skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Did you both go to the same univerisity? That probably matters more than high school rank
Actually, I didn't like the sidecar idea at first, given my experience with it ten years ago (we ended up changing architectures twice). But that was in a project where everything was in the language (C++) that was best supported by all the internal libraries.

I've since been exposed to the vagaries of dealing with multiple languages. I think code generation can only help so much, if you care about performance and latency. Things like flow control and handling memory pressure are easier in some languages vs. others.

Not going very far, if you look at gRPC, it really has three implementations: C++, Java and Go. All other supported languages wrap the first. They have different defaults, feature sets and performance characteristics. Not to mention the behavior under load. In theory it shouldn't be like that.
> If you as a security researcher reasonably believe the vendor has neglected to patch the vulnerability, and you release exploit details, you are amplifying the current harm it's inflicting.

At least the public now has a fair chance to evaluate if they want to use their devices despite this vulnerabilities.
The best investment advice you'll never get
They have lots of impetus to change. It's just that they struggle to find a better system.

Talking about prior experience? Flawed for the reasons you mentioned.

Take home stuff? Flawed -- cheating and other issues (I discuss this in another comment).

Work with us for a week? Doesn't scale. Unfair to candidates. Lots of issues here.

Sit down and help me fix this bug? Flawed:

1. Huge bias based on whether they know this particular skill set -- the right tools, etc.

2. Pretty arbitrary as to whether they find that particular bug.

3. It can't be a real bug. It has to be a toy project in order to get a consistent evaluation.
Yeah when I use webpack all you can see is all the code compressed into one line, about as helpful as reading binary, its really a matter of sharing the source code, most mobile users which are the majority can't even view source anymore. That aspect of the web is dying due to things like webpack and webassembly, but github offers a better alternative than "view source" these days.
Here's our process:
1. quick phone-screen by recruiter. They ask some high-level job skills questions and inform the candidate of our process

2. take-home assignment. Should take only a few hours. We look at both general programming and software design skills, but the assignment also includes some data structures / algorithms stuff and thread-safety. Note that:

a. The assignment is open-book (no need to memorize computer science trivia)

b. The algorithms and data structures are actually used by us in production (it is relevant to the work being done)

3. Once the homework is complete, the hiring panel reviews the homework assignment and resume. I completely review the homework before even touching their resume, so that my appraisal of the code is as unbiased as possible.

4. The candidate is brought in for the interviews (assuming the panel approves). We do four 1-hour, 1-on-1 interviews (1 manager, 2 developers, 1 tester). The style is very conversational, and we want to make sure candidate can speak intelligently to different aspects of software engineering. The only white-boarding I may ask a candidate to do is to manually show the algorithm that they implemented as a part of the homework.
I agree, it was quite good for the time.

I can justify considering it "marketing" though. They didn't consider it a way of making money, so from a business point of view it was basically a way of showing how good their research was and how powerful their hardware was. (Compare to, say, Deep Blue, or AlphaGo today.)

And to be fair, Google didn't start out knowing how they would make money either.
Blogs were around long before, and the term "blog" to refer to them was even coined around the beginning of the .com bubble (1997) , not after the crash (2000-2002).
It started with the search engine and followed by all Google's services, including but certainly not limited to Blogger, Adwords, Play store, Gmail and so on. So Chinese students who were applying to foreign universities with a Gmail account would wake up one day and find they had difficulty accessing their own mailboxes. (Don't ask me how I knew it.)

Last time I checked the only Google service available now seems to be the Google Translate.

One project monitors how many popluar sites are blocked in China:

https://en.greatfire.org/analyzer

Tor is also blocked so it takes a considerable amount of effort to make it work. VPNs and other measures (socket proxy, etc.) work but they're also sinfully slow, and it breaks all the time.

The most common search engine there is Baidu: https://baidu.com. Bing has some market share as well.
This is going to work splendidly for anyone who uses public transit.

I wear headphones so I don't have to hear train screeches...
What Is It About Haruki Murakami That Mesmerizes People?
Clearly this checkbox will be AI's next target.
> Why reinvent the wheel?

Look who's talking :)!

Wasn't WiX released and developed as an Open Source project by MS?
Great question.

We basically had a single branch per repo, and every repo other than the master one was a fork (ala github). But that was dictated by the limitations of the VCS we used (Teamware) before the advent of Hg and git.

So "branches" were just a developer's or project's private playgrounds. When done you pushed to the master (or abandoned the "branch"). Project branches got archived though.

In a git world what this means is that you can have all the branches you want, and you can even push them to the master repo if that's ok with its maintainers, or else keep them in your forks (ala github) or in a repo meant for archival.

But! There is only one true repo/branch, and that's the master branch in the master repo, and there are no merge commits in there.

