skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Although I have a soft spot for abjunction (as discussed in my wall-of-text comment deeper in the thread), my favorite universal gate is the three-input conditional: x if y else z, or y ? x : z in C or JS syntax, the element from which BDDs are built. (Like abjunction, it's falsehood-preserving, and it's also truth-preserving, so unlike NAND and NOR, it is only "universal" if you have access to constants TRUE and FALSE.) As Darius Bacon has pointed out, one way to generalize it to continuous variables, or variables over arbitrary fields, is as the lerp operation commonly provided by GPUs: yx + (1-y)z, or, without using constants, x + y(z-x). In GF(2), subtraction and addition are both XOR, so that ends up being x ^ y & (z ^ x), which is a correct definition of the operation for bits.

The universal reversible gates like the Fredkin gate and the Toffoli gate are also really interesting and potentially important.

Designing circuits with separate combinational gates and registers is fairly easy, but it treats the temporal separation of cause and effect as a sort of defect in the universe, and consequently we have to be cautious about glitches (when we don't clock) and metastable states resulting from inadequate setup and hold times (when we do clock). Suppose we continue to discretize time with clocks just as in the current RTL paradigm; can we find a finite state machine that is minimal and universal in some NAND-like sense, and also admits a reasonably tractable design methodology? Would it have two binary inputs, one binary output, and one bit of state? Is it just a J-K flip-flop?
The author derides the ahistorical, overly-respectful approach of people who treat ragtime like pre-20th-century classical music - but fails to acknowledge that this approach is just as ahistorical and overly-respectful when applied to pre-20th-century classical. Chopin, Liszt, and Beethoven were absolutely writing to put bread on the table, and absolutely did not play to the score as written.

> Classical music and popular music serve entirely different purposes and have diametrically opposed motivations behind their creation. In general, a classical composer uses music to express his deepest emotions and experiences. Classical music arouses the intellect and the passions. It addresses the deepest questions of human existence. Classical music is sophisticated and intelligent. The impression is that it cannot be appreciated by the uninititated and the uneducated. Of course, classical composers were traditionally supported and constrained by the patronage system. Poverty may have obliged Mozart to accept commissions for works he might not otherwise of written, but his patrons probably never asked him to "dumb it down."

This is sheer nonsense. I'm hardly a major classical fan but I can immediately think of an example: Beethoven's String Quartet No. 13 B flat (thanks HN for eating the flat symbol) originally concluded with his Große Fuge (which was later published separately), but at his publisher's pleading he reworked it with a lighter and more accessible ending.

As far as I can see this essay draws no genuine distinction between Ragtime and Classical. Joyous improvisational play is equally authentic - and equally valuable - for (pre-20th century) classical as it is for ragtime.
libripgrep isn't currently a thing (not merged to mainline). On reddit, the author noted that ripgrep (and other utilities) need to be on the PATH, which is one of the issues related to windows packaging.
Norway Waking Up..Norway Deports Muslims; Crime Rate Drops 31%
I'm a heavy Apple CarPlay user and I am delighted that my car (a 2016 Seat) has analogue controls that work with it. I know that when I'm required to use the on screen controls for certain functions, I am a less safe driver.
Because who know when the volume control might get iterated out of existence
Indeed. My grandfather worked at a coal mine and after that he laid tram rails with his bare hands. This was during the reconstruction decades after WW2.

I don't know how things are exactly in the US but my country is wealthier than ever. Hundreds of thousands of people are retiring so there are tons of jobs going to be around.
> I'm amazed they published that in the newspaper. (...) That was a freaking brave editorial decision.

As someone not from the US: what would the controversy here be? (i.e. what reason would someone opposed to publishing this name?)

The Netherlands has done pretty awful things in Indonesia after WW2, and while that is unfortunately hardly mentioned in high school, I can't imagine it being controversial for a Dutch newspaper to publish testimonials of it.
My only problem with Java is how it’s written. Enterprise java tends to be abstracted to absurd levels. I prefer a more direct approach.
It takes a while for things to trickle down to certified jets and touchscreens are still relatively new. It will come: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-aims-for-a...

If recent business jets are an indication, it's all touch based at the high end already. Also, Ipads are getting pretty popular for pilots. My understanding is that most pilots would bring one by default (two plus extra batteries typically) and that especially for GA, there is a lot of equipment and software that integrates with them. One odd thing is that some pilots use ipads to control equipment in the plane because of UI and UX issues. E.g. you can control a garmin 530 with an ipad and it seems like pilots prefer doing that because it is just easier.

