skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think you are being downvoted because of the pun at the end of your comment, but if you don't mind sharing, I would love to learn how OTA antennas work.
Thermite.
Many iOS apps connect to graph.facebook.com without asking.
> but you aren't allowed to shoot someone in the back who is fleeing even if they did just try to rob you.

This will probably vary from state to state and maybe even from locality to locality. A gas station attendant in Indiana shot and killed a man fleeing from an attempted hold-up. The police cleared the attendant.

If a person is willing to steal something off a front porch, you can't make the assumption that they're unarmed, and won't turn around and shoot you.
Russian Cosmonauts Say That the Hole in the Soyuz Was Drilled from the Inside
I would like to see something like this for statisticians and data scientists.
> "..., there’s got to be a future in suborbital space,” Bennis said. “I want it to come in my lifetime.”

But, why? What possible benefit is there from a suborbital vomit ride? They're probably not even high enough to get the overview effect.

This is going to be the day of downvotes for me, but I can't see what good comes from strapping people in to a vehicle that gets less than 3% of the energy needed to get to orbit for a ticket price of $100k. None of the technical problems you'd have to solve would advance real spaceflight. It cannot be the space frontier dream of humankind to lob themselves briefly to 8 times the altitude of an airliner and then flop back down.

I'd have been embarrassed to have gone on that trip for that price, to the point that I'd have turned down a free ticket for fear of having given the impression that I'd paid.
Worth mentioning Xcor has gone bankrupt, and why they might have trouble getting their money.
For what I was doing, which was video processing stuff, I'm not sure that it was faster than if I had written it in Haskell. For this job, I was required to use C or C++, and so I never attempted to port it to Haskell or OCaml or something. I'm more of a wannabe-academic and certainly not a systems programmer, so I did what I could.

If I were to guess, the C version would have a bit better performance in a single-threaded context due to the fact that I would occasionally use tricks to avoid reallocations/frees, and the Boehm GC is opt-in, so when I was reasonably certain I could handle the memory correctly, I would do it myself, minimizing how much was actually being done by the GC.

I do feel that a static functional language like Haskell might perform well (maybe even better-on-the-average-case?) in a multi-threading context, since I personally find dealing with locks in C (and C++) to be very difficult to do correctly, so utilization of some of the cool tricks in Haskell to avoid manual locking might benefit. I was too much of a coward to use threads and locks much at that job, so I haven't had much of a chance to test it.
Sometimes when I'm interviewing people I say things that I think are wrong because I want them to challenge and defend positions. I always preface these sections of the interview with a moment to explain that I expect them to push back and disagree if I say something they think is wrong so that we can talk about it. The reason I give that warning is because I want to stop people from just agreeing because they're in an interview and don't want to seem disagreeable.
What part of "warning shots" didn't you understand?
Exposing a person's misery without their consent is usually not ethical, for example the last stages of someone dying of AIDS. There is nothing to be done and the person deserves some dignity in death.

That is not the same for someone in a critical but reversible or preventable state, their misery is intrinsically a public cry for help and relaying it is similar to shouting "someone is drowning over there", calling attention to their urgent need. For large scale, social issues, an argument can be made that the public good realized outweighs the rights of the anonymous individual used to ilustrate the issue.

As a species, we are hardwired to seek and react to such messages of vulnerability - hence the temptation for the first type of exploitative, undignified depictions of gore.
Has zero to do with politics. Years ago, I did home networks.

Worked for myself, so granted, the social dynamics were a little different. Even so, 99 times out of 100, went inside, took their orders, took care of business, went home. No sex dungeons, no mafioso, a little cat pee (but not much), and absolutely no time or inclination to examine their bookshelves or the condition of book spines.

If she had made the grand-tour of right-wing talking-points instead, you probably wouldn't have quibbled with me. Whereas, I'd have still raised the same objection.
we just did it in Italy
>That’s because with one click, Deckert has done what could have taken her hours to do a few months ago — she has filed a noise complaint with officials at the Maryland Aviation Administration.

One thing though is that the very ease diminishes how much attention the officials actually pay. Same as when you contact your officials, a hand written letter or phone call is much more effective than an email template or a retweet. When they got a noise complaint in the past, they would have thought: this bothered them enough to spend an hour filling out a noise complaint. Now, they can think: this bothered them enough to spend half a second to push a conveniently located button or use an app.
I subsequently lost my copy in a flood, but I quite enjoyed reading it.
The only nurses who spend more time behind the computer than doctors are those who are shopping. Unfortunately the doctor profession has turned from patient caregiver to note taker
Thank you for your perspective.

I should've been more specific: is it at all likely that Grover's will enable faster/feasible search of "quantum algorithm space" (?) or crypto_algo_classical_implementations-space? Or are we limited by number of qubits and QEC for the foreseeable future?

