skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In 1993, 26 years ago, the US government burned 76 people alive. The FBI lied about their planning of the operation. They “lost” evidence. They lied about not having used incendiaries. They got helicopters under false pretends with drug warrants. Less than a month after the FBI caused the death of just under a hundred people the entire site was bulldozed, which happily for the government, rendered checking their stories quite difficult.

No one was ever punished for those deaths. No one suffered any professional, administrative or political demotion, censure or firing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
What about iot and embedded systems?
Then why do people from suburbs flock to the cities for their entertainment? Or build their suburbs right on the edge of cities?

Suburbs are boring. I grew up in them and much of my family still lives in them. I understand why people live in them — cost and space for raising kids, but they are definitely boring. And most of the people I know that live in them wouldn’t disagree, it’s a necessity driven by cost.
The weakness in this model is that technically people calling other people jerks, tend to be jerks. Especially when there's some negative consequence for that person in the form of less favorable reviews it would be kind of nasty to do this on the record. So, the people doing this the most would in my book be the actual jerks. This thing gets super political and in politics, the charismatic sociopaths end up leading.

I'd advertise a different model where who works for whom is strictly voluntary. Somebody wants something done and needs somebody else to work with them; that other person needs to agree to work with that person and should have the option to join another team instead of being assigned to a group of people. Nobody likes working for jerks and the whole thing will sort itself out in no-time. Team players joining forces together will produce great results and you can then simply judge the output.

You'll get certain people having a hard time getting a team together or finding a team that will have them because they are jerks, that would be a reason for them to get a bad review (because they don't deliver). People voting with their feet is a more honest model than people whining to their managers. Empower people to vote with their feet. Small teams, empowered to do what needs doing, with people committed to working with each other can get things done.

You'll get all your performers joining forces and you can expect great results. Everybody else ends up stuck with each other and it should show in whatever teams results you get from that. Some people get a lot of stuff done by themselves and that might still be positive. Linus Torvalds is a jerk, I wouldn't want him on my team but I use Linux and Git on a daily basis and I'm glad he's working on that.
Typically, it means anybody who has an iota of knowledge, cares about the product and company and is not like the benchwarmer whose claim to fame is B.S. and jargon. He is that stupid sincere guy in a tide of mediocrity. It is easy to cut and normalize one guy than bring up the level of the rest
I know not all things should be attributed to technical causes.

But I'm a consultant and I often have to deal with - to me - new MLOC piles of C++ code.
These code bases are of course almost always non-trivial and my first approach is most of the time - If I am permitted - to analyze the include structure and to optimize it. Removing headers, pimpl, basic things. Only then would I even begin, to explore particular problems. Side effect is an intermediate 500 feet view, that develops along the way.

Many developers are too hasty, taking too narrow an approach.
What are the common "safe" traits of a 10x developer?

So far everyone I have met with traits like
- produces working feature/code faster than anyone else
- delivers stable massive projects on time
- can carry a whole team through fire and hell
- praised to produce masterpiece*

Are the same people everytime who are just
- good at playing office politics
- are excellent at cutting major corners
- knows when their project will fall apart and leaves before
- are in league with upper management, so can't callout

I have yet to met a real developer who when left team/project/job didn't leave a massive trail of destruction but up until they were present everything was a-ok-top.

May be someday I aspire to meet one, but so far, most pseudo 10x are just people knowing how to play right politics and hide the skeletons really well :(
wait - so you mean you can go to that site and read what the idea was that was banned!?! please refute my point #1 given this detail - an Idea which can be looked up online has not been banned, it has been disseminated.
You seem to agree with implication that developer performance is measurable, when in fact these management driven annual reviews are a fantasy used to justify someone’s already planned agenda; raises and promotions for those in the in group for example.
> This should be a type error, because there's no further information available to resolve which implementation of FromIterator<> should be used. (Also you'd need to use filterMap to ever arrive at Vec<string> since you can't simply discard the errors.)

I don't want to have to worry about whether the function "throws" or not at the point where I'm calling map - that's the whole problem of doing this in Java. What if the function that calls map is itself a generic higher-order function? Result's great benefit over exceptions is that it isn't a special case; generic functions work with Result just as they work with string.

> In Rust, exceptions are part of the type system, so you only need one map().

So what's the answer to the question? If there's only one map() I should be able to use it to map with foo; when I do, what do I get back?

> The Rust implementation (syntax I use might vary from reality) of async/await is just this sort of syntactic sugar over a type: "async fn foo() -> X" is sugar for "fn foo() -> Future<X>", and "await!foo()" is (kind of) sugar for "foo().then(rest of the function)".