I think both in cars and in the aviation industry there is the notion that the companies manufacturing UIs there are not necessarily that good at it because historically their focus was more hardware oriented. The UX of especially older equipment can be kind of clunky. E.g. many planes have an fms (flight management system) with a non qwerty keyboard that looks like it was designed in the nineteen sixties and just never updated. You still find the same design in relatively new planes like the A319.

I agree that it is nice to have physical controls for some thing. E.g. I love volume dials. But overall, touch is great when hardware designs result in very complex UX.

So, I suspect that Mazda getting rid of touchscreens is more their own inability to do good UI than any inherent problems with touch screens. The rest of the industry seems to be trying to catch up to Tesla. I recently sat in a very new Renault with Android Car and a big touch screen. It's a very nice upgrade from the previous generation which was very clunky to use and had lots of annoying bugs. Renault outsourcing the UI to a company that has a clue was a big improvement for them they were just hopelessly out of their depth.
It took me a minute to figure out what this is doing... basically, it shows you which expired domains you can buy that bought pixels on the Million Dollar Homepage.

It doesn't really work all that well (most of the domains are still actually registered but don't resolve), but it's clever!
No problem, it's really interesting isn't it! There's so much cool stuff out there related to this, the other side of the surge of DevOps hype that people don't see as often, there's tons of cool tech powering these newish ways of deploying software
Temporary problem. The Chinese market alone is the size of the whole West (US+EU combined)

It will be Apple who has the biggest decline over the next few years. (US and EU market is saturated - next Apple target market was China.)
I use haproxy as a forward proxy on my personal computers mainly for ability to control SSL options, sniffing SSL traffic and to support non-SSL enabled clients. I do not need any caching so squid seems inappropriate.
Incidentally, that was the aspect of old feature phones I most miss today. I could operate them without looking by muscle memory - and it worked because the UI was fixed, but more importantly, it was soft-real time: the delays were predictable and you could learn them too. Today's touch devices tend to lag completely randomly.
Why do you say that FAANG isn’t paying enough for this? They seem to be, since they are hiring more than enough engineers in this manner to build even trillion-dollar companies. I doubt they give two shits about the developers who decide to work elsewhere.
Any language that will survive as much as Java or C++ will accumulate some baggage, even your cool shine new language will look outdated 20 years from now to the new cool programmers.

Look at other examples, CSS - full of bad examples on how do do X, JS - a lot of bad parts, missing core stuff like importing modules , Python - it had is issue caused by some old decisions that caused a lot of pain when migrating version 3.

My point a 5 old years new language will eventually have similar issue in 10-15 years
You shouldn't be doing anything like that while driving. Also if it's physical in any way you can build accurate muscle memory and know without looking that you have gone to the right spot. This is almost never the case with touch screens interfaces.

There is no safe way to interface with a screen while driving. You are taking your eyes off the road, and your focus goes with it necessarily. The safest option is no screens. It's the only reason I would never get a Tesla. If it's mission critical it needs to be physical.

It's different in a plane, because you can safely take your eyes off the sky. In fact flying by instruments only is routinely the only choice; night time, weather. So a glass cockpit/touch screen controls make sense there. But even then the key controls are still physical.
> You get in the car and it already knows where you want to go because it has access to your calendar.

We're revealing too much to google and God knows who else.
Nothing stopping you from doing that. For HTTP some of the newer frameworks like javalin or spark encourage it and get close to flask or Go levels of simplicity. Chose you own JSON parser, connection pool etc...
Apple Search Ads Priceless Insights in 2019
Cycling commissioners say painted bike lanes don’t make cyclists feel safer
Slaves were (if im not mistaken) the first asset that was securitized in the new world. People across Europe who never touched a slave got rich from the trade.

"First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the
banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers,
many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized."

"Here is how the American slave-breeding industry worked, according to the Sublettes: Some states (most importantly Virginia) produced slaves as their main domestic crop. The price of slaves was anchored by industry in other states that consumed slaves in the production of rice and sugar, and constant territorial expansion. As long as the slave power continued to grow, breeders could literally bank on future demand and increasing prices. That made slaves not just a commodity, but the closest thing to money that white breeders had. It’s hard to quantify just how valuable people were as commodities, but the Sublettes try to convey it: By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined."

https://kottke.org/16/02/a-history-of-the-slave-breeding-ind...
Years ago I had a friend that was an embedded HW/SW guy working for our local Ford manufacturing (AU). He was very proud of an antenna switch that had options for "fully up/halfway/fully down" and explained all the complexities of counting revs on the motor that was doing the moves and remembering the count and working out whether it had reached the top etc.

When I asked him why they didn't replace the existing 3 position switch (down/halfway/up) with a 3 position "go down/stay where you were/go up" and just count the revs and remember them, he looked completely blank.

