skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
One of the big problems with machine learning algorithms at this time is that they have a hard time figuring out intent. A lot of the terms used by the LGBTQ community, have been used by homophobic people as slurs. Yes it is great that the community is reclaiming those words, but current ML tech has no way of distinguishing when those terms are being used by the community in a respectful manner from where they are used by homophobic people to promote hate.

This is also the case with African Americans, and there is a similar problem of machine learning flagging African American content as hate speech. https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/8/15/20806384/social-media-h...

The problem may be that we cannot depend on machine learning algorithms to do an acceptable job of moderation, and that a lot more humans need to be hired as moderates. However, doing that really changes the economics of the platform
I was absolutely rekt by this exact question several years back for a Microsoft internship interview. I had just finished my first CS class where I learned binary search, heaps, hash tables, but unfortunately not cumulative sums.
>Their domains are mutually exclusive and yet the conversation continues stupidly (on both sides) as if they were.

This may be true in principle, but your whole argument falls apart because religion does make assertions about the real physical world. They (taking here the example of Christianity) they postulate miracles, divine intervention, life after death, an unlikely and unsubstantiated cosmology, not to mention of course stories about the creation of the universe or biblical floods which have conveniently become "metaphorical" after it became plain enough that they were nothing but fabrication. So your premise is not true, and that is where the whole friction comes from.

EDIT: Engagement rather than downvotes would be appreciated :)
> I think we over focus on these scary edge cases where some trickster is trying to con their way into the job. The worst case is you just fire them when they are unable to do the work, and that's on them.

The problem is once you offer them a job you stop searching for a candidate. Then you get a bad hire and even if it's quick you won't really know for a while, so then you're really behind.

It's bad enough when you hire someone who really wasn't qualified but didn't do anything bad. Now you have to get rid of someone who probably left a previous position and, like above, you have to go get someone to do the job you were hiring for in the first place. Worst of all possible worlds.

Perhaps the calculus is different in a big company, but for a startup your approach sounds pretty bad.
I think a difference of purpose is to be mentioned here. Not all people are the same, some strive for different aspects of life than others.

Using your example, some seek family, a close social circle, a white-picket-fence life. There's nothing wrong with that, but another group seeks relative solitude, doesn't see a purpose in creating a family or having a nice house, and fills some kind of intellectual hole, be it with creative writing, or relatively non-conformist research.

My point is, I don't see Bukowski as one who lacks empathy, rather, someone who follows his own purpose, though, potentially blind to some others' happiness doing other things.

Lastly, the workforce ethics back then were quite different from today's. It's my understanding that the pay was significantly lower compared to costs of living while progressing in ranks was near impossible without a degree.
I was also not allowed to use the C# ?? null-coalesce operator. So something like

if( nullableBooleanVariable ?? false )

was also forbidden.
For example, on std:String, the + operator is hidden away in the Add trait implementation. (In this case it's reasonably obvious anyway.)
Deploying a Gatsby Application to an S3 Bucket Using CircleCI
Depends on the company. I fought the senior engineering leadership and HR to get data scientists on the same scale as engineers (they had previously been lower--much lower).
It's my understanding that "publishing bad news" does not equate to the subject in question being "true", certainly not in today's media climate. Had the OP said something like: "publishing evidence of bad things" then of course that the discussion would have been totally different. And to judge by the discussion in this thread the linked article is not "evidence", is merely "news".

To recapitulate: willingly publishing "bad news" (which you don't have any evidence that they might be true or not) in order to financially gain stuff on a stock exchange should be treated as securities fraud.
It only has to do that once though. Once it's built once it's cached. When you're working on code you don't even need to fully compile your own code every time.
I believe the post makes it very clear, and the title, which some may consider misleading regarding your actual issues with the new policy, is appropriate because 1) that's the feature as presented by Google, and 2) is clearly just the tip of the iceberg when you notice the post is quite long.
Sorry to be overly harsh! I think I was initially excited by the suggestion, then disappointed when I thought it through and found it less compelling that it sounded. :)

Re small angles, I don’t quite follow; if I have a couple of small angles, say 0.01 and 0.015, isn’t it useful to have good resolution around 0 so I can represent them reasonably accurately? The Farey sequence seems to have its biggest gap right at that point, between 0 and 1/N.
That, or, candidates without formal education lack the basic statistical knowledge and/or communication skills required.

PhDs can't code, hackers don't know stats. A good team has both. If you're a one-man show, you need to do both yourself.
> Especially when China is building 300-500 new coal plants?

China is also building a ton of renewable energy. They're building a ton of everything and "India and China are doing X" isn't a reason for others to do nothing.

> Actually, as individual consumers, the best way one can lower one's carbon footprint is to not spend money.