Sure, and try!foo() does a pretty similar thing for Result. I think that's a better approach than exceptions, because you can see what's going on at the call site - having functions that "throw" and don't "throw" look exactly the same at the point of use is too magic/confusing IME.

> The value of using a unified interface to continuations (or monads, if you prefer) is that you can use ones that don't have a magic blessed syntax: parsers with automatic backtracking written as simple imperative blocks, non-determinism via iterators where the continuation is a flatten operation, etc.

Yeah, I find continuations too confusing to reason about but I really wish Rust would adopt some general-purpose syntax for monads ("do notation"). That would require HKT though, because you can't even form the type of a monad in the general case without that.
What a huge difference from the standard corporate formal announcements.

That's HOW funding announcement should look like!
Woosh. So to the parents point, let me just explain that if you have kids and bring them up in the city, there’s a good chance they’re back on 2050s version of hackernews posting the suburban-centric viewpoint of how bleak city life is.

I get that everyone is living the best existence out there, but c’mon people, isn’t it clear that there is no objectively better place, only places with trade offs that appeal to different folks?
A lot of this rings true for me. A few years back I worked for a company that seemed hell bent on utterly demoralising its engineering organization. Think endless rules (even down to which HTTP verbs you were allowed to use), a Macbook Air for development work, releases that very literally required manager signoff coupled with a company culture that was very partial towards throwing engineers under the bus. Of course they were crippled by technical debt, outdated development practices and regularly plagued by production fires. They did make a lot of bad hiring decisions - helped largely by not conducting technical interviews. But even those of us who were competent felt like 0.1xers.
It's so weird to see so many people argue so hard that the Usain Bolt's of the programming world simply cannot / should not exist.
It means a person who is knowledgeable, experienced but can't work in a team without trashing someone other team or all members or need to vent often by humiliating one or another

I am pretty sure, Linus qualifies as one in past, not sure about the current developments there.
I haven’t been exposed to this tweetstorm but that sounds like the opposite of 10x. If no-one else has named it I’d call it the pig-in-mud engineer: They’re happy working with that codebase because they’re used to it (and it probably contains a fair bit of their excrement) even though no one else can get anything done in it.
Factory Bot Sequence Testing
That could be okay, if it’s done slowly and discreetly by upper management. Otherwise their are all kinds of hazards around recruiting like in the NCAA.
Why to Invest in Diversified Crypto Portfolios
It looks like the real 10x debate is not so much "do these people exist" (yes) or "is it context dependent" (yes), but the more subtle questions of how to identify one by any other means than working with them for weeks, and what a 10x developer (or salesperson!) is allowed to get away with in terms of not following the rules.

There is also the Stakhanov question about how to attribute the work of supporting and being supported by others, and how this can be used for propaganda.
I agree. But is this enshrined in some constitution that everybody reads and adheres to?
Living in a space, smaller than a prison cell and paying millions for it is not exactly a successful model of living. All those people loitering in shopping malls and spending majority of the time outside not with kids or family is a result of such cramped up space.

Funny part is all the frustration of no jobs, no opportunities, and prison cell home is blamed on China and the discontent which needs to be pointed towards the 14 real estate billionaires controlling every aspect of Hong Kong person's life and freedom is very nicely directed towards China as if they made things so bad in Hong Kong.
Reality is Hong Kong relied too much on real estate and traded living in prison cell houses for getting rich quick scheme. So the current situation is created by it. After living in Hong Kong for over a decade as an expat can understand pretty well when living in a expat bubble it's hard to see things for majority.
Hopefully no city in the world follow Hong Kong model of development will result in same protest and violence be it democracy or autocracy.
Anyone Can Hire a Team of Spies
The project I got transferred to was the thing of nightmares. It was a C++ project and all the bad things that have ever been said about C++ were true about that code base. There was not much code but it was utterly incomprehensible. There were massively deep inheritance hierarchies, compilation speed was measured in minutes for even the most trivial changes, and so on. It was managed by an architecture astronaut that, as one is wont to do, rewrote existing mature libraries as header only template libraries that were buggy and untested (one could even say untestable).

Oh no, it seems like a hyper-modern-C++ developer lead the project and transformed the code into template-metaprogramming madness... (inferred by the absurdly long compile times) Deep condolences to all the people who worked on the project.
Shouldn't it be "bonware". Since "mal" is French.
> Of course not, but its a requisite to strong social bonds isn't it?

A requisite, it isn't. But, for people living in cosmopolitan cities, or people who have an open mind about the world, of course it is.
Why are you questioning it - IIRC the NYT wrote "feel good" articles about those visionaries several times ...