The idea that the people building these UIs are actually interested in actual safe UX is misguided. UX is irrelevant, UI has to be sexy in the showroom.

Neither Apple or Google want the manufacturers to put in knobs and switches, because then they'll have to adapt their partially neutered existing iOS/Android UIs to support things like CANbus etc. Plus the integration costs will go up and nobody got time for that.
ok i am curious what is the name of the book?
Are you saying PHP has improved the way JavaScript has over the last decade?

The improvements in both the language/community plus how people are using JS since The Good Parts was quite a significant improvement.

But people largely went through that whole process because of the ubiquity of browsers not because JS was a good idea. There are so many better alternatives on the server side for web, I don’t see the point in PHP going through that whole renovation unless it’s to hire more and cheaper developers.
Which allows them to have the UI for controlling the car be done by a team without strong communication links with the team designing the rest of the car's UX.

Is that a genuine benefit, or one that shows up more early in planning and who's downsides show up late?
>Have you ever tried to jump to a thread without using the mouse? Or copy a link to the last message? Or share it? Or ask Slack to remind about it? Or snooze all notifications?

I'm not sure these are issues?

* Not sure what "jump to a thread" is referring to, but you can step through top-level messages with the cursor keys and use <Tab> + <Enter> to activate the "n replies" link.

* You can focus the relative timestamp link (it's got a sensible tab ordering) with the keyboard and then trigger the browser's context menu to achieve this.

* The message's context menu is also tab accessible. The "More actions" link is aria-label'd as you'd expect. You can navigate the subsequent context menu using the keyboard to select "Share message".

* Snooze/remind are accessible via commands, as well as menus which are accessible as described above. The commands are documented in the help.
> Good design and java rarely go hand in hand. These small details matter. I don’t think it’s a mistake that Ruby, JS, Rust, Elixir, etc attract people with good design sensibilities which is reflected in their blog posts, websites, and also API designs, documentation, etc.

That's an interesting claim, but now that I think about it, I wholeheartedly agree. The reason for that might be Java's poor support for UI programming (especially on the web) and the coders therefore creating their blogs with alternative languages and ecosystems that they are unfamiliar with.
Only a person who loves something would start with "Love it or Hate it", FYI.
if you don't mind my asking - how much do you doe? Do you microdose more often to prevent migraines or take them "as-and-when" required?
This isn’t going to change in the near term, because the companies in the middle emulate the companies at the top, and the companies at the top are doing just fine with their current hiring processes. Sure, they’re missing out on some good people, but they have enough excess demand for employment that they can keep their cubicles well-stocked with enough C++/Java/Python coders to accomplish their business objectives and make tens of billions of dollars per year.

Telling them they should change is like telling Tom Brady he should change the way he holds the football — even if you’re right, he’s not going to listen to you while he’s still winning the Super Bowl every other year.
I see, didn’t know about this. Thanks for pointing it out!
That's the reason all real IQ tests (not the ones you find on the internet, the real ones) are secret/closely guarded: Knowing the tests beforehand skews the results.
So: yes, it is the same in that way and has been theorized as one of the reasons for the Flynn effect. Afaik there's also research into new types of IQ tests to mitigate this all the time, but a good IQ test has higher requirements than the typical interviewing test, so it takes longer.
Disable notifications?
Setup a Pi-Hole and don't depend on browser-level but network-level ad blocking.
The point of many of these cycle lanes is not to be useful to cyclists but to be useful to the council's PR.
Frameworks, graphical debuggers and first class IDE support it is good for developers.

Working with caveman tooling just in the name of some greater good, not so much.
Doesn't equivalence checking normally use BDDs, and SAT solving normally use separate AND, OR, and NOT? I mean the algorithm to reduce an expression to CNF is a pretty simple set of local rewrite rules with AND, OR, and NOT; I could be wrong but I feel like the NAND-based equivalent of CNF is quite a bit hairier.

As for minimizing combinational logic, don't you want to use the full set of gates available to you in that case, taking into account their cost, and maybe trying to minimize or at least limit circuit depth? It seems like just using NAND would be kind of a step backwards in that case. Karnaugh maps give you DNF; PALs/GALs want DNF; the fact that your DNF PAL circuit might just be two layers of NAND (equivalent to a layer of AND feeding into an OR layer) is kind of an implementation detail, isn't it? I mean you would configure the circuit in the exact same way if it were made out of physical AND and OR gates.
Either-or would achieve the same goal of not being bothered once every 15 minutes.
> I think it's pretty trivial for any company to argue that technical interviews are relevant to a developer job.

