skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I believe partially due to vendors getting their hooks in decades ago and expanding scope and increasing prices

I would be surprised if this isn't the vast majority of it, with the rest being the over-provisioning you mention later. Mostly, it's tough to gauge, because each effect is multiplicative.

I'll go so far as to say that, somewhere between 10 and 15 years ago, that any hardware support you've been paying to vendors can be considered as complete waste [1]. Worse, it's often a percentage (i.e. multiplier) of original purchase that goes one indefinitely, even though the value of that gear falls rapidly.

Also, (for that 90% you believe you can move to the cloud), if you have any proprietary hardware, you're paying an eye-watering multiple of its commodity equivalent (even considering additional labor, if any).

The above is easiest to observe in storage. There's not all that much mystery around how much the components cost and how reliable they are, so cost estimation for an equivalent commodity solution is easy enough. Today, even commodity/free no longer means "no frills" in terms of software features, but I expect that's less relevant when comparing to cloud providers, anyway.

> you wouldn't believe the savings, or maybe you would, which is even more when not ported 1:1 but used in conjunction with smaller VMs

I very much would. Just remember you can smaller VMs yourself, cheaper than cloud providers, bringing your staff up to speed on more modern skills, so long as you don't fall into a vendor's trap.

VMWare's model where the software ends up cost is the same order of magnitude as the hardware is such a trap, but so is software that's free but requires expensive professional services to set up and maintain (OpenStack, historically, though I'm not sure if that's still true).

> and autoscaling.

This, actually, is the rare case where cloud providers can save really save money, if your duty cycle (for lack of a better term) is under 10% of so. Other comments in the thread mentioned this, as well.

Unfortunately, if you never autoscale to (approximately) zero, then you're grossly over-paying for that base load, which can wipe out those savings.

The "hybrid cloud" model addresses this, as well as avoiding all-or-nothing thinking.

Ultimately, if you're optimizing (not necessarily exclusively, of course) for cost and want it to last, you'll have to change the whole organization's way of thinking. Avoiding vendor lock-in is key, be it proprietary hardware, software, or cloud providers. Also, encourage good engineering practice/culture, without getting overly focused on the latest fashionable tool. (A trite example being saving on labor through automation but buggy automation causing an eye-watering AWS bill).

[1] There's some non-zero value to any actual replacement hardware, but that's negligible if considering what you actually got, net of any markup for being propreitary.
The original post was saying parents should work out what's OK in advance. I realize that's very hard but that if you get it wrong, you'll adapt your behavior so it won't be an ongoing problem. Just like if your kid gets treated badly at a restaurant, you might not go there again. I'm not blaming the parent, just pointing out that it's a self-correcting problem so really nobody needs to be blamed.

Where it doesn't work is cases like your friend where a single unexpected event can cause a lot of harm. But most of these videos aren't that, they're just mildly "disturbing". If anything, they're a good warning that worse things might be coming.
> Little has changed except the content delivery mechanism and availability of content on demand.

What? You don't need to pay $100 for cable anymore, how is it that nothing has changed? Anyway, I think arguing with you is pointless, pirates will always find a way to justify their behavior.
Yeah people seem to be in iether one or the other camp. Best thing since sliste bread or the end of the world. lol
> Howell seems like a great guy who would probably make a great senior developer, founder or PM at any company that aims to solve customer needs. Google's focus, however, is on hiring SWEs that can solve uniquely complex and difficult technical problems.

Huh? Isn't all difficulty in software complexity management? Isn't writing a package manager a sufficient demonstration of that? What's a "difficult technical problem"?

Isn't solving customer needs through managing technical complexity what Google should be hiring for, full stop?

I'm actually confused at the philosophy here.
Sure, but I know people who are just allergic to metals in jewelry. Maybe it's germs on it, but if it's not...
I don't agree at all.

First, people do learn and process differently. No one size fits all here.

Adding this to the forms we have developed makes great sense. No argument.

I personally prefer to take it in mixed mode. If I'm wanting to do something, understanding related history helps. Maybe that's a backward progression back to roots.

But, it can be a chain of forward influences too. Who built on what and how, why?

In a more general sense, maybe narrative makes the best learning. What happened?
Not yet, but I think it makes sense to support VIM keybindings in the long term. Issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/47930
What puzzles me about NZ is that getting stuff delivered into it is a bargain, while shipping 1kilo package out costs something like $50+.
Flexport will pass UPS and Fedex in Asia to US ocean freight in Q4 (now hiring)
How does any of this change the OP's point about fragmentation of the market? It does nothing to benefit the consumer, the competition is not lowering prices, so why would consumers not go back to piracy when it results in a superior product?
Yes they do. Tons of it. And, for that stuff that is "uniquely complex and difficult" they don't lean nearly as heavily on these practices. They pull those people straight out of postdocs at CMU, Cambridge, MIT, Stanford, etc.
Looks like this comment was force-hidden by the mods for some reason.
I think you misunderstand me: the point is you can't criticize someone got saying "higher than the current rate" if they are just always advocating 40% and that is always higher than what is actually tried. They would clearly be wrong to randomly flip flop.