... Quantum Algorithm Zoo:
http://math.nist.gov/quantum/zoo/
As someone whose lived all over the giant unlabelled area -- what I consider "the west" is pretty culturally uniform across that space. Western Dakota to eastern Idaho, northern Nevada and some of the eastern range of California. Mostly ranching, resource extraction. A whole lot of beautiful nothing.
For those wondering what a reference to an "IPhone" is doing in a story from 1996 -- it's referring to the Infogear/Cisco/Linksys IPhone; a VOIP product.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_iPhone
NPM isn't really json if you leave the easy JavaScript only place.

For anything which requires a "build" (i.e. transpiling typescript or any form of test integration, minification, ...) you are in the land of "arbitrary scripts doing whatever they like" even worse when getting to C++ modules which default to gyp ...
Please show me a regex parser in 18 lines of code! Even 36! I did this exercise once and it took 100s of lines, I think using C++... but it's been a long time. Maybe it's significantly shorter in Python? But still 18 lines is impressive.
I'd say the majority of consumers stick with their existing suppliers out of sheer inertia. It takes time, effort, and hassle to switch, and absent any meaningful change in status quo (like a prolonged outage or sharp price increase), most people will coast. Especially when they're not technically inclined, as the difference in service will be less meaningful or apparent to them.
Still running a 2009 AirPort Extreme at our house. I haven't yet brought myself to replace it, even though I'd probably see a significant benefit from 802.11ac support and better ipv6 support

It has been reliable for nearly a decade with barely a few thoughts. Much more than I can say about any previous router I had.

I can't decide whether to go as open-as-possible-but-more-expensive, or with something like Ubiquity, or what.
"Curated" seems rather strong. One of the C++ lists has some let's-trip-you-up-on-trivia questions, with bad answers to boot:

> 1. Explain mutable and volatile keywords.

> Volatile keywords are designed to prevent the writer from applying optimisations on objects over which he or she has no control. Any objects that are declared as volatile are just omitted from optimisation to prevent values being changed by coding outside the scope of the original code.

Volatile is a keyword which tells the compiler to not optimize away loads or stores to the relevant memory location (note that volatile is actually a property of memory accesses, not variables, so there's lots of fun corner cases such as volatile bitfields). Actually, strictly speaking, it was originally meant to tell the compiler that the variable was being used to access memory-mapped I/O registers, but it has been shoe-horned to serve other deoptimization uses as well.

> 5. When would you use virtual inheritance?

When you want to find bugs in your compiler. :-) Well, the "correct" answer given in the guide is to not use it, but let's explain what it does anyways. The question really should have been to explain the difference between virtual and regular inheritance, although this does venture into obscure trivia territory because I'm not sure I've ever seen someone use it or want to use it in over a decade of C++ programming...

> 9. What does the acronym OOPS stand for?

This is a worse-than-useless interview question. For starters, I've only heard it as OOP (object-oriented programming), so I have to guess at the S. It has nothing really to do with C++ in particular, especially as C++ has been growing in non-OOP ways in the past decade. Finally, the question doesn't ask to explain or contrast OOP with other paradigms, it just asks you to say that you know its abbreviation. You can know an abbreviation without understanding anything else--I know that SU(3) means Special Unity group of degree 3 but I literally know nothing else about it.

> 13. Define an inline function.

> This is when a function is prefixed and the keyword ‘inline’ is placed before the function definition. They often work faster than normal functions as the compiler replaces the definition of inline functions at compile-time instead of the referring function definition at run-time.

... That's not correct. In C and C++, a function can only have one definition in general. An inline function--which can be specified either by adding the inline keyword or by giving the function body within the class definition--circumvents this rule, instead supplanting it with a rule that the linker must discard all but one copy of the function.

Note that compilers do not generally treat inline as a hint as to whether or not to inline a function, they use their own heuristics instead (incidentally, the register keyword falls in the same boat). Obviously, the function cannot be inlined if its body is not present, but equivalently replacing inline with static would generally have the same impact on inlining.
yeah i don't agree with this. i live alone and spend about the same or a bit more as my friends who live with roommates. they have nicer apartments generally but it's a choice thing in our city (NYC). this is people in early-mid 20s working at faang/banking/consulting.
Just added a very short section with our key distinctive features and referenced a blog post about why temporal databases are often times a good fit.
> Why do you assume that the person is lying?

There was a blog post "Adventure in the Low Status of Software Engineers" by Michael Church (apparently taken down now), basically if you're interviewing for "low status" positions you're assumed to be a fraud but for "high status" positions (VP-level) you're assumed to be a great candidate even if your resumes are almost identical in both cases.
My personal experience:
I got 2 airports express for my parents.
Both of them died within a year (permanent orange LED meaning the circuit was fried).
Now they are on Google Wifi, and so far it works.
when you do not trust the third party
That is not true (or true in only a very restricted sense that barely ever applies). Positive-sum games do actually exist. See: literally everything around you that wasn't around before people decided to make stuff.