I can't upvote this enough. This is the best way for individual consumers to make a difference.
It's too bad I didn't figure out until after college that college was about meeting people and networking and not about coasting through the easy classes.
How significant is that take home? I immediately reject such requests of unpaid work if it takes more than 10-15 minutes.

If in your case, you demand allocating more time for that step, consider adding additional filter (requiring 10-15 mins) after the resume review. And then redirect [part of] resources (money) from the onsite part to pay for that take home task.

Another red flag I see in your process - asking for allocating time before even talking to a human being - that would be another reason for an immediate rejection. Consider moving your phone part before the take home task.
It's the sort of attitude that enables a LOT of bad things in the world:

The poster doesn't like "unvetted" news sources like the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times (which get lumped in with Reddit and Stephen Colbert in their opinion). Instead, apparently they consider the information they get from their friends and family as adequately "vetted." Now, that's a very unusual definition of "vetted," plus where are the friends/family getting THEIR info? The poster is information-gathering via the old game of "telephone" with all the attendant problems and distortion that invites.

Now, the poster also claims they are getting all the info they need. How do they know that? How do they know their trusted friends and family are 100% informed on all of the relevant issues?

The world is a fast-changing place so to safely not worry about any of those changes, you have to be:

1) near the top of the socio-economic pyramid, AND
2) devoid of empathy

Example: as a white natural-born US citizen, I probably won't have to worry about any upcoming changes to the existing legal permanent resident program personally affecting me. But a recently-approved permanent resident really SHOULD pay attention to the news so that they can learn that many Americans and their representatives want to revoke their residency and kick them out.

Same thing for marriage laws: I'm a straight unmarried man, so I won't personally be affected if the GOP re-bans gay marriage, invalidates all of the existing ones, and jails county clerks and pastors for officiating them in the future.

But as a human being who cares about the people who ARE affected, it would be incredibly selfish of me to ignore not just their plight, but to go out of my way to avoid learning about what is going on.

I feel that being an informed citizen is a critical responsibility, an integral part of citizenship.
For the average person: light bulbs, air conditioners, refrigerators, microwaves, radios, etc., etc.
A nice PR piece, but for context, Apple is still largely using its vast resources to enrich investors, not workers.

Source: https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/5/1/18525672/apple-stock-ear...
Note that Let's Encrypt, which is making universal https possible, is also part of the Linux Foundation.

I was going to complain to sched.com for you, but I can't replicate the problem:

https://ossna19.sched.com/password-reset is the default and http://ossna19.sched.com/password-reset redirects to it.

(I work for the Linux Foundation.)
Many or most of them, at least in Munich, are reversible as well.
If this is the case, that's tragic in the dramatic sense -- LGBT groups fighting algorithms that are protecting them, because they can't appreciate the unseen danger prevented.

I also imagine the 'algorithms' are a moving target, which makes me think this should be settled quickly if not dismissed, as Google tries to correct this. But certainly a lawsuit should bump this up the engineering priority list.
People need hope and agency to find meaning. The problem is not that people work between 9:00AM-5:00PM, it's that their job overwhelms the rest of their life with demands that they have no control over and cannot ever hope to escape.

If you are a well-compensated tech worker, you probably have some measure of control over what you work on, even if that occasionally means voting with your feet. And you are probably able to save enough to leave and arbitrarily pursue your passions at least once a decade, whether that means going back to school, trying to start a business, getting more involved with your family, or just escaping a toxic environment.

It's easy to lose sight of the fact that not everyone has those sorts of choices available to them.
Your take-home could actually be part of a useful result. A whiteboard or napkin test usually doesn't cross that bar.
Ionic provides this as a service: https://ionicframework.com/appflow
Deskpass.com lets you drop into any coworking space in their network. It looks like they are up to 11 cities. You pay a subscription and then the coworking spaces get a flat fee for the day when you actually show up to their space.
I didn't say it invalidates the point, because I honestly don't know what your point was to begin with. Which is why I asked the question originally. I'm still no closer to knowing, and it seems like you're not interested in elaborating. Suit yourself.
Very good points, thanks for sharing! To compliment this article, an uncle of mine who had retired as VP of a major airline company started his career there as a janitor. He told me simply, "make the company more money than they're paying you" - by doing so it doesn't make any sense to let you go. This hasn't kept me free from layoffs somehow, but in general it keeps me afloat.
General reminder that fires are a part of the natural order of things, and if anything we've put too much effort into suppressing them.

Fire allows new growth, cuts down on disease, and gives the soil access to nutrients.