For developers working on large projects the workflow went like this:

- clone the project repo/branch

- work and commit, pulling --rebase periodically

- push to the project repo/branch

- when the project repo/branch rebases onto a newer upstream the developer has to rebase their downstream onto the rebased project repo/branch

Project techleads or gatekeepers (larger projects could have someone be gatekeeper but not techlead) would be responsible for rebasing the project onto the latest upstream.

To simplify things the upstream did a bi-weekly "release" (for internal purposes) that projects would rebase onto on either a bi-weekly or monthly schedule. This minimizes the number of rebases to do periodically.

When the project nears the dev complete time, the project will start rebasing more frequently.

For very large projects the upstream repo would close to all other developers so that the project could rebase, build, test, and push without having to rinse and repeat.

(Elsewhere I've seen uni-repo systems where there is no closing of the upstream for large projects. There a push might have to restart many times because of other pushes finishing before it. This is a terrible problem. But manually having to "close" a repo is a pain too. I think that one could automate the process of prioritizing pushes so as to minimize the restarts.)
Universal Basic Income Could Work in Italy
if you want to practice your processing/p5js skills, here is a little site of weekly challenges I made: http://www.pushpopchallenge.com/
This is a little off-topic, but I'm not entirely sure I understand who this article was written for. It reads as a bit condescending to people who might benefit from it (namely the hypothetical MBA who wrote the query), and most of this is what engineers already know about.
For some reason that feels like cheating on a test but it's brilliant nevertheless. I think I'll try it with the 15 local corner shop sites that I'm hosting out of the goodness of my heart. Thanks!
It is a great idea for sure but "tolerance, kindness and mutual respect" live on a spectrum... and people are all at different points on it.

What I find funny you might find offensive (thats how humor works some times) by trying to have rules and enforce them your always pissing someone off... the less you have the better and let people be their own filter.
> At the end of the day, it's about getting work done, not making decisions that are the most "pure".

This attitude will lead to a total breakdown of the development process over the long term. You are privileging Work Done At The End Of The Day over everything else.

You need to consider work done at every relevant time scale.

How much can you get done today?

How much can you get done this month?

How much can you get done in 5 years?

Ignore any of these questions at your peril. I fundamentally agree with you about purity though. I'm not sure what in my piece made you think I think Purity Uber Alles is the right way to go.
> That's now how modern capitalism works

We usually call that Crony capitalism. Which is, not really capitalism.
Dear Highly Successful People: Stop Talking About Your Failures
That's true, but it glibly ignores the reality of vendor lock-in. The average non-infosec human is not going to switch devices because of a vulnerability whitepaper. This "vuln-insensitive user" is better served by giving the vendor a longer timeline to take care of the issue, rather than releasing exploit details two weeks after someone changed a status on a ticket.
For all of Franco's troubles, the conclusion was basically foregone when he appointed as heir a member of the royal family. Juan Carlos's father had long accepted an evolution into a constitutional monarchy should he ever regain the throne, as an inevitability; any smart person in JC's shoes would have seen the writing on the wall and would have acted in the same way, imho. I don't think it was luck, the forces in motion were already there; in a Cold War setting, a Franco-less Spain would have been subject to infighting between different franchist groups and would have suffered infiltration from Washington and Moscow, with the risk of a new civil war. A transition to a more legitimate government was the only way to reduce instability, it simply couldn't be done with Franco alive. South-American countries went through similar transitions at one point or the other.
The right solution would've been a powershell script.
What are my requirements such that this wouldn't work for me?
So if whiteboard interviews are stupid and ineffective, what process do you think is better?

I assure that the big tech companies absolutely do care, but they struggle to find something better.
> We have recently developed the ability to run MicroPython "bare metal" in a web browser. This is acomplished using unicorn.js, which is an Emscripted version of unicorn, which is a stripped-down version of QEMU.

I don't think "bare metal" means what you think it means.
Sony revamps its Digital Paper tablet with new screen and interface
I don't really care what you believe about this stuff --- you're entitled to your opinions! --- as long as we're clear that people probably shouldn't be perpetuating the term "responsible disclosure".
Making JUnit read a little more like RSpec
Dang, I thought it would be the wallet app. :(
Whenever I see a startup shutting down, sadly, my first thought is: Who? Granted I don't work in technology, but I'm a big user, fan, consumer, etc. So I have to wonder: Am I just missing these companies, is their market too narrow, or do they have trouble reaching a larger audience?
Indeed, there are many other ways of building a business on-line than startups.

Makes me think, maybe it's time to create a "bootstrapped" badge, or something like that; something that sites that didn't take VC money could proudly display? At least for me personally, whether something is an investor startup or not is an important data point for deciding whether to invest my time in it.
I second that claret / green combo is a no go, I thought page was broken.
A democracy is not just a system of governance. The fact that a law was voted by congress means it is a republic, or a parliamentary monarchy.