The 100% rate you mention is clearly a strawman: we haven't even tried a 35% rate on the top people in the modern era.
Companies focus on buying content while ignoring the quality of the broadcast experience. I am tired of competitors that skimp on this.

Netflix doesn’t shove ads in your face, works on every platform and almost never has mysterious transmission failures. And now they have excellent content too. They have figured out so much more than some of the last-century providers.
>Seeing “how someone thinks” in an artificial 30-60 minute session only tests a completely separate and mostly unnecessary skill set

Totally agree. However, what's a good alternative? A company can't hire everyone for a trial week, and a candidate can't work a trial week for every company. It's really hard to design a hiring process that is efficient for both parties plus resistant to abuse.
but do you interview with the same company multiple times per season? isn't that like cheating? like taking basically the same test e.g. 10 times?
>Some seeds grow, some don't. Just because we look for seeds that lead to the future, doesn't mean they were there (things happen for no reason) or that there weren't many other seeds that didn't bear fruit, or later, or differently.

You can far more easily make the same argument in the normal forward taught history (in fact that's what you do above, when you say: "some seeds grow, some's don't".

Teaching history backwards it's harder to point that, because you start from what's already established (grown).
If that feeling went both ways I could agree. Companies however, obviously don't like not controlling everything the public has and do things like increase copyright to a length that their own company would have never started(Disney), or try to claim that users no longer own products they buy and can no longer repair things themselves (John Deere).

Companies have already taken multiple sustained attacks against consumers rights so why would consumers care about the companies rights?
Are you accepting investments?
Estimate Pi by Dropping Sticks
The behavior of the last cards is interesting.

This can be improved by splitting the deck between riffles.
I am actually trying to implement generic pointers in Rust, that could safely work with object pools and/or preallocated memory regions of arbitrary bitness.

My struggles are here: https://github.com/lostmsu/mem_bitness
White People Are Noticing Something New: Their Own Whiteness
I think that the physics scales pretty well, actually. It's just that once you get small enough, ground-based or air-based launch systems are going to be more effective than rockets. We're talking railguns, ram accelerators, beam-powered propulsion, and particle accelerators for the really small stuff.
Try practising speaking your ideas and approach out loud. This may do two things, which reinforce each other: giving yourself momentum and positive vibes as you say things you know are right and leading you forward towards the answer, and building a clearer idea of your skills and manner in the minds of the interviewer. In effect, you are trying to turn the liability of the audience into an asset.
Agnotology: the study of culturally induced ignorance or doubt
Microsoft throws the moneys at you and "owns" places. They marched into our company as if they owned the place. They have all the selling power and all the money to "convince" you. And yes, contracts are time limited so the big squeeze will be coming eventually.
They can ask probing technical questions about past work experience, projects and education. Pretty much like how every other industry interviews people.

You are right that interviewers won’t get much more than an hour to judge a candidate. So why waste it on information that fundamentally can’t be helpful (like whiteboard trivia)?

Instead, first jump right into a domain where the candidate should already be comfortable and technical — their past work projects — and go from there, probing for more technical depth.

The idea that it somehow makes more sense to use limited time by wholesale discounting & ignoring the person’s previous work history in favor of having them write a sorting algorithm in CoderPad is totally indefensible.
>Why is that a useful framework, though?

>why shouldn't the devices I use switch to my context instead of me switching to theirs?

Mostly because, in my opinion, every attempt to create a device that does that has resulted in failure, and those failures are due to fundamental opposing priorities with each 'mode'.

I may of course be wrong, in which case you're right this framework should be junked. But so far nobody's cracked both use cases well with a single setup, and the model holds. IMO.

>How does this philosophical split help Apple in the long term?

For a brand that's betting so heavily on the walled garden, ecosystem-based sales and marketing methods, having an 'answer' to every consumer need is essential to is to not have an answer for one of your customer's needs, ecause that opens the door for that customer to adopt something outside your ecosystem. Keep them within the curated suite of products you offer, and keep them happy, or you'll see attrition. Note all of the noise about the latest MBP devices and how they're no longer meeting the needs of many content creators, to see how tricky this can be.
I call it "Nothing matters, everything matters" dilemma.

Every little thing you do has some sort of meaning (even those hours spent debugging) if you choose to give it one.