> It's unethical

You can't know whether it is or isn't. It's quite likely ethical - share with others the opportunity to make money off their WeWork investment. Maybe they'll instead lose money, but he didn't force them to buy it, so what exactly might be unethical about it?
I agree to this. As I commented elsewhere, this is what most 10x I have come in contact with can be described as(sort of).
Great area to think about. Now is probably the best time ever to try something in this space.

Rationale: The modern Apple-using programmer wants something to do with their touch bar, there are more meta keys than they can use, they are running a machine with huge graphics capabilities that are underutilized.

Some ideas: Full screen, keyboard-driven navigation (meta-arrow = codeblock, meta-arrow = window/file), meta keys for compile/test/git commit/diff. Combine tmux, vi/emacs, Visual Studio, FileMerge.

Try it and see. Don't listen to others. Sometimes rethinking things for the ground up is for the best. Worst case you learn. Supportive wisdom:

To be original you don't have to be first - you just have to be different and better. - Adam Grant

Experience doesn't matter. The rate of learning matters. First principles thinking matters. - Vinod Khosla

Light speed analysis: What is the best theoretical performance I could achieve with this design? What is the real information content being transferred and at what rate of change? What is the underlying latency and bandwidth between components? Could the approach ever achieve the performance goals or does it need a rethink? Understand the true performance characteristics of your building blocks rather than focusing on functional characteristics. - Terry Crowley
Most suburbs I've seen have areas of countryside around them. That's what makes them a suburb rather than an urban centre. It's kind of by definition.
คrt 3.8 rēlēคŞē໓: คŞ¢ii คrt li๖rคrฯ f໐r pฯth໐ຖ
1 Apple in 10 lemons is a culture misfit and can be labelled as a brilliant jerk.
> Not deterred, I hacked into it a shitty solution and shipped it very fast.

And moved the burden of maintenance to someone else? If so, this is one of the things people are complaining about 10x dev on twitter. You may look good, but the team / dept / company is worse off, and someone else has to clean up.
< 0 yr old - no screentime

5 yrs old - ~ 3hours screentime (TV only, we see what he's watching). If he want, he can reduce that time before dinner so after the dinner he can play on PS4 for the rest of the remaining time (Lego Worlds or Gran Turismo Sport).

No TV during meals. No cartoons after 20:00.

If something is truly educational (e.g. he learnt numbers and letters thanks to youtube channel) he can watch a bit longer.

AMA ;)
WeWork CEO has reportedly cashed out of over $700M ahead of IPO
Modern antivirus programs tend to have some heavy heuristic real-time virus detection, too. The problem is if you set the heuristic detection levels very high, then the number of false positives skyrockets.

In some environments the best solution is to use a whitelisting approach and there are several solutions for Windows on the market. Unfortunately, I don't know of any easy to use whitelisting solution for Linux.

My personal experience with one of these solutions on my gaming PC was that for normal end-users whitelisting is too much work for everyday use, and at the same time I was never really confident that the mechanisms the program used to block non-whitelisted software couldn't be fooled easily. Those mechanisms are proprietary and even seemingly reputable companies make claims on their web pages that look like snake-oil to me. If someone talks about "military grade protection", then you can count me skeptic. In the end, the success of such software mostly depends on whether the malware author tests against the particular vendor or not, so there is some high level of security by obscurity involved that might actually help against most attacks, especially if you're using some obscure vendor as I did. Probably not worth the effort for everyday use, though.
You should know it means his understanding on 7.x is not stable enough.
Yeah. Debates are weird, and IMO poisonous to mind.

Taking a topic, splitting into two teams and fighting it out with words until the victor remains is the exact opposite of what you want to do to reach any useful conclusion on any topic.
WizzAir Hacked? – Customers Asked to Change Passwords
"rather than a score, they either get an “exceptional year”, a “great year” or an “off year”." - I wonder if that means an average year counts as an "off year"?
Lisp machines were sold in the market, before UNIX Workstations won over thanks for being based on source code available at a symbolic price, thus cutting down their hardware costs.

ETHZ had their Oberon workstations servicing the complete CS department for around 10 years.

Midori powered part of Bing during its high time.

Don't mix technology capabilities with politics and budgeting.
> Good news: There are people who are neither. I prefer to work for competent non-jerks. A team of good people will always outperform a brilliant jerk that drives everyone else away.

I prefer to work with brilliant people and love to learn from them.
Yes, I meant that. Thanks for clarifying!
> You must deliver software like you're delivering a book from amazon, no matter what.

This particular story provides an important refinement to this point. Success isn't always possible. Delivering "no matter what" is part of what engenders trust, but an even more important component is being ahead of the ball.