It also consumes fuel, meaning subsequent burns won't be as large. When you tamp down all naturally occurring fires, you set yourself up for an out of control blaze later on.
Metal is Obj-C.
The 1/5th as long isn't as relevant as the peak - I guess gyms have a peak in the evening after working hours. Duringnthe peaknit doesn't matter if people stay half an hour or four hours ...
> Rather than softening our interpretation of a conflict between our models and new evidence, we should always seek the simplest explanation and be willing to abandon failed models.

Sure, but what is exactly is "evidence"? The word is used as if observational data has no ambiguity or subjectivity is the way it is defined.

The book, Range (Epstein), had a great example of this in discussing the Challenger explosion in the last chapter.

The premise: several engineering teams in Nasa had a working theory/model about O-ring susceptibility to cold whether. However, their model was not backed up by the evidence available. Nasa made the call to launch based on data alone.

Why? the evidence collected for decision-making was incomplete and poorly presented. Range presents a thesis that over-reliance on a quantitative thinking can lead to optimization of the wrong thing and actually inhibits learning.

Related, "The Challenger: An Information Disaster" https://www.asktog.com/books/challengerExerpt.html - Tufte’s re-examination of the Challenger disaster.
Elastic which used to be called Elasticsearch. There is a free community tier of this, though according to recent drama, not sure how much longer it will remain open as such.
That sucks. I recently had a similar experience. Onsite interview went well with some coding and design questions and then got a rejection a day later saying I don't have networking experience which was quite clear from my resume.

I was only asked how DNS works in the interview and I answered that. I told the recruiter this wasn't mentioned in the job description nor was I asked those questions in the interview, but he didn't have anything to say.
Yeah. That's right. The pr disaster cost is getting cheaper and cheaper, allowing companies to get away with more and more.
When we were interviewing CEOs for my company, one of the things that surprised me was the interesting set of backgrounds we encountered. One, for example, had previously pled guilty to a federal indictment. We didn't hire him, and he went on to be CEO of another startup.

I think the CEO career risk, excepting gratuitously bad behavior at the wrong time (see Mark Hurd), is actually quite low and very, very overstated.
In the philosophical sense, I'd say truth is what reality is. In the practical sense, truth is what the evidence indicates, and anything else either remains unknown or is false if it contradicts the evidence.

We're limited to never knowing the complete truth of most things, which is why we have science so we can make our practical truth approximation ever closer to reality.
Not really. An NMI is delivered just like any other interrupt, and the NMI handler absolutely depends on kernel state. This is needed for the handler to do things like figuring out that it's a performance counter event and queueing up the perf event record involved.

There are a few relevant things about interrupts that matter here:

1. Interrupts, in general, don't have useful payloads. This is because the CPU and its interrupt controller keep track of all interrupts pending so that they can make sure to invoke the interrupt handler when it's next appropriate to do so. To avoid having a potentially unbounded queue of pending interrupts, the pending interrupt state is just a mask of bits indicating which vectors are pending. On x86, NMI is vector 2. It is pending or it isn't. This is like like a regular device IRQ, which can be pending or not. In the case of regular device IRQs, the OS can query the APIC to get more information. If the IRQ vector is shared, the OS can query all possible sources. In the case of performance counter NMIs, the kernel can read the performance counters. In the case of magic AWS NMIs, there is nothing to query. This is why I think it's a poor design.

2. The x86 NMI design is problematic: NMIs are blocked while the CPU thinks an NMI is running, but the kernel has insufficient control of the "NMIs are blocked" bit, and the CPUs heuristic for "is an NMI is running?" is inaccurate. The result is extremely nasty asm code to fix things up after the CPU messes them up. This is nasty but manageable.

3. x86_64 has some design errors that mean that the kernel must occasionally run with an invalid stack pointer. The kernel developers have no choice in the matter. Regular interrupts are sensibly masked when this happens, so interrupt delivery won't explode when the stack pointer is garbage. But NMIs are non-maskable by design, which necessitates a series of unpleasant workarounds that, in turn, cause their own problems.

The kernel can definitely have bugs that cause NMI handling to fail. I've found and fixed quite a few over the years. Fortunately, no amount of memory pressure, infinite looping, or otherwise getting stuck outside the NMI code is likely to prevent NMI delivery. What will kill AWS's clever idea is if the kernel holds locks needed to create a stackdump at the time that the NMI is delivered. The crashkernel mechanism tries to work around this, but I doubt it's perfect.
The reality is that you need to be able to trust the founders and board members you work with. A corporation's board typically has the authority to issue new shares (thus diluting existing shareholders), so even having unrestricted common stock or even preferred stock does not guarantee that you will always own a certain % of a company's outstanding shares.

Between all the preferred share terms, warrants, options, contingent earn-outs, etc, there's a million ways to engineer the divvying-up of proceeds in a sale.