On the other hand nothing really matters on a large enough scale not the things Bezos, Putin, Musk or any other human does.

Everything is ephemeral as Ecclesiastes already found out.

I think I'd be even more depressed were I put Ozymandias shoes.
Coding interviews is a performance-based art, so treat it as such. The best way to prepare for an on-stage performance? 1 Memorize your lines until you can't forget, 2 practice with fellow actors, and then 3 practice with real interviews. 1+2 is practice. For step 3, concentrate on improv & how to compensate for when you're not at your best (aka you didn't get great sleep so you forgot a line - what do you do?)

Same for coding interviews. Practice, then interview. 5-10 years down the line, every time you're looking to switch jobs, it gets easier, and you get the insights from the past experiences.

NB

The phone screen isn't easier than on-site; it can often be harder, and often is the same level of difficulty, with more pressure.

NB 2

If you're mid-level they'll ask a few systems design questions. Make sure for the systems you've built, you know at a high level how each individual component was built and what abstraction it stands for.

Good luck! And ping me at my tw email (check profile) if you want to follow up
Gullible teens with money, which is why their influence can be worth money.

Which is why this stuff works for premium mediocre products. Stuff that is more expensive, but still within the reach of the middle class.

But their followers cannot afford 1000 dollar a night hotels. So if I was a luxury hotel, I'd tell them to fuck off.

But if I was a cupcake shop, I'd let each of these influencers eat whatever they wanted for free.
You’re assuming these votes are binding in some unreviewable, uncontrollable way. That seems quite unlikely.
Also playwriting. There's a really good book explaining that if you read a play backwards you can work out the causality much better and get a far greater understanding of the play:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Backwards-Forwards-Technical-Manual...
That makes sense. Thanks for the insight.
ATH-M50x. I don't mind over-ear headphones with soft-padding like this one, and it has a very good sound quality/price ratio (if you don't mind the lack of bluetooth).

The thing is that I was using the app for meditation, but I accidentally fell asleep. Woke up extremely refreshed though!
Your answer is not helpful on several levels and you might even know it.
I'm sorry, completely off topic. I can't believe your username was available up until 2016, kinda jealous.
Reminds me of this article: https://www.monitornerds.com/oled-pc-monitors/ on the subject of where OLEDs are. Dell famously announced that 30" OLED display two or three years ago, and then revived it once or twice only to cancel. Seems like a shame, especially given how prevalent OLED TVs have become.
I was wondering about the debt involved to pull off this deal, thanks for the link.
Ask HN: Books about programmers and programming culture?
Hey all,

I'm looking for some "programming" books, and not "learning X in Y minutes", but rather things about culture. Stories from people in the field, weird anecdotes, bash.org/bofh humor, those kind of things. Any recommendations?
> going through 200+ rejections is just soul wrenching

Yeah I've been through this many rejections total, and some of them have been pretty tough emotionally, but it only takes 25-50 before landing another really cool job I've been excited about. 200 rejections is pretty soul wrenching, but getting the other big companies on the resume makes it more than worth it.
I don't think anyone honestly believes that this was "coincidental".
Building on SQLite means no windowing functions which is a deal killer for me.
I conduct interviews on interviewing.io so I'd just like to add some clarification on this advice. You don't get unlimited interviews so it's best used for interview practice, not coding practice. If you have trouble with the technical parts (sorting, trees, etc), you can learn that on your own from books/leetcode. Once you're confident in your coding and CS fundamentals, use interviewing.io for the aspects of interviewing that you can't learn from leetcode: gathering requirements from the interviewer, explaining your thought process, staying calm under pressure, time management, etc.
This is a great comment.

As an adult, the way I’ve come to learn is exactly the same as you. It’s way more efficient, too: if you begin with the end and work backwards, you can ignore the things that aren’t very useful. Like if you’re learning how to make a graphics engine and you don’t know linear algebra, you can learn only those parts of linear algebra that are relevant to the work of creating an engine and leave all the other useless stuff behind. (And in linear algebra there seems to be a ton of pretty useless stuff.)

This is probably a bad idea for a mathematician or scientist, but for a programmer who’s in the trenches just trying to build stuff, it’s great.
Ridiculous story. When was the last time you heard of a newspaper going under because its stories weren't "written permanently into the secure digital ledger known as the blockchain"?

Newspapers are dying because other kinds of companies ate their advertising revenue.

We can add the Denver Post to a list of old-guard companies desperately grabbing for blockchain straws on their slide to oblivion (Long Island Iced Tea, Kodak).