Is it? Can you show, right now, that your companies technical interviews and job performance correlate positively? Cause from the things I've seen that's not checked commonly in companies and even if it is you don't hear "the technical interview is bullshit, let's do something else" as a result.
Slack has replaced 99% of internal emails in our organisation. When pointing towards other platforms for long lived content, email just doesn’t seem to have a use case. We still need it for external comms obviously.
> "Enterprise Software" CRUD-churn

I did some Java in the late 90s at university, and a tiny bit in about 2001, pre-dating a lot of the enterprise stuff.

I've come back to it in the last three or four years and it's currently my main language. I think I manage to miss the enterprisey stuff. I remember J2EE happening to other people, and then for a while everything was Spring. Somehwere in there were 'Beans'

Now ... I was pleasantly surprised to come back to it. There are a lot of building blocks and interfaces to use in the various maven-centric public repositories, development is rapid, expressive (I <3 lambdas, which I never thought I'd say) and ... yeah. I'm having fun.

Part of this might be because I did (mostly) C for a decade!
"What do you care what other people think?" Is the most poignant question I've ever been asked in my life and for that I owe Mr. Feynman an inestimable debt. So few people as good questions.
You won’t go back because of the gains but would you have done it again from the start? Or is it more of the supporting libraries being the problem.

Even outside of python many people seem to be on the fence when talking about actually implementing it.
Honestly, talk is cheap. If they do hire people with programming tests and keeping the performance metrics of the people they hire (as most companies do), they could have just published how test performance predicts actual job skills. Until then, the null hypothesis reigns supreme.
Can you expand on this? I really don't get it... I understand why people would prefer "fixed-function" buttons like temperature up or lock doors, but I don't understand how radial button (which is just switching focus on the display) is any better than touchscreen... To me, it looks strictly worse, you need to focus on the button and the screen (to see what's selected), instead of just focusing on the screen and touching what you want directly.
Simple salary doesn't give the entire picture, though.

A doctor generally makes more in the US than, say, Norway. The Norwegian doctor, however, doesn't necessarily have a school loan since tuition isn't charged. If they live in a city, they don't need a vehicle, to pay health insurance, and their children's health care is free. The doctor gets maternity leave and they get paid sick leave if needed.

They probably pay a bit more tax, but it isn't crushing.

The entire life cost structure is simply different - without including some of these quality of life things in with the costs, it isn't a fair comparison.
Thank goodness! At least Mazda is opting out of the Pictures Under Glass insanity: http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesi...
You are not the target audience for this feature, but that audience exists and it's gigantic.
I prefer to think of cars as cars. A dock for a smartphone takes care of entertainment and for everything else discrete knobs switches and levers. Preferably clicking with a loud click.
> It's kind of freaking me out. Is the test that hard?

You didn't show us the test so let me flip a coin...

One can get pretty far in embedded just knowing how to OR flags and mask & shift values. I guess that's something most embedded devs working at that level should be able to just blurt out. Is that what your test was about?

Then again, I'm sure you can find "senior embedded developers" who worked on the browser based interface to an appliance that runs Linux... and, well, the last few times I used U-Boot on our product I didn't really need to play flipper with bits. (Well, I did, even if I didn't need to.)
“Let’s say I own a professional basketball team and need to make a hiring decision on a player who walks in the door. Am I going to be able to, with just an interview, determine whether they are a currently good player, or a formerly great player who has only been coaching in recent years and has forgotten how to play?”

No, that would be phenomenally stupid. You would do what teams actually do, and look at their recent playing history.

Note that this is also entirely possible for engineers.
The ones I checked were all available.

The real question is, will the pixels be reloaded differently if you buy a domain and place a different image there.
Sure, but how big a percentage of Broadcom this is isn't the whole story. It's not just about the impact on Broadcom, but also the impact on the economy and communities. A loss of $2bn worth of orders would probably have a similar impact in terms of jobs for example regardless of how big Broadcom was, perhaps unless they went bust.
My favorite forms solution (for SPAs) is https://github.com/final-form/final-form (there are adapters for React and Vue). The author has also written a previous form management tool called Redux Forms. Between the two versions (both are very good), you could tell the API evolution that the author had deep knowledge of the space, and the solution is pretty elegant.
You're stating that the company doesn't lose out with false negatives. That's certainly true with big FAANG companies. But I suppose in my original comment, and when I brought up Goodhart's law in a descendent comment, also suggests that by creating a system that can be gamed by prep, you end up creating a situation that encourages false positives. In the end, is a company of Leetcoder elites and new CS grads going to be a more productive company than one comprised of experienced and capable engineers who don't happen to do as well on those tests? Which I suppose is the question for a different study.