Ultimately, it comes down to whether you trust your leaders to hold to the spirit of their agreement with you.

All that said... it would be really interesting to see a corporation with bylaws and governance/voting structured in such a way that employee ownership and payout %s could be maintained within certain guaranteed bands. It would severely limit that corporation's flexibility, and might lead it to have a higher risk of failure in bad funding market environments... but it could become a big draw for high-value employees who strongly prefer equity certainty over cash comp and company autonomy.
I've read a million "hiring is broken" articles about software companies, so I asked my sister (lawyer) yesterday how the legal industry does hiring. She told me that even at the most prestigious and exclusive legal firms in the nation, the interview success rate is ~50%.

That seemed staggeringly high, considering that Google's is less than 10%. So I asked her how these legal firms managed to pull off such a high interview success rate. Apparently, they only ever invite someone to interview, if they are already pretty sure they want to hire that person. And how does that work? They make no attempt whatsoever to judge your competency on the basis of interview performance. Rather, you are judged almost entirely by your resume - the "brand name" of the law school you attended, your GPA, and the "brand name" of the law firms you've previously worked at. If your school or previous law firms aren't prestigious enough, you won't even be invited to an interview.

In fact, not only is the above a convention, it's often a firm policy. My sister once got a job offer, through very fortunate circumstances, at an elite law firm. But their HR department blocked her hire, literally because she did not attend a top-15 law school.

Ironically enough, I've never heard anyone complain about legal hiring being broken. Perhaps that's precisely because legal firms don't even give most people a shot - they are filtered out entirely at the resume stage. I imagine people get far more agitated when they are rejected after an interview, as opposed to being ignored entirely from the outset.

I'm personally glad to work in an industry where even the most exclusive companies are willing to give everyone a shot at the interview, regardless of which school they went to. Is hiring broken in tech? Sure. But it's completely dysfunctional elsewhere.
What would be nice is a service that just forwards unknown calls to someone competent.
What about the environmental impact? 10k servers use a lot more energy than 100k
Why not just deposit the check in an ATM or with an image
Rules for Troubleshooting an Unfamiliar System
Fix Bugs as Soon as You Find Them
I imagine that an army of twitter bots sending automatically thanksgiving messages could mess with the results. A sad event in christmas would be balanced by the global cheering and be perceived as "less sad" by the program than in a common day.

The opposite is also possible. That bots can be programmed to create outrage deliberately is not a secret. Outrage means bussiness for newspapers so is a desired goal.
Yeah, discussions of remote work almost always overlook this. Companies are absolutely going to use it to offload office costs onto employees. Working from home already does that.
Keeping up annually with federal and individual state education reporting regulations is a severe PitA. The Texas Board of Ed itself is a monster of a bureaucracy compared to some other states.
He wasn't talking about their home life, he was talking about their work life. He was talking about how they were trapped at work, and how being trapped turned them into empty things. It's true that many people that work monotonous, bureaucratic jobs can turn spiteful and disinterested in anything other than towing the line to get along. They are the empty people, the ones who will put up with ungodly amounts of shit, just to have the privilege of continuing to put up with that shit. They can't see a way out, and it eats a hole in them.

I know few people with a "rich, full life", and a lot more people who work all day, buy fast food for dinner, and then play League for 5 hours until they fall asleep. It's not fulfillment they're after, it's distraction, comfort, escape. Self-medication comes in the form of drink, food, tv, gambling, drugs, even other people.
Or put more succinctly: https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en

"Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but you can’t invert a binary tree on a whiteboard so f* off."
Maybe it's on your radar too, but what about an official port of postmarketOS?
> political activity was a protected class in CA & NY.

Yes, but cloudflare is not denying a job to any of those people. Not to mention there are certainly threats of violence on those sites, which are technically illegal. That's grounds enough to take the site down.

I argued above that cloudflare's actions were concerning, but at the end of the day, it's cloudflare's network. Do you really want the state compelling by force a firm to carry the traffic of any one? I don't, and find it the only option more concerning than a firm arbitrarily refusing to do business.

I personally dislike the actions of cloudflare in this case, and am allowed to criticize them. However, I don't think it makes sense to have the state enforce my criticism via compulsion.
Not only that, but the GP misses the point that, while yes I can work for myself and do contract work, I then also have to find health insurance, pay taxes monthly, do a bunch of extra accounting that does nothing to move my business forward and is boring, etc. That's fine if you get more benefit that the resource sink of doing those things, but for most people that's only additional stress and no additional value. So saying they're equivalent is patently absurd.
It's disingenuous to compare a single year vs an average like this, without going into what the distribution looks like.

Maybe years are either very calm or have lots of fires? That would result in some years being much worse than the average.