I'm all for innovation in applied cryptography. But these desperate stories of blockchain cargo-cultism need to stop.
Nope, provides no value except for spreading negativity. I don't have time for talking about everything I put in my mouth. I'm not a critic.
Pretty much. The fact that it solved a specific performance problem (avoiding GC pauses) in a tiny game I was making, along with the ease of reasoning about and debugging game state was really interesting to me. Most of the articles about it were about managing large code bases which didn't apply to my little toy game project.

I then took it to the furthest extreme I could (everything in a single table) just to see if it would work well, and it did. Almost a purely functional approach to game architecture.

Frame State 0 -> Collection of composable functions to modify state -> Frame State 1

I found that to be vastly simpler and more effective than the OO approach of segregating state and functions into individual opaque objects. At that point OO seemed like such a brain-dead way to make things more difficult for myself I wondered if the entity-component idea wouldn't be more universally applicable to systems other than games. It is.

This was one of those rare cases where taking something to a logical extreme had an architectural benefit (all state in one easy-to-reason about table) that matched up really well with the performance benefit (memory locality). For systems where the system state is too large or varied to fit in a human's head, the benefits wouldn't be as apparent. But game states are, by definition, something that should be fairly easy to reason about because that's what the player is seeing and interacting with.
Embracing the Future
They still need to defend against malicious requests; for example how do you know that it's not someone's potential enemy requesting for that information?
Ask HN: Difference of implication between co-founders
I'm about to create a startup. I happen to be lucky that some of my coder/phd friends are willing to join me.

We agree on almost everything (vision, equity, responsibilities)

However, there is one issue where we cannot come to an agreement: how to manage a difference of implication between the co-founders. I have no girlfriend/family and very little responsibilities, so I can and expect to put all of my time into this venture (minus sleep, eating and exercice). However, one of the founders has a family and the responsibilities that come with it, so the effort he can put in is more limited. The french 35h/week is ok for him, he can maybe do more sometimes, but with no guarantee.

My question: how can I manage the likely difference of implication, when it comes to equity/compensation and the implicit contract we have between each other.

I see a few possibilities:

- Tolerate it: each co-founder has equal equity and is expected to work 35h/week. More effort is not rewarded. I suspect this will be highly demotivating for high performers.

- Ban it: set a minimum of 50 or 60h/week, and refuse anyone who cannot pull it off. I am good friends with all my co-founders, so I don't like the idea of them not joining because they have a family. Besides, most of us will start a family at some point.

- Measure and scale: find some way of measuring implication and reward everyone including co-founders proportional to it. This introduces the problem having to measure, estimate or self-report the implication of each one.

Thoughts?
I recently started collecting blu-rays. A lot of them are available for $5-6 and I like having a shelf and feeling some sense of ownership over them (bizzare DRM aside[1]). Best Buy has a bargain bin with some gems, Book-off in NYC has a nice wall of $4-10 used blu-rays too, and I’m sure other places do too.

[1]: With BD+, the disc maker adds artifacts into the bitstream, and then includes executable code for a VM that can look around, see if it is satisfied with its environment, and correct the artifacts. Seriously. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BD%2B
Unix haters handbook. Thankfully its freely available now - http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf .
That's the part that amazes me, just how much more companies pay for the cloud stuff, even on the labor side, yet startup executives (some of whom I've personally interviewed with) keep insisting it's cheaper.
Take YouTube’s recommendation system for starters

That's going to be their downfall, since its priority seems to be to connect people to the worst of the site as firmly as possible. A year or two ago I became curious about the flat earthers and watched 2 videos to try and figure out if there was any sort of deeper meaning to their superficially ridiculous claims (spoiler: there isn't). YT kept shoving flat earth videos at me for weeks like some sort of ontological crack dealer.
Right, now you spend for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, Showtime, Stars, CBS, and soon Disney. Plus Crunchyroll if you like anime, plus a sports package for sports.

If this keeps going $100 will seem like a bargain, and piracy will surge.

I also think it’s rude and out of line to tell someone that arguing with them is pointless. Do the mature thing and just stop responding, or the even more useful thing and actually try to have the conversation.
You'll land on the correct page if you add a trailing slash: https://www.entertainmentone.com/home/EN/peppa-pig/

But from the home page you're redirected to an URL without the trailing slash that doesn't work when copied and pasted.
This tool claims to have those features, but does not. The article covers this.

It’s actually kind of worse, because it lulls parents into thinking it’s safe. And it’s even harder to police since adults never use it and the UI is different than the YouTube parents expect.
> You can propose that journalism needs to reinvent itself, but this is not an original insight. Smart people have been trying for years, and it's really hard to make a public good sustainable on the web.

Case in point, almost all of open source software exists because someone else paid for it, and releasing it as FOSS didn't directly contradict their business interests.
I am really enjoying working through the book "Elements of Programming Interviews"
"We were so preoccupied with whether we could, that we didn't stop to question if we should"?