To be considered a democracy a country needs to provide its citizens more than the ability to elect a legislative body. There needs to be some basic freedoms and guarantees as well, like strong protections against unlawful detentions (habeas corpus) and unlawful seizures.

Border control agents are provided exceptions to the normal rules. They can check your luggage for weapons or illicit goods without any probably cause. The logic behind these exceptions is that it has a deterrence effect on criminals that would like to bring in illegal goods.

But going through your digital information makes no sense in that regard. If you were "up to no good" you would be able to send that information digitally without stepping foot in the country. Going through someone's private information is not about ensuring the safety of the country. It is an invasion of privacy and an intimidation tactic. The deterrence effect is not against criminals. The government uses this power to intimate people they do not like. For instance Loira Poitras and Glenn Greenwald are routinely subjected to this, for political reasons. Many muslims are subjected to this, simply because they are muslims.

These are the tactics of non democratic regimes. It is sad to see them becoming more and more widespread in the US.
Honestly my response is the result of reading the thread wrong shortly after waking up.
The process is flawed in that it ignores the ability of interviewers to rate a candidate.

The solution to this is not getting rid of coding interviews because (coding sure is important). But the overweight emphasis on coding as a binary decision-making is ridiculous.

There are actual engineers doing actual real coding work. They don't necessarily spend entire days solving puzzles. So, they won't do as well in whiteboard puzzle test as a person who slacked off at their last job/college and just practiced whiteboard coding problems.

But the current interview process would rather select the slacker practicing problems than the effective person who didn't practice problems.

Why?

Because the process is overweight on whiteboard coding accuracy and the interviewers who are incapable of identifying a person's ability outside of that overweighted process.

This is a flawed process. And improvements in the process is impeded by flawed interviewers.
We need to measure the average temperature of the earth starting with accurate thermometers and not pictures of polar bears, ice bergs, glaciers, patterns of ice in late summer in the Arctic, coral reefs, the snows on Mount Killimanjaro, etc.

This NYT story is one more example of why I refuse to consider the NYT for anything, why it's "dead to me", on paper can't compete with Charmin and on the Web is useless for wrapping dead fish heads.
Took github long enough to provide that feature. Speaking of opinionated tools...
> doujin sales made up 48%

You forgot to mention it's mostly because doujin is pornographic in nature. That's why it's so big. Now if you were to classify pornography in a separate category, well the numbers would look much lower.
Well, the WebAssembly bytecode is the same target that is used by JS, so it kind of is JS in a way, well, at least in the way that is important to the OP's concern, in that WebAssembly should have the same risk profile as JS. wasm and JS don't represent two different pipelines - they run on the same VM.
Do you truly believe that all those top tech companies have decided on this process to boost the egos of the interviewers? Are you saying this because you have actual evidence? Have you talked to interviewers who admitted this was their personal motivation?

I assure you that the purpose of these questions is to identify good engineers. You might think it fails to do so, but that is the purpose.
Science isn't broken... here's a bunch of ways that people cheat?

Science itself can never be broken, but when people are cheating the system that makes it effective to actually figure out what is true and what isn't, for personal gain, then that system is broken.
Amazon’s new rating system to challenge the New York Times bestseller status
First principle
I didn't say that Fossil is just for SQLite3! I said that's what its developers care about.
Today a revolution would be illegal. Not just illegal but even talk of a revolution, or openly espousing that the idea should be considered.
Glad to see journals finally omitting p-value cases for more substantiated findings.
Oh, you don't have to have side projects. But if you are struggling to get noticed, it can help.
A lot of this applies to Python as well.
Golem: Building the World’s Most Powerful Supercomputer
Yup, but Japan does not have the military might of the US to ensure they remain a dominant country.
React Native or Xamarin Forms.
A lot of these can be linter rules, like no single-letter aliases, or forcing common packages to be imported as one consistent name. (I don't know a ton about clojure but I'm assuming linting is a thing.) To the extent that linting keeps things consistent and helps prevent mistakes, without unnecessarily hamstringing developers, it's a good idea imo.
If you're a mammal, you are subject to operant conditioning. Hell, most vertibrates are, as well). You aren't "freakish" for believing advertising doesn't work on you. There are plenty of gamblers who have convinced themselves that they have a system that will beat the house or alcoholics that believe they can hold their liquor.

The world is rife with people who believe they are immune to marketing. Nearly no one believes the ad impressions subliminally control your mind and force you to buy their advertised product. By simply seeing a product image, logo, brand name, etc (even in your periphery), you are being (re)exposed to a product in hopes that over time, you will remember the impression that ad made on you. Advertisers know, from studying consumers, that advertising doesn't work equally on all people or at all times.

