: Come into a location in your city at a particular date/time, sit down at a computer pre-loaded with various editors / IDEs for common languages, and run through an 4-hour coding exercise specified by the hiring organization, and, at the end, your code is provided to the hiring organization for examination. Internet access is freely permitted but it is fully logged and reviewable by the hiring organization. A proctor is present to keep an eye out for cheating and to resolve any technical difficulties. This reduces the pressure to something not much higher than working in a regular office.

Bear in mind that this is for the coding part, which people seem to have the most difficulty doing on a whiteboard under pressure. There would still need to be a conventional behavioral interview as well.

Somebody want to run the idea past YC? ;)
That "research" is done by a company called Aspiring Minds, whose business is to teach folks software programming skills. You know what their motivations are. Also, that statement itself is so broad, it's just playing with words. They ran that test in engineering schools so these are students. How many of these are freshman or juniors? How many of them fail to write programs because of lack of time?
This tool is really well thought-out and useful! I made a working API in less than 1 hr. This tool has a much better design & implementation than Kimono and easier than using Python 3 + Beautiful Soup 4 which is how I made my previous web scrapers. This tool also works for POSTing to web forms.
You can automatically sign your add-on by calling `jpm sign` (SDK add-ons), `web-ext sign` (WebExtensions), or by manually hitting our API: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/Distribution#Sig...
One important reason is to qualify for financial aid at private colleges and universities. I have worked with undocumented parents of documented students applying to really competitive colleges. Some of these colleges will meet their financial need even if their parents are undocumented so these parents file their taxes, often owing taxes, to demonstrate their income.
I think flying cars are possible, but security and regulatory issues actively prevent them from taking off.

Look at all the microlights [1] that enthusiasts are having so much fun with. There are also tons of lightweight lower cost planes available now from as low as $20K. $80k like a high end car costs would get you something with decent speed and range.

With the huge investment that the average car model development cycle receives you could develop a flying car, at least make a start. The fact that that there is no serious effort suggests its not the technology barrier.

Some commentators seem to be concerned with the risks, but technology will develop to address it. If cars were introduced today the same arguments about risk and accidents could be made. After all cars can travel at high speeds much closer to crowds and other cars. But cars have been matured over nearly 100 years. Flying cars could do the same.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrEhrecBFIs
A Baby or Your Money Back
> When they run out of warehouses to build (or crazy ideas to invest in) their costs will drop and that will turn into profit in an instant.

I don't think there's any evidence to back that up. There are two types of costs- fixed costs and variable costs. Costs associated with setting up new warehouses are variable in the short term, and sure, those will drop to zero when they choose to stop building them. But there are substantial fixed ongoing costs associated with operating warehouses and any change in market dynamics (high unemployment, lower consumer confidence, market crashes) can cause their costs to outstrip their revenue. Just because they are Amazon doesn't make them immune to the same P&L considerations that affect every other retailer.

I just don't see much evidence looking back at Amazon's history to suggest that they can suddenly become wildly profitable when they haven't been able to in 20+ years.
Same here. What she describes in her wish list sounds like a great environment to work in. I tend to value those sorts of things much more than than free food and ping pong tables.
Uhm... No. They care about the other c-word.
I give them kudos for getting past the Moeller air-car stage and actually having something flying. I think if they had been a bit more plugged into the typical fraud patterns from this sort of pitch they might have shot that video a bit differently. In particular it has exactly zero frames where it is in an environment that can authenticate its scale. Consider that this airbus380 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Rt9zX1rZFU) is a really big model but when it is in the air and there are no scale references you could believe it was full size if you had seen a static mock-up of one on the ground. To avoid this you need the unit to fly by, or operate near items that set its scale accurately. A good one is to have people near it when it takes off or lands.

That they flew it without a person is understandable (its a new aircraft after all and who wants to kill a test pilot really?) but the cockpit area was completely empty and that is a problem. Test flight data is really only valid if you're testing actual flight conditions. So they really should have had crash test dummy and enough ballast to at least simulate the mass of a pilot in command. The thing that was even more challenging was that the lift moment of the vertical fans in the rear of the wing are behind the center of mass for the pilot. So all of the pilots mass is going to create a pitch down moment on the much smaller front fans. There are really good engineering reasons that most flying car prototypes put the weight over (or under) the wing. They could of course be counter balancing the weight of the batteries that are all located behind the wing, but that would make carrying the weight in the pilot seat even more important.
> Would you risk getting in legal trouble for publishing a way to do bank fraud (for example) - assuming you gave some reasonable timeframe for disclosure?

Of course you would. The bank would call the FBI and tell them you're hacking the bank, and the FBI would then knock down your door, tear up your house and drag you away. The system would then do everything it could to represent what you did as a crime, and if you are lucky you get away with only a year in court, many thousands in debt and your name dragged through the mud.

tl;dr The actual legality of an action is only tangentially related to how the legal system will be used against you in response to it.
Please use SI units: 150 km/h speed, 300kg useful load.

Thank you for the Pipistrel link!
> Entrepreneurship should be the first choice for everyone

That's just a sugar-coated way of saying: "We, the capital owners want to externalize the risk to everyone else"
Swiss aim to shape international drug policy
Is it possible to lower the cost of failure? Quarantine new hires and let them go quickly if they don't work out. Have a bunch of "ready-made" tasks ready for them. For senior hires, talk for a bunch of hours.
So after the U.S. government bailed out banks, did you deduce that "USA" is the same entity as "Bank of America"?
>Poor roads (due to stress and lack of maintenance)

Uh, hovercraft (and flying things) are extremely loud. Their weight causes things not well attached under them to go flinging out at high speed. You have to keep the ground pretty clean to keep peoples heads from getting knocked off.
I don't think you need to "go from wings level to a banked turn at exactly the right moment" for this. There are two ways to make it work.

As proposed, the runway is banked. You bank your aircraft well above the runway surface. You fly above the runway, possibly following it as your holding pattern prior to landing. You can keep going around, banked already. When it is your time to land, you continue around in that bank and descend to the runway.

Alternately, it could be unbanked with straight landings. This makes the circle considerably thicker. Landing is quite normal, aside from the runway markings.

BTW, your "kick out of the crab angle just prior to touchdown" method may be standard, but it is pretty bad. The B-52 gets this right, with 4 pairs of wheels that touch the ground at the same time and are all capable of being rotated.
To be fair, he has raised money from investors to start those companies. I'm not advocating for the end of banking, so people would still be able to borrow money and invest. I'm also not talking about taxing wealth, but income.

SpaceX is interesting because we could be doing that stuff at NASA if it were funded well.

I get what you are saying though, it would have an effect on investment and speculation. Maybe we don't need as much of those things.

I'm also not saying that this is particularly well thought out.
That's called target practice.

These guys do it all the time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtxwT6PQIw8
This is very interesting to me but not really revolutionary since I am so used to languages like javascript where array indices don't matter the same way they do in C. However, I do see the utility in being able to generate new "views" of an existing array by offsetting all indices by a set amount.

First thing that comes to mind is time-series data - like a sliding window based on some concept of "now" where indices can be offset by the current date/time. (e.g. timeSeries[0] == now, timeSeries[-1] == one second ago, timeSeries[1] == one second in the future, etc.)

I actually find these linear-algebra based languages even more mind-bending than functional based languages.
Hire slowly... don't hire until it's a real pain point and the runway for 6+ months is there.
And get sued for libel and market manipulation.
Intel seem to just made Enterprise Lusre free.

See https://www.nextplatform.com/2017/04/20/intel-shuts-lustre-f...