Even if we're talking about literal dollars, the Fed can and does print new dollars more or less out of thin air. And this is a really good thing, because we wouldn't be doing very well if we were restricted to the 1792 supply of US dollars.
Yeah, my impression as well. Kickstarter for the rich.

Don't go handing over money without some recourse if things fail to materialize.
I understood, but I understand a few other things too. Shooting at or near something is not the foolproof activity movies might lead some to believe. It’s also monumentally stupid to bring a gun into play unless you’re willing to use it for its intended purpose. You don’t draw a weapon until you intend to use it, don’t point it at anything you’re not prepared to destroy. Even if you don’t care about accidentally killing someone (including a neighbor you didn’t see for example) it is all too common that people have their weapon taken and used against them.

A gun is not a tool to make threats, it’s a tool to kill things. Respect that. The other people who hear the gunshot will, many police officers will, and in the worst case the person you’re seeking to threaten will too and you’ll be another statistic.
"Kickstarter rage" seems to be a pejorative, but perhaps you're not intending it in such a way? The funds should've been held in escrow, and while not investors, evidence of fraud would allow customers to take legal action piercing the corporate veil and pursuing company officers directly to be made whole.

Don't sell something you can't deliver, most especially to bypass accredited investor laws (by selling tickets versus securities). Don't misappropriate your customers' escrow accounts (the article specifically mentions these funds were to be held in escrow). This applies whether it's a $100k ticket to space or a $200 piece of electronic kit on Kickstarter.
Today is the day I found out this page existed, I thought it's fascinating, and figured others might find it interesting too.
I don't think it is a very good thought problem because I think very few would figure it out unless they have encountered the algorithm or a similar one before.

It is one that a lot of people will go "Aha, of course" when they hear about it but not figure out themselves.
True, I suppose the web isn't structurally similar to a file system - at least until it gets to the website level. Maybe the navigator could show networks of nodes, grouped by themes/topics, with scaling proportional to popularity..

Interestingly, I just searched for "visualization of the world wide web", and most hits were articles from the 2000's - perhaps related to the image of "cyberspace", a term that's since fallen out of fashion.
> 38 miles above the Earth ... high enough that passengers would feel 90 seconds of weightlessness.

What does this even mean? As I'm sure we all know here, there is in fact gravity in space near the Earth. Astronauts on the space station experience 0.89g at 200 miles altitude. You get a feeling of weightlessness by masking gravity with inertial forces, not by being far from Earth (I mean, being far from Earth would do it, but you have to be really, really far. Certainly further than $100k is going to get you). If you just want to experience weightlessness you don't have to go far from Earth at all. Just take a trip on the vomit comet for $5k.
My humble opinion is that the cure for aging is going to involve creating some perfect stem cells for the body to regenerate from. The idea is that you could perform an analysis on a few thousand cells from an adult, and since the mutations in each adult cell are in different places, by looking at the most common variant of each base pair you can figure out what the perfect original dna strand looked like. Then you can create at least one perfect stem cell. The reason I like this approach is that fixing mutations by comparing multiple dna strands is something that evolution can’t do, whereas if the problem was some simple chemical that the body needed, evolution would have solved that problem on its own. So I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that’s probably not going to work.
I wake up every morning full of ideas on things to create. Deciding which to do is the problem.
Where else can you go from pauper to billionaire in your twenties?
The officials already made clear that passenger comfort isn’t a priority; they could have mandated that airlines install noise sensors and file monthly reports with their data, but instead they chose to require passengers to risk suffering and then have to file complaints to seek recompense for it.
Pulse jet is another simple jet engine design, was used by Germany in WW2 on their V1 flying bombs. Not particularly efficient, but cheap. And noisy.
I'm surprised at the quality of the article. I didn't realize Huffington Post can publish things like this.
Walking out is bad? For you maybe, because you just lost out on a potential senior candidate.
If you're interviewing for some core, low level algorithm development then fair enough but I suspect if that's the case you could come up with something a little closer to the real life domain.

It's not that I think the question is too complicated, just not the best marker.

In my mind, more relevant questions are ones that demonstrate real life experience in the field. For example, populating a tree of objects in a high level language like Java from a DB where the tree of objects are stored as many to many relationships. You'd be surprised how many times I've run across production code which does this via SQL calls inside nested loops.