You should read or watch Tristan Harris describe how some of the best companies in the world (especially tech companies) are great at "persuading" their customers/users/visitors to go through a well defined loop, often taking advantage of quirks in human behavior.

As a developer who worked at a game company, I've seen the development process first-hand.

As an enthusiast of behavioral economics, I've seen proof that humans aren't as rational or and don't have as much "free will" as most Americans believe they have.

As an amateur dog trainer who has trained a blind and deaf dog, I've seen amazing progression of learning and intent that happens when using operant conditioning to train an animal.

[1] http://www.tristanharris.com/essays/
Re white shirts:

A former boss had a gig with the LDS (Mormon) Church. First day he shows up in a suit and tie - but his shirt wasn't white. His boss pulled him aside and said, "I respect your courage, but not your wisdom."

Yeah, my boss wasn't happy staying in that environment (even though he was LDS).
"Quite a few “developers” have even added it to the App Store themselves, violating the GNU GPL license in the process."

Oh, so now the developer is all about following the rules, huh? Rings a bit hollow to me: https://9to5mac.com/2016/10/13/evidence-against-dash-develop...
Fewer racists. Or did you actually mean people who on average were less racist?
And I don't really care what you call this stuff! "Coordinated disclosure" is a good value-neutral term and I appreciate the reasons why you prefer it. I'm just trying to get a discussion going on which approach, if any, is most responsible (lowercase).
Just because a person is a "trained clinical psychologist, doesn't mean there is no bias in their work. ALL SCIENTISTS - are aware they will have natural bias whether they like it or not.

My point: was that using Barkley to justify something "having no benefit" is not a good justification.

Looking at the negatives you've given here - these are all consequences of a lack of help, support and self-acceptance - where a person has fallen through society because of being different. We obviously get this a lot with adhders because we are different - society isn't set up for us at the moment - but people with adhd are NOT BORN WITH:

- obesity, addiction, antisocial behavior, low academic performances(don't get me wrong academia is fucking hard as fuck it sucks your soul and takes your life away...it also takes enormous strength of character to persevere)

I'm not knocking Barkley's work - no need to attack me here - he's done incredible things to make sure that adhd is regarded as a genuine condition that needs treatment, help and support - IT DOES.

On Barkley his work focuses specifically on the deficits - even his books focus on this - it focus on the negatives - again for good reason he wants people to take it seriously.

I notice btw - you're fixated on there just being "creativity" as a positive for adhd - and it being some disease (it's not fyi medically a disease) - so i'm not gonna sit here and start posting the papers which posit the opposite, that humanity needs these characters in order to thrive, or the recent papers that show if a person with adhd is put in a good environment for them - they thrive - because I think you're someone who will probably respond aggressively. I'm not going to bother posting about the amazing shit i've seen working with adhd kids either.

Because nothing I say is going to change you're mind. You sound mad as fuck and upset about adhd.

And I can't be fucked.

I've seen how bad it is - about 10 of my members with adhd have addiction issues - i'm under no delusion.

My Dad with ADHD died of alcohol, was in and out of prison. However - they never had help and support or knowledge of adhd until it was too late. :(.

My work: researcher in neuroscience and a software developer, adhd coach, have adhd and dyslexia, have 18 close family members with adhd(Nan had 10 kids, her mum had 10 kids, huge family), worked with kids with adhd for 3 years, give workshops on adhd, volunteer at a charity for adhd, run my own company part-time creating tools for people with neurodiversity and therapies for stroke and dementia patients.

I attribute my struggles to being able to better understand others with cognitive deficits - and it means I run a successful business with it.

If there's anything I can help with - please let me know.
It radically simplifies everything. Every commit is reproducible across the entire tool chain and ecosystem.

It makes the entire system kind of pure-functional and stateless/predictable. Everything from computing which tests you need to run, to who to blame when something breaks, to caching build artifacts, or even sharing workspaces with co-workers.

While this could be implemented with multiple repros underneath, it would add much complexity.
Agree with most of them, except,

Advise against higher order functions. Higher order functions separate clojure from other languages, and is one of defining features of this class of languages.

Advise to not use threading. Threading is just a series of steps. I find it very readable. If I start using symbols the step sequence can become a step graph FWIW.
In an undergrad philosophy course many years ago, one of my classmates declared that one of his first principles was that he is Asian. I think a first principle would be more like "I exist" or "matter exists".
It's possible that if I started using Fossil seriously I'd have the same feeling as you. However, when I browse SQLite3's history, I still see a branched model, not clean, linear history.

I can imagine that a VCS might make merging so painless that one might not miss rebasing, but I would still prefer rebasing.
Building Minimal Docker Containers for Go Applications
Customer Journey Marketing