If your manager comes to you saying "you're not matching expectations", whatever explanation you might have will be read as an excuse. If you proactively tell your manager "hey, this framework seems hellish, we might face some problems", you're leading the discussion in how to recover from a bad situation — You redefine "success" early enough in the game that you can actually deliver it. Knowing how to have this conversation (and the self-reflection necessary to understand you need to have it) is one of the most important parts of a "true" 10x engineer.
> but last time AWS wanted a valid reason.

Yep - my reason is normally "I'm planning a project that needs more instances"

I doubt they even look at that field to be honest
Which aspect of elliptic curves would you like to understand better? The original paper for Curve25519 contains a dedicated subsection for attack models, for example, and leaves only marginal room for hidden backdoors with its detailed reasoning about curve parameter choice. The implementation of EdDH or EdDSA is specified in RFCs that are explicitly written to be "fool-proof", as others already commented.
Why I Indent My Code 8 Spaces? (2018)
Strongly agreed, and I'm happy this was created, even though I'm not convinced it's going in the right direction. We do need people experimenting with tech that lets us streamline reasoning and arriving at group consensus.
C++ is never fast to compile, but some design decisions will make it much slower than it needs to be. The less stuff you put in your headers, the faster it will build (for the most part).

You can also sometimes make templates slow by programming horrors like iteration through repeated template instantiation. There's an old joke about those sorts of problems. "Doctor, it hurts when I do this," says the patient. The doctor replies, "then don't do that."
The title isn't descriptive. What is this article about, in a nutshell?
If people know they can pay 10p so that the important email they have to send will certainly not end up in the spam folder I think it will benefit everyone. And if all marketing email is being filtered and they don't see value in paying to get it delivered, everyone wins.
You're putting words into my mouth.

People (taken as an overall population) care about democracy after they care about their general well-being.

That doesn't make them pigs, it makes them rational.
It's a shame. People have even stopped using certain niche programming languages because their non-standard compilers create executables that are often flagged by antivirus software.
Indeed it's not even not impossible.
Will you in any way address the issues I brought up, or you just want to have the last word?
> You can argue against things without pissing people off in the process.

This requires lots of political skills that only few people have.
Take time to listen to the idea from your own team – Story of Carrot HQ
Seldo (NPM cofounder) leaves company
Sprinting - individual sport.

Development - team sport. You could put Messi on my company's 5 a side lunch time team, and we still wouldn't win the champions league, and the skill of the others on the team would atrophy, and they would become over reliant on a single person. Not a great thing for a team.

A true "10x" engineer raises up the team by 10x by doing the things a lot of devs hate doing - docs, mentoring, guidance (without taking over someone's feature), and knowledge sharing. Not shipping :all-the-things: on their own.
Millennials are driving brands to be more purposeful
That is what we have today.
I think the 10x developers are a myth if you compare the whole output versus another developer whole output.

But it is very common that a developer can fix a problem or build something 10x or even 100 times faster than others. Simply because they know the project, the language, understand the problem already, have experienced that problem before.

I have many anecdotes where I was stuck on something for hours and a colleague solved it in 10 minutes. But I have also counter anecdotes where 2 colleagues were stuck a whole day trying to solve a problem while I was out of the office and the next day I solved it in less than 5 minutes. The multiplication factor of that is insane, but it really happened.
> Being opposed should be encouraged even if it's just a way to internally test ideas; being obnoxious should be discouraged.

The lines between "opposed" and "obnoxious" are very blurry and depend a lot on whether the respective person is very socially adept or not.
I think this is a real flaw. Office politics are popularity contests. And popular people are usually not the most effective or integral people. In fact, often the popular path is entirely the wrong one.
And when two-thirds of reviews are about "soft skills" or some such, it will probably actually boil down to a popularity contest.

I mean I can think of multiple times over the years where projects absolutely failed even though people politely pointed out the flaws but did not push to correct them because they did not want to rock the boat and knew it would make them unpopular or "a jerk".

Sure there are _actual_ jerks that theoretically this would "catch", but it seems like competent managers would give them a warning and if they weren't obviously improving, eliminate them by necessity.

Another aspect of this is that politically connected (office politics) people in the organization are often immune to this type of thing, and calling them out in a review could be career suicide.
There are many techniques to combat compile times in C++. One of the more easy solutions is to not use heavily templated header-only libraries too much, which is precisely what the architecture astronaut mentioned in the article did.

Many people say that templates in C++ is a zero-cost feature, but it slows down compile times so much up to the point that you can't call it "zero-cost". I think it's just another tradeoff that C++ developers have to make - between generic code, performant code, and fast-to-compile code.
What I thought I wanted was not really what I wanted. My mind just concoted those goals, so that I could go towards them and escape current unpleasant situation. Once I did that, I learned that the grass was not greener on the other side.
This. Also this would be ripe for abuse, I can easily see nefarious actors setting up email accounts just to receive the paid emails and get money.