This whole infatuation with algorithm questions like you'd find in SICP might be good for new grads but misses the mark for Senior level engineers.
In my experience with technical interviews, the majority of time is spent on algorithm questions. This was especially bad at a recent interview I had at Google... all 5 interview rounds were almost entirely focused on one or two algorithm questions without any regard to any of the usual open-ended questions about past challenges, motivation, etc. I even had one interviewer start out asking about an interesting technical challenge I had, and basically cut me off after a minute or two with kind of a "ok thats great lets get on with the whiteboard now."
Can someone please explain the downvotes? Do you not like the idea that meditation can mitigate pain? Don’t think it’s true? Find it wrong to teach kids? What?
Could the energy be beamed from the surface, like a trolleybus powered by power lines?
It looks like a joke, so it was downvoted when I saw it. It remembered some project to add iron to the sea, so I hoped that it was a serious proposal.

Try to avoid onliners, it's very easy to misinterpret them. (Bonus points for a link to Wikipedia or somewhere with more details.)
I know people like to hate on errors as values as in Go, but I think exceptions are worse when it comes to unexpected side effects and this is a prime example!
Yes, that. And there was always that possibility. I would have hoped someone with $100K to drop would have known better — bankruptcy protection laws didn't just come about in the past few years.
Probability field interactions would theoretically be mediated by a probability particle, so this field being negative is mediated by the equivalent probability anti-particles. I came to this realization a few minutes ago while snorting Oumuamua dust.
Former MSFTie here: I was doing FTE interviews in the OSD/Bing org about four years ago and the “puzzle questions” were long gone even then. So either this post is somewhat belated or this particular PM division is a bit behind. It’s a big company and individual orgs/teams have a lot of leeway in how they hire, rather than a company-wide diktat, so either is possible.
Maybe they'll even find a cure for body dysmorphia. It's usually those people that use growth hormone.
I feel bad for him — feel someone should have intervened before he handed over the money in the first place.
The hero / rockstar / ninja narrative rears its ugly head again.

Some people will be at the top of their field. Most people won't.
One may as well just use C# without classes.
premise invalid
Article has nothing to do with passengers.
Why not just do a “Describe a time...” behavioral question ?

In an interview both sides should put their best foot forward, assuming positive intent and trust. Purposefully asking “dumb questions” on the hopes someone picks up on the game, and then plays it as you expect, seems like a suboptimal approach.
My favorite is constructors of things that taken input/output streams that themselves can throw.
It becomes very verbose to ensure that the unwinding happens correctly.
So honest question, how does a legal/regulatory solution protect users against illegal bad actors, foreign actors, or malicious projects and frameworks that are either Open Source or that aren't backed by a company?

I hear this argument brought up a lot, that the only thing that can fix this is regulations. I've always come at this from the opposite direction -- regulatory solutions are nice, and I'm not against them, but they're less useful than technological solutions because my gut instinct is regulations only cover a) law-abiding entities (and usually only corporations at that), who are b) competent enough not to mess up compliance in the first place.

The perspective I lean on by default is that even if you have good regulations in place, the problem isn't really solved until there's a widespread technical solution. So for example, it might be nice to have a law banning MITM attacks, but HTTPS is the superior solution that we really want. When we pass laws criminalizing stuff like hacking or tracking children, my perspective is we're just trying to buy time and localize the damage to the slightly less frequented parts of the Android app store while we fix the crappy permissions models and sandboxing on our core platforms.

Is there a secondary aspect to the regulatory solutions that I'm missing? Something that would go much, much farther and be much stricter than laws like GDPR? I don't mean it as an argument, I'd just be curious to hear someone with the regulation>infrastructure perspective elaborate more on what they're thinking about when they say that, because it's a perspective I don't have much experience with.
When I buy a plane ticket, that's a regular purchase, because tens of thousands of planes exist and millions of people are actually flying on planes every day.

When you purchase a ticket on a spacecraft that doesn't yet exist, hasn't even been fully developed yet, and that no one has ever flown on, it's quite a different situation. I don't think the company lied about any of these facts. It should have always been clear that there was more risk involved.

And the reason the refund won't happen has little to do with bankruptcy protections and everything to do with the fact that the company failed. It turns out what they had tried to do was harder than expected, and they spent all their money without coming close to the end goal. That money is gone and won't be coming back, regardless of anything having to do with bankruptcy. As the saying goes, you can't squeeze blood from a stone. In theory they may be owed their $100k back, but in practice they'll never get it because it's no longer there.
Yes, I was also wondering if there are any other nibs besides gold that can survive this ink. Not sure if I'm ready to shell out that much for a fountain pen.
WSO2 is more than just Enterprise Service Bus. There are a bunch of products and solutions belongs to WSO2[1]. Enterprise Service Bus, API Gateway, Identity and Acess Manager, Analytics and Stream Processing Server are the core products.

[1] https://wso2.com/platform
This was my reaction as well. What exactly do you get for the $95,000 price premium and the massive amount of added risk? Not even bragging rights, since even the most generous definition of "space" is 50 mi, not the 37 mi Xcor planned.